sir, you may perceive by the inclosed brief for rebuilding the cathedral church of st. paul ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1678 approx. 21 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 3 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2008-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a93905 wing s5668 estc r42881 38875892 ocm 38875892 152417 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a93905) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 152417) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 2296:12) sir, you may perceive by the inclosed brief for rebuilding the cathedral church of st. paul ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [4] p. s.n., [london : 1678] place of publication from wing (2nd ed.). signed on p. 2: edw. stillingfleet, dean of st. pauls. "imprimatur. dat. xxx. mai. 1678. h. london (henry compton)." -cf. p. 4. reproduction of original in: bodleian library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng st. paul's cathedral (london, england) -early works to 1800. london (england) -history -17th century. great britain -history -charles ii, 1660-1685. 2007-04 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2007-05 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-07 john latta sampled and proofread 2007-07 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion sir , you may perceive by the inclosed brief for rebuilding the cathedral church of st. paul , how much his majesty is concerned to have this work carried on , and in what particular manner he recommends it to the city of london ; and therefore i am commanded , not only to send you the briefs , but to excite you to a more than ordinary care and diligence in promoting so good a work , and which tends so much to the honour of this city . i am sensible what objections a work of this nature is like to meet with in our age ; wherein some love to cavil at whatever relates to god and his worship ; and especially if it be like to cost them any thing ; others who seem very zealous for some kind of religion , are for enjoying it on as cheap and easie terms as may be ; and many of those who declare a good will to this work , yet express great dissatisfaction both as to this method of proceeding , and the time we have chosen , which they think very unsuitable to such a design , if we either respect the present state of the city or nation . so that till such objections be removed out of mens minds , there is little reason to expect they should make any free and chearful contributions ; and if i can be any waies serviceable therein , i shall think my time and pains well employed in writing and sending this letter to you . it is a principle among those who love a thrifty and parsimonious religion , that whatever is beyond the bounds and measures of necessity and conveniency in the worship of god , is vain and superstitious , and therefore deserves no encouragement at all . i do not wonder at this principle in those men who measure their religion by their interest , and choose that which brings them the best trade , and saves them the most expence . but there are many well meaning persons among us , who look on what is great and magnificent as unsuitable to the times of the gospel , and only proper for that dispensation , wherein god declared , that he loved the gates of sion more than all the dwellings of jacob. but i desire such to consider that we worship the same god , who gave order for the building of solomon's temple ; not meerly for the conveniency of that way of worship ; but with all the splendour and greatness which was agreeable to the majesty of that god who was worshipped therein . for since it was the house of god , the sense of nature did teach the jews as well as gentiles , that it ought to bear some proportion to the greatness of him who dwelt in it : and that is the reason given by solomon to king hiram , and the house which i build is great , for great is our god above all gods . hath not god made the most glorious temple for himself in heaven , and adorned it after such a manner , as all the wit and art of his creatures can never exactly describe or imitate ? and the jews think , not without reason , that the fashion of their temple was designed on purpose to represent in little , the far more magnificent temple which god had framed for his own glory in the fabrick of the world. and certainly , it is no part of the ceremonial law , to worship god in a way agreeable to those conceptions of his greatness , which the works of his hands suggest unto us . under the gospel , i grant , that christ hath altered the way of worship which was used among the jews ; and now we are no longer tied to make any part of the places dedicated to god's worship , a kind of shambles by slaying the beasts for sacrifice , but must we therefore make them stables ? there is a natural decency and fitness to be observed in these things which christ hath never taken away , no more than he hath their separation from common use ; the destroying whereof brings such rudeness and barbarism into religion , as even the turks and scythians abhorr . and although christ appeared in a low and mean condition in the world , as most suitable to the design of his coming , yet even when he lay in the manger , he had gold , and frankincense , and myrrhe offered him ( which were all rich and costly presents ) and that by wise men too . and when he was to be buried , his body was embalmed before-hand with a costly oyntment ; and we know what a severe check christ himself gave to him that said , to what purpose is all this waste ? although at the same time he pretended great charity to the poor . it was the poverty and persecution of the primitive christians , which made them at any time to worship god in chambers and grotts : for as soon as they had any respite and ease , they erected lofty and beautiful churches , as eusebius relates ; and the first christian emperours shewed their zeal in the splendour and magnificence of the churches which they built ; and not only the emperours themselves , but the best christians of those times thought this to be for the honour of christ and of the christian religion . and do these men indeed think , that building great houses for themselves , and adorning them with the richest furniture , or raising of families , and heaping up vast treasures , is more agreeable to the design of the gospel , than serving god in a beautiful and magnificent church ? but if none of these things will move them , let them consider this work , as a design which will employ many poor men for many years ( and this they cannot deny to be a work of charity . ) let them look on it as an ornament of the city , as an honour of the nation , as like to be a standing monument of protestant affection to good and publick works ; and on such accounts as these , we are sure there can be no scruple of conscience against it . but others say , their own parish churches are not built , and therefore it cannot be expected they should do any thing yet towards the cathedral . i am heartily sorry for the occasion of this objection in any parts of the city ; and god forbid that we should hinder the building of any of the parochial churches ; but i do not understand how this will do it . all that we desire is , that the mother-church may not be forgotten , while the others are rising so fast out of their ruines , and so many of them are already finished with extraordinary beauty and conveniency . for , however length of time hath made the relation to be almost forgotten between the mother-church and the rest ; yet for some ages of the christian church , whatever other conveniencies they might have for assembling together , there was but one church in a city which had a baptistery belonging to it , that all the christians being there baptized , might own their relation to the mother-church . and although , since the great increase of the number of christians , it hath been thought fit to have the sacraments administred in parochial churches , yet it ought to be considered , that this church is properly the city church , to which our princes on extraordinary occasions , and the governours of the city have alwaies resorted , and where the worship of god hath been more solemnly performed , and the word of god set forth by preachers chosen out from the universities , and all parts of the kingdom , to the great honour as well as satisfaction of this city . and it ought not to be forgotten , that the emulous city to this for trade and riches , hath not only built a stathouse , but a magnificent church too at their own charges ; and it will be no great reputation to london to fall so much short of amsterdam in zeal for the publick worship of god. but why should the burden lie on the city which hath suffered so much of late by a dreadful fire ? this were indeed a terrible objection , if it had been made in the ruines of the city ; but thanks be to the wonderful providence of god almighty , we have lived to see the city rise with a splendour and greatness so far surpassing whatever it had before , that this were enough to put us in mind of building the house of god in a way suitable to the present grandeur of the city . i do not think that in all respects the prophet's argument will reach our case , is it time for you , o ye , to dwell in your cieled houses , and this house lie waste ? but yet methinks , those who have already laid out so many thousands on a monument of the dreadful fire , should think themselves as much concerned to contribute freely towards a monument of the resurrection of the city after it , and what can be more proper for that , that the re-building st. pauls ? lastly , those who have nothing else to object against this work , find fault with the season , as very ill chosen by us , when so many burdens and taxes lie already on the city , and men are still afraid of more . as though the season were of our own choosing ! whereas the true state of the case is this : as long as our stock held out any waies proportionably to the expence , we went on chearfully and with great diligence ; and we may say it without vanity , the stock we had hath been managed with as much care and good husbandry , as of any publick buildng whatsoever : but when we found that we could not carry on the work without farther supplies ; what should we do ? should we let the work stand still without trying other waies ? then we might have justly suffered under the clamours which would have been made against us , that the work might have gone on , if we had not been careless and negligent ; that the city would , no doubt , give very considerable supplies , if they were but asked ; that in the former repairs the chamber of london gave two hundred pounds per annum for ten years ; besides the liberal contributions of the aldermen and of the wards , and companies ; that it was not to be supposed , the city should be less able , or less willing than it was at that time ; that a very easie rate upon the new-built and inhabited houses would serve to sinish the choire ; that but a fourth part of the rate for the poor in all the parishes of england would go very far towards the body of the church ; that no citizen of london would ever refuse doing something towards it ; that at least it was but our trying this way , and if it did not succeed , we need not doubt at last of the kindness both of king and parliament . upon such discourses as these , it was thought fit by the commissioners to make an address to his majesty , for authority to gather contributions , which out of his royal clemency and great readiness to promote this work , he was pleased to grant us . and now the time is vnseasonable ! as though it were ever otherwise , to those who have no mind to it ! but is it ever unseasonable to do praise-worthy , pious and generous actions ? we do not desire men to impoverish themselves to re-build st. paul's , but to give freely and chearfully , and in such a proportion as other publick occasions will permit , and as will be no hindrance to the concernment of their trade or families . for our fears of future burdens and troubles , can we do better to prevent them than to be full of good works ? and if we were as full of troubles , as we are of fears , we may remember that the city and temple of jerusalem were fore-told to be built in troublous times : but thanks be to god , we yet enjoy peace and tranquillity ; our port is full of ships , our city of trade , and there is great store of riches among many , who without any considerable diminution to their stock , may contribute freely to this great work. i am glad the clergy of this city have already shewed so good an example to others by their own subscriptions ; and therefore we are the more encouraged to hope for your chearful assistance in procuring subscriptions and contributions from others , and your diligence in pursuing the directions contained in the brief it self . i am your affectionate brother and servant , edw. stillingfleet , dean of st. pauls , and arch-deacon of london . for the better satisfaction of all persons concerning the present state of the building , i have annexed a brief abstract of it ; and for the encouragement of others to subscribe now , i have adjoyned some of the subscriptions made in this city towards the former repairs . s t. paul's church , london . a brief account of the receipts and disbursements for the rebuilding the said church .   l. s. d. l. s. d. l. s. d. remained in cash in the chamber of london , the first day of may , 1674. ( when the work was first begun ) upon the coal duty at 4 d. ½ . per chaldron — 12038 05 03. 12707 01 02. 40525 10 3 ¼ . upon free gifts , legacies , &c. — 00668 15 11. brought more into the chamber aforesaid upon the said duty of coals ; from the said first of may , 1674. to the first of may , 1678. 18144 04 01 ½ . 27818 09 1 ¼ . and upon free gifts , &c. — 09674 05 00 ¼ . out of which hath been paid and disbursed in the said building from the said first day of may , 1674. to the first of may , 1678. including the carting away of 28000 loads of rubbish ; breaking up 11133 cubical yards of old foundation walls , with scaffolding , and taking down old walls , amounting to 4000 l. and upwards — 33000 00 00. 36000 00 00. besides there is due upon a reasonable conjecture for scaffolding and other materials , masons work not yet measured , the several accounts not being yet audited — 03000 00 00. subscriptions towards the repairs of s t. paul's , 1631 , &c. the cities gift , feb. 21. the free gift of the city out of the chamber of london , by order of the lord major and court of aldermen , the summ of two hundred pounds per annum , for ten years . the ninth annual payment i find received feb. 10. 1639. — 200. per annum for ten years . the company of merchant-taylors subscribed the summ of five hundred pounds to be paid by fifty pounds per annum , for ten years ; the first payment to begin before easter , 1632. 50 l. per annum for ten years . the company of gold-smiths four hundred pounds 50 l. per annum for eight years . the company of grocers three hundred and fifty pounds 50 l. per annum for seven years . the company of vintners one hundred pounds to be paid before the last of jan. 1631.   the company of salters one hundred and forty pounds , forty pounds in present , and the remainder at 20 l. per annum for five years . the company of skinners the summ of two hundred and eighty pounds at 40 l. per annum for seven years . the company of girdlers 10 l. per annum for seven years . the company of ironmongers 20 l. per annum for five years . the company of cloth-workers 40 l. per annum for five years . the company of stationers 15 l. per annum for ten years . the company of fishmongers 50 l. per annum , of which i find the seventh payment . the company of haberdashers 30 l. per annum , of which i find the eighth payment . i omit the other companies , these being the most considerable for subscriptions . aldermen , 1631.   l. s. d. sir john leman 30 00 00. and left by him , 1632. 50 00 00. sir robert ducie 50 00 00. sir george whitmore 20 00 00. alderman bromfield 50 00 00. sir james campbell 20 00 00. sir william acton 20 00 00. sir john gore 20 00 00. alderman pool 15 00 00. alderman backhouse &c. 15 00 00. sir paul pinder's extraordinary bounty ought never to be forgotten , who besides what he did towards adorning the quire , gave to the south end 4000 l.     wards , 1633. langborn ward 209 09 00. broadstreet ward 103 02 03. farringdon without 250 07 03. bassishaw ward 056 13 06. aldgate ward 150 09 10. farringdon without , more 126 00 02. candlewickstreet ward 050 00 00. bishopsgate ward 041 05 10. farringdon within 334 08 04. limestreet ward 039 17 09. tower-ward 153 00 00. aldersgate ward 077 05 02. cripplegate ward 045 16 04. more of the same 110 07 00. vintry ward 065 04 06. these i have only mention'd as a tast of the readiness of the city at that time , and they are faithfully extracted out of the books of the receipts then kept in the chamber of london . imprimatur . dat. xxx . mai. 1678. h. london . a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall, march 23, 1689/90 by ... edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1690 approx. 44 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61621 wing s5661 estc r14192 13142358 ocm 13142358 97976 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61621) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 97976) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 752:9) a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall, march 23, 1689/90 by ... edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 35 p. printed for henry mortclocke [sic] ..., london : 1690. marginal notes. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -o.t. -ecclesiastes xi, 9 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall , march 23. 1689 / 90. by the right reverend father in god edward lord bishop of worcester . published by their majesties special command . london , printed for henry mortclocke at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . 1690. ecclesiastes xi . 9. rejoyce , o young man , in thy youth , and let thy heart chear thee in the days of thy youth , and walk in the ways of thy heart , and in the sight of thine eyes ; but know thou , that for all these things god will bring thee into judgment . if solomon had said , rejoyce not , o young man , in thy youth , neither let thy heart chear thee in the days of thy youth ; walk not in the way of thine heart , nor in the sight of thine eyes ; for know thou , that for all these things god will bring thee into iudgment , the sense had been so easie and plain , that there had been no appearance of difficulty in reconciling one part with the other : for the whole had been look'd upon but as a necessary and seasonable admonition to such who by the heats of youth , and strength of inclination , and allurements of the world , are too apt to be transported with the love of sensual pleasures . and this had been very becoming the wise man towards the conclusion of his book , wherein he had not onely before set forth the several vanities of humane life ; but so soon after , bids men remember their creatour in the days of their youth , while the evil days come not , nor the years draw nigh of which they shall say they have no pleasure in them . i. e. in the days wherein they are most apt to walk in the way of their hearts , and in the sight of their eyes . for he knew very well , that nothing is so powerfull a check and restraint upon mens inclinations to sin , as the serious consideration of that god that gave them their beings , and will bring them to an account for their actions . but how then comes he in this verse to seem rather to give a permission to young men in the time of youth to indulge themselves in their mirth and vanity ? rejoyce , o young man ▪ in thy youth , &c. some think that the wise man onely derides and exposes them for their folly in so doing ; but that seems not agreeable with the grave and serious advice which follows . and we find nothing like irony or sarcasm in any part of the foregoing book ; for he begins it with a tragical exclamation against the vanities of humane life ; vanity of vanities , saith the preacher , vanity of vanities : all is vanity . and he pursues his argument by a particular induction of the most tempting and pleasing vanities of life ; and particularly all sorts of sensual delights ; as mirth and iollity in the first place , then wine and musick , fine palaces , curious vineyards , gardens and pools , a great retinue , and , which was needfull to maintain all this , abundance of silver and gold. but what a melancholy reflection doth he make on all these pleasures of life ? then i looked on all the works that my hands had wrought , and on the labour that i had laboured to doe ; and behold all was vanity and vexation of spirit . what incouragement then could the wise man , after so much experience of the world , give to young men here in the text , to rejoyce in the days of their youth , and to walk in the way of their hearts , and in the sight of their eyes ? i. e. to pursue vanity , and to lay the foundation for greater vexation of spirit , when they come to reflect on their own follies . what then is the meaning of these words ? for this , we are to observe , that the preacher having declared his own main scope and design in the beginning and conclusion of his book , brings in sometimes the different senses which mankind are apt to have concerning the happiness of life . and that is the reason that we meet with such different expressions concerning it . in one place it is said , that there is no better thing under the sun , than to eat and drink and to be merry ; but in another , he saith , sorrow is better than laughter , and by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made better . in one place he saith , all things come alike to all , there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked : but in another , that it shall be well with them that fear the lord , but it shall not be well with the wicked . how can such passages as these be reconciled , if we look on them as expressing the sense of the same person ? but if we allow them to be the different notions of two sorts of men in this world , they are easie to be understood , although not to be reconciled . and the one sort is of those who place all happiness in this life , without regard to religion or vertue , or another world ; and the other of those , who look on this life onely as a passage to another ; and that all persons ought to behave themselves here , so as conduces most to their happiness hereafter . and according to these different schemes , we have in the words of the text two very different sorts of counsel and advice to young men . i. the first proceeds upon the supposition that all the happiness of man lies in this life , and in the enjoyment of the sensual pleasures of it ; rejoyce , o young man , in thy youth , and let thy heart chear thee in the days of thy youth ; and walk in the way of thy heart , and in the sight of thy eyes . we have no other rule here given but the sight of the eye , and the way of the heart ; i. e. outward appearance and inward inclination ; and these are the beloved rules of the most sensual and voluptuous persons , and they judge of happiness onely by the pursuit of them . here is nothing mention'd of reason or conscience , or a regard to vertue in the restraint of natural inclinations : nay , here is nothing of that severity which epicurus himself thought necessary towards the maintaining of a pleasant state of life ; which he granted could never be done without some restraint of mens appetites and inclinations to the pleasures of sense ; and it is not to be imagined , that solomon should give young men greater liberty than the corruptest moralists did . therefore i cannot look upon these words as a permission for them to doe what is here expressed ; but as a full description of that method of living , which the jolly and voluptuous corrupters of youth would instruct them in , rejoyce , o young man , in thy youth , and let thine heart chear thee , &c. ii. we have here the most powerfull check and restraint laid upon all these sensual inclinations of youth . but know thou that for all these things god will bring thee to iudgment . which words are the wise man's correction of the foregoing liberty , or the curb which reason and religion give to the pursuit of natural inclinations , wherein every word hath its force , and ought to make a deep impression upon us : for , ( 1. ) know thou : thine is not then the same case with creatures that have no understanding ; they are not capable of any check from themselves , having no law of reason or conscience within them to controul or govern their sensual desires ; but god hath given thee not meerly a brutal appetite , but a rational soul , capable of understanding the differences of good and evil , and the reasons why some things which appear pleasant are very disagreeing to the principles of humane nature ; i. e. to that order , decency , modesty , and regularity , which the more elevated frame and capacity of mankind do require . ( 2. ) for all these things ; as light and vain as you esteem them , as soon as they are over and forgotten by you , as secretly and closely as they are committed , as much as you endeavour to palliate and excuse them , yet but for all these things god will certainly bring thee into iudgment . therefore you have all the reason in the world to consider what you doe , since every thing will be brought to judgment , whether it be good or evil , as solomon concludes this book . which shews the great regard god hath to the good or evil of our actions ; and if the great judge of the world hath so , certainly we ought to have it , and never think our selves at liberty to doe what we please , in gratifying our lusts , and pursuing our natural inclinations to evil. ( 3. ) god will doe it . if there were no god to call thee to an account , yet there are some actions of vertue so agreeable to mankind , and some vices so loathsome and deformed , that there would be sufficient cause for them to love the one and to abhor the other . if we could suppose such a frame of things and such sorts of beings as we now see , and no god to make them , ( which is most absurd and unreasonable , ) yet we must suppose these beings to have natures and properties distinct from each other ; so that we could not imagine men to become beasts , and therefore they must not act like them , but preserve that decorum or agreeableness in their actions which is suitable to the peculiar excellencies of humane nature . and there are some sins so much below the dignity thereof , that no circumstances , no suppositions , can make them fitting for mankind to commit them ; which shews that the nature of good and evil is no arbitrary thing , but is founded in the very frame of our beings , and in the respects we owe to our selves and to one another . and since there is an infinite and supreme being which hath absolute power and command over us , and gives us both our beings and the comforts of our lives , it is most absurd to suppose it not to be a fault to hate his goodness , or to despise his mercy ; or to slight his power , and to contemn his authority : for in all these there is something repugnant to the common sense of mankind , and to all principles of true honour and justice . and there are such common principles of morality arising from our necessary relation to god and each other , which are of so clear and convincing evidence , that every one that considers them will grant that wicked men may as well go about to dispute their beings as their sins ; and may as easily prove that they are not , but onely appear to be , as that no actions are really evil , but only by false glasses appear so to be . but however vain men may deceive themselves , god will not be mocked ; for he not onely sees and knows all our actions , but he will bring us to an account for them . ( 4. ) god will bring thee into iudgment . it is a dreadfull consideration to a sinner , that god knows all his false steps , all his secret sins , all his falshood and dissimulation with god and men : and there is nothing which men of art and design hate more , than to be discover'd and found out in all their double and deceitfull dealings ; but to have these not onely privately discover'd , but exposed and laid open to the view of the world ; and not onely so , but to have every circumstance examin'd , and every action scanned , and that by the great judge of all the world , whom nothing can escape , nothing can deceive , nothing can withstand ; whose justice is inflexible , whose knowledge is incomprehensible , whose power is irresistible , and whose vengeance is insupportable : this we cannot but imagine must strike an awe and terrour into the minds of men , when they are pursuing the pleasures of sin , that for all these things god will bring them into judgment . but notwithstanding these and many other expressions to the same purpose in scripture , wherein god hath declared that he will certainly iudge the world in righteousness at the great day ; that the secrets of all hearts shall then be disclosed ; that we must all appear before the iudgment-seat of christ ; and that god will render to every man according to his deeds : and notwithstanding it is a thing in it self very reasonable , from the consideration of god's justice and providence , and the nature and consequences of good and evil actions ; yet the generality of mankind go on as secure and careless as if there were no such thing , or that they ought not to be concerned about it . therefore i shall not spend time in the proof of that which i take for granted you all believe , and i am sure have reason so to doe ; but i shall enquire into these things which are most practical and therefore proper for our consideration at this time. ( 1. ) how a matter of so great importance as a iudgment to come makes so little impression on the minds of the generality of mankind , who profess to believe it . ( 2. ) by what means the consideration of a future judgment may have a greater influence on all our minds . ( 1. ) how a thing of so great importance as god's bringing us into iudgment comes to make so little impression on the minds of the generality of those who profess to believe it , when we are so tender and sensible of small things with respect to this world. for resolving this , we must consider , that there is a great difference between the not disbelieving doctrinal points of faith , and the practical improvement of them in our minds ; without which , they remain there but as general and confused notions . thus too many who abhor being thought atheists , live as if there were no god ; not , that they deny or dispute his being or attributes , but they have no regard to them in the last dictates of their minds , or in the course of their actions . to go about to prove such things to be true they look on as lost labour , for they do not question them ; but there is another thing then which we are to give an account of , viz. how it comes to pass , that so great and so weighty doctrines , being received and allowed to be true , make so little impression on the generality of mankind ; especially this of the day of judgment ; of which these seem to be the main reasons . ( 1. ) mens impatience of considering great and weighty things at a distance , which cannot affect and move our senses . ( 2. ) the bewitching and stupifying nature of present and sensual pleasures ; which draw off the mind from greater things , and weaken all the impressions they make upon us . ( 3. ) a general presumption upon god's mercy towards mankind on the account of the frailty of humane nature , notwithstanding the severity of his threatnings in scripture . ( 1. ) i begin with mens impatience of considering . we flatter and please our selves with the thoughts that we are intelligent and considering beings , when , it may be , considering ( especially as to matters of greatest consequence ) is one of the things which mankind have the greatest aversion to . for generally , they love to go no farther than the outsides and appearances of things , and have their minds wholly possessed with false and flattering imaginations , having neither truth nor consistency in them . and those who account themselves of better breeding than others , are often more imposed upon than others in this way . the pomp and grandeur of the world , the gaity and splendour of living strikes their fancies with such vehement impressions , that scarce any thing else gets into their minds , or sinks deep into them . there are many other things that seem to stand fair in their opinion at some times , but it is as they are thought serviceable to worldly greatness and honour . this , after all the instructions of philosophers , the declamations of heathen and christian orators , and the far more powerfull arguments of the wisest and best of men , recorded in holy scripture , is still the great idol of mankind , which they serve and worship with the truest and warmest devotion . all other things , how great and weighty soever in themselves , yet are really look'd on by them as a sort of metaphysical abstracted notions of things invisible and immaterial , quite out of the reach of their imagination , which may serve for the amusement of some , and the affrightment of others , and the entertainment of speculative minds ; but , how to raise themselves in the world , to appear great , and have many dependents ; to pursue and carry on their own interests ( though without regard to justice and honesty ) these they account great and noble things , and fit to employ their minds upon . but alas ! how much are such imposed upon by meer shews and appearances of things , which are really what god made them , but are not what we fansie them to be ! there are , no doubt , real conveniencies of life in riches , and honour , and ease , and plenty , or else they could never be esteemed blessings , nor could we have reason to thank god for them ; but there is a great difference between the fitness of things for our present use , and for our happiness ; i. e. when we make them our end , and do not employ them in order to a farther end. but it is good advice of s. paul , vsing the world as not abusing it ; for the fashion of this world passeth away : it passes like a ship under sail , while the generality of mankind , like passengers , lie asleep in it . sometimes when storms arise , or waves cross them , they seem to be awake , and to look about them , and to think whither they are going ; but those thoughts being uneasie to them , they lie down again , and are carried they know not whither . but still it is but the fashion of this world ; a meer landskip , wherein there is great variety but little satisfaction , the shew far out-doing the substance . when the devil shewed christ the kingdoms of the world , and the glory of them , the highest mountain could afford but a small prospect of them , but as some think he caused a representation in the air of the most tempting splendour and glories of them . and this was the truest representation of them , by glorious appearances and bewitching shews . but unless there be something in humane nature which makes it very apt to be deceived by such things , it were strange the devil should think to prevail on our saviour by them . we pity those who travelling in the night are deceived by false fires and shining meteors , and follow them into bogs and precipices ; but the case of such is so much worse who are deluded by the deceitfull vanities of this world to their own destruction . and can there be any greater argument of the want of consideration , than for persons to suffer themselves to be so easily and so fatally cheated ? it is a wise observation of aristotle , that true knowledge and wisedom lies most in settling and fixing the mind . for it is not the subtlety and fineness of thoughts , not the quickness and sharpness of apprehension , not the close and mathematical deductions of reason which make a wise man , but the having a calm and composed temper of mind , the subduing our passions , and governing our actions with respect to our chief end. and in order to this , consideration is absolutely necessary ; without which that which is nearest to us , and offers it self first to our choice , must prevail upon us . and here lies the main difficulty to perswade mankind to choose a far greater happiness at a distance and invisible , before a present enjoyment of things we are constantly conversant with , and have made an early impression upon us . but still we say , that it is nothing but mens impatience of considering , which makes them have so little regard to another life . for if they would but lay both worlds in the balance one against the other , they would soon discover the wonderfull folly of preferring that which this world accounts happiness before that which is offered to our choice in another . for let us make all the fair and reasonable allowances that may be , as to our inclinations , and appetites , and circumstances in this world ; as to the distance , obscurity , incomprehensibleness of the joys of another world ; yet every considering man that regards true happiness will be sure to chuse that which is to come . for , ( 1. ) supposing the happiness were equal , yet there is no proportion in the continuance of them ; and a considering man will be sure to choose a happiness that can never have an end , before one that may be irrecoverably lost in a moment ; and can certainly be enjoyed but for a little time , if there were any certainty at all in the enjoyment of it . ( 2. ) the more any have considered , the more they have repented placing too much of their happiness here , because reason and experience shews them the folly of it . but the more they have considered , the better satisfied the minds of good men are in placing their happiness above ; where alone that good is to be found which can make us truly happy , and is to be enjoyed in that fulness , that purity , that certainty which makes it fit for the wisest and most considering men to prefer above a present happiness , if it were to be enjoyed on earth . ( 3. ) he that looks after a future happiness doth not thereby lose any of the real conveniencies of humane life ; but he that places his happiness here , cannot find it in this world , and is sure to be miserable in another : and this makes a very considerable difference in the choice . indeed , if god made it absolutely necessary in order to future happiness for us to forgoe all the natural pleasures and innocent delights of this life , the terms would be much harder , and hardly possible to humane nature . for , if all pleasures of sense must be renounced , we must not see the pleasing varieties of nature , nor hear the melodious sound of birds , nor tast the meat when we are hungry , nor drink when we are thirsty ; for there is really greater pleasure of sense when nature craves necessary sustenance , than what the most voluptuous epicurean enjoys in all his contrivances , first to raise his appetite , and then to please it : for what is most natural and necessary is the most delightfull ; every thing of force must have something vneasie in it . but god hath not dealt thus hardly with mankind ; he allows us all the reasonable desires of nature , and hath onely forbid us what is unreasonable and unnecessary . and upon the forbearance of what is so , joyned with our entire dependence upon himself for it , ( which the scripture calls faith working by love , ) he hath made the gracious offer of eternal happiness . it is true , in extraordinary cases of persecution he requires more , but then he proposes extraordinary rewards to make abundant recompence for them ; but in the common and ordinary case of mankind , he requires no more than our avoiding those excesses in pleasing our appetites which nature and reason condemn . and those who consider , cannot but see how unreasonable it is to place their happiness in forbidden pleasures ; and to think that nothing can make them happy , but what god hath declared shall make them miserable . it is a strange crossness in our desires , if nothing can please them but what displeases god. it were no hard task to shew , that god forbids nothing but what is really repugnant to our well-being here ; and how then can any such thing as happiness be hoped for in such things ? and when a man ventures being miserable for ever , for what can never make him happy here , if he had his full liberty to pursue his desires ; he shews how far he is from acting like a wise , rational , considering being . so that impatience of considering is one great reason why the thoughts of a judgment to come make so little impression on mens minds . ( 2. ) the second reason is the bewitching and stupifying nature of sensual pleasures . the epicurean philosophers , who managed the theory of pleasure with the greatest art , so as it might look like a proper happiness for mankind , found two things absolutely necessary in order to it . ( 1. ) the retrenching all inordinate desires , viz. such as had more pain following them , than there was pleasure in the enjoyment of them . ( 2. ) the removing the fears of another world out of mens minds . for as long as these sunk into their minds , they must rob them of that inward tranquillity , without which it were a vain thing so much as to talk of happiness . but it was impossible , upon their grounds , to doe either of these . for , ( 1. ) it is unreasonable to suppose that the happiness of our present life should consist in the enjoyment of pleasure , and yet the pleasure of opinion to be taken away , since the pleasure of opinion is the far greatest part of the pleasure of life ; and that which is as much valued and esteemed by all those who place their happiness in pleasure . if it were all to be reduced to that which lies in satisfying the necessary desires of nature , then such as have just enough for that , are far more happy than the rich and voluptuous , because they have less pains and care. but if any allowance be made to the pleasure of fancy and opinion , then no stop can be given to inordinate desires . for , who can set bounds to fancy , or lay a reasonable restraint upon desires , if the differences of good and evil be taken away ? as they must be , if meer pleasure and pain be to be regarded in our actions . ( 2. ) as to the other , the methods they used to remove all fears of another world were weak and trifling , and they had no advantage in point of argument , but what the ignorance and folly of the idolatrous part of mankind at that time gave them . but there is a far greater advantage in point of interest , which makes men of sensual lives very willing to be rid of the fears of another life . and a willing mind goes a great way in believing or not believing . those who place their happiness in eating and drinking well ( as they call it ) and other sensual delights , which can never be enjoyed when htis life is ended , have but a melancholy prospect into another world ; for they are shut out from the very possibility of being happy in their own sense , ( unless they would believe the eastern impostour ; ) but when they once come to apprehend that there is no pleasure to make them happy but what is seated in the body , they are apt to conclude that when that dies , there is an end of all , for their imaginations can reach no farther . and the true reason is , they have laid reason and conscience asleep so long , that it is very hard to awaken them ; their notions of good and evil are like the confused apprehensions of men half awake ; they see enough to perplex but not enough to satisfie them . and when their fears grow upon them , they have not the heart and courage to examine them , whether they be reasonable or not ; but rather choose to return to their former opiates , than undergo the trouble of an effectual cure by a hearty repentance and coming to themselves , as the prodigal son in the parable did , when his hardship had brought him to consideration . we do not know what had become of him , if he had been wise and frugal in his pleasures ; if he had taken care of a good stock and a plentifull subsistence ; but he first came to be pinched with want , before he was awakened to repent . but we have in scripture a more remarkable instance of the stupifying nature of sensual pleasures ; and that was in david after his sins of adultery and murther . it is a wonder , how a man of such a tender conscience in other things , should continue so long under the guilt of these enormities , without being awakened to repentance : did he not know these to be great sins ? and did not his conscience charge him with the guilt of them ? how came he then to need a prophet to be sent to him , and to deal so plainly with him , as to tell him thou art the man ? but this is a plain evidence , how much the pleasures of sin are apt to stupifie mens consciences so far , that unless god by his grace be pleased to awaken them thoroughly , they never come to a sincere and hearty repentance . david saw nothing more as to the guilt of his sins , when he penn'd his 51st psalm , than his own reason and natural conscience might inform him before ; but he had quite another sense of his sins then ; his heart was broken and his soul wounded under the apprehension of god's displeasure ; and this makes him pray so earnestly and so importunately to god for the pardon of his sins . and if it were thus in the case of a man otherwise after god's own heart , i.e. afraid of offending him , and carefull to please him ; what may we imagine it to be in those who in the time of youth walk in the way of their hearts , and in the sight of their eyes : i. e. allowing themselves in all sensual inclinations , and pursuing carnal delights so far till they have lost all sense of god and another world ; and such as these , nothing but the powerfull influences of divine grace can awaken and recover . ( 3. ) the third reason is , a general presumption upon god's mercy . the first thing which sinners , in the heat of their youth , and pursuit of their lusts , aim at , is to think as little as may be of what they are doing , or what will be the consequence of their actions . for every thought of themselves is very uneasie to them , and every thought of god is much more so ; therefore they drive away all such thoughts by one means or other , by sleep , diversion , company , and such publick entertainments , as rather heighten and inflame their vices than correct them . if all this will not doe , but there will be some melancholy hours , wherein conscience begins to rouse it self , and to awaken the sinner to some sense of his folly ; then he is ready to hearken with pleasure to any raileries against religion and morality ; and admires the wit of any one who dares say a bold and sharp thing against the wisdom of all ages , and of the best men in them . and one or two such sayings , without proof , are cried up as far beyond the best rules of morality , or the evidence of natural and revealed religion . any sceptical disputes are sufficient demonstrations to them ; and the most unreasonable cavils against religion are embraced , because against the thing they hate ; and even a jest against the day of judgment shall signifie more with them , than the strongest arguments in the world to prove it . the true reason is , they love their vices , and hate every thing which makes them uneasie to them ; and nothing doth more so , than the thoughts of a judgment to come . but suppose after all , the terrible and frequent expressions of scripture concerning the day of judgment , joyned with the reasonableness of the thing , do make such impression on their minds that they cannot wholly shake off the fears and apprehensions of it , then their last endeavour is to mitigate and lessen them , from a general presumption of god's mercifull nature ; and therefore they are willing to suppose , that however god , to keep the world in awe , hath threatned them with the dreadfull severities of the great day , yet as a tender father who threatens his disobedient son , in order to reclaim him , with no less than disinheriting him for ever ; yet when it comes to execution he may relent , not from his sons deserts , but his own compassion ; so they hope , or believe , ( or are willing to doe so ) that god at the great day will not proceed according to the rigour which he hath threatned to use . and to comfort themselves in these hopes they find out all possible extenuations of their sins : if we , say they , had been created purely intellectual beings , free from this load of flesh , and the inclinations which are natural to it , then it had been more reasonable to have called us to a strict account for every action of our lives ; for then every inclination to evil must have come from our minds ; but now our bodies corrupt and draw them aside ; and the inclinations to evil grow faster than our reason , which should check and restrain them . and when those inclinations are strongest , men have not that judgment which is necessary to the government of unruly passions . so that the very frame of humane nature seems to plead for sins committed in the heat and violence of youth . besides , such is the strictness and purity of the law of god , and so great the weakness and disability , the ignorance and inadvertency of mankind , that if god will make no allowance for humane frailty , who can stand before his tribunal ? and , if any allowance be made for sins of infirmity , there are so many abatements to be made for sins committed through sudden passion , through mistake , through the unavoidable impotency of humane nature in this degenerate condition , that the severity of that day is not much to be feared . this is the utmost of the sinners plea against the severity of the day of judgment ; but , to shew how faulty it is , i shall offer these considerations ; 1. that god will certainly iudge the world in righteousness ; and therefore none shall have cause to complain of the harshness or severity of his proceedings . for , this righteousness is not the rigour of justice , but that equity which hath a regard to the circumstances of actions , and the abatement and extenuation of faults which arise from them . 2. none shall suffer at that day , but for their wilfull impenitency , and obstinate continuance in sin. for , this is not onely agreeable to the mercifull nature of god , to forgive repenting sinners ; but it is one of the great designs of the gospel to assure mankind of it by the highest testimonies , even by the death and resurrection of the son of god , and all the miracles wrought in confirmation of it , and of the truth of his doctrine . 3. there are several degrees of wilfulness and obstinacy , and mens judgment shall be according to them . some mens capacities , opportunities and helps have very much exceeded others ; some have broken through stronger convictions and more powerfull assistences of grace than others ; some have had more early instructions , more frequent warnings , more obliging favours from heaven than others . and as it is reasonable that persons suffer for their obstinate continuance in sin , so that they should suffer according to the degrees and circumstances of it . ( 4. ) it is not unjust severity in god , to deprive men of that happiness which they have wilfully refused ; and to condemn them to that misery which their sins have deserved . hath not god made the most condescending offer of mercy and salvation , that it is possible for creatures to expect from him , after so many and great provocations ? could heaven stoop lower than it hath done to vile and ungratefull sinners ? when the son of god came down from heaven on purpose to reconcile god and man together ; when the spirit of god warns and excites their minds to the consideration of their eternal welfare ; when the messengers of this reconciliation are to woo and intreat and beseech sinners in christ's stead , as though god did beseech them by them , that they would be reconciled to god ; when the patience and goodness and long-suffering of god is exercised so much on purpose to lead them to repentance ; when god instead of perfect obedience , is willing to pardon and pass by so many offences , if they truly repent of them , and to receive them still into his favour and mercy ; when after all this men do rather prefer the present pleasures of sin , before all that happiness which god so freely offers , is it any injustice in him to suffer them for ever to be deprived of that which they so wilfully , so ungratefully , so obstinately refused ? and supposing the souls of men to subsist in another world free from all those clouds of errour and mistake , and the false notions they are deceived by here , as well as all the diversions and pleasures of this life , it is not to be imagined , but they must for-ever suffer an intolerable anguish within ( called , a worm that never dyes , and a fire that never goes out , ) from the reflexions upon their own folly. what vengeance beyond this god may inflict , we now know not , ( may none of us ever know it ! ) but we are sure it will never exceed the proportion and desert of their sins . which is sufficient to clear the justice of god in his proceedings with mankind in the day of judgment . 2. it remains now onely to shew by what means god's bringing us to judgment may make a deeper impression upon our minds ; by considering th●se two things ; 1. that our not considering it will not make our condition b●tter , but much worse . 2. that our considering it is the best means to prevent the evil consequences of it . ( 1. ) our not considering it will not make our condition better . there were great reason indeed to walk in the way of our hearts , and in the sight of our eyes , and never trouble our selves with what will happen at the great day , if the putting it out of our heads would make our accounts the easier when it comes . but alas ! whether we think of it or no , the account runs on , and we must answer to every particular at last ; and how unprovided shall we be , if we spend no time here in examining , stating and clearing of them as far as we are able . it is a mighty priviledge we have by the gospel , that god allows us to clear our accounts with him in this world ; for , if we would judge our selves we shall not be judged : i.e. if we call our selves to a strict account for our actions ; if we repent heartily and sincerely of our sins ; if we seek earnestly to god for mercy ; if we have our consciences cleansed by the blood of christ from the pollution of our sins , then we may with joy and peace in our minds think of the great day of recompence . but if we never enter into our selves , to search and examine our own actions , never look into the habits of our own minds , nor charge our selves with the guilt of the sins we have committed , how can we ever hope to escape the scrutiny or avoid the severity of that day ? for our account continually increases by our neglect of it , and the burden of god's wrath must be so much heavier when we have taken no care to lessen it , but after our hardness and impenitent hearts have onely treasured up wrath against the day of wrath . ( 2. ) our considering that god will bring us to judgment is the best means to prevent the evil consequences of it . for , although we cannot hope to plead innocency ; yet , ( which is next in point of wisdom ) this is the most effectual motive to bring us to repentance : and that which makes us repent makes us to grow wise in time , and to lay a good foundation for eternal life . there are many arguments to induce us to it in the folly and shame of our sins ; the wisdom of reflection and reformation ; the instances of it and exhortations to it recorded in scripture ; but there is none more sensible and which touches men more in point of interest and concernment than this of a iudgment to come . must i then , saith a penitent sinner , give a strict account to god of all the evil actions of my life , and suffer according to the desert of them if i die in impenitency ? how much doth it then concern me to repent betimes , to repent in good earnest , to repent while there is hopes of mercy ! away then all ye deceitfull vanities of this wicked world , ye have too long deceived and seduced me : what will all this vain shew , this busie seducer , this impertinent outside of the world signifie , when i must be stript of all , and stand guilty and accused by my own conscience before the judgment-seat of christ ? oh! how wretched shall i be , if my conscience condemns me before the sentence of the judge ! therefore , i am resolved to prevent the judgment of that day ; i will accuse , judge , and condemn my self ; nay , i will proceed to execution , as to all the vitious habits and corrupt inclinations within me . and although i cannot wholly mortifie them , yet i will crucifie them ; i. e. nail them to the cross , and allow them no longer liberty ; and albeit they may struggle for a time , yet i will never give way to their dominion over me any more ; that so death and judgment may find me prepared , if not with unspotted innocency , yet with hearty and sincere repentance . to conclude all ; let the consideration of this day of iudgment to come enter deep into our minds , and awaken us out of our lethargy and security . we are very apt to put off unpleasing things from time to time , and to pass away our time here as easily as may be . but this is no part of wisdom , and we shall extremely blame our selves for it one time or other . the best we can do now , is to recover what is past by repentance , and to set our selves to the making up our accounts with god in this world : for , we are all walking on the brink of eternity , and know not how soon we may drop into it . but what eternal horrour and confusion must follow us , if we go on to slight the opportunities he still affords us of making our peace with him who is to be our judge ? may god therefore of his mercy awaken us all to a timely and serious repentance , and then our iniquities shall not be our ruine . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61621-e110 ch. 12. 1. ch. 1. 2. ch. 2. 1. v. 3. v. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7. v. 8. v. 11. ch. 8. 15. ch. 7. 3. ch. 9. 2. ch. 8. 12 , 13. ch. 12. 14. act. 7. 31. rom. 2. 16. 2 cor. 5. 10 rom. 2. 6. 1 cor. 7. 31. matt. 4. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . nat. ausc. l. 7. c. 4. n. 15. gal. 5. 6. luke 15. 17. 2 sam. 12. 7. acts 17. 31. mark 9. 44. 1 cor. 11. 31. rom. 2. 5. a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall on christmas-day, 1693 by the right reverend father in god, edward lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1694 approx. 46 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61625 wing s5665 estc r8161 13729689 ocm 13729689 101600 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61625) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101600) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 852:10) a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall on christmas-day, 1693 by the right reverend father in god, edward lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 33, [1] p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1694. "published by their majesties special command." advertisement: p. [1] at end. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -john iii -sermons. christmas sermons. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-04 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 melanie sanders sampled and proofread 2004-05 melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall , on christmass-day , 1693. by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . published by their majesties special command . london , printed by i. h. for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in s. paul's church-yard , 1694. s. john iii. 17 . for god sent not his son into the world to condemn the world ; but that the world through him might be saved . these words are part of the gospel written by s. john , wherein he doth not only fill up the history of our saviour with many particular discourses omitted by the other evangelists , but the whole seems to be penned in another strain and with some different purpose and design . it 's true , that they all agree in the same general end of writing which s. john mentions , viz. that we might believe that jesus is the christ the son of god , and that believing we might have life through his name ; but they make use of several methods , as most agreeable to the circumstances of the time and place and occasion of their writing . s. matthew wrote his gospel for the sake of the jews ; and therefore he begins with the genealogy of jesus christ from abraham , and shews that the prophecies were accomplished in him , and how he came not to destroy the law but to fulfill it , and that his miracles and doctrine were sufficient to convince them that he was the promised messias . s. mark wrote only a summary account of the most material passages relating to the person and doctrine of christ for the sake of the gentiles . s. luke takes a larger compass , and puts things into an exacter order of time , as himself tells us , and adds many circumstances relating to the birth of christ , and the general advantage to mankind by his coming ; that he was to be a light to lighten the gentiles , as well as the glory of his people israel . s. john succeeding the rest , found two great things which gave him occasion of writing his gospel ; 1. the perverting the doctrine of christ by the ebionites and cerinthians , who pretended to give great honour to christ as an excellent person both for wisdom and holiness , but yet so that he was but a meer man , to whom god , upon his baptism , had given extraordinary gifts and assistances of his holy spirit . 2. the other was , that the gospel which was designed for the universal good of the world met with such cold reception and entertainment from it . he was in the world , and the world was made by him , and the world knew him not . he came unto his own , and his own received him not . what could be more uneasy to so true a lover of christ as s. john was , than that he lived to see his doctrine perverted , and his design in so great a measure rendred ineffectual ? and therefore in the writing of this gospel , 1. he begins after another manner ; and in a very short , significant and lofty style , he sets forth his eternal being and godhead . in the beginning was the word , and the word was with god , and the word was god. and as the eternal power and godhead were understood by the things that were made , as s. paul saith , so he adds , that all things were made by him , and without him was not any thing made that was made . vvhich is as certain an argument of the divinity of christ , as there is of the being of god from the creation of the vvorld . 2. as to the other point ; it was indeed a sad and amazing consideration , that the wonderfull love of god in sending his son into the world should have so little effect upon the generality of those to whom he was sent and his doctrine preached ; but the apostle contents himself with these two accounts of it ; 1. that it was far from being god's intention or design in sending his son to make mens condition worse and more desperate ; for god sent not his son into the world to condemn the world , but that the world through him might be saved . 2. but it might be presently objected , that if this were god's intention , the world would not have receiv'd so little benefit by it , but according to the terms of salvation proposed by the gospel so few will have advantage by it ; therefore the evangelist adds , that if men did perish they must thank themselves for it ; for , this is the condemnation that light is come into the world , and men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil , v. 19. so that here are two things which deserve our consideration . i. the wonderfull condescension and gracious intention of god in sending his son into the world. ii. the true reason why so many miscarry , as to their salvation notwithstanding ; viz. their own wickedness and folly. 1. the former of these , is that , which upon this day we have particular reason to take notice of ; not in a slight superficial manner , ( as though an annual commemoration of it were all that god expected from us , ) but our minds and souls ought to be possessed with a deep and humble sense of so great , so undeserved , so astonishing a condescension of god to mankind . and the more we think and consider of it , the more amazing and surprizing it must appear to us : for when the psalmist thought but of god's providence towards mankind , he could not but break out into that expression , lord , what is man , that thou art mindfull of him , and the son of man , that thou so regardest him ! what is man indeed ! a mass of vanity and disorder ; weak in his judgment , wilfull in his passions ; uncertain in his best resolutions , violent in his worst inclinations ; strangely bent upon what tends to his ruin , and hardly brought to understand and pursue his truest interest ! what is such a creature as this , that a god infinitely wise and powerfull , far above our thoughts as well as our services , should concern himself about the low and trifling affairs of mankind ! but such is the goodness and condescension of god , that he humbles himself so far , as not only to behold , but to govern the things that are done upon earth . but what is man that he should visit him ! not with the meer common demonstrations of his kindness , which he affords to other creatures ; but that when mankind had so far degenerated and fallen off from god by their sins , that they deserved to be for ever cast off and forgotten by him ; that then god should visit him by sending his son into the world that the world through him might be saved ; this is so far above our imaginations as well as deserts , that it seems to be the most colourable pretence for infidelity , that it is too great a thing for mankind to believe . but i am sensible , that in this sceptical and unbelieving age , there is such a humour of cavilling against matters of revelation , especially this fundamental article of it , that it would seem as if we were afraid to look their objections in the face , if we take no notice of them ; and on the other side , to insist too much upon them , were to make them appear much more considerable than they are . therefore i shall pass over all the trifling and impertinent talk of such men ( which is not whispered in corners , but i am afraid is become a matter of too common and publick discourse ) and i shall single out that which seems to have the greatest weight in it ; viz. suppose god should have an intention to offer terms of salvation to mankind , yet what need was there that the son of god should come into the world for that end ? had not god easier methods of doing it than by the incarnation and crucifixion of his son ? is it not more credible , that god should forgive sins without any attonement , than that he should send his son to be a sacrifice of propitiation to himself ? is it not enough for us to believe all the principles of natural religion to be true ; for we own a god , and providence , and a life to come , and rewards and punishments of mankind according to the nature of their actions ; but why should our faith be cramp'd by such incredible mysteries as these , concerning the son of god's coming into the world ; in such a manner as the evangelists describe it : this is so far from being a kindness to the world , that it makes the condition of salvation so much harder , if we must believe things which seem so impossible to us , and so hard to be reconciled to the natural principles of reason and religion . i shall not dispute it with such men whether these late pretenders to natural religion have at the bottom any real kindness for the principles of it , or not ; i am willing to hope the best , and that it is a meer dissatisfaction in them as to our revealed religion ; and that this pretended zeal for natural religion is little more than a meer sham and disguise to avoid a more odious imputation . but let it be as great and real as they pretend , what i at present undertake , is to make it appear , that none who do embrace the principles of natural religion can have any reason to reject the christian , even as to this article of god's sending his son into the world , which they seem most to stumble at . i shall not go about to shew , how the christian religion not only supposes , but improves , refines , establishes and enforces the most noted and allowed principles of natural religion , as to the being of god and providence ; the most agreeable way of worship ; the nature and kinds of moral duties , the rewards and punishments of another world , since no one of common sense can deny that the christian religion is very exact and particular in these things above any other institution in the world. and therefore i cannot , but in passing , take notice , that i do not remember any one institution in the world with respect to religion , except that which we have by revelation , which hath not some notorious blunders in it , as to the principles of natural religion and vertue ; and therefore they have far less reason to quarrel with christianity than any other religion ( if their quarrel were not really against all , as i fear it is ; ) let them look abroad over the unchristian world ; and they will find such foolish notions , such vain superstitions , such incoherent fables , such immoral practices allowed by their several religions , as would make a considering man wonder how the notion of religion could be so debased among men. let them look backward upon the passages of elder times , and they shall find either they set up false gods with the true , or the false worship of the true god ; or a worship disagreeable to the divine nature by mean representations , or uncouth sacrifices , or impure rites ; or else there were some horrible flaws , as to the common principles of morality , as to conjugal society , or the rights of property , or the due regard to the preservation of mankind ; or they give such a pitifull representation of the rewards and punishments of another life , as if they had a mind to have them look'd on as fables , or despised as unworthy our regarding them above the present pleasures of life . but i dare challenge the most cavilling sceptick to find any just fault with the duties of christianity ; for the worship of god required therein , is pure , holy , spiritual , very agreeable to the divine nature and the common reason of mankind . the moral precepts of it are clear , weighty and comprehensive . and those who have delivered them to us , neither commend any vice , nor sink the reputation of any vertue ; they never lessen our duties to god , or to one another ; all the just complaint is , that the precepts are too strict and severe , too good and too hard for mankind to practise them . but is this an objection against our religion , or against mankind ? if they think that , let our religion require what it will , the generality of the world will still live and act like brutes , and go against all reason and religion ; how can we help it ? but we hope the blame is not to be laid on reason or religion , that so great a part of mankind are either fools or mad-men ; i. e. either want sense to understand their duty , or are resolved not to practise it . especially considering , that the rewards and punishments of another life , are set forth in the gospel , with that clearness , that force , that authority , that if any thing of that nature would work upon mankind , these must . but all these things i pass over , and come to that which i proposed as my chief design , which is to prove , that none who truly believe the principles of natural religion , can have any reason to reject this fundamental article of it , as to god's sending his son into the world. and that upon two accounts . i. that the principles of natural religion make this design appear very credible , or fit to be believed by men of sense and understanding . ii. that the principles on which this fundamental article of our revealed religion stands , afford sufficient evidence to prove it true ; and therefore that we are bound to believe it . as to the former , the grounds or principles which i go upon , are these : i. that the great end of christ's coming into the world , viz. the salvation of mankind , is most agreeable to the infinite wisdom and goodness of god. no one who believes a god , can deny him to be of infinite wisdom and goodness ; for the very same reasons which move men to believe a god , do convince them that he must be of infinite wisdom and goodness , seeing the strongest evidences to prove his being are from the instances of them in the world. these being then supposed , as essential and inseparable attributes of the divine nature ; we are to consider what end with respect to mankind is most agreeable to these to carry on ; and we must suppose mankind to be made up of soul and body , which are capable of pleasures and satisfaction , both in this world and another : but our souls are of an immortal nature , that will subsist in happiness or misery after this life , otherwise the rewards and punishments of another world signify nothing ; the question then is ( if it can be made a question ) whether it be more agreeable to the infinite goodness and wisdom of god to provide for the well-being of mankind in such a low and gloomy a region , as this earth is , or to advance them into a far better place , and better company , and more noble and divine delights , and those not depending on a fading , drooping , dying life , but on the perpetual enjoyment of a complete happiness both of soul and body . no one that ever dares to think or consider of these things , can believe there is any comparison between them ; so that the salvation tendred by the gospel , is the most agreeable end which the wisdom and goodness of god could carry on for the benefit of mankind . but why should mankind flatter themselves with the hopes or expectation of a happiness so far above what they can pretend to deserve ? there were some grounds for such an objection as this ; if we supposed the rewards of another life to come from any other fountain than the infinite goodness of god towards those who sincerely love him and endeavour to please him ; although with many failings and imperfections . but this is the only hypothesis , which we maintain to be the christian doctrine : and what is there in it , which is repugnant to the wisdom and goodness of god ? what was it but infinite goodness which gave a being to the world at first , and hath preserved it ever since , and made it so usefull and beneficial to mankind ? what is it , but infinite goodness that suffers us to live and enjoy so many comforts of life , after so many great and continual provocations ? if we were to argue from our deserts , it were impossible for us to justifie the wonderfull patience and long-suffering of god towards the sinfull race of mankind ; for we are certain , that they have long since deserved to be cut off from the face of the earth ? if we consider the justice and holiness of god , whereby he is daily provoked to punish offenders , and the power he hath to execute his justice in a moment , without any opposite power to controll or resist him ; we have reason to be astonished at the wonderfull patience and forbearance of god , of which we every day see so large experience . but this is not all ; he doth not only suffer them to live , but often makes their condition easie and prosperous as to this world , having health , riches and honour , and the hopes of their posterity , enjoying the same things after them . now these to such , who do not believe or value another life , are the greatest things god can do to their satisfaction . but if they can allow so much goodness in god towards those who continually offend him ; why should they question greater instances of it towards those that endeavour to please him ? i do not mean as to this world , but as to another which they value far before it ; for if they do not , they have no reason to expect any happiness in it : why then should it be thought more unreasonable for god to bestow the happiness of another life , on those who esteem and choose it , than to give the good things of this life to those who love and admire it ? i do not say , the wisdom is equal in the choice ; but the goodness of god is wonderfull in both . and there can be no imaginable ground to suspect , that god should be really less kind to those who love him best . it is a vain thing to talk of those being saved by christ's coming into the world , who do not heartily love god and keep his commandments ; for the whole design of the gospel is to perswade us to one in order to the other ; and therefore it is not a well-grounded hope , but a fond imagination for any to expect salvation by christ on any other terms . if we then take in the whole hypothesis or true scheme of christianity together , it is no other than that god sent his son into the world , that the world through him might be saved ; not by continuing in the sinfull practises of this world , which s. john calls the lust of the flesh , and the lust of the eye , and the pride of life ; but by subduing and mortifying all disorderly passions do prepare themselves for a better state. now , if there be in our minds a firm perswasion of the infinite goodness of god , of which we are convinced by meer natural reason ; why should it be thought hard to believe , that god should take care of so great and good an end , as the eternal salvation of those who truly love and obey him . ii. the next principle agreeable to natural reason and religion is , that no such thing as salvation or happiness in a future state can be expected without the particular favour of god. for , all who do own natural religion , must agree that the soul of man is an immortal thinking being ; and therefore its happiness must consist in such a sort of thinking , as carries the greatest pleasure and satisfaction along with it . let us think with our selves what a soul separate from the body can do , to make it self happy : here it was intangled , corrupted , and therefore apt to be deceived by the false appearances of things , which glide through the senses and leave too lasting impressions on the mind ; and thereby it comes to mistake shews for substance and meer colours for realities . but this is a mistake so common and so fatal to mankind , that very few are throughly undeceived in this world ; for one way or other they are apt to flatter themselves with some pleasing mistakes and delightfull errors of life . but assoon as the soul is dislodged from this cloudy mansion in the body , all things will then appear , not as by an uncertain sky-light in a dark room , but in an open and distinct view , and then it will be impossible to be any longer deceived by false representations of things . what then can be conceived sufficient to entertain and please the mind ? will it be the reflection on the past pleasures of the body ? no certainly ; for those cannot bear a severe reflection onw ; and the very thoughts of them make men's minds very uneasie ; for the most tempting pleasures of sin leave no grateful relish behind them . how then should the mind bear up it self in another state , when its reflections must be far more constant and severe ? what then ? can the mind lay it self asleep , and put it self into a state of unthinking ? that were all one , as a kind of self-annihilation if it be of a thinking nature . there is a state of unthinking in this vvorld , which is too common ; when the mind is as it were overlaid and stifled with feathers ; i mean is so taken up with trifling and vain imaginations , as hardly give way to one serious thought . but this is impossible in another state ; and therefore nothing but what will bear a most strict and severe scrutiny can give any support or comfort to the mind then . it must be true and real good to create any satisfaction ; it must be durable and lasting to keep it up ; it must be compleat and perfect to answer all the just and reasonable desires of an immortal soul. and what can this be less than god himself ? and therefore the christian religion speaks most agreeably to natural reason , when it still supposes the happiness of another vvorld to consist in the presence and enjoyment of god. for those must have all that is desireable , who enjoy the favour of him who commands all things , and knows how to suit them to the greatest advantage to those to whom he designs to shew his favour . and this prospect of another state , or of the salvation of mankind by christ's coming into the world , is that which lets us into another view of all that relates to the son of god's coming into the vvorld : for if our minds be possessed with great apprehensions of the power and greatness of the vvorld ; all that the gospel represents as to the manner of god's sending his son into the vvorld , his being born of an obscure virgin , being laid in the common manger , being bred up in a private place , having so mean followers , meeting with so cold a reception from his own people , and at last , being exposed to an ignominious death by them , looks very reproachfull and contemptible . but on the other side , if we could raise our minds to such idea's of things here , as the glorious spirits above have ; and see how all things are esteemed by them according to the ends and purposes they are designed for , we should then perceive how admirably all these things were fitted for his great end ; which was to wean mens hearts from the pomp and vanities of this vvorld and to prepare them for a better ; and we should then have quite another opinion of these things : for as there is a certain greatness , which is above all the formal shews and affected appearances of it , so when a great and noble design is to be carried on , the true measure of decorum in that case , is that which is most serviceable to the principal end. if a great person had a design to rescue some near relations out of slavery , he would never go with a splendid equipage and a long train of attendance , which would but make his person more gazed at and his design less effectual . if he had intended to have rescued them by force out of captivity , it had been necessary to have had power and strength proportionable to his design ; but if it were only by perswasion , then he must accommodate himself to such methods as were most likely to prevail . the great end of the coming of christ was to deliver the souls of men from a much worse captivity , viz. of their own sinfull passions and the devil's tyranny by their means ; but he did not come in a way of violence to break open the prison-doors and in an instant to knock off their fetters and bid them be free ; but he makes use of all the gentle and effectual methods of perswasion , not only by his words but by his own example ; that they might learn by him to despise this world , who had so little in it , and to prepare for that from whence he came , where their happiness should be unconceivable and without end. iii. the third principle is , that no such particular favour of god is to be expected , as long as his displeasure is so just against mankind for sin , and no effectual means used to remove it . the truth is , the whole scheme of the gospel turns upon this point , whether god be really displeased with mankind for their sins , so as to need a reconciliation : for , if all that the scripture so often expresses concerning the wrath and displeasure of god against mankind for sin , be only figurative and hyperbolical expressions , then the whole design of the gospel must be given up as a meer scheme ; for , if god be not really displeased , there is no need of reconciliation ; if no need of that , then there can be no need of christ's coming to reconcile us to god ; and if he did not come for that end , we have no reason to believe the scripture , which affirms it over and over . and i do not think any stronger argument can be brought to prove a thing , than that the most emphatical expressions are so often applied to that purpose , by such persons who used all sincerity and plainness . so that this matter as to the scripture is clear , if any thing can be made so ; and if nothing can , i cannot see how it is possible to have a written rule of faith ; since all writings are capable by ambiguity of words and phrases , by the different use of particles and transposition of letters and syllables , of very different interpretations . but this is not my present business , which is rather to consider the natural sense and reason of mankind as to this matter . we cannot in reason suppose any such passion in an infinitely perfect being , as that which we call wrath and anger in men. for that is a violent perturbation arising from surprise and indignation ; but there can be no disorder or surprise in a being of infinite wisdom . therefore wrath in god must suppose two things . 1. a just cause of displeasure given by us . 2. such a just displeasure following upon it as will end in the severe punishment of offenders if it be not removed . now , whether there be a just cause of displeasure or not , must depend upon the natural differences of good and evil. and it is impossible that any one who exercises his reason , can judge amiss in this matter . not , that all the differences of good and evil are equally clear , for all propositions in mathematicks are not so ; but it is sufficient to our purpose , that the general principles are so ; and the greater instances ; so that no man can think that he acts as much according to reaso in one as the other . and , can any one of common sense imagine god to be as well pleased with him who blasphemes his name , and despises his service , and hates religion , as with one that fears and honours him , and endeavours to please him ? can he be as well pleased with him , that assassines his parents , as with him that obeys them ? with him that robs and defrauds his neighbour , as with him that relieves him in his necessities ? with him who subdues his disorderly passions , as with him that gives way to them ? with him who is cruel , inhuman and perfidious , as with him that is faithfull and just and compassionate ? these are but some of the instances of the differences of good and evil , but they are so plain and notorious , that a man must renounce the common principles of humanity , who doth not own them . and to say there are no such differences , because there have been mistakes and disputes about some things accounted good and evil , is as absurd , as to say , there is no difference between day and night , because in the twilight it is hard to distinguish them . but if there be such a real difference in the nature of human actions , and god be a strict observer of them , he being a god of infinite holiness and justice , cannot but be offended with mankind's wilfull omission of what they know to be good , and commission of what they know to be evil. but here we must distingush between god's displeasure against the actions and against the persons who commit them . the former is a necessary consequent upon the evil of sin and can never be removed , for god is irreconcileable to sin. but those who commit sin are his creatures ; and therefore capable of mercy and forgiveness . there is always a desert of punishment following upon sin ; but there is no inseparable connection between the sin and the punishment ; for the great and wise governor of the vvorld acts not by necessity of nature in punishing sinners , but by the methods of vvisdom and justice . and if the saving of sinners upon their repentance can be made agreeable to these , such is the mercy and goodness of god to his creatures , that there is great reason to hope for a reconciliation . for , although god be displeased , he is not implacable ; although he be justly provoked to punish sinners , yet there is no absolute necessity that he should ; nor any irreversible decree that he will do it ; and therefore notwithstanding this displeasure of god , there is a way still left open for reconciliation , which leads to the next . iv. the fourth principle is , that if god be thus displeased with the sins of mankind , and yet there is a possibility of reconciliation between god and them , he alone is the most proper and competent judge , on what terms this reconciliation may be obtained . for being both the offended party and the supreme governor , he hath the sole right on both accounts of fixing those terms and conditions , upon which he will forgive sins , and receive the offenders into favour . it is a vain thing for any to argue from one attribute of god against another . some are apt to flatter themselves that god will easily forgive sins , because he is mercifull , but they ought to consider that he is just and holy as well as mercifull ; and there is as much ground to fear that he will not forgive because he is just ; as there can be to hope that he will because he is mercifull . and thus it is impossible for a considering man to satisfie his own mind as to god's forgiving his sins ; unless he be some way assured from himself that he will do it . and therefore a particular revelation in this case must be made , if god designs to bring men to repentance by the hopes of forgiveness . but meer repentance can never make any satisfaction to god for the breach of his laws . suppose a sinner comes to himself and is heartily sorry that he hath offended god so many ways , and with such aggravating circumstances as he hath done ; and now resolves in the anguish of his soul never more to return to the practice of them ; this no doubt , is far more pleasing to god , than going on to offend still ; but all this is no more than a man in justice to god and to himself is bound to doe ; for he is bound to vindicate the honour of god's laws , and to condemn himself for his own folly , and to return no more to the practice of it . but what amends is made by all this , for the infinite dishonour which hath been done to god and his laws by the violation of them ? the courts of justice among men take no notice of the malefactors repentance ; however he be affected , the law must be observed , and offenders punished . how then can any persons be assured from meer natural reason , that god will not be as tender of the honour and justice of his laws , as mankind are allowed to be without any imputation of cruelty or injustice ? if god should be exact in punishing offenders , who could complain ? for who can plead not-guilty before his maker ? and when a man 's own conscience condemns him that he hath deserved punishment , what reason can he have from himself not to expect it ? and if he doth justly expect to be punished , what reason can he have to hope for forgiveness ? since he knows that he deserves to be punished , and therefore can never deserve to be forgiven . it must be therefore a free act of grace and mercy in god to forgive even penitent sinners ; and upon what terms and in what manner he will do it depends wholly upon his own good will. he may forgive sins if he pleases , and it is agreeable to his nature to do it , if sinners do repent and forsake their sins ; but whether god hath actually made known to us the way of reconciliation cannot be known by any principles of nature ; because it is a matter of fact and must have such proof as a thing of that nature is capable of . ii. having thus shewed , how strongly the principles of natural religion do make way for entertaining this point of the christian doctrine , as to god's sending his son into the world in order to our reconciliation with him and our salvation by him ; it remains now to shew how justly god doth require the belief of it from us as true ; for the next words tell us , that he that believeth on him is not condemned ; but he that believeth not is condemned already , because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten son of god , v. 18. this , some may say , is very hard doctrine ; for they believe as much as they can ; and if they can believe no more it is no fault ; for no man can be bound to believe more than he can . i do not question but nicodemus ( to whom these words are generally supposed to be spoken by our saviour ) thought he had gone a great way , when he used those words to christ , v. 2. rabbi we know that thou art a teacher come from god , for no man can do these miracles that thou dost except god be with him . i. e. he was willing to believe him some great prophet whom god had sent ; and this was a fair step for a ruler among the jews , who were generally very unreasonable unbelievers . but christ tells him plainly this would not do ; for unless he believed him to be the only begotten son of god , he could not be saved . and this is the great point , that god so loved the world , that he gave his only begotten son , that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life , v. 16. not , as though meer believing this were sufficient ( for this carries a great many other things along with it ) but that since god had sent his only begotten son into the world upon such a message , he did expect that he should be received and entertained as such upon their utmost peril . but can we believe farther than we have reason to believe ? no ; god doth not expect it from us , provided that with sincere and impartial minds we set our selves to consider and weigh the evidence and with great humility beg the assistance of divine grace , without which god may justly leave us to our unbelief . it would be too large a subject now to lay open the several arguments to prove that it is as evident , as a matter of fact can be made to us , that god did send his son that the world through him might be saved ; therefore i shall only mention these two things . 1. that if the matters of fact are true concerning the history of christ's coming , as related by the evangelists , there can be no reason to doubt his being the son of god. for he that was the most exact pattern of humility and self-denial , not only frequently assumes this title to himself , and his most intimate disciples affirm it of him ; but god himself gave the most ample and convincing testimony to it ; by his miraculous birth ; and a voice from heaven to that purpose at his baptism ; by a long train and series of publick and usefull miracles to attest the truth of his doctrine ; by his resurrection from the dead and ascension into heaven , and wonderfull effusion of the h. ghost , with the strange effects which followed it ; so that no one who doth believe these things to be true can have any ground to say that he cannot believe christ to be the son of god. 2. that if these matters of fact are not to be believed as true we cannot be bound to believe any thing but what we see our selves . for the distance of time and place are equal in this case ; and no other matters of fact are so well attesten as these are . and so , as the apostle saith of christ's resurrection , if he be not risen our faith is vain ; so in this case i say if there be not reason to believe these things all faith is vain . for no other matters of fact , which we should be accounted fools for not believing , have had such a sort of testimony which these have had . for these things were not conveyed by a silent tradition for some time till the chief parties were dead who could either prove or disprove them ; but they were publick and exposed to all manner of examination ; they were not deliver'd by one or two , who were trusted with a secret , but openly avowed by a great number of competent witnesses , who were present ; and none of them could be brought by the greatest sufferings to deny , or falsify , or conceal any part of their evidence ; that when these things had been thus delivered by those who saw them , who were most remarkable for their innocency and integrity , in the next ages they were examined and enquired into by men of sagacity and learning , who upon the strictest search found no reason to suspect their testimony ; and therefore heartily embraced and defended the christian faith. and from thence they have been conveyed down to us ; not by an uncertain oral tradition , which can hardly hold the same from one end of the town to another ; but by unquestionable writings ; of such authority , that the christians would rather dye than deliver up their books . and in these are all those circumstances contained , which we are bound to believe as christians ; among which this is one of the chief , that god sent his son into the world for the salvation of mankind . to summ up all ; i desire those who after all this pretend that they are willing to believe as much as they can , and those who are liable to any suggestions of infidelity , to consider seriously with themselves , whether there can be a greater and more noble design , more becoming the wisdom , power and goodness of god to carry on , than that of rescuing mankind out of a miserable state , and putting them into a certain way of eternal happiness ? whether such a design must not be discovered in some particular age of the world , with all the circumstances relating to it ? whether that age were not the fittest of all others , wherein the most remarkable prophecies were to be accomplished , as to the coming of the messias , while the second temple was standing ? whether the difficulties as to human testimonies be not equal to all ages and things ? whether because it is possible for all men to deceive , it be reasonable to infer that all men are deceived ; and that there is nothing but illusion and imposture in the world ; and that all men lye and deceive for the sake of lying and deceiving ? but if there be a difference to be made between men and between testimonies ; then we are to examine the different characters of truth and falshood and give our assent according to them . and if after the severest examination we do not find sufficient reason to believe that god sent his son into the world for the salvation of mankind , upon such testimonies as are given of it , we must conclude all mankind to be made up of fraud and imposture ; and that there is no such thing as sincerity and honesty in the world ; or that if there be , it is not possible for others to discern it . which are such fatal reproaches upon human nature , that no one who pretends to any regard to it can be guilty of . for if they be universally true , they must condemn themselves ; if not , we must see some very particular reason why we should not rather think them deceived , than fix such an indelible blot upon the reputation of mankind . and surely it is a great advantage to the truth of religion to find , that it cannot be overthrown but by such methods , as equally overturn all truth and certainty , and that the faith of christianity stands not only upon the same bottom with the common faith of mankind . but if we reject such assurance as is offer'd us for the faith of the gospel , our infidelity cannot be the effect of reason and argument , but of a causeless suspicion and unreasonable mistrust of the best part of mankind . who have most firmly believed the truth of these things and have led the most holy and exemplary lives in hopes of a blessed immortality . and if the testimony of any persons deserves to be taken before others , it must be of such who could have no design upon this world but were resolved by faith and patience to prepare for a better . to conclude . for us who believe and own the truth of this great and fundamental article of the christian faith , we have something else to do than meerly to vindicate and assert it . this at some times is more necessary than at others ; and i heartily wish this were none of them . i am willing to hope the best of all who in such an age of infidelity have the courage and zeal to own the faith of this day ; viz. that god sent his son into the world in order to the making us for ever happy . and i hope none who profess themselves christians this day will ever be discouraged by the mocks and flouts of infidels so as to let go the anchor of their hope , or mistrust the foundation of their faith. it is as great a piece of wisdom to know when to believe , as when not to believe ; and it is as certain an argument of a weak mind to be always doubting , as to be over-forward in believing : for the soil must be very bad that can bear no foundation . but withall let us not flatter our selves only that we have a better faith than others . for how miserable will our case be , if we have nothing but a superficial faith ; and a sort of anniversary devotion . we can never thank god too much for the blessing of this day ; but god expects something more from us , than meerly the giving him solemn thanks once a year for sending his son into the world. we must endeavour to answer the end of god's sending him , i. e. to save us first from our sins , and then from the wrath to come . this is the method which god himself hath appointed , not barely from his own will and pleasure , but from the necessary order and reason of things . for , otherwise a man might be rewarded for doing amiss , and punished for performing his duty . if we therefore ever hope for any benefit by this coming of christ into the world , we must apply our minds to consider seriously on what conditions we may reasonably hope for salvation by him . can they think that christ came to so little purpose as to save men in their sins ? if that were to be hoped , there had been no need of his coming ; but it is a hard work indeed to save us from them . the guilt must be expiated , and the power subdued ; the former christ hath done ; but he expects , and with great reason , that we should deny ungodly and worldly lusts , and work out our own salvation with fear and trembling . finis . lately printed for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall feb. 22. 1688 / 9. upon 1 pet. 4.18 . a sermon preached before the king and queen at white-hall , march 23. 1689 / 90. upon ecclesiastes 11.9 . christian magnanimity : a sermon preached in the cathedral-church at worcester , at the time of the assizes , sept. 21. 1690. upon 2 tim. 1.7 . a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , march 1. 1690 / 1 on luke 6.46 . a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , march 13. 1691 / 2. upon rom. 8.6 . the mysteries of the christian faith vindicated , in a sermon preached at st. lawrence-iewry , london , april 7. 1691. upon 1 tim. 1.15 . all six by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese , in his primary visitation , begun at worcester , sept. 11. 1690. the unreasonableness of a separation from the new bishops : or a treatise out of ecclesiastical history . shewing , that although a bishop was unjustly deprived , neither he nor the church ever made a separation , if the successor was not a heretick . translated out of an ancient greek manuscript in the publick library at oxford . the case of sees vacant , by an unjust or uncanonical deprivation , stated : in reply to a treatise , entituled , a vindication of the deprived bishops , &c. together with the several pamphlets lately published as answers to the baroccian treatise : both by humphrey hody , d. d. fellow of wadham-college in oxford . the folly and unreasonableness of atheism demonstrated , from the advantage and pleasure of a religious life ; the faculties of human souls ; the structure of animate bodies , and the origin and frame of the world : in eight sermons , preached at the lecture founded by the honourable robert boyle esq in the first year 1692. by richard bentley , m. a. chaplain to the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61625-e140 ch . 20.31 . ch . 1.3 . 2.32 . ch . 1.11.12 . rom. 1.20 ver . 3. psal. 8.4.144.3 . ● joh. 1.16 . a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall, march the 1st, 1690/1 by the right reverend father in god edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1691 approx. 48 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 21 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61622 wing s5662 estc r15244 13593505 ocm 13593505 100692 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61622) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100692) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 802:20) a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall, march the 1st, 1690/1 by the right reverend father in god edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 37, [1] p. printed for henry mortlock ..., london : 1691. "published by her majesties special command." advertisement on p. [1] at end. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -luke vi, 46 -sermons. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , march the 1 st . 1690 / 1. by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . published by her majesties special command . london , printed for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . 1691. a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , march the 1st . 1690 / 1. s. luke vi. 46. and why call ye me lord , lord , and do not the things which i say ? these few words contain in them a smart and serious expostulation of our blessed saviour , with such who professed great kindness to him in their words , but shew'd no regard to his commands . they owned him to be the messias , and depended upon him for their happiness , and were willing enough to be known to be his disciples and followers , but yet his doctrine made little impression on their minds , and scarce any alteration in the course of their lives . they loved to be where christ was , to hear his doctrine , to see his miracles , to observe his conversation , to admire what he did and said ; but herein lay the whole of their religion ; for although they named the name of christ , and it may be rejoyced and glory'd in it , yet they did not depart from iniquity . now , considering the circumstances of that time , this seems to have been an unaccountable kind of hypocrisie . for their calling christ lord , lord , spoiled their interest in this world ; and not doing what he said , debarr'd , them from the hopes of happiness by him in another . for , if they own'd him to be their lord , they were bound to believe him in what he declared ; and there is nothing he doth more expresly warn men of than hoping to be saved by him without obeying his commands . not every one that saith unto me lord , lord , shall enter into the kingdom of heaven , but he that doth the will of my father which is in heaven . which is shorter expressed , but to the same purpose here by s. luke ; and why call ye me lord , lord , and do not the things which i say ? as though he had said to them , it is in vain to think to please and flatter me with your words , when your actions are disagreeable to them . to call me lord , lord , is to own my authority in commanding you ; but to do this , and yet wilfully to disobey me , is to shew your hypocrisie and folly together . which expostulation of christ , was not confined to that time , no more than his commands were ; but it hath always the same force , where persons are guilty of the same folly. for , although now none can plead for themselves , as they did , we have eaten and drank in thy presence , and thou hast taught in our streets ; yet we may build as presumptuous hopes upon privileges of another kind , which may be as ineffectual to our salvation , as these were when christ said to those very persons , depart from me all ye workers of iniquity . we all bear the name of christ , and own his doctrine , and partake of his sacraments ; and in one of them profess to eat and drink in his presence , and at his table , and renew our solemn baptismal vow and covenant with him as our lord and saviour ; and so we pray to him and profess to depend upon him for our salvation ; and therefore we are as deeply concerned in the scope and design of these words , as ever the iews were to whom our saviour spake them . but that i may the better apply them to the consciences of all those who hear me this day , and to make my discourse more usefull and practical , i shall single out some of the most remarkable instances of those duties , which christ hath enjoyned to his disciples of all ages and nations ; and then shew how just and reasonable it is that all who call christ lord , lord , should do what he saith about them ; and yet that the generality of those who do so , do very little mind or regard them . the main part of those duties which christ requires from all his disciples may be reduced to these three heads : i. such as relate to the government of our passions . ii. to the government of our speech . iii. to the government of our actions ; so , as that we lead a sober , righteous and godly life . i. as to the government of our passions . and that may be considered three ways . 1. as to the things which are apt to provoke us . 2. as to the things which are apt to tempt us . 3. as to the things which concern us , in respect of our condition in this world. ( 1 ) as to the things which are apt to provoke us . such is the frame of human nature , that we are very tender and sensible not only of any real hurt or injury which may be done to our bodies or estates , but of any thing we apprehend may do so , or that touches upon our reputation . and where the injury is real , yet that which often touches most to the quick , is the contempt which is expressed in it . for , if the same thing be done by one , we are satisfied did it not out of any unkindness or ill-will , the matter is easily passed over , and makes no breach or difference between them . but , if it be intended for an affront , although it be never so little , then the brisker mens spirits are , and the higher opinion they have of themselves , so much deeper impression is presently made in the mind ; and that inflames the heart and puts the blood and spirits into a quicker motion in order to the returning the affront on him that gave it . but there is a considerable difference in mens tempers to be observed ; some are very quick and hasty , others are slower in the beginning , but more violent afterwards ; the passions in the former , are like a flash of gun-powder , which begins suddenly , makes a great noise and is soon over ; but the other are like a burning fever , which is lower at first , but rises by degrees , till the whole body be in a flame . the one is more troublesome , but the other more dangerous ; the care of the one must be in the beginning ; of the other in the continuance of passion , lest it turn into hatred , malice and revenge . but , what through the natural heat of temper in some , the jealousie and suspicion in others , the crossing each others designs and inclinations , the misconstruction of words and actions , the carelesness of some and the frowardness and peevishness of others , mankind are apt to lead very uneasie lives with respect to one another ; and must do so unless they look after the government of themselves as to real or imaginary provocations . there are two things i shall therefore speak to , ( 1 ) that it is reasonable that a restraint should be laid on mens violent passions . ( 2 ) that christ hath laid no unreasonable restraint upon them . ( 1 ) that it is reasonable that a restraint should be laid on mens violent passions . and that on a twofold account . ( 1 ) with respect to the common tranquillity of human life . ( 2 ) to the particular tranquillity of our own minds . ( 1 ) to the common tranquillity of human life . the great comfort and pleasure of it depends on the mutual benefit men have from society with one another . this cannot be enjoy'd without particular persons abridging themselves of some natural rights for a common benefit . if we could suppose no such thing as government or society among men , we must suppose nothing but disorder and confusion ; every one being his own judge and executioner too in case of any apprehended wrong or injury done to him . which condition of life having all imaginable uneasiness attending it , by perpetual fears and jealousies and mistrusts of one anothers powers , there was a necessity that they must come to some common terms of agreement with each other ; so as to fix their rights and to establish a just measure of proceeding in case of wrong . for every mans revenging his own injury according to his own judgment , was one of those great inconveniencies , which was to be remedied by society , laws and government . and mankinds entering into society for this end , doth suppose it possible for them to keep under their violent passions ; and to submit their private injuries to the equal arbitration of laws ; or else they are made to no purpose , unless it be to punish men for what they cannot avoid . for many of those crimes which all the laws of mankind do punish , as wilfull murder , may be committed through the force of a violent passion ; and if that be irresistible , then the laws which punish it are not founded on reason and justice . but if such laws are very just and reasonable , as no doubt they are , then all mankind are agreed that mens violent passions may and ought to be restrained in some cases . the only dispute then remaining is , whether it may not be as fitting to restrain our passions in such cases , which the law takes no notice of . for , there is a superiour law , viz. that of reason whereby we are to be governed ; and the publick laws do not forbid or punish offences because they are unreasonable , but because they are dangerous and hurtfull to human society . and if it be allow'd to be fitting and necessary for men to keep their passions within the compass of laws , why not within the conduct of reason ? especially , when a great deal of disorder may happen , and disturbance of the peace and quiet of human society , by the violence of passions , which may be out of the reach of human laws . and every man is bound by virtue of his being in society , to preserve the tranquillity of it as much as he can . ( 2 ) the tranquillity of our own minds depends upon it . and certainly , that is a very reasonable motive for the government of our passions , since those are the occasions of all the storms and tempests within our breasts . for the government of reason is calm , even and serene , full of peace and all the blessings which follow it ; but the government of passion is tyrannical and boisterous , uncertain and troublesome ; never free from doing mischief to it self or others . the greatest pleasure of passion is revenge ; and yet that is so unnatural , so full of anxiety and fear of the consequents of it , that he who can subdue this unruly passion hath more real pleasure and satisfaction in his mind , than he who seeks to gratifie it most . for , if he be disappointed , then he must be uneasie by failing of his end ; if he be not , then he is tormented with the apprehensions of what may follow it . so that there is nothing which conduces more to the greatest blessing of life , the tranquillity of our minds , than the government of our passions doth . ( 2 ) let us now see , whether our saviour hath laid any unreasonable restraint upon our passions . there are three things he particularly requires in order to the government of them . ( 1 ) meekness . ( 2 ) patience . ( 3 ) love of enemies . and i hope to make it appear , that there is nothing unreasonable in any of these . ( 1 ) meekness . which is such a gentleness of temper , as makes a man not easie to be provoked . there is a great deal of difference between meekness and stupidity ; the one arises from a natural dullness and insensibility ; the other from a fixed , calm and composed temper of mind ; and is founded on two , which are both wise things , especially when they go together ; and those are , consideration and resolution . for , nothing tends to the abating the heat and violence of passion so much , as consideration doth , and resolution makes it effectual . if it were nothing but the time it gives , that is of great force for letting out the inward fermentation , which will spend it self in great measure , if vent be given to it . whereas , if it be kept in and suffer'd to work upon it self , it turns from a hasty passion to malice and revenge . but consideration is of greater use , as it suggests arguments from reason to quell and allay the sudden heat of passions ; as , that , it exposes the weakness of our minds , in not being able to keep under that which they ought to govern and have power to command ; that , it is a great folly to disorder our selves , at the pleasure of our enemies ; or , at such accidents , which we can neither prevent , nor remove ; that , the wisest thing we can do , is not to betray our folly to others , if we cannot wholly suppress it in our selves ; that , we weaken the reins of the government of our selves , by not holding them with a stricter hand ; and make our passions more seditious and turbulent by letting them alone ; that , the more we try to command our selves the easier we shall do it ; that our most rebellious passions will submit , if they find we are in earnest ; that , it is the way to make that a real injury by being disturbed , which would lose is force by being neglected ; that , while we are true to our selves , we are out of the reach of our enemies , and then we are most under their power , when we are least under our own ; that , the great work of religion lies within us ; and that we are in a very ill condition if neither reason nor religion can keep us in order . by such considerations as these , men are brought to a more calm and composed temper , which is that meekness which our saviour requires . and to this he seems to appropriate the happiness of this life . blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth . what doth our blessed saviour mean by inheriting the earth ? is there any thing like blessedness to be expected in this troublesome and sinfull world ? not absolutely ; but comparatively there may ; and if there be any thing like it to be had here , the meek may put in for the largest share of it . for they have more friends and fewer enemies than the rest of the world ; they enjoy themselves with more quietness and satisfaction , and are less disturbed at the noise and tumultuous passions of the rest of mankind . o happy temper ! to be calm and easie and in good humour , in the midst of disorders and provocations ; to enjoy the peace and serenity of the regions above , in the midst of the storms and tempests , here below ; to raise the mind above the power of detraction ; and thereby to suffer the venom of malicious tongues to scatter and disperse it self in the open air , if it doth not return to the breasts of those from whom it came . s. iames might therefore well call it the meekness of wisdom , not only because wisdom directs it , but that it consists very much in the exercise of it . 2. patience . for let persons be endued with the spirit of meekness , yet the world is so froward and hard to be pleased , so captious and ill-natured , so ready to apprehend an injury and to revenge it , that there is great need of patience , not only in bearing the troubles of life , but in forbearing to return evil for evil . and this is that which our saviour particularly requires of his disciples . he strictly forbids all causeless anger , all contumelious and reproachfull words ; and when injuries are done us , he commands us that we resist not evil ; but if one smite us on the right cheek , to turn to him the other also . and if any man will sue thee at the law and take away thy coat , let him have thy cloak also . and whosoever will compel thee to go a mile , go with him twain . now here lies a real difficulty ; for this seems to go beyond the bounds of human patience : to pass by affronts without taking notice of them ; not to resent the injuries of those whom no kindness can oblige , seems to be a great degree of vertue ; and it is so ; but to bind hand and foot when we receive them , to invite them to do more , and to offer our selves to double the proportion , seems wholly unaccountable to reason , and inconsistent with the wisdom of christianity . the true account of the meaning of these commands is this ; our saviour takes it for granted , that all considerable matters of right and wrong were determin'd by laws ; as the most equal measures between parties ; and these he meddled not with ; for , saith he , to one that desired him to interpose in such a matter ; who made me a iudge or a divider among you ? therefore he doth not abridge his followers from making use of these laws and courts of judicature , which are established for matters of common justice and equity ; but all the laws in the world cannot alter the temper of some mens minds , who are peevish and quarrelsome , who are provoked on any slight occasion , and it may be are provoked if you gave them none . like the roman orator , seneca mentions , who was angry with every one that came near him ; and when a client sought to humour him in every thing , he was at last angry with him , because he did not provoke him . there are some tempers so easily provoked , and yet so hard to be reconciled , as if their original sin did not lie in concupiscence but in ill-nature . and yet , even that is a kind of concupiscence ; for the stoicks defined anger by libido ; and said it was a lust of revenge ; and so far , seem'd more unreasonable than that of intemperance ; because this aims only at pleasure , in things which are apt to produce it ( however mean and unreasonable ) but the other is an extravagant and unnatural pleasure , which arises from anothers pain ; and differs from the other , as the pleasures of evil spirits do from those of brutes . but if we happen to converse among such who take pleasure in doing us injuries upon every slight occasion , by some personal affronts , or litigious suits , or unjust exactions in ordinary cases ; what are we to do ? may we not right our selves by retaliating the injury upon them ? since the law of moses did allow of retaliation in case of real injuries , an eye for an eye , a tooth for a tooth ; and so by an equitable construction of the law , it may extend to personal affronts . thus the iews indeed understood it ; but if our saviour had allow'd their interpretation , he would never have said , but i say unto you , that ye resist not evil . there was a spirit of revenge in them , so as they would pass by no kind of injuries , although they were such , which the law had made no provision for ; and this our saviour condemns . but here comes a hard case to be resolved ; not so in it self , but the custom of the world hath made it so ; for when a mistaken notion of honour and conscience come in competition , it is not an easie thing to forego honour for conscience sake . the case is , concerning contumelious words and personal affronts , which are given to men of honour . is it unlawfull for them to right themselves according to the received customs among them , when the law takes no notice of such injuries , and so seems to leave it to them ? this is the case ; and i have put it as fair as the thing will bear . i might say in general that our saviour makes no distinction of mens honour and quality in his commands ; and that for all that i can see , such must be saved on the same terms with others ; that honour is but an imaginary thing when it stands in competition with the rule of conscience ; and that no custom is to be observed against reason and religion : but here lies the insuperable difficulty ; how the exposing one anothers lives for the sake of reproachfull words or personal affronts , can be reconciled to this command of christ ? for my part , i cannot see how it is possible to do it ; since in this case , there is a studied and premeditated design of revenge in the case of such injuries which are here mention'd ; and that of the highest nature , and beyond any proportion between the offence and the punishment , which all men out of passion , think , in common justice ought to be consider'd . i know some casuists in the church of rome , allow it to be lawfull to take away the lives of any who give them contumelious words ; but these have been condemned as very loose casuists ; and they have found out a subtle way of directing the intention , whereby to keep from breaking the laws of christ ; but this is too subtle to be reconciled with the plainness of his laws ; and they all deny it to be lawfull by way of revenge . others say much better , that although nature may seem to give an injured person a right to vindicate himself by the best means he can ; yet that right is so restrained and limited by christ's commands in this case , that it is by no means lawfull for christians to use it ; and to pretend to do it for a reparation of honour , à ratione & pietate valde alienam videtur , is repugnant both to reason and religion ; saith one , who very well understood the rules of both . but all the pretended right of nature is taken away by laws , and where those declare it to be wilfull murder to take away the life of another on such accounts as these , there is no colour left for natural right , which supposes no determination by laws . i confess it requires a more than ordinary degree of christian fortitude as well as patience , to be able to despise such a prevailing custom . but if men hope to be saved by christ , they must observe his commands ; and if they once declare , that they are resolved to do so in this particular , ( if they do the same in all others ) it will be then thought to be conscience and not cowardice for them to decline a challenge ; and that upon good grounds they contemn such a custom , which no good man could ever approve , nor any wise man defend . 3. love of enemies . this seems to be harder yet . is it not enough to bear them ; but must we love them too ? yes , christ hath strictly required it . but i say unto you , love your enemies ; and again in this very chapter , but love your enemies . if he had bid men love their friends and take heed of their enemies , there are some ages of the world , wherein this had been no impertinent advice . but how can those be supposed to love their enemies , who hardly love any thing but themselves ? self-opinion , self-will , self-interest prevail over the far-greatest part of mankind ; i wish i could not say , even among those who call christ lord , lord. but self-love as natural as it is , must be artificially disguised ; for , if it appears too openly , it meets with so much self-love in others , that it will not be easily born . therefore the most crafty lovers of themselves , if they design to have the love of others , must conceal their inward passion . for , he that appears to set up himself , is certain to make the rest of mankind his enemies ; for , even those who would do the same , will be the most displeased with those who do it . therefore , the most certain way to honour and universal esteem , is to mind the good of others more than our own ; to be just and charitable and kind to all ; and to oblige as many as we can , without partiality or prejudice . and this , i say , is that love of enemies which our saviour requires , which doth not suppose the same kind of affection to them which we have to our friends , for that is grounded on mutual love and good-will to each other ; which , if we suppose in enemies , we suppose a contradiction ; for that is to suppose them not to be enemies , but friends . what then is it which our saviour means ? it is certainly an universal charity , or a readiness of mind to do good to all , although they have personally provoked , or injured us . and so christ himself explains it , by doing good to our enemies , praying for them and relieving them in their necessities ; and he proposes the best example in the world for our imitation ; and that of god himself , who maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good , and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust . but none can suppose that the righteous and holy god , can have the same love or kindness for the evil , which he hath for the good , or for the unjust , which he hath for the just. so that this precept , which being misunderstood , seems to be irreconcilable to human nature , contains in it , nothing but what all mankind approve in others , as unwilling as they are to practise it themselves . and now , it is time to make a stand , and to look about us , for , i have gone through our saviour's commands with respect to the things which are apt to provoke us . and where are those christians to be found , who do what christ hath said herein , who do yet every day call him lord , lord ? if peevishness and frowardness , perpetual uneasiness and discontent ; if rancour and bitterness , strife and envying , faction and animosity ; if impatience of apprehended injuries , and the making of enemies , instead of loving them , were the marks of good christians , we should find number enough ; even among those who pretend to reformation . we profess to thank god for a late great deliverance from the hands of our enemies , i mean as to our religion ; ( and truely there appears more and more reason for it , since it is so much more evident that the design was no less than a total subversion of our religion . ) but what a sad requital is this , for so great mercies , to break out into factions and parties , instead of pursuing the common interest of our religion ? instead of laying aside differences about religion , to increase them ; nay to make religion it self not only the subject of their quarrels , but of their scorn and contempt ? what can be said or hoped for , as to such a froward , unthankfull , atheistical generation of men ? thanks be to god , there are not wanting some extraordinary examples of true piety and goodness among us ; and of meekness , patience and vniversal charity , and truely there needs a great deal , to bear up against the daring and insolent profaneness and irreligion of others . when i once see a true spirit of reformation prevail among us , not meerly as to doctrines , but as to mens lives and tempers ; when i see them more zealous for god and religion , than for the interest of particular parties ; when i see them really promoting peace and unity , and not making a pretence of it to serve private ends , i may then hope for a lasting settlement of the true religion among us . but till then — ( 2 ) i proceed to the second head of our saviour's commands , and that is as to such things which tempt us . s ▪ iames saith , every man is tempted , when he is drawn aside of his own lust and inticed . lust is the ungoverned desire of sensual pleasure . now , as to this , christ hath laid so strict a command , as seems very hard for human nature to observe . for he not only forbids the act of adultery , but the tendencies to it ; viz. the impurity of the inward desires , and of looks and glances , and makes these to be adultery in the heart . what is that ? for adultery is an outward , deliberate act , and hath injustice as well as vncleanness in it . but desires and looks , are sudden and transient things , which may leave , no permanent effect behind them . however , our saviour , to shew how much god abhorrs impurity , ( who sees into the secret thoughts and intentions of the heart , ) declares that the unmortified desires and inward lusts are very displeasing to god ; and therefore that those who hope to see god , must be pure in heart . which as it implies a sincere endeavour to suppress all inward motions which are contrary to it , is both a reasonable and necessary duty . but the hardest part of christ's commands in this matter , is that which requires us to pluck out right eyes and to cut off right hands : must the blind and the lame only go to heaven ? but he speaks of such sinfull inclinations in us , which seem as delightfull and usefull to us as to the pleasures of life , as a right eye or a right hand ; yet we must part with them , if we ever hope to get to heaven . not , by any one single act like the cutting off a hand , or plucking out an eye , but by a serious , constant and sincere endeavour to mortifie and subdue them . and if this be thought hard , the consideration of future happiness and misery ought to reconcile us to it ; and surely it is reasonable , we should part with something which is pleasant to us here , for the sake of an infinitely greater pleasure in another world ; especially since this is only a sensual pleasure , which cannot be pursued without disturbance of the mind , and can be enjoy'd but for a little time ; and the other is no less than eternal felicity of soul and body together . ( 3 ) as to the things which concern us , as to our condition in this world. there is no precept of christ which seems more inconsistent with the wisdom of this world , than this doth . for , as that lies in taking great care for the future ; so our saviour on the contrary seems to allow none at all therefore i say unto you , take no thought for your life , what ye shall eat , or what ye shall drink , nor yet , for your body , what ye shall put on . what doth our saviour mean by this ? would he have all christians live like the young ravens , meerly upon providence ? or , as the lillies of the field , which grow and flourish and yet neither toil nor spin ? but man is an intelligent creature , and apt to forecast and contrive things for his future advantage , and god seems to have left things very much to his own care and providence ; and generally speaking , mens condition in this world is according to it . what then ? doth our saviour indulge men in a careless , easie , unthinking life ? or , require that his disciple's thoughts ought to be wholly taken up with matters of religion ? not , if s. paul knew his meaning ; for he saith , those who provide not for their own , have denied the faith and are worse than infidels . but this only seems to make the difficulty greater . therefore to clear it , we must attend to our saviour's scope and design ; which was , to perswade his disciples to lay up their treasure in heaven , to seek the kingdom of god and his righteousness in the first place ; and then represents this world and another as two opposite interests , so that one cannot serve two masters ; which implies a contradiction to each other . so that what follows must be understood in such a sense , as is inconsistent with the main duty , of looking after heaven as our happiness ; and therefore ought not to be understood of a prudent , necessary care , but of an anxious , solicitous , distrustfull care , which implies that we place our happiness too much here . and therefore s. luke subjoyns these commands to the parable of the rich man , whose heart was in his barns and store-houses , and took great care to lay in provision enough for a sensual and voluptuous life : but to shew the unspeakable folly of such vain contrivances , it was said to him , this night shall thy soul be required of thee ; and then whose shall these things be which thou hast provided ? ii. i come now to our saviour's commands with respect to the government of our speech . and he seems to be very severe as to this , when he saith , that every idle word that men shall speak , they shall give account thereof at the day of iudgment . what a heavy account then , are those to make , whose time is so much taken up with idle and impertinent talk ; and who can hardly forbear it , when they should be most serious ? is it unlawfull then to speak any more than is just necessary to express our minds ? may we not imploy our speech sometimes for our innocent diversion and entertainment if we keep within the bounds of prudence and religion ? i do not see that our saviour forbids it . for the idle words he speaks of there , are profane , false , abusive , malicious reproaches of religion and the means to confirm it ; as appears by his bringing it just after the mention of the blasphemy against the holy ghost . so that all such abuses of speech which entrench on piety and good manners , or truth and sincerity , are certainly forbidden by him . but there is one particular vice of conversation , which he hath with most force of argument forbiddden ; and yet ( which is a great shame to any that would be called christians ) none more common among some who would pretend to understand the methods of conversation and the best modes of speaking ; and that is the profane custom of swearing . i take it for granted , that all are christians among us , till they disown it themselves ; and however men may act , they are not willing to renounce all hopes of salvation by christ. i beseech them then to consider , what a contempt of his authority is implied in this , too fashionable sort of profaneness ? the other duties i have mention'd , have a great difficulty in them , as to our tempers and inclinations ; but nothing of that nature can be so much as pretended as to this . for no man could ever say , that he had a swearing constitution , or that it was an infirmity of his nature . there is nothing in it but the tyranny of a very bad custom ; which every prudent man , as well as good christian , will see cause to break . but what a reproach is it , to the very profession of christianity among us for so plain , so easie a command of christ to be broken so commonly , so unconcernedly , so impertinently , as is every day done ; and yet they call christ lord , lord ? in all ages , there were some pretended christians , who did not sincerely obey the commands of our saviour ; but their hypocrisie was of a finer and more artificial make ; this is gross and rude , without the common respect which is due to the religion we all profess to be that , or hope to be saved by . some say , a custom in it self is no sin , because it is no act ; but certainly a customary breach of a plain command is so much greater a sin , as it implies a greater contempt of him that made it ; and when custom hath taken away the sense of a fault , it is so much more aggravated by it . it is really a matter to be wonder'd at , that among persons professing a better sort of breeding , as well as christianity ; a vitious custom , so untempting in it self , so unbecoming the decency of conversation , so affronting to the divine majesty , so directly contrary to the commands of christ , should get so deep a rooting in ordinary conversation , that it seems almost impossible to be reformed . but till men do think of breaking off such a practise as this , i despair of ever seeing them reform other things which have a deeper root in their natural inclinations , and have greater advantages as to this world. iii. the commands of christ extend to the whole course of our actions ; so , as that we lead a sober , righteous and godly life . 1. as to sobriety . take heed to your selves , saith christ , lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting and drunkenness . these are somewhat hard words for that which our age hath learnt to express in much softer terms of eating and drinking well . luxury seems a thing quite forgotten to be a sin ▪ among those who are most guilty of it ; and intemperance thought so uncertain a thing , as though it were impossible to tell when persons are guilty of it . 't is true , that temperance may vary as to the degrees and limits of it ; and we do not pretend to define it by grains and scruples . but still , there ought to be a governing our appetites according to reason , and that is temperance . but what is reason in this case ? some send us to the brutes to find out what reason is ; and they tell us , it lies in a plain simple diet , such as the beasts use , without provoking or raising the appetite . but i know not where god hath forbidden the use of art , as to our eating and drinking ; and if this were so , we must practise temperance only in the use of water and acorns . if meer satisfaction of nature were the exact rule of temperance , then eating or drinking any thing beyond it were a sin ; which would fill the minds of those who are afraid to sin , with infinite scruples ; and make all feasting unlawfull . yet our saviour was present at one in cana of galilee ; and did a miracle relating to it . but we need not run into niceties in this matter ; for , intemperance is either an over-charging of nature , so as to make it to sink or totter under the load ; or it is a wanton humouring and pleasing the appetit● , not , for the service of nature , but for the pleasure of eating and drinking ; or , it is as s. paul calls it , making a god of their belly , by sacrificing their time , their study , their estates in order to the filling and pleasing of it . any of these ways , it is no difficulty to understand what intemperance is ; i wish it were as easie to avoid it . 2. as to righteousness . our saviour hath given one admirable rule ; which all persons agree to be of excellent use in all contracts and transactions of men with one another ; v. 31. and as ye would that men should do to you , do ye also to them likewise . which is an universal rule of justice and equity , if it be understood of what we would have others to do to us according to reason , and not according to the partial affection we are apt to have to our selves . for this rule is founded upon the second great commandment , as our saviour calls it , thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self . 3. as to godliness . he lays the foundation of that upon the first and great commandment , thou shalt love the lord thy god , with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy strength . we need not to question , but where-ever there is such a love of god , as is here required , there will be true godliness in all the parts of it . and where this is wanting , all external shews of devotion want the true life and spirit of it . for it is the love of god which makes all our weak and imperfect services to be acceptable to him ; and without it all our prayers and our fastings , and all other appearances of devotion , are empty and insipid formalities . not , but that the acts themselves are commendable ; but , they are like a body without a soul , dull and heavy ; or like the leaves of a tree in autumn , which make a great noise in the wind , but are dry , sapless and soon fall to the ground . but where the love of god prevails , it keeps up the life and order and vigour of devotion ; and preserves it from being tainted by hypocrisie , or choaked by the love of this world , or decaying from want of constancy and resolution . thus i have set before you some of the most remarkable duties of christianity ; not such as depend on the opinions and fancies of men ; but such as our blessed saviour , the great law-giver of his church , hath made the necessary conditions of our salvation by him . and what now can we say for our selves ? we do call christ lord , lord ; or else we renounce our baptismal vow , and all hopes of salvation by him . but can we say that we love god , when we love what he hates , viz. sin ? can we say , we love him with all our heart and soul , when our hearts are so much divided between him and the vanities of this world ? can we say , we love him with all our might , when our love to god is apt to grow cold and remiss upon any apprehension of difficulties ? can we say , that we love our neighbour as our selves , when we despise and scorn him , or over-reach and defraud him , or oppress and ruin him ? if it go not so far , are we as tender of his reputation as of our own ; as unwilling to see him injured , as ready to help him in his necessities , as we should desire it from others , if we were in the same circumstances ? if strict sobriety and temperance be the duties of christians , where are those vertues to be generally found ? i do not speak of particular persons ; but i am afraid , there is hardly such a thing left as a sober party among us . what profane , customary swearing is every-where to be met with ? what complaints are daily made of the abounding of all sorts of wickedness , even to an open scorn and contempt , not barely of christianity , but of any kind of religion ? for , many who have long denied the power , seem to be grown weary of the very form of godliness ; unless it serves some particular end and design . so that , if we look abroad in the world , we find little regard shew'd to the precepts of christ ; and yet those who commit these things call christ lord , lord. what is the meaning of all this gross hypocrisie ? nothing would have been thought more absurd or ridiculous , than for one who used no kind of abstinence , to be thought a pythagorean ; or one that indulged his passions a stoick ; or one who eats flesh and drinks wine a brachman , or banian . it is really , as much for any one to break the known and particular precepts of christ , and yet desire to be thought a christian. for , a loose , profane and debauched christian , is a contradiction in morality ; it is to be a christian against christ , to call him lord , lord , and yet to defie his laws and authority . a star without light , a guide without eyes , a man without reason , a sun with nothing but spots , are not more absurd suppositions , than a christian without any grace , or vertue . but let us say what we will , there are and will be such , who will own christ and call him lord , lord , and yet will not part with their sins for him . there were multitudes of such formerly who would lay down their lives for the ground he trod on , and yet would not mortifie one sin for his sake . the reason is still the same which our saviour mentions , they hope that calling him lord , lord , will make amends for all ; and yet it is not possible that fairer warning should be given to any , than he hath given in this case , that let them pretend what they will , he will say to them at the great day , depart from me all ye workers of iniquity . o dreadfull sentence ! not , to be mention'd without horrour , nor to be thought upon without astonishment . how miserable , for ever miserable , must their condition be , whom christ at that day shall bid to depart from him ! what is this , some will be apt to say , but to put all christians into utter despair ? for , who is there that can say , that he hath done all that christ hath said ? truely , we have a sufficient ground for deep humility and serious repentance , and timely reformation . but there is a great difference between the failing of our duty and the works of iniquity ; between the infirmities of those who sincerely endeavour to do his will , and the presumptuous sins of those who despise it ; between sins committed and heartily repented of ; and sins habitually practised and continued in , without any marks of amendment . such must go out of this world in a state of sin , and therefore can expect nothing but that dreadfull sentence , which i tremble at the very thoughts of repeating . but there are others , who in the sincerity of their hearts have endeavour'd to do his will ; and whose sincerity will be so far accepted by him , that he will say to them at that day , come ye blessed of my father , inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. to which god of his infinite mercy bring us through the mediation of christ jesus our lord. finis . lately printed for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , febr. 22. 1688 / 9. upon 1 pet. 14. verse 18. a sermon preached before the king and queen at white-hall , march ▪ the 23d . 1689 / 90. upon ecclesistiastes 11. verse 9. christian magnanimity : a sermon preached in the cathedral church at worcester , at the time of the assizes , september 21. 1690. upon 2 tim. 1. verse 7. all three by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese , in his primary visitation , begun at worcester , septemb. 11. 1690. quarto . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61622-e130 matt. 7. 21. luk. 13. 26. v. 27. matt. 5. 5. jam. 3. 13. matt. 5. 22. v. 39. v. 40. v. 41. luk. 12. 14 de irâ , l. 3. c. 8. tusc. 3. 9. exod. 21. 24. levit. 24. 20. deut. 19. 21. gr. de i. b. & p. l. 2. 1. 10. luk. 6. 27 , 35. luk. 6. 27. 33. 35. jam. 1. 14. matt. 5. 28. matt. 5. 8. matt. 5. 29. 30. matt. 6. 15. luk. 12. 22. luke . 12. 24. job 38. 41. psal. 147. 9. 1 tim. 5. 8. luke . 12. 18 , 19. v. 20. matt. 12. 36. v. 31. matt. 5. 34 , 37. luk. 21. 24 phil. 3. 19. matt. 22. 39. matt. 22. 37. matt. 7. 25. luk. 13. 27. matt. 25. 34. a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall, february 22d, 1688/9 by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1689 approx. 50 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 21 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61620 wing s5660 estc r14193 13142365 ocm 13142365 97977 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61620) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 97977) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 752:8) a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall, february 22d, 1688/9 by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [3], 36 p. printed for henry mortlocke ..., london : 1689. marginal notes. errata: p. 36. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -peter, 1st, iv, 18 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-07 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2004-07 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , february 22d . 1688 / 9. by edw. stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. paul's . london , printed for henry mortlocke , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , 1689. imprimatur , hen. wharton , r. r. in christo p. ac d. d. wilhelmo archiep. cant. à sacr. domest . ex aed . lamb. march 1. 1688. i. peter 4. 18. and if the righteous scarcely be saved , where shall the vngodly and the sinner appear . this epistle was written by s. peter for the incouragement of christians under all their sufferings ; but these words seem to carry so much terrour and severity in them , as though none but martyrs and confessours could have any reason to hope for salvation , and all others were to be left in despair . although mankind be not easily satisfied concerning the punishment denounced against the vngodly and sinner , yet the justice of god , the equity of his commands , the freedom of their choice , the contempt of grace , and their wilfull and obstinate impenitency take away all just cause of complaint : but , that the righteous should scarcely be saved , seems hardly reconcilable with the grace , and design , and promises , of the gospel . for the righteous here are not vain , proud , self-conceited hypocrites , such who think they need no repentance , but such who by the grace of god were brought off from their former sins , and were redeemed from their vain conversation with the pretious bloud of christ , who had purisied their souls in obeying the truth through the spirit ; who were a chosen generation , a royal priesthood , an holy nation , a peculiar people ; yet of such as these it is said , if the righteous scarcely be saved . but how can this agree with the infinite goodness and mercy of god declared in the gospel , whereby sinners are courted and encouraged to repent with the hopes and promise of salvation ? did not christ come to save sinners , and st. paul call this a faithfull saying and worthy of all acceptation ; and yet after all , shall the righteous scarcely be saved ? what ioy in heaven can there be over one sinner that repents , if after his repentance it be so hard to come to heaven ? doth not christ himself invite those who are weary , and heavy laden , to come to him , with a promise that he will give rest to their souls ? but what rest can they have , who , notwithstanding their coming to him , do with so much difficulty attain to eternal rest ? how can that be said to be an easie yoke , and a light burthen , which is of it self so hard to be born , and the reward which is to make it easie so hard to be attained ? if it be said that this expression , that the righteous are scarcely saved , is to be understood of some sufferings , and persecutions , which the christians were then to undergo , and it was very hard for any , though never so righteous , to escape ; and that to this v. 17. refers , i answer , that this doth not clear the difficulty ; for from whence doth this necessity of suffering arise ? is it not enough to repent and forsake our sins , but we must undergo some punishment for them in this life , although god remits that of the world to come ? but how is this consistent with the fulness of christ's satisfaction , and the freeness of god's remission of sins ? and if god's justice be satisfied and the sins be forgiven , what need can there be that persons must here suffer for their sins before they can come to heaven ? so that for the clearing this subject these thing must be spoken to : i. in what sense the righteous are said to be scarcely saved . ii. how this is consistent with the grace of the gospel . iii. what incouragement there is for us to hope for salvation , when the righteous are said to be scarcely saved . i. in what sense the righteous are said to be scarcely saved . that may be understood two ways ; ( 1. ) with respect to accidental difficulties arising from the particular circumstances of times and seasons . ( 2. ) with respect to the general terms of salvation , which are common to all persons and times . 1. with respect to accidental difficulties arising from the particular circumstances of times and persons . for the difficulties of religion are not alike in all times , nor to all persons ; for they are not like a geometrical measure , which is always exactly the same ; but rather like a voyage at sea , which is to be managed by the same compass and to the same port ; but it sometimes proves calm and pleasant , and at other times stormy and tempestuous . which chiefly happens , when a religion appears new , or goes about to reform the old ; for then it is sure to meet with all the opposition , which the passions , and interests , and prejudices of partial men can raise against it . it s true , he that stills the raging of the sea , and the madness of the people , can , when he pleases , calm the most violent passions of mankind , and make way for the reception of truth in their minds ; but he thinks fit by such means to trie and discover what is in men. who never shew their passions more violently and unreasonably than when they are mask'd under a pretence of zeal against heresie and innovation . for that blinds their understandings , corrupts their wills , inflames their passions , hardens their hearts , and shuts up all bowels of pity and compassion towards brethren . thus it was among the iews towards the christians , both in iudea , and in the several places of their dispersion : for they looked on them as apostates and hereticks , and treated them , not onely with the utmost scorn and contempt , but with all the fury and rage imaginable , and where their own power fell short , they called in the assistence of the roman governours , representing the christians to them , as an upstart and pernicious sect , seditious and turbulent , and therefore ought by all means to be supprest : by such insinuations the poor christians in the eastern provinces of the iewish dispersion , were miserably harassed and proceeded against as malefactours . thus it was at that time when s. peter wrote his epistle to the iewish christians , who were scattered throughout pontus , galatia , cappadocia , asia , and bithynia , where there were abundance of iews , and many converts , but very hardly used among them . st. peter having been imployed much among them , ( the apostleship of the circumcision being committed to him ) and being withdrawn into the kingdom of parthia , where he had planted a church at babylon , ( not so desolate at that time , as not to be sufficient for such a number , as appears by strabo and iosephus ) from thence he writes this excellent epistle for the advice and comfort of the suffering christians . he adviseth them to behave themselves with great prudence and care of their actions , to give no advantage against themseves , by doing any ill things ; and then , if it pleased god to call them out to suffer , they ought not to murmur , or complain , or mistrust his gracious providence towards them , but commit themselves to god in well doing , as unto a faithfull creatour . and if they did think it hard for them to suffer these things , they ought to consider , there was a wise directour of them above , who had beforehand appointed such a series of events , that although their enemies rejoyced to see them suffer in the first place , yet their turn would come not long after , and then these enemies of the gospel would feel the severity of god's wrath and displeasure against them . which is the meaning of the foregoing verse , for the time is come that iudgment must begin at the house of god ; and if it first begin at us , what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of god ? i. e. christ hath foretold desolation and ruine to come upon the jewish nation , for rejecting him when he came to save them ; but he withall saith , that before these things , they shall lay their hands on you and persecute you , delivering you up to the synagogues , and into prisons , being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake . which implies a severe persecution of the christian church , begun by the iews , but carried on by the governours of kingdoms and provinces . and therefore saith the apostle , although the time be now come that iudgment begins at the house of god , yet it will not end there ; but that which is onely a cup of trembling and astonishment to them shall be a cup of fury and destruction to the obstinate and impenitent iews . the case was hard to the poor christians , but it would be much more severe towards their cruel persecutours ; for if the righteous , whom god loves , meet with such sharp usage by his permission for a time , the day will come when god will avenge the cause of his suffering people , and make their ungodly and perfidious enemies feel the smart of his displeasure in such manner that they shall not know where to hide themselves , where shall the sinner and ungodly appear . but that which i observe from hence is , that there are some accidental circumstances which depend on divine providence , which may make the condition of some men , as to salvation , much more difficult than that of others : for it is no such easie matter to go through many tribulations into the kingdom of god , i. e. to be content to be contemned and reproached as the worst of men ; to be torn from friends and relations , and all the comforts of life ; to be cast into loathsome prisons , and more loathsome company in them ; to be in continual expectation of such cruel usage and torments , as make death be look'd on as their best friend and most seasonable deliverer . if sufferings do not rise so high , yet when men cannot keep faith and a good conscience , without hazarding the loss of what mankind are apt to set too great a value upon , their ease , and riches , and expectations in this world , even these make it harder for such persons to get to heaven ; because sincerity and constancy are the necessary conditions of it , which may be tryed much more in some than it is in others . we must all have the same journey's-end , if we hope to get to heaven , but some may meet with a freer road , and a calmer season , and better company , in their journey than others . however it happens we must go through all , and not be discourag'd at any appearance of difficulties upon our way . but herein mankind are apt to be deceived , as though all the difficulties lay in a suffering condition ; whereas a soft , and careless , and voluptuous life is rather more dangerous to their souls , because persons are less apt to suspect their danger . he that is set upon by force and violence endeavours to defend himself as well as he can ; but he that is betrayed under a pretence of kindness is drawn into his ruine before he is aware , and goes on chearfully to his own destruction . prosperity hath the true nature of an opiate , for it stupifies and pleases at the same time . the temptations of the suffering side are apt to allarm , awake , and rouse up the sleepy powers of the soul ; whereas the gentle and easie condition of life either lays them asleep , by a kind of intoxication , or so diverts them from all serious things , as puts them out of the very way to heaven . for , the first thing in it is a steady and serious resolution of mind to doe what lies in them to go thither ; which can never be done without a true consideration of the vanities of this world , how pleasing soever ; and a fixed and settled judgment , preferring the happiness of heaven before all the most alluring pleasures of this life . so that the different circumstances of life do make the way of salvation more difficult to some than to others . but this is not all ; for there are many things which make it more difficult to some than to others , which are of another nature . some tempers are more flexible and pliable than others ; more capable of hearkning to reason ; and more apt to reflect on their own actions ; whereas others are naturally stiff and obstinate , who stick as fast to an opinion or prejudice which they have once taken up , as if they were fatally determined to it ; and such as these can hardly ever be convinced they are in an errour , unless by a power superiour to nature . some again , are very easily convinced of a fault , but very hardly reclaimed ; for that facility of temper which makes them easie to be convinced , lays them open to the next temptation , which they are not able to withstand . these are always repenting and amending and beginning to reform , but without the grace of god , not able to go through with it . some are modest and bashfull sinners , whom fear and shame may restrain ; others are so hardned and impudent in their wickedness , that they deny even the very first principles of morality as well as religion , and not onely refuse to hearken to reproof , but reject it with scorn and indignation . and it cannot be supposed that the grace of god , working on mens minds in a way suitable to them , should have as easie an admittance into one as into the other ; for the one are like a house with doors shut , but easily opened ; the other like a house not onely shut , but bolted and barracadoed . again , some have had the advantage of a pious and religious education , by which the principles of piety and vertue have made an early impression on their minds , and have been a continual check upon evil inclinations ; and if they have been too weak to subdue them , yet they have been strong enough to prevent their extravagancies , or to bring them to a speedy repentance , and to take up firmer resolutions ; and such are more easily brought to themselves and settled in a vertuous course of life . but the generality of mankind , through a wretched carelesness , mind not the early improvement of their children in what is good ; and what education they give them tends to any thing more than the planting the sense of god , and true religion , and vertue , in them . it were well , if they would but let nature alone in their children ; but instead of that , they often place such about them , who humour them in their worst inclinations , and give them an early taste of profaneness and irreligion ; so that when they come into the world , they run into all manner of wickedness , and commit it with greediness , having so quick a relish of it ; and then indeed it is a very hard matter to bring them to repentance ; for that is to take shame and dishonour to themselves , to say they have been fools , and have done wickedly ; and rather than doe this , they chuse to go on in their impieties , and treasure up wrath against the day of wrath . those who magnify the freedom of will in mankind in this degenerate state , seem to consider them onely in theory and speculation ; not as they are , but as they ought to have been . it is like that which they call the spring in some bodies , which are apt to dilate and expand themselves , but may be easily oppressed with such a weight as makes it impossible for them to inlarge themselves till it be removed . there is no doubt in mankind , considered in it self , a power of acting according to reason , which is the truest freedom , ( for a power of acting otherwise is weakdness and folly , ) but what through the natural propensity to evil ; what through the power of bad examples ; what through the violence of some tempers and passions ; what through the cloudiness of some understandings , from bodily distempers ; what through the strength of evil habits , and corrupt dispositions , there is scarce such a thing as freedom of will left , especially as to matters of salvation . so that if the scripture did not so plainly express the necessity of divine grace for the conversion of sinners ( as it doth , ) the mere consideration of the state of human : nature would make me believe it , supposing that any part of mankind be designed to be fitted for heaven . for although the difficulties be not alike in all , yet , of one kind or other , they are such as cannot be overcome by our selves , without the power of divine grace exciting , preventing , and assisting of us . ( 2. ) having thus shewed what difficulties there are which arise from the different circumstances of times and persons , i am now . to consider those which arise from the terms of salvation , which are common to all persons and times . here we must suppose salvation to be the thing aimed at , as the chief end or happiness of such men ; and here are two kinds of difficulties to be enquired into ; ( 1. ) such as are implied in the general pursuit of happiness . ( 2. ) such as immediately relate to this kind of happiness . ( 1. ) such as are implied in the general pursuit of happiness : for happiness is not a thing of chance or necessity , but a matter of choice and design . it is a vulgar mistake ( and i wish it were onely among the vulgar ) to account those happy , who are fortunate : but this notion of happiness was unanimously rejected by all the ancient moralists . some of them indeed have thought it repugnant to common sense , to call those happy who were under great calamities , i. e. who were , in the sense of mankind , miserable : but then they utterly denied , that the best outward circumstances could make a man happy ; for that must depend upon the temper of a man's mind , and his improvement in vertue . these are some things which the moralists agreed in , which may be of great use to us for clearing the christian doctrine in this matter about the difficulty of attaining salvation . ( 1. ) that happiness did consist in one uniform design of life , i. e. that a man must chuse one proper and chief end to himself , and so order his thoughts and actions that he may attain it . and therefore the dissolute and careless liver , that minds or thinks of nothing but eating , and drinking , and sleeping , and passing away his time , was no more capable of happiness than a brute , which exceeds him in that which he accounts the happiness of life . ( 2. ) that there must be a carefull and attentive mind to pursue this design . and that is by keeping close to those maxims , which were laid down as necessary to attain it . for , according to their different notions , they had different maxims , or rules of practice , either as to vertue or pleasure , and as men did observe these , they were nearer to their happiness : but if they broke their rules , they must blame themselves if they missed of it . ( 3. ) that any man who desired to be happy , must above all things take pains about himself ; for without that they concluded it impossible for a man to be happy , let his outward condition in the world be what it would : for that was too uncertain a foundation to build such a structure upon . therefore it was necessary for any one that pretended to happiness , to have a true notion of what conduced to it in his mind ; and to bring his passions into order . for all the world cannot make one whose passions are violent and extravagant , to be happy ; no more than him to be a sound and healthfull man , that hath a fever , and a dropsy , and convulsions , at the same time upon him . for the violence of lust is an inward burning fever ; covetousness , or an infatiable desire of riches , a perpetual dropsy , which encreases the thirst by an endeavour to quench it ; and excessive anger is a convulsion of those powers of the soul which ought to be sedate , and composed , in any one who pretends to happiness . but when they considered the force of natural inclinations , they found it was no easie matter to make the unreasonable part to be governed by the reasonable . for the less of reason , the more wilfulness and stubbornness ; and therefore the harder to be brought to reason and to be govern'd by it . and herein lay the main difficulty ; and after all their arguments , and rules , and directions , humane nature was found too refractory to submit ; and the violence of man's passions overthrew all the plausible schemes of happiness which the philosophers had set up . to which i add , ( 4. ) that those who consulted most the ease and pleasure of mankind , were forced to put men upon some hard and unpleasant things to make any thing like happiness to consist in pleasure . for they cast off all riot and excess , all intemperance and luxury , because the pain which followed exceeded the pleasure ; and therefore they made temperance and chastity necessary to the true pleasure of life . they reduced the happiness of pleasure to a fixed and setled state , and so took it off from that which was onely sensual . they brought mens desires within so narrow a compass , that the true lovers of pleasure would abhor such confinements as they made necessary . and although they could never conquer the fears of invisible powers , and of death , yet they thought no happiness was to be had without it . so that all were agreed , that it was impossible to attain to any thing that looked like happiness without some real difficulty , which was necessary to be undergone , although the success were uncertain . ( 2. ) let us now consider the difficulties relating to salvation , or that happiness which christians expect . and here i shall shew , ( 1. ) that it is far more reasonable to go through difficulties , for the sake of it . ( 2. ) that they are not such , but that we may reasonably hope to overcome them . ( 1. ) it is more reasonable to expect difficulties in the way of salvation . for the more excellent and desirable the happiness is , the more it is worth the while for us to take pains about it ; especially when there is a certainty of attaining it . the moralists had but very dark , and confused , and uncertain notions of happiness ; something they saw , but with a very glimmering light : they found that all men desired it , and wise men sought after it ; but wherein it lay , and how to be attained , they could not agree . the most considering men were convinced it must be in the best part of our selves , and that is our minds , and in the greatest perfection of that , viz. vertue and goodness . but they met with insuperable difficulties in the way to it , and the best among them sadly lamented the state of humane nature , after all the pains and endeavours they had used to rectifie their opinions , and to subdue their passions . for they found it too restiff and untractable , too much under the sway and dominion of the sensitive appetite , for them ever to hope by the mere power of reason to bring it into such subjection , as to pretend to a total conquest . and those who refined pleasure so much , as to make it a happiness fit for mankind to own , did make a happiness just as they made their gods , viz. a fine , subtil , airy , pleasant no-thing , or that had no solidity in it : for the epicurean happiness , with all its refinements , was rather a matter of speculation than practice ; and after all was not worth so much pains about it , but like the gourd , which after its paring , and cleansing , and dressing , is fit onely to be cast upon the dunghill . but it cannot be said that the happiness offered to christians is of such a nature : for it is really the best , the most valuable and desirable good , not promised to be enjoyed in this mean , despicable , and uncertain state of life , but reserved for a more free , spiritual and continuing state. so our apostle calls it , an inheritance , incorruptible and undefiled , and that fadeth not away , reserved in heaven for you . such is the condition of the world without us here , and of the passions and infirmities within us , that it is a vain thing to expect a true happiness to be enjoyed in this life ; the utmost we can hope for , is to be prepared for a better ; and god knows there is difficulty enough in that . we have hearts so vain and sensual , so addicted to the pleasures and impertinencies of this world , so prepossessed with the objects of sense , that it is no easie matter to bring them so much as in earnest to consider of another world. but it is yet harder to fix the thoughts of it upon our minds , so as to make a deep impression upon them , as they must do , if we make the happiness of heaven our chief end and design . supposing that paradise were still upon earth in its first glory , and to be found by the description which moses gives of it ; a man may think often concerning it , where it lies , what the rivers are by which it is to be discovered ; but all this amounts but to a mere speculation : but suppose that he takes up a resolution to go thither , what other kind of thoughts hath he then about it , as to the truth and certainty of the place , and the way that leads thither , and the difficulties he is like to meet with ? which make another kind of impression than the former dry speculation did . if a man doth not think heaven worth all the pains and difficulties which lie in our way to it , he never yet had one serious and becoming thought concerning it . for the happiness proposed is really so great and invaluable , that the more we think of it , the more we shall esteem it , and the more we shall despise and triumph over the greatest difficulties in order to it ; it being no less than the perfect enjoyment of the most perfect good , in a most perfect state of life , and nothing can be desired by humane nature greater than this . ( 2. ) the difficulties in our way to salvation are not such , but we may reasonably hope to overcome them ; i. e. if we set our selves about it ; otherwise a very mean difficulty will appear too great for us . therefore we must suppose not onely a willing mind , but a firm resolution to doe what lies in us . and there are two things to shew that we may hope to overcome them ; ( 1. ) that the most difficult duties are in themselves reasonable to be performed by us . ( 2. ) that god offers his gratious assistence for the performance of them . ( 1. ) that the most difficult duties are in themselves reasonable . i mean such whose difficulty doth not arise from accidental outward circumstances ; but from a respect to the present state and condition of humane nature . such as , ( 1. ) true repentance ; which is one of the hardest works of a man's life , when he hath been long engaged in a course of sinning against conscience . it is not hard for such a one to be made sensible that he hath done amiss ; for he that acts against his judgment is , as aristotle observes , apt to repent , i. e. to find fault with himself for his own actions , and to resolve to amend . there is a sort of displeasure against sin , which is consistent with the practice of it , which is called by the casuists , attritio impoenitentium ; but they say it is without a purpose of forsaking it , if there be such a purpose that they say is attritio poenitentium ; but if it be an ineffectual purpose , the scripture no where calls it repentance . for as long as the habitual practice continues , it is certain that man's love to his sin exceeds his hatred of it ; and what repentance can that be which is consistent with a prevailing love of sin ? when persons were first made christians , their repentance was easily discerned , whether true or false , because it was a publick and sol●mn renunciation of all their former sins ; but when men have accustomed themselves to sin under a profession to renounce their sins , it is a harder matter to find out the sincerity of their repentance as to those sins . and here a difference must be made as to the nature and kind of sins : for there are some sins which all agree to be sins , yet is a hard matter to convince persons that they are guilty of them , such as hypocrisie , schism , and idolatry , which men will find something to excuse themselves from , notwithstanding the clearest evidence against them . some are such strangers to themselves , that they do not suspect themselves for those sins which others easily discern in them , as is common in the case of ●ride , and envy , and covetousness , and superstition . it cannot be supposed that persons should so particularly repent of such sins which they are not sensible of ; but where self-love blind● it cannot excuse . and where such evil habits prevail , persons must repent ▪ and search , and examine themselves in order to a particular repentance . there are other sins which are really perpetual burthens to a good mind , but it knows not how to get rid of them with the utmost care ; such as inward motions to sin , sudden heats and surprises , mixt infirmities , coldness in devotion , distractions in prayer , and many omissions of personal duties ; in such cases as these , if we do not allow sincerity of repentance without through amendment , we make a general repentance insignificant , and make the condition of many good men desperate ; for none can be saved without true repentance . and if there can be no true repentance without actual forsaking all such kinds of sins , there is no such thing as true repentance to be found . but there are other sins of a more dangerous and malignant nature , which argue a very bad mind ; such as malice and hatred , a rooted aversion to what is good ; and a strong inclination to evil. there are some sins that are gross and notorious , of which st. paul saith , the lusts of the flesh are manifest ; i. e. such sins are easily known to be sins , and mens consciences condemn them even while they commit them ; such as murther , adultery , intemperance , injustice , perjury , and such like . of which the apostle after declares , that they who doe such things shall never come to heaven . therefore as to them , such a repentance is necessary as implies not merely a dislike and sorrow for them , but a thorough change of a man's mind , and the course of his life , with respect to them . and surely it is no easie matter to new mold the temper of ones mind , and to turn the tide of our actions ; to break off our beloved sins , and to bring forth fruits worthy of repentance . this is indeed a hard work ; but yet it is a most reasonable work. it is hard , but it is like the taking violent physick in some diseases , where the humour must be purged out , or the party must dye ; the uneasiness is not to be considered , but the necessity ; and in such a case the mind cannot be at ease till it be done . so that the very difficulty of repentance lays the foundation for greater peace of mind afterwards . and who will think much of such a difficulty , which is so necessary to peace with god and his own conscience ? ( 2. ) the love of god is above all things . this is so fundamental a duty , that we cannot place our happiness in god without it . for if we do not love god above all things , we must love somewhat else so ; and whatever we love above all things , that we make our happiness . but i am affraid the greatest part of the world love all things above him : for we are to judge of mens love and esteem by what they court , and pursue , and desire , and delight in ; it is impossible there should be such a love of god , where the stream of the affections and course of actions run quite another way ; i mean , to the vanities of this world , of which the apostle hath said , if any man loves it , the love of the father is not in him . but this is a hard point : for some degree of love to this world is allowable ; else how can we thank god for the comforts of it ? and all persons who know god do grant , that his perfections are far above all the world , and therefore they seem to have a value and esteem for him above it . we must here distinguish a notional esteem from that which is practical . a notional esteem implies no more than a mere conviction that god must exceed all the excellencies which are scattered in the creatures ; but a practical esteem is , when the acts of our souls towards him are suitable to the apprehensions we have in our minds concerning him . when we adore his infinite perfections , and delight in the meditation of them ; when we desire to doe all things pleasing to him , and avoid what we know to offend him ; when we believe , and hope , and trust in him , and commit our selves to his conduct in this world , in hopes of being happy with him in another . this is the love of god above all things ; but alas ! where is this love of god to be found ? it is no very hard matter to work up a heated and devout imagination to the fancy of raptures and ecstasies and mystical unions ; but after all , this is the love of god , that we keep his commandments . as the true love of a prince is not to flatter and admire him , and watch for his smiles ; but to observe his directions , and obey his orders , and to doe what is most for his service . and although such a love of god be hard to those whose hearts are full of carnal affections , and are taken up with the follies and vanities of this world , yet we cannot take one true step in the way to heaven without the love of god. for even those who have most corrupted the doctrine of repentance do confess , that there can be no true contrition of sin , which is not founded on the love of god as the principle of it , and however they have dangerously flattered and deceived those who are so weak to believe them , that attrition with the sacrament of penance is sufficient to put men into the state of grace ; yet st. peter's keys must have an extraordinary virtue , if they can change nature into grace , or fear into love , or mere horrour of conscience into true repentance . but although such a love of god above all things be so hard a thing to minds prepossessed with the love of other things ; yet no one can deny that it is the most reasonable duty in the world. the very thoughts of god , if they are such as we ought to have , imply , that he is the best , the wisest , the most perfect being , and therefore the most amiable and desirable object . and whither then should the most natural stream of our affections run , but towards him ? what do we mean to suffer so much earth and filthiness to obstruct the free passage of them in their most proper course ? what can we meet with in this deceitfull world , that can bear the least proportion to such infinite goodness ? oh what a difference is there between our reason and our love ? we verily believe that god deserves our love above all things , and yet how small a share hath he in it ? we love what we profess to despise above all things , viz. our sins and this vain world ; and we really too much despise what we still profess to love above all things , viz. god and our eternal happiness . o miserable condition of humanity ! made to be happy , and yet fond of misery ; loving what 's vain , and yet despising vanity ; hating what 's good , and yet accounts it best ; and therefore fittest for our choice and love. the love of god above all things is so just and reasonable , that those who doe it least approve it as the most excellent imployment of our minds ; and those that doe it most , think they fall short of what god deserves from them . the more we know of god , the more we know that we ought to love and delight in him ; and all our difficulty in the practice of it can never make us think it is unreasonable to love him above all things , without whom nothing can make us happy , and who alone can doe it . ( 3. ) vniversal holiness of heart and life . if this were not necessary to salvation , our apostle would not have pressed it with so much earnestness as he doth ; as obedient children , not fashioning your selves according to the former lusts in your ignorance , but as he which hath called you is holy , so be ye holy in all manner of conversation ; because it is written , be ye holy , for i am holy . again , dearly beloved , i beseech you , as strangers and pilgrims , abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul. and again , that he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh , to the lusts of men , but to the will of god. this is a hard saying to mankind , who part with nothing so hardly as with their sins ; yet these must be parted with , if ever we hope to get to heaven . i do not say , that a perfection in holiness is required , ( for that were to suppose happiness in this world , since there can be no perfect holiness without it , ) but there must be a constant , uniform , and sincere endeavour after it ; by avoiding all known and wilfull sins , and doing all our duties to god in such a manner as our conscience cannot charge us with gross neglect or insincerity . there are some things we cannot say are downright sins ; yet if they lead to them ; if they indispose our minds to god , and his service ; if they tend to lightness and vanity , and make us more easie to entertain the devil's temptations , we ought to avoid them as the snares of the devil . so , on the other side , there are some things which we cannot say are plain , and express , and necessary duties of religion , yet they tend so much to keep up the life and spirit of it , that a general design of holiness is enough to recommend them . as to positive duties of religion , we cannot exactly fix the time , and measure , and season of their performance , which must vary according to circumstances ; but this we can say , that the more persons set themselves to the practice of holiness , and the greater preparation they make for another world , the more they will delight in the performance of god's service , and the more ready to embrace any opportunities for it . those who would have all religious duties determined as to the circumstances of them , are like men who would have punctual rules set down , how often two friends should converse with each other , and how long time they are to stay together . true friendship will need none of those things , but will incline them to embrace the best opportunities for mutual conversation , lest too long distance beget a coldness first , and then the friendship dissolves . it is no hard matter to pray as far as words go ; but to pray with zeal and devotion , to attend upon god with that seriousness of mind we ought to doe , will require our utmost attention . and it is no easie matter to keep our minds composed and fit to converse with god in prayer , and other solemn duties of religion . but as hard as this appears to us , it is most fit and reasonable that we should doe it : for what an unbecoming thing it is to worship god in a careless , trifling , perfunctory manner ; as though nothing less deserved the imploying the vigour of our minds about , than the service of god. but how can we love him with all our hearts , if we do not serve him with all our mind and strength . ( 4. ) resignation of our selves to god ; this the apostle calls casting all our care upon him . this is a very wise duty if we can attain to it , because it eases our minds of many fears and perplexities , both as to our selves and others : but it is no easie thing to set our minds free from solicitous thoughts , about possible evils . we cannot mend our condition , nor prevent what is determined by our most anxious care ; but we may enjoy our selves with far greater peace and tranquillity , if we can be content to commit our selves to the best conduct , and that is of him that governs the world. and whatever strugglings we may find within our selves about it , yet the more we search , and weigh , and consider things , the more we shall be satisfied , that the resignation of our selves to god , as to all our concernments in this world , is the best means to calm our passions , to abate our fears , to prevent our impatience , and so to attain to that ornament of a meek and quiet spirit , which is with god of great price . but if all these duties be so necessary to our being saved , and we lie under such difficulties as to the performance of them , their appearing to be reasonable makes our condition so much worse : for to find it so hard to doe what we are convinced is most reasonable to be done , is one of the worst circumstances of our condition . it s true we do not want faculties of understanding and will ; but what then , if our moral indispositions make these useless to our spiritual advantage ? a man that is like to be stifled in a large vessel full of downy feathers , cannot complain of the hardness of what he lies upon , for all things feel soft and easie about him , yet he may be stifled with them ; our evil habits , and corrupt inclinations , have nothing that feels hard or troublesome to us ; but if we cannot overcome them , they will certainly ruine and destroy us . there is therefore a necessity of a higher principle of divine grace to enable us to break thorough all these difficulties . which grace is so abundantly promised by the gospel to those who seek it , that it comes at last to be our own fault , if we be not saved . ii. and this helps us to reconcile the difficulty of salvation , with the easiness of the terms of the gospel : for that which is not onely hard , but impossible to us , in our own strength , may , by the mighty power of divine grace , become not onely possible but easie to us : and withall those things are accounted easie which bring ease , and that is a light burthen which rids one of a far harder . and thus the commands of christ , however hard in themselves to us , yet being considered with the grace of the gospel , and the blessed effect of inward peace , which follows sincere obedience , even his yoke , which keeps us most in , may be said to be easie , and his burthen , which sits hardest upon us , may be said to be light . iii. and from hence we see what encouragement there is still for us to hope to be saved , if we be righteous . there is none for the vngodly and sinner ; i. e. for the profane contemner of god and religion , or for the wicked liver . for however they may flatter themselves with vain and presumptuous hopes , there is no more ground to think that the righteous shall be saved , than that the ungodly and sinner shall not : for both are alike made known by the same word of god. but what comfort is it ( may some say ) to hear that the righteous are scarcely saved , when we are so conscious to our selves of our own unrighteousness ? if we could think our selves righteous before god , there were some hopes , but we are sinners ; and if we should deny or excuse it , we should be so much more so ; what hope can there be then for us ? to this i shall answer , and conclude . ( 1. ) the righteous here spoken of were once great sinners ; for st. peter mentions their former lusts , and working the will of the gentiles in lasciviousness , lust , excess of wine , revellings , banquetings , and abominable idolatries . yet these are said , to be redeemed from their vain conversation by the precious bloud of christ ; and to be begotten again to a lively hope of an inheritance incorruptible , &c. there is therefore , not merely a possibility of being saved , but a just and grounded hope , if we renounce our former sins , and become righteous , according to the terms of the gospel ; i. e. if we sincerely repent of our sins , and turn from them , and live the rest of our time , not to the lusts of men , but to the will of god. but if god had declared , that he expected from mankind an entire and perfect righteousness without any sin , it were all one , as to publish a general and irreversible decree of damnation to all , for all have sinned and come short of the glory of god. from whence the apostle well argues , that men cannot save themselves : but god , of his infinite pity and mercy towards the deplorable condition of mankind , hath found out a way to save them , by the redemption which is in christ iesus , whom he hath made a propitiation for their sins . although therefore as to our selves we have no hopes , yet herein god hath magnified his abundant love towards sinners , that although they have sinned to a high degree , yet if they be so far wearied with the burthen of their sins , as to take christ's yoke upon them , then he hath promised ease and rest to their souls , which is the greatest blessing in the world , especially to repenting sinners . but ( some may again say ) we have repented and sinned , and sinned and repented again , and can hardly yet tell which will get the better at last ; we cannot say that we have entirely submitted our necks to christ's yoke , for that requires a great deal more than we can perform ; how then can we be thought righteous ? i answer therefore , ( 2. ) where there is a sincere and honest endeavour to please god , and keep his commandments , although persons fail in the manner of doing it , god will accept of such as righteous : but where they please themselves in their unrighteousness , and go on in it , hoping that god will accept some kind of repentance in stead of it ; or , where there hath been long struggling , and many acts of repentance , and the interest of sin prevails ; the case of such is very dangerous , but not desperate . for as long as there is hopes of a true repentance , there is of salvation ; and there is still hopes of repentance where mens hearts are not hardned by an incorrigible stiffness : for , according to the best measures we can take by the rules of the gospel , none are effectually excluded from the hopes of salvation , but such as exclude themselves by their own impenitency . the end . errata . page 24. line 22. dele is . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61620-e230 1 pet. 1. 18 , 19 , 20. c. 2. v. 9. 1 tim. 1. 15. luk. 15. 7 , 10. matt. 11. 28. v. 30. 1 pet. 1. 1. gal. 2. 8. although babylon were very much exhausted , by the neighbourhood of seleucia first , and afterwards of ctesiphon ; yet i see no reason to conclude that babylon was not then capable of having a church in it , when s. peter wrote this epistle . for iosephus , lib. 18. owns , that there was in babylon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the time when hyrcanus was sent thither ; and out of such a multitude of iews a church might easily be gathered . the calamities which befell the iews of those parts afterwards rather reach to the country than the city of babylon . and when such numbers of iews are allowed to have been after them in ctesiphon , nearda and nisibis , which were all cities in those parts , i see no cause to question that there were great numbers of iews at that time in babylon ; since even in trajan's time , they are confessed to have been very numerous in mesopotamia . strabo , lib. 16. saith , that a great part of babylon was deserted in his time , and so it might well be , and leave room enough for a christian church to be there notwithstanding . so that no reason appears sufficient to me to take babylon in any other sense , than for the city generally known by that name , without flying to any mystical sense , or a strong place in egypt bearing that name ; there being less probability of a church in a garrison , as strabo describes it , than in the remainders of so great a city . pet. 4. 19. luk. 21. 12. act. 14. 22. 1 pet. 1. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nicom . l. 7. c. 8. inter cateramala , hoc quoque habet stultitia proprium , semper incipit vivere . sen. ep. 13. gal. 5. 19 , 20 , 21. 1 cor. 6. 9 , 10. eph. 5. 5 , 6. 1 joh. ● . 15. 1 joh. 5. 3. 1 pet. 1. 14 , 15 , 16. 2. 11. 4. 2. 1 pet. 5. 7. 1 pet. 3. 4. 1 pet. 1. 14. 4. 3. 1. 18 , 19. 1. 3 , 4. 4. 2. rom. 3. 23. a sermon concerning sins of omission preached before the king and queen at white-hall, on march 18th, 1693/4, being midlent-sunday / by ... edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1694 approx. 48 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61598 wing s5636 estc r15343 13144620 ocm 13144620 98045 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61598) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 98045) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 780:4) a sermon concerning sins of omission preached before the king and queen at white-hall, on march 18th, 1693/4, being midlent-sunday / by ... edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 32, [2] p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1694. marginal notes. advertisement: p. [1]-[2] at end. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng church of england -sermons. bible. -n.t. -james iv, 17 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 rachel losh sampled and proofread 2004-05 rachel losh text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon concerning sins of omission , preached before the king and queen at white-hall , on march 18 th . 1693 / 4. being midlent-sunday . by the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester . published by their majesties special command . london , printed by i. h. for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in s. paul's church-yard . 1694. s. james iv. 17. therefore to him that knoweth to doe good , and doth it not , to him it is sin. although our apostle in this epistle calls the gospel the law of liberty , yet to prevent any misconstruction thereof , as tho' it allowed a liberty to sin , we no where find more strict and severe passages against it , than in this epistle , both with respect to sins of commission , and sins of omission . as to sins of commission , his expression seems hardly consistent with the grace of the gospel ; for whosoever shall keep the whole law , and yet offend in one point , he is guilty of all . hath the law of moses any thing more apt to terrifie the consciences of men , if not to drive them into despair , than this ? it is not , if one breaks the whole law ; then it had been no wonder if he were guilty of all , even under the gospel , which doth not take away the force of the moral law. but , if he keeps the whole law ; and yet offend in one point ; he is guilty of all . how is this agreeable with the equity of the gospel , to make a breach of one part to be a violation of the whole law ? since he cannot keep the law , and break it at the same time ; and so far as he did keep it , he could not be guilty of the breach of it ; but , if he offended but in one point , he must keep all the rest . it is not enough to say , that the chain of the whole is broken , and the authority of the law-giver contemned ; for there is a great difference between breaking a chain , and breaking it all to pieces ; there is no such contempt in the breach of one command , as of all ; and he that keeps all the rest , seems to shew more regard to his authority in keeping the other parts of the law , than contempt in that wherein he offends . what then is the apostles meaning ? it is , that the gospel doth not allow any wilfull breach of the law of god in any one kind or sort whatsoever ; as appears by the following words , for he that said , do not commit adultery , said also , do not kill ; now if thou commit no adultery , yet if thou kill , thou art become a transgressor of the law. what is before said , that he is guilty of all , is here explained , that he is a transgressor of the law. this cannot therefore be understood of any sudden act of passion and surprise , nor of any failings as to the manner of our duties , but of a wilfull deliberate practice of some one known sin , although the person may be carefull to avoid many others ; because this is not consistent with that integrity of mind , and that sincere regard to god and his laws , which every good christian ought to have ; and so being guilty of the whole law , is to be understood with respect to the favour of god ; which can no more be expected where there is a wilfull persisting in any one known trangression of the law than if he were guilty of all . as to sins of omission ; the words of the text taken in their full extent , have a very mortifying consideration in them . for it is much easier to know to doe good , than to practise it . it is hard for men under the plain precepts of the gospel , not to know how to doe good ; but who is there that can say , he doth all the good he knows ? we all know , we ought to love god with all our heart and soul and strength ; and our neighbour as our selves ; yet who can pretend to doe it in the utmost latitude and extent of our duty ? so that what s. paul saith of the law , is true of the text , that it concludes all under sin. for , as our apostle saith , in many things we offend all . and the more we know , the more we offend , as he tells us in these words , to him that knoweth to doe good , and doth it not , to him it is sin . what advantage then have we by the gospel , since the more we know of our duty , the worse our condition is , if we do not practise it ? and we know so much more to be our duty than we can hope to practise ; that this expression seems to leave mankind in a more deplorable condition under the light of the gospel , than if we had never heard of it . for , if the sin be aggravated by knowing our duty , and not doing it , it must proportionably be lessened by having no opportunities to know it . therefore , for the clearing the sense of the apostle in these words , and for the right understanding the just measures of our duty , and the due aggravation of our sins , it will be necessary to state and clear the nature and extent of sins of omission : or to shew how far this rule of the apostle holds , to him that knoweth to doe good , and doth it not , to him it is sin. to doe good here , doth not barely imply something that is lawfull and commendable , which it is some way in our power to doe ; but that to which we are under some obligation , so that it becomes our duty to doe it . for a sin of omission must suppose an obligation ; since every sin must be a transgression of the law. but there are several sorts of things that are good ; and there are different kinds of obligation ; and from hence arises the difficulty of stating the nature of sins of omission ; which some are too little sensible of , and some too much . but it is in it self a subject of so important a nature , and so seldom spoken to , that i shall at this time endeavour to clear it . and in order thereto we must enquire , i. into that good which we are obliged to do . ii. the nature of the obligation we are under to do it . i. as to the good which we are obliged to do ; that may be considered two ways . 1. with respect to god , and so it implies the duty we owe , on the account of the relation we stand in to him. 2. with respect to one another , and so it implies not mere duty but something , beneficial and advantageous to others , which we are in a capacity to do . 1. our duty with respect to god , is either 1. that of our minds , which lie in internal acts , which we are bound to perform towards him. 2. that which consists in external acts of duty and service to him. 1. the duty which we owe to god in our minds ; which is , not barely to know him , but frequently to consider and think of him , as our maker and benefactor . it is a strange incogitancy in mankind to live , as without god in the world ; to suffer the cares and thoughts and business of this world to justle god out of our minds ; whom we ought in the first place to regard . if we could free our minds from that disorder and confusion they are under by the strong impressions of sensible objects , and the false idea's of imagination , they would think of nothing so freely , so frequently , so delightfully as the divine perfections . for god being the most perfect mind , other minds that are created by him , do naturally tend towards him as their centre , and are uneasie and restless , like the needle touched with the loadstone , till they are fixed towards him . we meet with too many things which divert and draw them another way ; but it is certainly one of the most necessary duties lying upon us , to call back our thoughts from too busie and eager a pursuit of earthly things ; and to fix them in the serious thoughts of god and another world. it is the opinion of aquinas and the older casuists , that assoon as ever any person is come to the use of his reason , he is not only bound to think of god , but to love him as his chief good ; and that it is the most dangerous sin of omission not to doe it . the latter casuists , who think this doctrine too severe , as to the first use of reason ; yet cannot deny it to hold , assoon as any come to the knowledge of god ; if the want of knowing him be not through their own fault . assoon as they know god , they confess , that they are bound to love him ; but are they not bound to know him assoon as they are capable ? what allowance may be made in the cases of gross ignorance , or natural stupidity we are not concerned to enquire ; but we now speak of those who have all advantages and opportunities of knowing god betimes ; and as to such their ignorance is so far from being an excuse , that it is their sin. and that can never excuse from a fault , but when it is no fault to be ignorant . but , not to know god when persons know so many other things in the world besides him , is so much greater a fault ; because all those other things lead them to the knowledge of him. so that i take it for granted , that no man of understanding can avoid the knowledge of god , without shutting his eye against the clearest light ; without darkening his understanding by unreasonable prejudices ; without confusion of thought , and perplexity of mind ; without groundless imaginations , and ridiculous suppositions ; and most commonly not without very disorderly passions and vicious habits , which make the very thoughts of god uneasy to his mind . but suppose we do own and believe a god , are we bound always to be thinking of him ? must we spend our time in contemplation of him , and neglect all our affairs here ? if not , what are the bounds of our duty which we may not omit without sin ? there are two things which are necessary for us to doe with respect to god in our minds . 1. to have frequent and serious thoughts of him ; without which it will be impossible to keep our minds in that temper which they ought to be in . for the thoughts of god keep up a vigorous sense of religion , inflame our devotion , calm our passions , and are the most powerfull check against the force of temptations . and therefore we ought to allow our selves fit times of retirement for recollection and consideration ; wherein we draw in our thoughts from the business and impertinencies of this life ( and even these go a great way in that which looks like business ) that we may converse with god and our own minds . and those who do not sometimes withdraw from the noise and hurry , the dust and confusion of this world , must be great strangers both to god and themselves ; and mind any thing rather than their chiefest interest . but i am afraid there are too many among us , of whom the psalmist's words are too true , god is not in all their thoughts ; i wish there were not some who would make good another reading of those words , viz. all their thoughts are there is no god. but i think not so much their deliberate thoughts , as their wishes and desires . but those can never alter the nature of things ; and therefore the wisest thing they can doe , is to make the thoughts of god desirable to them ; and that can be only by reconciling themselves to him by a hearty and sincere repentance . 2. we are always bound to have an habitual temper and disposition of mind towards god. this is that which is commonly called the love of god ; and is opposed to the love of sin. which doth not consist in sudden and transient acts of complacency and delight in him ; but in a firm purpose and resolution of mind to obey him . the jews think , that the fundamental precept of the law as to the love of god with all their heart and soul and strength , goes no farther than that they should doe that which the law requires as to the worship and service of god. but certainly the love of god must go deeper , and rise higher , or else it will never come up to the great design of religion ; which is , not only to doe those outward acts of service which he commands and expects from us ; but to bring our souls nearer to him , to make him our chief end ; and to direct the course of our lives and the acts of our obedience in order to it . now this is a duty towards god so necessary to our happiness , that we must be always obliged to it , and at all times ; although it be an affirmative precept . for the true reason of the difference of obligation is from the nature of the commands , and not from the manner of expressing them either negatively or affimatively . the reason of the perpetual obligation of negative precepts is , that it can never be lawfull to doe what god forbids ; but it may be sometimes lawfull to omit what he requires ; because the circumstances may make it not to be a duty at that time . but when an affirmative precept is of that nature that no circumstances can alter the obligation of it , then it binds as much as a negative . and so it is as to the command of true repentance , and turning from the love of sin , to the love of god ; for no man can be in such circumstances wherein he is not bound to doe it . but as to particular acts of repentance and of the love of god , supposing that habitual temper , the obligation of them is according to the proper seasons and occasions of them . when a sinner is conscious to himself of fresh acts of sin , he is bound to renew his repentance , and the omission of it adds to his guilt ; and when god calls men to repentance in a more than ordinary manner , by strong convictions of conscience ; or some awakening providence ; or by some solemn times of fasting ; he is guilty of a farther aggravation of his sin , if he neglects those seasons of performing the proper acts of repentance . but suppose we do know god , and have this habitual love to him as our chief end , doth this come up to all that mankind owes to god ? do we know him and love him and serve him as we ought to doe ? do we not fail in the manner and degree of those very duties which we in some measure perform ? and are not these failings omissions ? and will not these omissions be charged upon us as sins ? how then can mankind hope to escape the wrath of god against those who continue in the practice of sin ? to answer this , we must distinguish between omission as a defect and as a wilfull sin. we must say , as s. james doth , in many things we offend all ; and in all things , i am afraid , we offend some way or other ; if god would be exact to mark what is done amiss . but here lies the main point as to this matter , how far god will charge those things upon us as omissions , which in us come rather from want of power than of will to doe them ? i do not mean of natural faculties , for those we have entire , but of moral power , i. e. of such a measure of divine grace as will enable us to doe things beyond the imperfection and infirmity of our present state ; which , in this fallen condition , is like that of a man under a dead-palsie , who hath all the parts of a man , but not the power of moving them . and where god by his grace doth recover mankind to a new life , yet there are such remainders of the former deadness upon us , as makes us unable to doe that which we most desire to doe ; and do fail in the manner of performance , where we are sincere as to our purpose and design . but will god lay these moral defects , or infirmities of our corrupt nature on us as wilfull sins now under the gospel ? god forbid . i do not question god's right to command us all that which is just in it self , and he hath given us faculties to doe ; but i consider him as a gracious lord towards a decayed tenant , of whom , if he be willing to pay what he is able , he will not exact the uttermost farthing ; as a compassionate commander to a wounded soldier , who is willing to accept what service he is able to doe , although he fails in many points of his duty ; as the good samaritan , which poured in wine and oil into the wounds which he had not made ; and discharged the debt which he had not contracted . if god were not infinitely gracious and mercifull , there were little hopes for us to avoid punishment ; but since he is pleased to deal with us upon the terms of a new covenant , we have reason to hope that he will not charge involuntary neglects and moral disabilities upon us , as sins of omission . 2. there are duties of external worship and service owing to god ; and how shall we know when the omission of these becomes a sin to us ? for these are not always necessary , and sometimes we may be hindred from them . to answer this , i lay down these rules ; i. a constant or habitual neglect of those duties which god hath appointed for his worship and service , cannot be without a sin of omission , because , that must arise from an evil temper and disposition of mind . when it comes from a contempt of god and his service , it must be a sin , because the reason of it is a very great one . when it comes barely from a careless , indifferent , slothfull temper , which is glad of any excuses for the neglect or omission of them ; it argues very little sense of religion , or regard to god and his service , when they are so ready to find an excuse for their fault . but some are ready to justifie themselves in such a neglect , as though all the outward worship of god were mere ceremony , and only a decent way of entertaining the people with some outward pomp and shew of devotion towards a divine majesty . i am afraid , such hardly mention a divine majesty , but in a complement ; however , we are willing to believe that they do own such a being , but they think it a vain thing to serve him ; as though he could be moved by our prayers to him , or praises of him . we do not deny that god is infinitely above all our services : but is that a reason why we should not serve him in the way he requires it from us ? he doth not want our services , but we want his favour and blessings ; and can we expect them , when we slight that little service , in comparison of the time he allows for other imployments , which he expects from us ? if we had nothing but the light of nature to direct us , we should conclude it very reasonable that mankind should own their creator , by some outward , and publick , and stated ways and times of worship . for this is no more than natural justice to own our maker and benefactor ; and can it become less necessary , when he hath declared himself pleased with the performance of them , and made great promises to those who call upon him ? but this , say they , is the greatest difficulty of all , to understand what effect our prayers can have upon the eternal counsels of heaven ; since they are already fixed and cannot be reversed by our prayers . as great as this difficulty is , the true point of it is only this ; whether we are to believe and trust the frequent and repeated promises of god , although we are not able to comprehend , how the efficacy of our prayers is taken in , as a necessary condition towards the execution of god's eternal purposes . for , if they are conditions , as the scripture often tells us ; then we may easily understand what is meant by the efficacy of prayers ; and as to the manner of reconciling such contingent conditions with god's eternal purposes ; it is a difficulty which will afford perpetual matter of dispute , but ought no more to hinder us from plain duties , than a man should be from going a necessary journey , till he be satisfied whether the earth moves about the sun , or the sun about the earth . ii. whether the omission of such publick duties of divine worship be a sin or not , depends very much on the reason and occasion of it . for if it be a wilfull neglect , it doth imply a degree of contempt , and that cannot be without sin. and that is a wilfull neglect , when nothing but an act of a man 's own will hinders him from serving god in publick : i do not mean only at the very time , but if he hath by some former act of his will brought an incapacity upon himself , that want of power doth not excuse , when the impotency arises from a voluntary act of his own . if it be intended on purpose to hinder , it is as wilfull in its cause , as if there were no such impediment . for , although the actual impediment be the immediate cause of the omission ; yet it is the design and purpose which makes it wilfull . but if persons by an act of providence without their own fault be hindred from the worship of god as by long sickness ; no one can say , that this omission is wilfull , and therefore cannot be accounted a sin. but if a person by his intemperance and debauchery hath brought himself into an incapacity of attending on the service of god ; we cannot say that the actual omission was wilfull ; but we may justly say , that the original cause was so ; and that it cannot excuse the omission . ii. but besides the duties which we owe to god , there are such which we owe to one another , which cannot be omitted without sin. but here the stating of the case seems yet more difficult , since there is not to plain an authority to oblige ; nor such a relation to each other , as we stand in to god. and besides the circumstances of humane affairs are oftentimes so intricate and perplexed , that it is very hard for persons to know their duties , and much more to practice them . but there are certainly such duties , which we owe both to the publick and to one another ; and it may be of some use to us to understand the force of the obligation , and what those are which cannot be omitted without sin. 1. as to the publick ; and concerning that , we may take notice of two rules ; 1. those duties cannot be omitted without sin , which cannot be omitted without prejudice to the publick good. by which i do not mean any fancyfull notions , or pretences to it , but the true and real publick interest of the nation ; which consists in the preservation of our religion and laws . the main duty of this kind , which i shall insist upon , is the laying aside all heats and animosities and distinctions of parties , and minding and carrying on that which is the undoubted common interest of us all . what is the meaning of all those jealousies and suspicions which are among us , when we all profess to own the same religion , the same laws , and the same government ? this is a very melancholy subject to speak of ; for this unseasonable difference of parties among our selves , is like a flaming meteor in the air , we can hardly keep our selves from looking upon it ; and yet cannot behold it without some kind of terror and amazement . it is disputed among the casuists , whether if a man sees two men fighting with each other , he be bound to part them to his own hazard ; and the general resolution is , that if he be in a private capacity he is not , but in a publick he is . i hope the publick capacity , i appear in here at this time , will excuse my interposing to allay such heats and animosities as are not only of dangerous consequence , but great sins . and therefore , unless i would be guilty of omitting a duty my self , i must ( and will ) lay open the mischief of such divided interests as the difference of parties carries along with them . when god had given children to rebekah , while they were yet unborn , and in their mother's womb , she found them struggling within her to such a degree as made her in a consternation to cry out , if it be so , why am i thus ? i. e. if god hath given me these children for blessings , what is the meaning of this struggling between them ? and it is said , her concernment was so great , that she went to enquire of the lord. some think that melchisedek was still living at salem , and that she went to him , to consult about the consequence of it ; and he was a very proper person for it ; for he was king of righteousness and king of peace . and those are the best antidotes against the strugglings and animosities of those who have the same common interest and obligations . we need not to consult any oracle in this case ; for s. paul hath told us that , if we bite and devour one another ; not like canibals , but like different parties , living in hatred and malice and animosity to each other ; take heed , saith he , that ye be not consumed one of another . as if he had said , things cannot always continue at this pass , the inward fires , if not suppressed , will break out at last , and in probability end in your mutual destruction . nothing hath more puzzled the wits of men in this inquisitive age , than to give an account of the ebbing and flowing of the sea ; but a great man of our nation hath told us , that we need not run to the moon , or other remoter causes ; for the true reason of it is nothing else but the clashing of the waters of two mighty seas crossing each other ; and therefore , where there are no such contrary motions , there is no such ebbing and flowing . we have too much of this ebbing and flowing upon land , both as to our condition and expectation . but whence comes it ? is it not from two parties among us crossing and striving to over top and over power each other ? and till we unite and join in the same common current , we have little cause to hope for a state of peace and tranquility . our saviour tells us , a kingdom divided against it self cannot stand . i need not tell you of what kingdom he speaks ; but it was such a one , where there would be no subtilty or diligence wanting in the several parties as to carrying on their designs ; but he looks on an united common interest so necessary to the preservation of government , that he declares , that no kind of society can be supported without it . if we then regard the interest of our nation or of our religion ; if we would avoid the shame and reproch of destroying by our divisions , what we pretended to value above our lives ; we must lay aside our mutual jealousies and suspicions ; we must abate our heats and animosities ; we must unite and join in the things that belong to our peace . but if they be hid from our eyes ; then i am afraid what s. paul said of the gospel may be too truly applied to the things of our peace ; if they be hid , they are hid to them that are lost ; in whom the god of this world hath blinded their eyes . for it is too apparent , that the true ground of the contention of the several parties , is not matter of conscience or religion , or the common interest of the nation , but about power and superiority over each other ; which , if it be carried on , in humane probability can end in nothing but mutual destruction . which god of his mercy prevent . ii. men cannot without sin omit the doing those duties which their places do require from them . for those are intended for a publick benefit . those who study to be quiet , and to doe their own business , are not only the best christians , but the best instruments of the publick good. whereas , men of turbulent , restless and ambitious minds , who make abundance of noise and clamour , are like wasps , always flying and buzzing about , and very angry and peevish and discontented ; but are nothing so usefull as the more silent and industrious bees ; which make the best of every thing , and serve the common interest by it . every society of men is a body made up of head and members knit and compacted together by joints and bands ; but all have their several uses and functions , and while these are duly performed , the whole is preserved ; but if the feet should mutiny against the other parts , because they bear the burthen of the whole ; or the stomach , that it is loaded and oppressed with what serves for the nourishment of all ; or the head , that it must direct and contrive and manage all ; what would the effect be of such complaints and discontents at their own share , but that the whole body must suffer by them . while all the materials of a building are kept in their due place and order , the whole is strengthened and supported ; but if they start out of their places and tumble one upon another , the whole must fall . there are always some who love to carry on their own ends under publick pretences ; and if those be not attained , they matter not what becomes of all other interests , although their own must suffer with the rest . these are like the ivy to a flourishing tree , which seems to embrace it and stick close to it , but it is for its own advantage ; but at the same time , it weakens it and hinders its growth , and if it falls , it must perish together with it . but there are others , who by the very duties of their places are bound to regard the publick and the good of others ; and when they do it not , they are certainly guilty of sins of omission in a high degree . for every such place is a trust from god , of which an account must be given ; and a sacred and solemn obligation goes along with them ; so that there can be no sins of omission in such cases , without sins of commission of as high a nature as breach of trust , and of the most solemn obligations . the truth is , the world is so humoursome and fantastical a thing , that it will hardly endure to be made better ; so that those who have the greatest zeal and resolution to do good , are extremely discouraged in it , when they find so many objections and difficulties ; such frowardness and perverseness in some , such remissness and coldness in others , such an universal lassitude and indifferency , that it is enough to check the best inclinations that way , and to make them leave the world to be managed as it will. and there are some seasons wherein it is much harder to do good than in others . such i mean , when wickedness and vice have corrupted the very principles of mens minds ; when they account it a piece of wit to be profane , and a higher sort of breeding to despise religion and vertue ; when some are ready to pervert the best designs , and mix such mean and sinister ends of their own with them , and thereby blast them , that they come to nothing ; when others will not endure that good may be done , unless they may have the sole doing of it , and endeavour to lessen the reputation of all who are not altogether such as themselves ; when all imaginable arts are used to make government contemptible ; and the best purposes ineffectual ; lastly , when any who are bound to carry on the publick good , account it wisdom to do little or nothing in their places , and take all possible care to disoblige no body by doing their duties , for fear of evil consequences ; i say , when such seasons do happen , there is a very melancholy prospect of affairs , and little hopes of doing or of seeing good. ii. i now proceed to the good which we are to do with respect to others of the same nature and in a worse condition than our selves ; and therefore need our help and assistance . this is so remarkable a sense of doing good , that it hath almost appropriated the name to it self ; as good works are generally taken for works of charity . these are such , as all agree , that they cannot be wholly omitted without sin ; but the difficulty lies in stating the measure and seasons of the obligation to them . concerning which , these rules may be observed : 1. that the measures of duty in this case are very different , according to the different circumstances and conditions of persons . for , although the standing general rules of our duty are fixed and unalterable ; yet the particular obligations depend upon great variety of circumstances , as to those who are to do and to receive good. if the easiness of persons conditions in the world will afford their laying by a constant stock of charity , it will be always in readiness for such occasions , when we would be more willing to doe good if it were in our power ; but it is hardly possible to make such rules which may not give occasions for trouble to scrupulous minds , when they do not strictly observe them . but we are all so far bound to do good to those in want , that the not doing it according to our abilities and opportunities , is such a sin of omission as is inconsistent with true christianity ; but of those , every person is left to judge ; but so , as he must give an account of it at the great day . for , it is observable , that our saviour speaking of the proceedings then , particularly mentions the sins of omission with respect to the doing good to others . 2. there are particular seasons , when a greater measure of doing good is required than at others ; i. e. when persons suffer for religion and a good conscience ; when the necessities of people are more general and pressing ; when great objects of charity are certainly known to our selves and concealed from others ; when a present relief puts them into a way of doing good for themselves ; when god hath done good to us after a more remarkable manner than he hath to others ; when we do the more good , because we have done so much evil ; and thereby manifest the sincerity of our repentance , by bringing forth such fruits worthy of amendment of life ; when our calling and profession is to do good ; and we are bound to give the best examples to others according to our abilities ; when our religion suffers by not doing good , and our faith is questioned for want of good works ; lastly , when there are no such natural drains of charity , as children and near relations which need our assistance ; in these and many other instances of a like nature , there is so much greater obligation to the doing good , that it cannot be omitted without sin. ii. i now come in the last place , to consider the nature of the obligation we lie under to do the good we know . and the reason of considering this , is from the comparison of several duties with one another ; for we may be bound to several things at the same time , but we cannot perform them together ; and the difficulty then is to understand , which of these duties we may omit without sin. and the comparison may be three-fold ; 1. as to the nature of the duties . 2. as to the authority which enjoyns them . 3. as to the particular obligation we are under to do them . 1. as to the nature of our duties . for there are several kinds of things that are good ; and we are to have a different regard to them . some things are good because they are commanded ; and some things are commanded , because they are good ; and even god himself allows us to make a difference between these , when himself saith , i will have mercy , and not sacrifice ; although he required both ; but if it happens that both cannot be done , then he prefers the former , although his own honour seems more concerned in the latter . our saviour extends this rule to mercy on the souls of men ; and to mercy on our bodies , even out of the case of urgent or extreme necessity , which cannot be pleaded in the apostles case of plucking the ears of corn on the sabbath day . but from hence we have ground to infer , that when two duties interfere with one another , we are bound to prefer the greater and more substantial duty , and then the omission of the lesser is no sin. 2. as to the authority which requires them . there is no question , but when the authority of god and man do contradict each other , god is to be obeyed rather than man. but the authority of god's command is not equally clear in all cases ; for some things are required plainly and directly , and some things by consequence and parity of reason ; some things are declared and enforced by the gospel , others left to our own deductions and inferences ; some things are made positive commands for all ages , others are reported by way of example , but that example understood by the church to have the force of a command ; now , in all these and other like cases , we ought to have the greatest regard to plain , positive , moral and perpetual commands ; but withall , to have a due regard to consequential and usefull duties , especially where the church of god hath always so understood them , which is the best interpreter of such doubtfull cases , where the sense of it is truly delivered to us . 3. as to the obligation we are under ; and that is threefold . 1. that of nature , which is , to act according to reason ; and none can question that , but those who question , whether there be any such principle as reason in mankind ; and whosoever do so , have reason to begin at home . 2. of christianity , which supposes and enforces that of nature , and superadds many other duties which we are bound to perform as christians . 3. of our several relations , and particular imployments . as to the former , we are under great obligations from god and nature and christianity , to doe the duties which belong to us in them . as to the latter , they commonly require a stricter obligation by oath , to doe those things which otherwise we are not bound to doe . but being entered into it by a voluntary act of our own , we cannot omit such duties without sin , but where the circumstances of things do supersede the obligation . thus i have gon through , as clearly and distinctly as i could , the most usefull cases relating to sins of omission ; it remains now , that i make some application to our selves . when we reflect on our lives and actions , our sins of commission are apt to terrifie our consciences ; and make us very apprehensive of the wrath of god ; but how few are any ways concerned for their sins of omission , viz. for not discharging the duties of their places , for not doing the good they might and ought to have done , for not serving god with diligence and exemplary devotion , for not having their minds so fixed and intent upon him as they ought to have on their creatour and preserver and redeemer ? in a very corrupt age not to be remarkable for doing evil is a kind of saintship ; but how few are remarkable for doing good ? and yet that is one of the best characters of saintship . how much time is squandred away in vanity and folly ? and yet , how is that grudged which is spent in the worship of god ? o what a burthen it is to serve god , and spend any time in devotion ! how many excuses and pretences of business will such make rather than attend upon religous duties , which themselves would judge very frivolous in other matters ! and will god and conscience be satisfied with such unequal dealing , such notorious partiality ? let us deal faithfully and sincerely with our selves ; are we as ready to serve god as to serve our lusts and pleasures ? have we the same regard to his worship that we have to any thing we really love and esteem ? if not , there must be something very much amiss in the temper and disposition of the mind ; and we are highly concerned to look into it . i do not speak now of casual and accidental omissions of some particular duties at some times ; but of a general unconcernedness about matters of religion , as though they were either too high in the speculation , or too mean and low in the practice of them ; or at least , that it is no great matter one way or other , whether they mind them or not . this , i am afraid , is too much the temper of the age we live in ; which seems to be sinking into a strange indifferency about religion . it is possible for persons to have a zeal against some corrupt opinions and practices in religion ; and yet to have no true zeal or concernment for religion it self . for they may so much hate being imposed upon by false pretenders , that carry on an interest and faction , under the shew of religion , as from thence to suspect all religion to be nothing else ; which is as unreasonable , as for a man to conclude , that all merchants and jewellers are cheats , and that there are no such things ( nor can be ) as true diamonds in the world , because he hath fallen into the hands of such as would have cheated him with those which were counterfeit . and it is common with such who design to deceive , that what they want in sincerity , they make up with confidence . this is a good argument for caution and looking about us ; but it is none at all for our indifferency about matters of religion . for it is not here , as in jewels , which are fine things to look upon ; but the happiness of life doth not depend upon them . but would any one let alone things necessary to the support of life , because poison may be put into them ? we may take care to prevent it ; but we must have the necessaries of life ; and it would be great folly to die for want of sustenance , for fear of being poisoned . if we have no true love to god and religion , we must perish ; for there is no hopes of salvation without it . and if we go on in a careless indifferency about god and his service ; if we do not do our endeavours for suppressing wickedness and vice ; if we do not mind religion our selves , nor are incouraging it in others , it will shew that we have not that love of god and religion which we ought to have . therefore , if we regard the honour of god , our own salvation , the duties of our places , the interest of the nation , and the satisfaction of all that are wise and good , we must shake off all this coldness and indifferency about religion , and apply our selves heartily and sincerely to promote the great ends of it ; which are , to make persons good in this world , and happy in another . which god of his mercy grant , &c. finis . a catalogue of some books , published by the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester : and sold by henry mortlock , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . sermons preached upon several occasions , with a discourse annexed concerning the true reason of the sufferings of christ ; wherein crellius his answer to grotius is consider'd . in fol. the reformation justified in a sermon preached at guild-hall chapel , sept. 21. 1673. before the lord mayor , &c. upon acts 24.14 . a sermon preached nov. 5. 1673. at st. margarets westminster , upon matt. 7.15 , 16. a sermon preached before the king at white-hall , feb. 24. 1674 / 5 upon heb. 3.13 . a sermon preached on the fast-day , nov. 13. 1678. at st. margarets westminster , before the honourable house of commons , upon 1 sam. 12.24 , 25. a sermon preached before the king at white-hall , march 7 , 1678 / 9. upon matt. 10.16 . the mischief of separation , a sermon preached at guild-hall chapel , may 11. 1680. before the lord mayor , &c. upon phil. 3.16 . protestant charity , a sermon preached at st. sepulchre's church on tuesday in easter week , 1681. before the lord mayor , &c. upon gal. 6.9 . of the nature of superstition , a sermon preached at st. dunstan's west , march 31. 1682. upon col. 2.23 . a sermon preached before the king , feb. 15. 168● / 4. upon job . 23.15 . a sermon preached at a publick ordination at st. peter's cornhill , march 15. l684 / 5. upon 1 tim. 5.22 . a sermon preached at white-hall , feb. 19. 1685 / 6. being the first friday in lent , upon luke 15.18 . scripture and tradition campared , in a sermon preached at guild-hall chapel , nov. 27. 1687. upon col. 2.16 . a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , feb. 22. 1688 / 9. upon 1 pet. 4.18 . a sermon preached before the king and queen at white-hall , march 23. 1689 / 90 upon eccles. 11.9 . christian magnanimity : a sermon preached in the cathedral-church at worcester , at the time of the assizes , sept. 21. 1690. upon 2 tim. 1.7 . a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , march 1. 1690 / 1. on luke 6.46 . a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , march 13. 1691 / 2. upon rom. 8.6 . the mysteries of the christian faith vindicated , in a sermon preached at st. lawrence-jewry , london , april 7. 1691. upon 1 tim. 1.15 . a sermon preached before the king and queen at white-hall , on christmas-day , 1693. upon st. john 3.17 . the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese , in his primary visitation , begun at worcester , sept. 11. 1690. the unreasonableness of a separa●ion from the new bishops : or a treatise out of ecclesiastial history . shewing , that although a bishop was unjustly deprived , neither he nor the church ever made a separation , if the successor was not an heretick . translated out of an antient greek manuscript in the publick library at oxford . the case of sees vacant , by an unjust or uncanonical deprivation , stated : in reply to a treatise , entituled , a vindication of the deprived bishops , &c. together with the several pamphlets lately published , as answers to the baroccian treatise : both by humphrey hody , d. d. fellow of wadham-college in oxford . the folly and unreasonableness of atheism demonstrated from the advantage and pleasure of a religious life ; the faculties of humane souls ; the structure of animate bodies , and the origin and frame of the world : in eight sermons , preached at the lecture founded by the honourable robert boyle , esq in the first year 1692. by richard bentley , m. a. chaplain to the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester . the end of the catalogue . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61598-e160 2.12 . 2.10 . gal. 3.22 . ch . 3. ● . omisio non est nisi boni debiti ad quod aliquis tenetur , aqu. 2.3.79.3 . & 1.2.6.3 . reginald . prox. l. 15. c. 2. n. 10. 1.2 . q. 89.6 . victor . rel. 13. navarr . man. c. 11. n. 7. tolet. sum. l. 4. c. 9. azor. t. 1. l. 9. c. 4. gr. de valent . to. 2. disp. 6. qu. 19. to. 3. dis. 3. qu. 19. psal. 104. deut. 6.5.10.12 . james 3.2 . gen. 25.22 gal. 5.15 . lord bacon impetus l hil . mat. 12.25 . 1 thess. 4.11 . matt. 2● . 42 . hos. 6.6 . matt. 9.13 . 12.7 . a sermon preached before the king, march 13, 1666/7 by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1667 approx. 51 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 21 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61603 wing s5641 estc r14240 13142391 ocm 13142391 97979 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61603) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 97979) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 752:6) a sermon preached before the king, march 13, 1666/7 by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 37 p. printed by robert white for henry mortlock ..., london : 1667. marginal notes. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -o.t. -proverbs xiv, 9 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. sin -early works to 1800. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-07 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2004-07 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the king , march 13. 1666 / 7. by edward stillingfleet , b. d. chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . printed by his majesties especial command . london , printed by robert white , for henry mortlock , and are to be sold at his shop at the sign of the white hart in westminster hall. 1667. proverbs 14. 9. fools make a mock at sin. when god by his infinite wisdom had contrived , and by a power and goodness , as infinite as his wisdom , had perfected the creation of the visible world , there seemed to be nothing wanting to the glory of it , but a creature endued with reason and understanding , which might comprehend the design of his wisdom , enjoy the benefits of his goodness , and employ it self in the celebration of his power . the beings purely intellectuall were too highly raised by their own order and creation , to be the lords of this inferiour world : and those whose natures could reach no higher than the objects of sense , were not capable of discovering the glorious perfections of the great creator : and therefore could not be the fit instruments of his praise and service . but a conjunction of both these together was thought necessary to make up such a sort of beings , which might at once command this lower world , and be the servants of him who made it . not as though this great fabrick of the world were meerly raised for man to please his fancy in the contemplation of it , or to exercise his dominion over the creatures designed for his use and service ; but that by frequent reflections on the author of his being , and the effects of his power and goodness , he might be brought to the greatest love and admiration of him . so that the most naturall part of religion lyes in the gratefull acknowledgments we owe to that excellent and supreme being , who hath shewed so particular a kindness to man in the creation and government of the world . which was so great and unexpressible , that some have thought , it was not so much pride and affectation of a greater height , as envy at the felicity and power of mankind , which was the occasion of the fall of the apostate spirits . but whether or no the state of man were occasion enough for the envy of the spirits above ; we are sure the kindness of heaven was so great in it , as could not but lay an indispensable obligation on all mankind to perpetuall gratitude and obedience . for it is as easie to suppose , that affronts and injuries are the most suitable returns for the most obliging favours ; that the first duty of a child should be to destroy his parents ; that to be thankful for kindnesses received , were to commit the unpardonable sin ; as that man should receive his being and all the blessings which attend it from god , and not be bound to the most universall obedience to him . and as the reflection on the author of his being , leads him to the acknowledgement of his duty towards god , so the consideration of the design of it , will more easily acquaint him with the nature of that duty which is expected from him . had man been designed only to act a short part here in the world , all that had been required of him , had been only to express his thankfulness to god for his being , and the comforts of it ; the using all means for the due preservation of himself ; the doing nothing beneath the dignity of humane nature , nothing injurious to those who were of the same nature with himself ; but since he is designed for greater and nobler ends , and his present state , is but a state of tryall , in order to future happiness and misery ; the reason of good and evill is not to be taken meerly from his present , but from the respect , which things have to that eternall state he is designed for . from whence it follows , that the differences of good and evill are rooted in the nature of our beings , and are the necessary consequents of our relation to god , and each other , and our expectations of a future life . and therefore according to these measures , the estimation of men in the world hath been while they did preserve any veneration for god or themselves . wisdom and folly was not measured so much by the subtilty and curiosity of mens speculations , by the finess of their thoughts , or the depth of their designs , as by their endeavours to uphold the dignity of mankind ; by their piety and devotion towards god ; by their sobriety and due government of their actions ; by the equality and justice , the charity and kindness of their dealings to one another . wisdom was but another name for goodness , and folly for sin : then it was a mans glory to be religious ; and to be profane and vitious , was to be base and mean : then there were no gods worshipped because they were bad , nor any men disgraced because they were good . then there were no temples erected to the meanest passions of humane nature , nor men became idolaters to their own infirmities . then to be betrayed into sin , was accounted weakness ; to contrive it , dishonour and baseness ; to justifie and defend it , infamy and reproach ; to make a mock at it , a mark of the highest folly and incorrigibleness . so the wise man in the words of the text assures us , that they are fools , and those of the highest rank and degree of folly , who make a mock at sin . it is well for us in the age we live in , that we have the judgement of former ages to appeal to , and of those persons in them whose reputation for wisdom is yet unquestionable . for otherwise we might be born down by that spightfull enemy to all vertue and goodness , the impudence of such , who it is hard to say whether they shew it more in committing sin , or in defending it . men whose manners are so bad , that scarce any thing can be imagined worse , unless it be the wit they use to excuse them with . such who take the measure of mans perfections downwards , and the nearer they approach to beasts , the more they think themselves to act like men . no wonder then , if among such as these the differences of good and evil be laughed at , and no sin be thought so unpardonable , as the thinking that there is any at all . nay the utmost they will allow in the description of sin , is , that it is a thing that some live by declaiming against , and others cannot live without the practice of . but is the chair of scorners at last proved the only chair of infallibility ? must those be the standard of mankind , who seem to have little left of humane nature , but laughter and the shape of men ? do they think that we are all become such fools to take scoffs for arguments , and raillery for demonstrations ? he knows nothing at all of goodness , that knows not that it is much more easie to laugh at it , than to practise it ; and it were worth the while to make a mock at sin , if the doing so would make nothing of it . but the nature of things does not vary with the humours of men ; sin becomes not at all the less dangerous because men have so little wit to think it so ; nor religion the less excellent and advantageous to the world , because the greatest enemies of that are so much to themselves too , that they have learnt to despise it . but although that scorns to be defended by such weapons whereby her enemies assault her , ( nothing more unbecoming the majesty of religion , than to make it self cheap , by making others laugh ) yet if they can but obtain so much of themselves to attend with patience to what is serious , there may be yet a possibility of perswading them , that no fools are so great as those who laugh themselves into misery , and none so certainly do so , as those who make a mock at sin . but if our authority be too mean and contemptible to be relyed on , in a matter wherein they think us so much concern'd ( and so i hope we are to prevent the ruine of mens souls ) we dare with confidence appeal to the generall sense of mankind in the matter of our present debate . let them name but any one person in all the monuments of former ages , to whom but the bare suspicion of vice was not a diminution to an esteem that might otherwise have been great in the world . and if the bare suspicion would do so much among even the more rude and barbarous nations , what would open and professed wickedness do among the more knowing and civill ? humane nature retains an abhorrency of sin , so far that it is impossible for men to have the same esteem of those who are given over to all manner of wickedness , though otherwise of great sharpness of wit , and of such whose naturall abilities may not exceed the other , but yet do govern their actions according to the strict rules of religion and vertue . and the generall sense of mankind cannot be by any thing better known , than by an universall consent of men , as to the wayes whereby they express their value and esteem of others . what they all agree on as the best character of a person worthy to be loved and honoured , we may well think is the most agreeable to humane nature ; and what is universally thought a disparagement to the highest accomplishments , ought to be looked on as the disgrace and imperfection of it . did ever any yet , though never so wicked and profane themselvs , seriously commend another person for his rudeness and debaucheries ? was any mans lust or intemperance ever reckoned among the titles of his honour ? who ever yet raised trophies to his vices , or thought to perpetuate his memory by the glory of them ? where was it ever known , that sobriety and temperance , justice and charity were thought the marks of reproach and infamy ? who ever suffered in their reputation by being thought to be really good ? nay , it is so far from it , that the most wicked persons do inwardly esteem them whether they will or no. by which we see , that even in this lapsed and degenerate condition of mankind , it is only goodness which gains true honour and esteem , and nothing doth so effectually blast a growing reputation , as wickedness and vice . but if it be thus with the generality of men , who were never yet thought to have too much partiality towards goodness , we may much more easily find it among those , who have had a better ground for the reputation of their wisdom , than the meer vogue of the people . he who was pronounced by the heathen oracle , to be the wisest among the greeks , was the person who brought down philosophy from the obscure and uncertain speculations of nature , and in all his discourses recommended vertue as the truest wisdom . and he among the iews , whose soul was as large as the sand on the sea shore , whose wisdom outwent that of all the persons of his own or future ages , writes a book on purpose to perswade men , that there is no reall wisdom , but to fear god and keep his commandments : that sin is the greatest folly , and the meaner apprehensions men have of it , the more they are infatuated by the temptations to it . but as there are degrees of sinning , so there are of folly in it . some sin with a blushing countenance , and a trembling conscience ; they sin , but yet they are afraid to sin : they sin , but in the act of it they condemn themselves for what they do ; they sin , but with confusion in their faces , with horrour in their minds , and an earthquake in their consciences : though the condition of such persons be dangerous , and their unquietness shews the greatness of their folly , yet because these twitches of conscience argue there are some quick touches left of the sense of good and evil , their case is not desperate , nor their condition incurable : but there are others who despise these as the reproach of the school of wickedness , because they are not yet attained to those heights of impiety which they glory in : such who have subdued their consciences much easier than others do their sins ; who have almost worn out all the impressions of the work of the law written in their hearts ; who not only make a practice , but a boast of sin , and defend it with as much greediness as they commit it ; these are the men , whose folly is manifest to all men but themselves ; and surely since these are the men , whom solomon in the words of the text describes , ( 1. ) by their character , as fools , and , ( 2. ) by the instance of their folly , in making a mock at sin ; we may have not only the liberty to use , but to prove , that name of reproach to be due unto them ; and ( 2. ) to shew the reasonablenesse of fastning it upon them , because they make a mock at sin . but before i come more closely to pursue that , it will be necessary to consider another sense of these words caused by the ambiguity of the hebrew verb , which sometimes signifies to deride and scorn , sometimes to plead for , and excuse a thing with all the arts of rhetorick ( thence the word for rhetorick is derived from the verb here used ) according to which sense , it notes all the plausible pretences and subtle extenuations which wicked men use in defence of their evil actions . for as if men intended to make some recompence for the folly they betray in the acts of sin by the wit they employ in the pleading for them , there is nothing they shew more industry and care in , than in endeavouring to baffle their own consciences , and please themselves in their folly , till death and eternall flames awaken them . that we may not therefore seem to beg all wicked men for fools , till we have heard what they have to say for themselves , we shall first examine the reasonableness of their fairest plea's for their evil actions , before we make good the particular impeachment of folly against them . there are three wayes especially whereby they seek to justifie themselves , by laying the blame of all their evil actions , either upon the fatall necessity of all events , the unavoidable frailty of humane nature , or the impossibility of keeping the laws of heaven . but that none of these will serve to excuse them from the just imputation of folly , is our present business to discover . 1. the fatall necessity of all humane actions . those who upon any other terms are unwilling enough to own either god or providence , yet if they can but make these serve their turn to justifie their sins by , their quarrell against them then ceaseth , as being much more willing that god should bear the blame of their sins , than themselvs . but yet the very fears of a deity suggest so many dreadfull thoughts of his majesty , iustice , and power , that they are very well contented to have him wholly left out ; and then to suppose man to be a meer engine , that is necessarily moved by such a train and series of causes , that there is no action how bad soever that is done by him , which it was any more possible for him not to have done , than for the fire not to burn when it pleases . if this be true , farewell all the differences of good and evil in mens actions ; farewell all expectations of future rewards and punishments ; religion becomes but a meer name , and righteousness but an art to live by . but it is with this , as it is with the other arguments they use against religion ; there is something within , which checks and controlls them in what they say : and that inward remorse of conscience , which such men sometimes feel in their evil actions ( when conscience is forced to recoil by the foulness of them ) doth effectually confute their own hypothesis ; and makes them not believe those actions to be necessary , for which they suffer so much in themselves because they knew they did them freely . or is it as fatall for man to believe himself free when he is not so , as it is for him to act when his choice is determined ? but what series of causes is there that doth so necessarily impose upon the common sense of all mankind ? it seems very strange , that man should have so little sense of his own interest to be still necessitated to the worst of actions , and yet torment himself with the thoughts that he did them freely . or is it only the freedome of action , and not of choice , that men have an experience of within themselves ? but surely , however men may subtilly dispute of the difference between these two , no man would ever believe himself to be free in what he does , unless he first thought himself to be so , in what he determines ? and if we suppose man to have as great a freedom of choice in all his evil actions ( which is the liberty we are now speaking of ) as any persons assert or contend for , we cannot suppose that he should have a greater experience of it , than now he hath . so that either it is impossible for man to know when his choice is free ; or if it may be known , the constant experience of all evil men in the world will testifie , that it is so now . is it possible for the most intemperate person to believe , when the most pleasing temptations to lust or gluttony are presented to him , that no considerations whatever could restrain his appetite , or keep him from the satisfaction of his brutish inclinations ? will not the sudden , though groundless , apprehension of poyson in the cup , make the drunkards heart to ake , and hand to tremble , and to let fall the supposed fatall mixture in the midst of all his jollity and excess ? how often have persons who have designed the greatest mischief to the lives and fortunes of others , when all opportunities have fallen out beyond their expectation for accomplishing their ends , through some sudden thoughts which have surprized them , almost in the very act , been diverted from their intended purposes ? did ever any yet imagine that the charms of beauty and allurements of lust were so irresistible , that if men knew before hand they should surely dye in the embraces of an adulterous bed , they could not yet withstand the temptations to it ? if then some considerations , which are quite of another nature from all the objects which are presented to him , may quite hinder the force and efficacy of them upon the mind of man ( as we see in ioseph's resisting the importunate caresses of his mistris ) what reason can there be to imagine that man is a meer machine moved only as outward objects determine him ? and if the considerations of present fear and danger may divert men from the practice of evil actions , shall not the far more weighty considerations of eternity have , at least an equall , if not a far greater power and efficacy upon mens minds , to keep them from everlasting misery ? is an immortall soul and the eternal happiness of it so mean a thing in our esteem and value , that we will not deny our selves those sensuall pleasures for the sake of that , which we would renounce for some present danger ? are the flames of another world such painted fires , that they deserve only to be laughed at , and not seriously considered by us ? fond man ! art thou only free to ruine and destroy thy self ? a strange fatality indeed , when nothing but what is mean and triviall shall determine thy choice ! when matters of the highest moment are therefore less regarded , because they are such . hast thou no other plea for thy self , but that thy sins were fatal ? thou hast no reason then to believe but that thy misery shall be so too . but if thou ownest a god and providence , assure thy self that justice and righteousness are not meer titles of his honour , but the reall properties of his nature . and he who hath appointed the rewards and punishments of the great day , will then call the sinner to account , not only for all his other sins , but for offering to lay the imputation of them upon himself . for if the greatest abhorrency of mens evil wayes , the rigour of his laws , the severity of his judgements , the exactness of his justice , the greatest care used to reclaim men from their sins , and the highest assurance , that he is not the cause of their ruine , may be any vindication of the holiness of god now , and his justice in the life to come ; we have the greatest reason to lay the blame of all our evil actions upon our selves , as to attribute the glory of all our good unto himself alone . 2. the frailty of humane nature : those who find themselves to be free enough to do their souls mischief , and yet continue still in the doing of it , find nothing more ready to plead for themselves , than the unhappiness of mans composition , and the degenerate state of the world . if god had designed ( they are ready to say ) that man should lead a life free from sin , why did he confine the soul of man to a body so apt to taint and pollute it ? but who art thou o man , that thus findest fault with thy maker ? was not his kindness the greater , in not only giving thee a soul capable of enjoying himself , but such an habitation for it here , which by the curiosity of its contrivance , the number and usefulness of its parts , might be a perpetual and domestick testimony of the wisdom of its maker ? was not such a conjunction of soul and body necessary for the exercise of that dominion which god designed man for , over the creatures endued only with sense and motion ? and if we suppose this life to be a state of tryall in order to a better , ( as in all reason we ought to do ) what can be imagined more proper to such a state , than to have the soul constantly employed in the government of those sensuall inclinations which arise from the body ? in the doing of which , the proper exercise of that vertue consists , which is made the condition of future happiness . had it not been for such a composition , the difference could never have been seen between good and bad men ; i. e. between those who maintain the empire of reason , assisted by the motives of religion , over all the inferiour faculties , and such who dethrone their souls and make them slaves to every lust that will command them . and if men willingly subject themselves to that which they were born to rule , they have none to blame but themselves for it . neither is it any excuse at all , that this , through the degeneracy of mankind , is grown the common custome of the world ; unless that be in it self so great a tyrant , that there is no resisting the power of it . if god had commanded us to comply with all the customs of the world , and at the same time to be sober , righteous , and good , we must have lived in another age than we live in , to have excused these two commands from a palpable contradiction . but instead of this , he hath forewarned us of the danger of being led aside by the soft , and easie compliances of the world ; and if we are sensible of our own infirmities , ( as we have all reason to be ) he hath offered us the assistance of his grace & of that spirit of his , which is greater than the spirit that is in the world . he hath promised us those weapons whereby we may withstand the torrent of wickedness in the world , with far greater success than the old gauls were wont to do the inundations of their countrey , whose custome was to be drowned with their arms in their hands . but it will be the greater folly in us to be so , because we have not only sufficient means of resistance , but we understand the danger before hand . if we once forsake the strict rules of religion and goodness , and are ready to yield our selves to whatever hath got retainers enough to set up for a custome , we may know where we begin , but we cannot where we shall make an end . for every fresh assault makes the breach wider , at which more enemies may come in still ; so that when we find our selves under their power , we are contented for our own ease to call them friends . which is the unhappy consequence of too easie yielding at first , till at last the greatest slavery to sin be accounted but good humour , and a gentle compliance with the fashions of the world . so that when men are perswaded , either through fear , or too great easiness to disuse that strict eye which they had before to their actions , it oft times falls out with them , as it did with the souldier in the roman history , who blinded his eye so long in the time of the civil wars , that when he would have used it again , he could not . and when custom hath by degrees taken away the sense of sin from their consciences , they grow as hard as herodotus tells us the heads of the old egyptians were by the heat of the sun , that nothing would ever enter them . if men will with nebuchadnezzar herd with the beasts of the field , no wonder if their reason departs from them , and by degrees they grow as savage as the company they keep . so powerfull a thing is custome to debauch mankind , and so easily do the greatest vices by degrees obtain admission into the souls of men , under pretence of being retainers to the common infirmities of humane nature . which is a phrase , through the power of self-flattery , and mens ignorance in the nature of morall actions , made to be of so large and comprehensive a sense that the most wilfull violations of the laws of heaven , and such which the scripture tells us do exclude from the kingdom of it , do find ( rather than make ) friends enough to shelter themselves under the protection of them . but such a protection it is , which is neither allowed in the court of heaven , nor will ever secure the souls of men without a hearty and sincere repentance , from the arrest of divine justice ; which when it comes to call the world to an account of their actions will make no defalcations at all for the power of custom , or common practice of the world . 3. the impossibility of the command , or rather of obedience to it . when neither of the former plea's will effect their design , but notwithstanding the pretended necessity of humane actions , and the more than pretended common practice of the world , their consciences still fly in their faces and rebuke them sharply for their sins , then in a mighty rage and fury they charge god himself with tyranny in laying impossible laws upon the sons of men . but if we either consider the nature of the command , or the promises which accompany it , or the large experience of the world to the contrary , we shall easily discover that this pretence is altogether as unreasonable as either of the foregoing . for what is it that god requires of men as the condition of their future happiness which in its own nature is judged impossible ? is it for men to live soberly , righteously and godly in this world ? for that was the end of christian religion to perswade men to do so : but who thinks it impossible to avoid the occasions of intemperance , not to defraud , or injure his neighbours , or to pay that reverence and sincere devotion to god which we owe unto him ? is it to do as we would be done by ? yet that hath been judged by strangers to the christian religion a most exact measure of humane conversation ; is it to maintain an universall kindness and good will to men ? that indeed is the great excellency of our religion , that it so strictly requires it ; but if this be impossible , farewell all good nature in the world ; and i suppose few will own this charge , lest theirs be suspected . is it to be patient under suffering , moderate in our desires , circumspect in our actions , contented in all conditions ? yet these are things which those have pretended to who never owned christianity , and therefore surely they never thought them impossible . is it to be charitable to the poor , compassionate to those in misery ? is it to be frequent in prayer , to love god above all things , to forgive our enemies as we hope god will forgive us , to believe the gospel , and be ready to suffer for the sake of christ ? there are very few among us but will say they do all these things already , and therefore surely they do not think them impossible . the like answer i might give to all the other precepts of the gospel till we come to the denying ungodliness and worldly lusts , and as to these too , if we charge men with them , they either deny their committing them , and then say they have kept the command ; or if they confess it , they promise amendment for the furture ; but in neither respect can they be said to think the command impossible . thus we see their own mouths will condemn them when they charge god with laying impossible laws on mankind . but then if we enquire further into the judgements of those who it may be never concerned themselves so much about the precepts of christian religion , as to try whether they had any power to observe them or not ; nay , if we yield them more ( than , it may be , they are willing to enquire after , though they ought to do it ) viz. that without the assistance of divine grace , they can never do it : yet such is the unlimited nature of divine goodness and the exceeding riches of gods grace , that ( knowing the weakness and degeneracy of humane nature when he gave these commands to men ) he makes a large and free offer of assistance to all those who are so sensible of their own infirmity as to beg it of him . and can men then say the command is impossible when he hath promised an assistance sutable to the nature of the duty & the infirmities of men ? if it be acknowledged that some of the duties of christianity are very difficult to us now ; let us consider by what means he hath sweetned the performance of them . will not the proposal of so excellent a reward , make us swallow some more than ordinary hardships that we might enjoy it ? hath he not made use of the most obliging motives to perswade us to the practice of what he requires , by the infinite discovery of his own love , the death of his son , and the promise of his spirit ? and what then is wanting , but only setting our selves to the serious obedience of them , to make his commands not only not impossible , but easie to us ? but our grand fault is , we make impossibilities our selves , where we find none , and then we complain of them : we are first resolved not to practise the commands , and then nothing more easie than to find fault with them : we first pass sentence , and then examine evidences ; first condemn , and then enquire into the merits of the cause . yet surely none of these things can be accounted impossible , which have been done by all those who have been sincere and hearty christians ; and god forbid , we should think all guilty of hypocrisie , who have professed the christian religion from the beginning of it to this day . nay more than so , they have not only done them , but professed to have that joy and satisfaction of mind in the doing of them , which they would not exchange for all the pleasures and delights of the world . these were the men , who not only were patient , but rejoyced in sufferings ; who accounted it their honour and glory to endure any thing for the sake of so excellent a religion ; who were so assured of a future happiness by it , that they valued martyrdoms above crowns and scepters . but god be thanked , we may hope to come to heaven on easier terms than these , or else many others might nevercome thither , besides those who think to make this a pretence for their sin , that now when with encouragement and honour we may practise our religion , the commands of it are thought impossible by them . thus we have made good the general charge here implyed against wicked men , in that they are called fools , by examining the most plausible pretences they bring for themselves . i now come to the particular impeachment of their folly , because they make a mock at sin . and that i shall prove especially by two things : 1. because this argues the highest degree of wickedness . 2. because it betrayes the greatest weakness of judgement and want of consideration . 1. because it argues the highest degree of wickedness . if to sin be folly , to make a mock at it is little short of madness . it is such a height of impiety , that few but those who are of very profligate conscienciences can attain to , without a long custom in sinning . for conscience is at first modest , and starts and boggles at the appearance of a great wickedness , till it be used to it & grown familiar with it . it is no such easie matter for a man to get the mastery of his conscience ; a great deal of force and violence must be used to ones self before he does it . the natural impressions of good and evil , the fears of a deity , and the apprehensions of a future state are such curbs and checks in a sinners way , that he must first sin himself beyond all feeling of these , before he can attain to the seat of the scorners . and we may justly wonder how any should ever come thither , when they must break through all that is ingenuous and modest , all that is vertuous and good , all that is tender and apprehensive in humane nature , before they can arrive at it . they must first deny a god , and despise an immortal soul , they must conquer their own reason , and cancell the law written in their hearts , they must hate all that is serious , and yet soberly believe themselves to be no better than the beasts that perish , before men can come to make a scoff at religion , and a mock at sin . and who now could ever imagine that in a nation professing christianity , among a people whose genius enclines them to civility and religion , yea among those who have the greatest advantages of behaviour and education , and who are to give the laws of civility to the rest of the nation , there should any be found who should deride religion , make sport with their own profaneness , and make so light of nothing , as being damned ? i come not here to accuse any , and least of all those who shew so much regard of religion as to be present in the places devoted to sacred purposes ; but if there be any such here , whose consciences accuse themselves , for any degrees of so great impiety ; i beseech them by all that is dear and precious to them , by all that is sacred and serious , by the vows of their baptism , and their participation of the holy eucharist , by all the kindness of heaven which they either enjoy or hope for , by the death and sufferings of the son of god , that they would now consider how great folly and wickedness they betray in it , and what the dreadfull consequence of it will be , if they do not timely repent of it . if it were a doubt ( as i hope it is not among any here ) whether the matters of religion be true or no , they are surely things which ought to be seriously thought and spoken of . it is certainly no jesting matter to affront a god of infinite majesty and power , ( and he judges every wilfull sinner to do so ) nor can any one in his wits think it a thing not to be regarded , whether he be eternally happy or miserable . methinks then among persons of civility and honour , above all others , religion might at least be treated with the respect and reverence due to the concernments of it ; that it be not made the sport of entertainments , nor the common subject of playes and comedies : for is there nothing to trifle with , but god and his service ? is wit grown so schismatical & sacrilegious , that it can please it self with nothing but holy ground ? are profaness & wit grown such inseparable companions , that none shall be allowed to pretend to the one , but such as dare be highly guilty of the other ? far be it from those who have but the name of christians , either to do these things themselves , or to be pleased with them that do them : especially in such times as ours of late have been , when god hath used so many wayes to make us serious if any thing would ever do it . if men had only slighted god and religion , and made a mock at sin , when they had grown wanton through the abundance of peace and plenty , and saw no severities of gods justice used upon such who did it ; yet the fault had been so great , as might have done enough to have interrupted their peace and destroyed that plenty , which made them out of the greatness of their pride and wantonness to kick against heaven : but to do it in despight of all gods judgements , to laugh in his face when his rod is upon our backs , when neither pestilence nor fire can make us more afraid of him , exceedingly aggravates the impiety , and makes it more unpardonable . when like the old germans we dance among naked swords , when men shall defie and reproach heaven in the midst of a cities ruines , and over the graves of those whom the arrows of the almighty have heaped together , what can be thought of such , but that nothing will make them serious , but eternal misery ? and are they so sure there is no such thing to be feared , that they never think of it , but when by their execrable oaths they call upon god to damn them , for fear he should not do it time enough for them ? thus while men abuse his patience , and provoke his justice , while they trample upon his kindness , and slight his severities , while they despise his laws and mock at the breaches of them , what can be added more to their impiety ? or what can be expected by such who are guilty of it , but that god should quickly discover their mighty folly by letting them see how much they have deceived themselves , since god will not be mocked , but because of these things the wrath of god will most certainly come upon the children of disobedience . which leads to the second thing wherein this folly is seen . 2. which is in the weakness of judgement and want of consideration , which this betrayes in men . folly is the great unsteadiness of the mind in the thoughts of what is good and fitting to be done . it were happy for many in the world , if none should suffer in their reputation for want of wisdom , but such whom nature or some violent distemper have wholly deprived of the use of their reason and understandings : but wisdom does not lye in the rambling imaginations of mens minds ( for fools may think of the same things which wise men practise ) but in a due consideration and choice of things which are most agreeable to the end they design , supposing the end in the first place to be worthy a wise mans choice ; for i cannot yet see why the end may not be chosen as-well as the means , when there are many stand in competition for our choice , and men first deliberate , and then determine which is the fittest to be pursued . but when the actions of men discover , that either they understand or regard not the most excellent end of their beings , or do those things which directly cross and thwart their own designs , or else pursue those which are mean and ignoble in themselves , we need not any further evidence of their folly , than these things discover . now that those who make a mock at sin are guilty of all these , will appear ; if we consider whom they provoke by doing so , whom they most injury , and upon what reasonable considerations they are moved to what they do . 1. whom they provoke by their making a mock at sin ; supposing that there is a governour of the world , who hath established laws for us to be guided by , we may easily understand , whose honour and authority is reflected on , when the violations of his laws are made nothing of . for surely if they had a just esteem of his power and soveraignty , they never durst make so bold with him , as all those do who not only commit sin themselves , but laugh at the scrupulosity of those who dare not when dionysius changed apollos cloak , and took off the golden beard of aesculapius , with those solemn jeers of the unsuitableness of the one to the son of a beardless father ; and the much greater conveniency of a cheaper garment to the other ; it was a sign he stood not much in awe of the severity of their looks , nor had any dread at all of the greatness of their power . but although there be so infinite a disproportion between the artificial deities of the heathens , and the majesty of him who made and governs the whole world ; yet as little reverence to his power and authority is shewed by all such who dare affront him with such a mighty confidence , and bid the greatest defiance to his laws by scoffing at them . what is there , the soveraigns and princes of the earth do more justly resent , and express the highest indignation against , than to have their laws despised , their persons affronted , and their authority contemned ? and can we then imagine , that a god of infinite power and majesty , the honour of whose laws is as dear to him as his own is , should sit still unconcerned , when so many indignities are continually offered them , and never take any notice at all of them ? it is true , his patience is not to be measured by our fretfull and peevish natures , ( and it is happy for us all that it is not ) he knows the sinner can never escape his power , and therefore bears the longer with him : but yet his lenity is always joyned with his wisdom and justice , and the time is coming when patience it self shall be no more . is it not then the highest madness and folly to provoke one whose power is infinitely greater than our own is , and from the severity of whose wrath we cannot secure our selves one minute of an hour ? how knowest thou , o vain man , but that in the midst of all thy mirth and jollity , while thou art boasting of thy sins , and thinkest thou canst never fill up fast enough the measure of thy iniquities , a sudden fit of an apoplexy , or the breaking of an aposteme , or any of the innumerable instruments of death , may dispatch thee hence , and consign thee into the hands of divine justice ? and wherewithall then wilt thou be able to dispute with god ? wilt thou then charge his providence with folly , and his laws with unreasonableness ? when his greatness shall affright thee , his majesty astonish thee ▪ his power disarm thee , and his justice proceed against thee : when notwithstanding all thy bravado's here , they own conscience shall be not only thy accuser and witness , but they judge and executioner too : when it shall revenge it self upon thee for all the rapes and violences thou hast committed upon it here : when horror and confusion shall be thy portion , and the unspeakable anguish of a racked and tormented mind shall too late convince thee of thy folly in making a mock at that which stings with an everlasting venom . art thou then resolved to put all these things to the adventure , and live as securely as if the terrors of the almighty were but the dreams of men awake , or the fancies of weak and distempered brains ? but i had rather believe that in the heat and fury of thy lusts thou wouldst seem to others to think so , than thou either doest or canst perswade thy self to such unreasonable folly . is it not then far better to consult the tranquillity of thy mind here , and the eternal happiness of it hereafter , by a serious repentance and speedy amendment of thy life , than to expose thy self for the sake of thy sensual pleasures to the fury of that god whose justice is infinite , and power irresistible ? shall not the apprehension of his excellency make thee now afraid of him ? never then make any mock at sin more , unless thou art able to contend with the almighty , or to dwell with everlasting burnings . 2. the folly of it is seen in considering whom the injury redounds to by mens making themselves so pleasant with their sins . do they think by their rude attempts to dethrone the majesty of heaven , or by standing at the greatest defiance , to make him willing to come to terms of composition with them ? do they hope to slip beyond the bounds of his power , by falling into nothing when they dye , or to sue out prohibitions in the court of heaven , to hinder the effects of iustice there ? do they design to out-wit infinite wisdom , or to find such flaws in gods government of the world , that he shall be contented to let them go unpunished ? all which imaginations are alike vain and foolish , and only shew how easily wickedness baffles the reason of mankind , and makes them rather hope or wish for the most impossible things , than believe they shall ever be punished for their impieties . if the apostate spirits can by reason of their present restraint and expectation of future punishments be as pleasant in beholding the follies of men as they are malicious to suggest them , it may be one of the greatest diversions of their misery , to see how active and witty men are in contriving their own ruine . to see with what greediness they catch at every bait that is offered them , and when they are swallowing the most deadly poyson , what arts they use to perswade themselves that it is a healthful potion . no doubt , nothing can more gratifie them than to see men sport themselves into their own destruction , and go down so pleasantly to hell : when eternal flames become the first awakeners , and then men begin to be wise , when it is too late to be so : when nothing but insupportable torments can convince them that god was in earnest with them , that he would not alwayes bear the affronts of evil men , and that those who derided the miseries of another life , shall have leisure enough to repent their folly , when their repentance shall only increase their sorrow without hopes of pardon by it . 3. but if there were any present felicity , or any considerable advantage to be gained by this mocking at sin , and undervaluing religion , there would seem to be some kind of pretence , though nothing of true reason for it . yet that which heightens this folly to the highest degree in the last place is , that there can be no imaginable consideration thought on which might look like a plausible temptation to it . the covetous man , when he hath defrauded his neighbour , and used all kinds of arts to compass an estate , hath the fulness of his baggs to answer for him ; and whatever they may do in another world , he is sure they will do much in this . the voluptuous man , hath the strong propensities of his nature , the force of temptation which lyes in the charms of beauty , to excuse his unlawfull pleasures by . the ambitious man , hath the greatness of his mind , the advantage of authority , the examples of those who have been great before him , and the envy of those who condemn him , to plead for the heights he aims at . but what is it which the person who despises religion , and laughs at every thing that is serious , proposes to himself as the reason of what he does ? but alas ! this were to suppose him to be much more serious than he is , if he did propound any thing to himself as the ground of his actions . but it may be a great kindness to others , though none to himself ; i cannot imagine any , unless it may be , to make them thankfull they are not arrived to that height of folly ; or out of perfect good nature , least they should take him to be wiser than he is . the psalmists fool despises him as much as he does religion : for he only saith it in his heart there is no god ; but this though he dares not think there is none , yet shews him not near so much outward respect & reverence as the other does . every the atheist himself thinks him a fool , & the greatest of all other , who believes a god , and yet affronts him and trifles with him . and although the atheist's folly be unaccountable , in resisting the clearest evidence of reason , yet so far he is to be commended for what he sayes , that if there be such a thing as religion men ought to be serious in it . so that of all hands the scoffer at religion is looked on as one forsaken of that little reason , which might serve to uphold a slender reputation of being above the beasts that perish : nay , therein his condition is worse than theirs , that as they understand not religion , they shall never be punished for despising it : which such a person can never secure himself from , considering the power , the justice , the severity of that god , whom he hath so highly provoked . god grant , that the apprehension of this danger may make us so serious in the profession and practice of our religion , that we may not by slighting that , and mocking at sin , provoke him to laugh at our calamities , and mock when our fear comes ; but that by beholding the sincerity of our repentance , and the heartiness of our devotion to him , he may turn his anger away from us , and rejoyce over us to do us good . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61603-e120 1 kings 4. 29 , 30 , 31. 1 joh. 4. 4. tit. 2. 12 ▪ gal. 6. 7. eph. 5. 6. the mysteries of the christian faith asserted and vindicated in a sermon preached at s. laurence-jewry in london, april the 7th, 1691 / by the right reverend father in god, edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1691 approx. 59 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 21 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61575 wing s5610 estc r21437 12484107 ocm 12484107 62248 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61575) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 62248) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 298:20) the mysteries of the christian faith asserted and vindicated in a sermon preached at s. laurence-jewry in london, april the 7th, 1691 / by the right reverend father in god, edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 37 p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1691. advertisement on p. [1] at end. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -timothy, 1st, i, 15 -sermons. christianity -essence, genius, nature -sermons. sermons, english. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 rachel losh sampled and proofread 2004-05 rachel losh text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the mysteries of the christian faith asserted and vindicated : in a sermon preached at s. laurence-jewry in london , april the 7th . 1691. by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . london , printed by j. h. for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . 1691. a sermon preached at s. laurence-jewry , april the 7th . 1691. 1 tim . i. 15. this is a faithfull saying and worthy of all acceptation , that christ jesus came into the world to save sinners , of whom i am chief . if these words were to be understood without any restriction or limitation that christ jesus came into the world to save sinners , they would overthrow the great design of the gospel , and make its excellent precepts useless and ineffectual . for , to what purpose should men be put upon the severe practise of repentance , mortification and a continued course of a holy life , if the meer being sinners did sufficiently qualifie them for salvation ? this indeed would be thought a doctrine worthy of all acceptation by the greatest sinners ; but it could not be a faithfull saying , being not agreeable either to the nature of god , or revelation of his will by christ jesus . but s. paul speaks of such sinners as himself had been ; i. e. such as had been great sinners , but had truely and sincerely repented . of whom i am chief . what then ? must we look on him as the standard and measure of such sinners whom christ jesus came to save ? what will then become of all those who have been sinners of a higher rank than ever he was ? it 's true in the verses before the text , he sets out his sins , as a humble penitent is wont to do , with the worst colours and deepest aggravations , who was before a blasphemer and a persecutor , and injurious ; but yet he adds , that he obtained mercy because he did it ignorantly , in unbelief . how then is s. paul the chief of sinners ? are sins of ignorance and mistake the greatest of sins , for which christ died ? is there no expiation for any other by jesus christ ? what will become then of all such who sin against knowledge and conscience , and not in ignorance and unbelief ? can none of these hope for mercy by christ jesus , although they do truely repent ? but the blood of christ is said elsewhere to cleanse us from all sin ; not , while we continue in them , but if we repent and forsake them . and jesus christ is said to be a propitiation for our sins ; and not for ours only , but for the sins of the whole world. and therefore this expression of s. paul notes his great humility and deep sense of his own sins ; but doth not exclude others from the hopes of pardon whose sins have other aggravations than his had . for , if we leave out the last words as peculiar to his case , yet the other contain in them a true proposition and of the greatest importance to mankind ; this is a faithfull saying and worthy of all acceptation , that christ jesus came into the world to save sinners . this , you may say , is a matter out of all doubt among all such who hope for salvation by christ jesus ; for all are agreed , that one way or other we are to be saved by him . but there is great difficulty as to the way of saving sinners by christ iesus ; whether by the doctrine and example of the man christ jesus , by the power he attained through his sufferings ; or , by the eternal son of god's assuming our nature , and suffering in our stead in order to the reconciling god to us and making a propitiation for our sins . these are two very different hypotheses or notions of christ's coming to save sinners ; and the former seems more easie to be understood and believed ; and the other seems to have insuperable difficulties in point of reason ; and to run our religion into mysteries , which expose our faith and make christianity appear contemptible to men of sense and understanding . is it not therefore much better to embrace such a scheme of it , as will have the least objection against it , that so men of reason may not be tempted to infidelity , and men of superstition may not under the colour of mysteries bring in the most absurd and unreasonable doctrines ? these are plausible insinuations , and would be apt to prevail on considering mens minds , if they were to form and make a religion that might be most accommodated to the genius and humour of the age they live in . and truely no men ( by their own authority ) can pretend to a right to impose on others any mysteries of faith , or any such things which are above their capacity to understand . but that is not our case ; for we all profess to believe and receive christianity as a divine revelation ; and god ( we say ) may require from us the belief of what we may not be able to comprehend , especially if it relates to himself , or such things which are consequent upon the union of the divine and human nature . therefore our business is to consider , whether any such things be contained in that revelation which we all own ; and if they be , we are bound to believe them , although we are not able to comprehend them . now here are two remarkable characters in these words , by which we may examin these different hypotheses concerning the way of salvation by jesus christ. i. it is a faithfull saying , and therefore must be contained in that revelation which god hath made concerning our salvation by christ. ii. it is worthy of all acceptation ; i. e. most usefull and beneficial to mankind . now by these two i shall proceed in the examination of them . i. which is most agreeable to the revealed will of god. ii. which doth offer fairest for the benefit and advantage of mankind . i. which is most , agreeable to the revealed will of god. for that we are sure is the most faithfull saying ; since men of wit and reason may deceive us , but god cannot . when the apostles first preached this doctrine to the world , they were not bound to believe what they affirmed to be a faithfull saying till they gave sufficient evidence of their authority from god , by the wonderfull assistance of the holy ghost . but now this faithfull saying is contained in the books of the new testament , by which we are to judge of the truth of all christian doctrines . and when two different senses of places of scripture are offer'd , we are to consider , which is most reasonable to be preferr'd . and herein we are allow'd to exercise our reason as much as we please ; and the more we do so , the sooner we shall come to satisfaction in this matter . now according to reason we may judge that sense to be preferr'd , ( 1. ) which is most plain and easie and agreeable to the most received sense of words ; not that which is forced and intricate , or which puts improper and metaphorical senses upon words which are commonly taken in other senses ; especially when it is no sacramental thing , which in its own nature is figurative . ( 2. ) that which suits most with the scope and design not only of the particular places , but of the whole new testament ; which is , to magnifie god and to depress man ; to set forth , the infinite love and condescension of god in giving his son to be a propitiation for our sins ; to set up the worship of one true god in opposition to creatures ; to represent and declare the mighty advantages mankind receive by the sufferings of christ jesus . ( 3. ) that which hath been generally received in the christian church to be the sense of those places . for , we are certain , this was always look'd on as a matter of great concernment to all christians ; and they had as great capacity of understanding the sense of the apostles ; and the primitive church had greater helps for knowing it than others at so much greater distance . and therefore the sense is not to be taken from modern inventions , or criticisms , or pretences to revelation ; but that which was at first deliver'd to the christian church and hath been since received and embraced by it in the several ages ; and hath been most strenuously asserted , when it hath met with opposition , as founded on scripture and the general consent of the christian church . ( 4. ) that which best agrees with the characters of those persons from whom we receive the christian faith ; and those are christ jesus and his holy apostles . for , if their authority be lost , our religion is gone ; and their authority depends upon their sincerity and faithfulness , and care to inform the world aright in matters of so great importance . ( 1. ) i begin with the character which the apostles give of christ jesus himself ; which is , that he was a person of the greatest humility and condescension , that he did not assume to himself that which he might justly have done . for let the words of s. paul be understood either as to the nature , or dignity of christ , it is certain that they must imply thus much , that when christ jesus was here on earth , he was not of a vain assuming humour , that he did not boast of himself , nor magnifie his own greatness , but was contented to be look'd on as other men ; although he had at that time far greater and diviner excellency in him than the world would believe . less than this , cannot be made of those words of the apostle , who being in the form of god , he thought it not robbery to be equal with god , but made himself of no reputation and took upon him the form of a servant . now this being the character given of him let us consider what he doth affirm concerning himself . for although he was far from drawing the people after him , by setting forth his own perfections ; yet upon just occasions , when the jews contested with him , he did assert such things , which must favour of vanity and ostentation , or else must imply that he was the eternal son of god. for , all mankind are agreed that the highest degree of ambition lies in affecting divine honour , or for a meer man to be thought a god. how severely did god punish herod for being pleased with the peoples folly in crying out , the voice of god and not of man ? and therefore he could never have born with such positive assertions and such repeated defences of his being the son of god in such a manner as implied his being so from eternity . this in his disputes with the jews he affirms several times , that he came down from heaven , not in a metaphorical but in a proper sense , as appears by those words , what and if ye shall see the son of man ascend up where he was before ? in another conference he asserted , that he was before abraham . which the jews so literally understood , that without a metaphor they went about to stone him ; little imagining that by abraham the calling of the gentiles was to be understood . but above all , is that expression which he used to the jews at another conference , i and my father are one ; which they understood in such a manner that immediately they took up stones to have stoned him . what means all this rage of the jews against him ? what ? for saying that he had unity of consent with his father ? no certainly . but the jews misunderstood him . let us suppose it ; would not our saviour have immediately explained himself to prevent so dangerous a misconstruction ? but he asked them , what it was they stoned him for ? they answer him directly and plainly , because that thou being a man makest thy self god. this was home to the purpose . and here was the time for him to have denied it , if it had not been so . but doth he deny it ? doth he say , it would be blasphemy in him to own it ? no ; but he goes about to defend it ; and proves it to be no blasphemy for him to say that he was the son of god ; i.e. so as to be god , as the jews understood it . can we imagin that a meer man knowing himself to be such , should assume this to himself ; and yet god to bear witness to him not only by miracles but by a voice from heaven , wherein he was called his beloved son in whom he was well pleased ? could god be pleased with a mortal , finite , despicable creature , as the jews thought him , that assumed to himself to be god and maintained and defended it among his own people , in a solemn conference at a very publick place in one of the portico's of the temple ? and this he persisted in to the last . for , when the high priest adjured him by the living god to tell , whether he were the christ the son of god , ( for he , no doubt , had heard of the result of this conference in solomon's porch ) jesus said unto him , thou hast said . s. mark , more expresly , jesus said i am . and this was the blasphemy , for which they put him to death ; as appears by the evangelists . so that this ought to be a dispute only between jews and christians ; since it was the very point , for which they condemned him to death . and in his last most divine prayer just before his suffering , he owns the glory which he had with the father before the world had a being . and now , o father , glorifie thou me with the glory which i had with thee , before the world was . was this nothing but the glory which god had designed to give him ? this is so far from being peculiar to christ , that it is common to all whom god designs to glorifie ; and takes away the distinction between the decree and the execution of it . ( 2. ) as to the apostles , the reason we believe their testimony is , that they were men of great sincerity and plainness , and of great zeal for the honour and glory of god. and according to this character , let us examin what they say concerning christ jesus . he that was most conversant with him , and beloved by him , and lived to see his divinity contested by some , and denied by others , is most ample in setting it forth in his admirable , sublime , and divine introduction to his gospel . which all the wit of mankind can never make tolerable sense of , if they deny christ's being the eternal son of god ; and it is he , that hath preserved those conferences with the jews , wherein he asserts his own divinity . s. paul was a stranger to him while he lived ; but at the same time when he was so zealous to perswade the gentiles to the worship of god and not of creatures , he calls him god , over all blessed for evermore . and when he saith , that the eternal power and godhead are known by the creation of the world , he attributes the creation of all things to christ , applying to him those words of the psalmist , thou lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth and the heaven , the work of thy hands . which cannot be understood of any metaphorical creation . and after the strictest examination of copies , those will be found the best , which have that reading on which our translation is grounded . and without controversie great is the mystery of godliness , god was manifest in the flesh. so that god's being manifest in the flesh is made a great part of the mystery of christianity . but here arises a difficulty , which deserves to be consider'd ; i. e. if there were nothing in the christian doctrine , but the way of saving sinners by the doctrine and example of christ , there would be little objection to be made to it ; since the obtaining eternal life is certainly the best thing can be proposed to mankind , and the precepts of christ are divine and spiritual , plain and easie to be understood , and agreeable to the reason of mankind ; but many other things are imposed on men as necessary to be believed concerning christ jesus , as to his divinity , incarnation , and the hypostatical union of both natures , which perplex and confound our understandings ; and yet these things are not only deliver'd as mysteries of the christian faith ; but the belief of them is required as necessary to the salvation of sinners ; whereas , if they are revealed they are no longer mysteries ; and if they are not revealed , how come they to be made articles of faith ? the scripture knows of no other mysteries of faith but such as were hidden before the revelation of them , but since they are revealed they are plain and open to all mens capacities ; and therefore it is a great injury to the plainness and simplicity of the gospel to impose such incomprehensible mysteries , as necessary articles of faith ; and it is abusing the credulity of mankind , to make such things necessary to be believed , which are impossible to be understood . but those who have ever loved to deceive and abuse the rest of the world , have been always fond of the name of mysteries ; and therefore all such things are to be suspected , which come under that name . for , all such points which will not bear examination , must be wrapt up and reverenced under the name of mysteries , that is , of things to be swallow'd without being understood . but the scripture never calls that a mystery which is incomprehensible in it self , though never so much revealed . this is the main force of the objection , which i shall endeavour to remove by shewing , ( 1. ) that god may justly require from us in general , the belief of what we cannot comprehend . ( 2. ) that which way soever the way of salvation by christ be explained , there will be something of that nature found in it ; and that those who reject the mysteries of faith run into greater difficulties than those who assert them . ( 3. ) that no more is required as a necessary article of faith than what is plainly and clearly revealed . ( 1. ) that god may justly require from us in general , the belief of what we cannot comprehend . it is to very little purpose to enquire whether the word mystery in scripture be applied to such particular doctrines , whose substance is revealed , but the manner of them is incomprehensible by us ; for why may not we make use of such a word whereby to express things truely revealed , but above our comprehension ? we are certain the word mystery is used for things far less difficult and abstruse ; and why may it not then be fitly applied to such matters , which are founded on divine revelation , but yet are too deep for us to go to the bottom of them ? are there not mysteries in arts , mysteries in nature , mysteries in providence ? and what absurdity is there to call those mysteries , which in some measure are known , but in much greater unknown to us ? although therefore in the language of scripture it be granted , that the word mystery is most frequently applied , to things before hidden , but now revealed , yet there is no incongruity in calling that a mystery , which being revealed , hath yet something in it which our understandings cannot reach to . but it is meer cavilling to insist on a word , if the thing it self be granted . the chief thing therefore to be done is , to shew that god may require from us the belief of such things which are incomprehensible by us . for , god may require any thing from us , which it is reasonable for us to do ; if it be then reasonable for us to give assent where the manner of what god hath revealed is not comprehended , then god may certainly require it from us . hath not god revealed to us that in six days he made heaven and earth and all that is therein ? but is it not reasonable for us to believe this , unless we are able to comprehend the manner of god's production of things ? here we have something revealed and that plainly enough , viz. that god created all things , and yet , here is a mystery remaining as to the manner of doing it . hath not god plainly revealed that there shall be a resurrection of the dead ? and must we think it unreasonable to believe it , till we are able to comprehend all the changes of the particles of matter from the creation to the general resurrection ? but it is said that there is no contradiction in this , but there is in the mystery of the trinity and incarnation . it is strange boldness in men to talk thus of monstrous contradictions in things above their reach . the atheists may as well say , infinite power is a monstrous contradiction ; and god's immensity and his other unsearchable perfections are monstrous paradoxes and contradictions . will men never learn to distinguish between numbers and the nature of things ? for three to be one is a contradiction in numbers ; but whether an infinite nature can communicate it self to three different subsistences without such a division as is among created beings , must not be determin'd by bare numbers , but by the absolute perfections of the divine nature ; which must be owned to be above our comprehension . for let us examin some of those perfections which are most clearly revealed and we shall find this true . the scripture plainly reveals , that god is from everlasting to everlasting ; that he was and is and is to come ; but shall we not believe the truth of this till we are able to fathom the abyss of god's eternity ? i am apt to think ( and i have some thoughtfull men concurring with me ) that there is no greater difficulty in the conception of the trinity and incarnation , than there is of eternity . not , but that there is great reason to believe it ; but from hence it appears that our reason may oblige us to believe some things which it is not possible for us to comprehend . we know that either god must have been for ever , or it is impossible he ever should be ; for if he should come into being when he was not , he must have some cause of his being ; and that which was the first cause would be god. but , if he was for ever he must be from himself ; and what notion or conception can we have in our minds concerning it ? and yet , atheistical men can take no advantage from hence ; because their own most absurd hypothesis hath the very same difficulty in it . for something must have been for ever . and it is far more reasonable to suppose it of an infinite and eternal mind , which hath wisdom and power and goodness to give being to other things , than of dull , stupid and sensless matter , which could never move it self , nor give being to any thing besides . here we have therefore a thing which must be owned by all ; and yet such a thing which can be conceived by none . which shews the narrowness and shortness of our understandings , and how unfit they are to be the measures of the possibilities of things . vain men would be wise ; they would fain go to the very bottom of things , when alas ! they scarce understand the very surface of them . they will allow no mysteries in religion ; and yet every thing is a mystery to them . they cry out of cheats and impostures under the notion of mysteries ; and yet there is not a spire of grass but is a mystery to them ; they will bear with nothing in religion which they cannot comprehend , and yet there is scarce any thing in the world which they can comprehend . but above other things the divine perfections , even those which are most absolute and necessary are above their reach . for let such men try their imaginations about god's eternity , not meerly how he should be from himself , but how god should coexist with all the differences of times and yet there be no succession in his own being . i do not say there is such difficulty to conceive a rock standing still when the waves run by it ; or the gnomon of a dial when the shadow passes from one figure to another ; because these are gross unactive things ; but the difficulty is far greater where the being is perfect and always active . for , where there is succession there is a passing out of not being in such a duration into being in it ; which is not consistent with the absolute perfection of the divine nature . and therefore god must be all at once what he is , without any respect to the difference of time past , present or to come . from whence eternity was defined by boethius to be a perfect and complete possession all at once of everlasting life . but how can we form any conception in our minds of that being all at once , which hath such different acts as must be measur'd by a long succession of time ? as , the creating and dissolving the frame of the world ; the promising and sending the messias ; the declaring and executing a general judgment ; how can these things be consistent with a permanent instant , or a continuance of being without succession ? for , it is impossible for us in this case , as to god's eternity , to form a clear and distinct idea in our mind , of that which both reason and revelation convince us must be . the most we can make of our conception of it is , that god hath neither beginning of being , nor end of days ; but that he always was and always must be . and this is rather a necessary conclusion from reason and scripture , than any distinct notion or conception of eternity in our minds . from whence it evidently follows , that god may reveal something to us , which we are bound to believe , and yet after that revelation the manner of it may be incomprehensible by us , and consequently a mystery to us . hath not god revealed to us in scripture the spirituality of his own nature ? that he is a spirit and therefore will be worshipp'd in spirit and in truth ; for , that is a true reason why spiritual worship should be most agreeable to him . now , if we could have a clear , distinct positive notion in our minds of god's spiritual nature , we might then pretend that there is nothing mysterious in this , since it is revealed . but let such men examin their own thoughts about this matter ; and try , whether the utmost they can attain to , be not something negative , viz. because great absurdities would follow if we attributed any thing corporeal to god ; for , then he must be compounded of parts , and so he may be dissolved ; then he must be confined to a certain place , and not every-where present ; he cannot have the power of acting and self-determining which a a meer body hath not . for the clearest notion we can have of body , is , that it is made up of some things as parts of it , which may be separated from each other , and is confined to a certain place , and hath no power to move or act from it self . but some of these men who cry down mysteries and magnifie reason , to shew how slender their pretences to reason are , have asserted a corporeal god , with shape and figure . it was indeed , well thought of by those who would make a man to be god , to bring god down as near to man as might be . but how to reconcile the notion of a body with infinite perfections , is a mystery to me , and far above my comprehension . but if it be no mystery to such men , they must either deny god's infinite perfections or shew how a bodily shape can be capable of them . but some men can confound finite and infinite , body and spirit , god and man , and yet are for no mysteries ; whereas these things are farther from our reach and comprehension , than any of those doctrines which they find fault with . but to proceed . if we believe prophesie , we must believe gods fore-knowledge of future events : for , how could they be fore-told if he did not fore-know them ? and if he did fore-know those which he did fore-tell , then it was either because those only were revealed to him which is inconsistent with the divine perfections ; or that he doth fore-know all other events and only thought fitting to reveal these : but how can they solve the difficulties about divine prescience ? is there no mystery in this ? nothing above their comprehension ? what then made their great master deny it , as a thing above his comprehension ? because nothing can be fore-known but what hath a certain cause , and therefore , if evil actions be fore-told god must be the cause of them , and men will not be free agents in them . and yet it is most certain , that the sufferings of christ by the wickedness of men , were fore-told . what then ? must we make god the author of sin ? god forbid . will the righteous judge of all the earth , punish mankind for his own acts , which they could not avoid ? then we must yield , that there is something in the manner of the divine prescience , which is above our comprehension . and the most searching and inquisitive men have been forc'd to yield it at last , as to the connection between the certainty of prescience and the liberty of human actions . is it not then much better to sit down quietly at first , adoring the infiniteness of god's incomprehensible perfections , than after all the huffings and disputings of men to say , in ignorantiâ solâ quietem invenio , as the great schoolman did ? surely then , here is something plainly revealed , and yet the manner of it is still a mystery to us . i shall not now insist on any more of the particular attributes of god , but only in general i desire to know , whether they believe them to be finite or infinite ? if to be finite , then they must have certain bounds and limits which they cannot exceed ; and that must either be from the imperfection of nature , or from a superiour cause , both which are repugnant to the very being of god. if they believe them to be infinite , how can they comprehend them ? we are strangely puzzled in plain , ordinary , finite things ; but it is madness to pretend to comprehend what is infinite ; and yet if the perfections of god be not infinite they cannot belong to him. i shall only adde , in consequence to this assertion , that if nothing is to be believed , but what may be comprehended , the very being of god must be rejected too . and therefore i desire all such who talk so warmly against any mysteries in religion to consider whose work it is they are doing ; even theirs who under this pretence go about to overthrow all religion . for , say they , religion is a mystery in its own nature ; not this or that , or the other religion ; but they are all alike , all is mystery ; and that is but another name for fraud and imposture . what were the heathen mysteries but tricks of priest-craft ; and such are maintained and kept up in all kinds of religion . if therefore these men , who talk against mysteries understand themselves , they must in pursuance of their principles reject one god , as well as three persons ; for , as long as they believe an infinite and incomprehensible being , it is nonsense to reject any other doctrine , which relates to an infinite being , because it is incomprehensible . but yet these very men , who seem to pursue the consequence of this principle to the utmost , must assert something more incomprehensible than the being of god. for , i appeal to any man of common understanding , whether it be not more agreeable to reason to suppose works of skill , beauty and order to be the effects of a wise and intelligent being , than of blind chance and unaccountable necessity ; whether it be not more agreeable to the sense of mankind to suppose an infinite and eternal mind endued with all possible perfections to be the maker of this visible world ; than , that it should start out from it self , without contrivance , without order , without cause ? certainly such men have no reason to find fault with the mysteries of religion because they are incomprehensible , since there is nothing so absurd and incomprehensible , as their darling hypothesis ; and , there is nothing which can make it prevail , but to suppose mankind to be as dull and insensible as the first chaos . thus i have shewn that it is not unreasonable for god to require from us the belief of something which we cannot comprehend . ( 2. ) i now come to consider , whether those who are so afraid of incomprehensible mysteries in our faith , have made it so much more easie in the way they have taken . and notwithstanding all the hectoring talk against mysteries and things incomprehensible in religion , i find more insuperable difficulties in point of reason in their way than in ours . as for instance , ( 1. ) it is a more reasonable thing to suppose something mysterious in the eternal son of god's being with the father before the world was made by him ; ( as s. iohn expresses it in the beginning of his gospel ) than in supposing that although iohn the baptist were born six months before jesus christ ; that yet christ was in dignity before him . what a wonderfull mystery is this ? can men have the face to cry down mysteries in deep speculations , and matters of a high and abstruse nature , when they make such mysteries of plain and easie things ? and suppose the evangelist in profound language and lofty expressions to prove a thing , which was never disputed , viz. that although christ jesus were born six months after iohn , yet he was in dignity before him ? yet this was a mystery , which , as i remember , faustus socinus glories in that his uncle laelius obtained by revelation . ( 2. ) it is a more reasonable thing to suppose that a divine person should assume human nature , and so the word to be made flesh ; than to say , that an attribute of god , his wisdom or power is made flesh , which is a mystery beyond all comprehension ; there may be some difficulties in our conception of the other , but this is a thing beyond all conception or imagination ; for an accident to be made a substance is as absurd , as to imagin it to subsist without one . ( 3. ) it is more reasonable to suppose that the son of god should come down from heaven and take our nature upon him , than that a man should be rapt up into heaven , that it might be said that he came down from thence . for in the former supposition we have many other places of scripture to support it , which speak of his being with god , and having glory with him before the world was ; whereas there is nothing for the other , but only that it is necessary to make some tolerable sense of those words . ( 4. ) it is more reasonable to believe that god should become man by taking our nature upon him , than that man should become god. for in the former , there is nothing but the difficulty of conceiving the manner of the union , which we all grant to be so between soul and body ; but in the other there is a repugnancy in the very conception of a created god , of an eternal son of adam , of omnipotent infirmity , of an infinite finite being . in the former case , an infinite is united to a finite ; but in the other a finite becomes infinite . ( 5. ) it is more reasonable to believe that christ jesus should suffer as he did for our sakes than for his own . we are all agreed that the sufferings of christ were far beyond any thing he deserved at god's hands ; but what account then is to be given of them ? we say that he made himself a voluntary sacrifice for expiation of the sins of mankind ; and so there was a great and noble end designed , and no injury done to a willing mind ; and the scripture as plainly expresses this , as it can do in words . but others deny this , and make him to suffer as one wholly innocent ; for what cause ? to make the most innocent persons as apprehensive of suffering as the most guilty ; and the most righteous god to put no difference between them , with respect to suffering ? ( 6. ) it is more reasonable to suppose such a condescension in the son of god to take upon him the form of a servant for our advantage ; than that a meer man should be exalted to the honour and worship which belongs only to god. for , on the one side , there is nothing but what is agreeable to the divine nature , viz. infinite love and condescension and pity to mankind ; on the other , there is the greatest design of self-exaltation that ever was in human nature , viz. for a meer man to have the most essential attributes and incommunicable honour which belongs to god. and whether of these two is more agreeable to the spirit and design of the new testament , let any man of understanding judge . for as it is evident , that the great intention of it is to magnifie the wonderfull love of god in the sending of his son ; so it is as plain that one great end of the christian doctrine was to take mankind off from giving divine worship to creatures ; and can we then suppose that at the same time it should set up the worship of a meer man with all the honour and adoration which belongs to god ▪ this is to me an incomprehensible mystery indeed , and far beyond all that is implied in the mysteries of the trinity and incarnation . for it subverts the very foundation of the design of christianity as to the reforming idolatry then in being ; it lays the foundation for introducing it into the world again ; for since the distance between god and his creatures is taken away , in the matter of worship , there is nothing left but the declaration of his will ; which doth not exclude more mediators of intercession but upon this ground , that the mediation of redemption is the foundation of that of intercession . and it is far more easie for us to suppose there may be some things too hard for us to understand in the mystery of our redemption by jesus christ , than that at the same time it should be both a duty and a sin to worship any but the true god with proper divine worship . for if it be idolatry to give it to a creature , then it is a great sin ; for so the scripture still accounts it ; but if we are bound to give it to christ who is but a creature , then that which in it self is a sin , is now become a necessary duty ; which overthrows the natural differences of good and evil , and makes idolatry to be a meer arbitrary thing . and i take it for granted , that in matters of religion , moral difficulties are more to be regarded than intellectual ; because religion was far more designed for a rule of our actions , than for the satisfaction of our curiosity . and upon due examination we shall find that there is no such frightfull appearances of difficulties in the mystery of the incarnation , as there is in giving divine worship to a creature . and it ought to be observed , that those very places which are supposed to exclude christ from being the true god ; must , if they have any force , exclude him from divine worship . for they are spoken of god as the object of our worship ; but if he be not excluded from divine worship , then neither is he from being the true god ; which they grant he is by office but not by nature . but a god by office who is not so by nature is a new and incomprehensible mystery . a mystery hidden from ages and generations as to the church of god ; but not made known by the gospel of his son. this is such a kind of mystery as the heathen priests had , who had gods many and lords many , as the apostle saith , i. e. many by office although but one by nature . but if the christian religion had owned one god by nature and only one by office , the heathens had been to blame chiefly in the number of their gods by office , and not in the divine worship which they gave to them . but s. paul blames the heathens for doing service to them which by nature are no gods ; not for doing it without divine authority , nor for mistaking the person who was god by office , but in giving divine worship to them who by nature were no gods ; which he would never have said , if by the christian doctrine , divine worship were to be given to one who was not god by nature . but these are indeed incomprehensible mysteries how a man by nature can be a god really and truely by office ; how the incommunicable perfections of the divine nature can be communicated to a creature ; how god should give his glory to another , and by his own command require that to be given to a creature , which himself had absolutely forbidden to be given to any besides himself . it is said by a famous iesuit ( i will not say how agreeably to their own doctrines and practices about divine worship ) that the command of god cannot make him worthy of divine worship , who without such a command is not worthy of it . and it is very absurd to say , that he that is unworthy of it without a command , can become worthy by it ; for it makes god to command divine honour to be given to one who cannot deserve it . ( for no meer man can deserve to be made god. ) but it is more agreeable to the divine nature and will not to give his honour to a creature . ( 3. ) but after all the invectives of these enemies to mysteries , we do not make that which we say is incomprehensible to be a necessary article of faith as it is incomprehensible ; but we do assert that what is incomprehensible as to the manner , may be a necessary article as far as it is plainly revealed . as in the instances i have already mentioned of the creation and resurrection of the dead ; would they in earnest have men turn infidels as to these things till they are able to comprehend all the difficulties which relate to them ? if not , why should this suggestion be allow'd as to the mysteries which relate to our redemption by jesus christ ? if it be said , the case is not alike for those are clearly revealed and these are not ; this brings it to the true and proper issue of this matter , and if we do not prove a clear revelation , we do not assert their being necessary articles of faith ; but my present business was only to take off this objection that the mysteries were incomprehensible and therefore not to be received by us . ii. and so i come to the second way , by which , we are to examin the several senses of christ jesus coming to save sinners : which of them tends more to the benefit and advantage of mankind ; or which is more worthy of all acceptation . and that will appear by considering these things ; ( 1. ) which tends most to the raising our esteem and love of christ jesus . ( 2. ) which tends most to the begetting in us a greater hatred of sin. ( 3. ) which tends most to the strengthening our hope of salvation by jesus christ. ( 1. ) as to the raising in us a greater esteem and love of christ. we are certain that the infinite love and condescension of christ jesus in under●aking such a work as the saving of sinners makes 〈◊〉 most worthy of all acceptation . some men may please themselves in thinking that by taking away all mysteries they have made their faith more easie , but i am certain they have extremely lessen'd the argument for our love , viz. the apprehensions of the wonderfull love and condescension of christ in coming into the world to save sinners . and yet this is the great argument of the new testament to perswade mankind to the love of god and of his son : god so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son , &c. this is indeed a mighty argument of love , if by the only begotten son be meant the eternal son of god , who came down from heaven , as s. iohn speaks just before ; but if no more be meant but only that god made a meer man to be his son , and after he had preached a while here on earth and was ill used and crucified by his own people , he exalted him to be god and gave him divine attributes and honours ; this were an argument of great love to the person of christ , but not to the rest of mankind . but gods love in scripture is magnified with respect to the world in the sending of his son. in this was manifested , saith the apostle , the love of god towards us , because that god sent his only begotten son into the world that we should live through him . herein is love , not that we loved god , but that he loved us and sent his son to be a propitiation for our sins . the great love we still see is towards us , i. e. towards mankind , but according to the other sense it must have been , herein was the love of god manifested to his son , that for his sufferings he exalted him above all creatures . he that spared not his own son , saith s. paul , but deliver'd him up for us all . if he were the eternal son of god who came to suffer for us , there is a mighty force and emphasis in this expression , and very apt to raise our admiration and our love ; but what not sparing his own son is there , if nothing were meant but that he designed by sufferings to exalt him ? for not sparing him supposes an antecedent relation of the highest kindness , but the other is only designing extraordinary kindness for the sake of his sufferings . therefore , the argument for the love of god is taken from what his son was , when he deliver'd him up for us all ; he was his own son ; not by adoption as others are ; s. iohn calls him , his only begotten son ; and god himself , his beloved son in the voice from heaven ; and this before his sufferings , immediately after his baptism , when as yet , there was nothing extraordinary done by him , as to the great design of his coming . which shews , that there was an antecedent relation between him and the father ; and that therein the love of god and of christ was manifested , that being the only begotten son of the father , he should take our nature upon him and for our sakes do and suffer what he did . this is indeed an argument great enough to raise our admiration , to excite our devotion , to inflame our affections ; but how flat and low doth it appear , when it comes to no more than this , that there was a man , whom , after his sufferings , god raised from the dead and made him a god by office ? doth this carry any such argument in it for our esteem and love and devotion to him as the other doth upon the most serious consideration of it ? ( 2. ) which tends most to beget in us a greater hatred of sin. for that is so contrary to the way of our salvation by jesus christ , that what tends most to our hatred of it , must conduce most to our happiness ; and therefore be most worthy of all acceptation . it is agreed on all hands , that christ did suffer very much both in his mind and in his body . in his mind , when it is said , that he was troubled in spirit ; that he began to be sorrowfull and very heavy ; and soon after , my soul is exceeding sorrowfull , even unto death . s. luke saith , that he was in an agony ; wherein he not only prayed more earnestly , but his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling to the ground . what made this amazement , and dreadfull agony in the mind of the most innocent person in the world ? was it meerly the fear of the pains of death which he was to undergo ? that is impossible , considering the assurance which he had of so glorious a reward so soon following after ; when so many martyrs endured such exquisite torments for his sake without any such disturbance or consternation . but the apostles give us another account of it . s. peter , saith he , was to bear our sins in his own body on the tree ; that christ suffer'd for sins , the just for the unjust . s. paul , that god made him to be sin for us who knew no sin , that we might be made the righteousness of god in him . hereby we understand how so innocent a person came to suffer ; he stood in our stead ; he was made sin for us ; and therefore was to be treated as a sinner ; and to suffer that on our account , which he could not deserve on his own . if he suffer'd on his own account , this were the way to fill our minds with perplexity concerning the justice of providence with respect to his dealings with the most innocent and holy persons in this world ; if he suffer'd on our account , then we have the benefit of his sufferings , and therein we see how displeasing to god sin is , when even his own son suffer'd so much by taking the guilt of our sins upon him . and what can tend more to the begetting in us a due hatred of sin , than to consider , what christ himself suffer'd on the account of it ? what can make us have more dreadfull thoughts of it , than that the great and mercifull god , when he designed to save sinners , yet would have his own son to become a propitiation for the sins of mankind ? and unless we allow this , we must put force upon the plainest expressions of scripture ; and make christ to suffer meerly to shew god's power over a most innocent person , and his will and pleasure to inflict the most severe punishment without any respect to guilt . and surely such a notion of god , cannot be worthy of all acceptation . ( 3. ) which tends most to strengthen our hope of salvation by christ jesus . if we believe that he suffer'd for our sins , then we have great reason to hope for the forgiveness of them ; although they have been many and great , if we sincerely repent ; because the most prevailing argument for despair will be removed ; which is taken from the iustice of god , and his declared hatred of sin and displeasure against sinners . if god be so much in earnest displeased with the sins of mankind , and his justice be concerned in the punishment of sinners , how can they ever hope to escape , unless there be a way for his displeasure to be removed , and his justice to be satisfied ? and this the scripture tells us is done by christ , who died that he might be a sacrifice of atonement to reconcile us to god by his death ; as s. paul expresly affirms . and by this means , we may have strong consolation from the hopes of forgiveness of our sins . whereas , if this be taken away , either men must believe that god was not in earnest displeased with the sins of mankind ; which must exceedingly lessen our esteem of the holiness and iustice of god ; or if he were so displeased , that he laid aside this displeasure , without any atonement or sacrifice of expiation . and so , as many as look on god's iustice and holiness as necessary and essential attributes of god , will be in danger of sinking into the depths of despair , as often as they reflect seriously on the guilt of their sins . but on the other side , if we believe that while we were enemies , we were reconciled to god by the death of his son ; then we may have peace with god through our lord jesus christ ; and have reason to believe that there will be no condemnation to them that are in christ jesus by a lively faith and sincere repentance ; then they may with comfort look up to god as a reconciled father , through jesus christ our mediator ; then they may with inward satisfaction look beyond the grave , and stedfastly hope for that salvation which christ purchased on earth and will at last bestow on all such as love and obey him . to which god of his infinite mercy bring us all through iesus christ. for , this is a faithfull saying and worthy of all acceptation , that he came into the world to save sinners . finis . lately printed for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , febr. 22. 1688 / 9. upon 1. pet. 14. verse 18. a sermon preached before the king and queen at white-hall , march the 23d . 1689 / 90. upon ecclesiastes 11. verse 9. christian magnanimity : a sermon preached in the cathedral church at worcester , at the time of the assizes , september 21. 1690. upon 2 tim. 1. verse 7. a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , march the 1 st . 1690 / 1. on luke 6. v. 46. all four by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese , in his primary visitation , begun at worcester , septemb. 11. 1690. quarto . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61575-e160 ver. 13. 1 joh. 1.7 . ch. 2. v. 2. phil. 2.6 , 7. act. 12.22 . joh. 6.32 , 33. 38.50.58.62 . joh. 8.58 . v. 59. joh. 10.30 . v. 31. v. 32 , 33. v. 36. matt. 3.17 . matt. 26.63 . v. 64. mark 14.62 . v. 64. matt. 26.66 . luk. 22.71 . joh. 17.5 . joh. 1.1 , 2 , &c. rom. 9.5 . rom. 1.20 . col. 1.16 . heb. 1.2 , 10. 1 tim. 3.16 . discourse of the word mystery , &c. p. 5. observations on dr. wallis his four letters , p. 4 psal. 90.2 . revel . 1.4 . c. 11. v. 17. bifterfield . c. grell . p. 50. pet●v . de trinit . l. 3. c. 9. §. 15. de consol. l. 3. s. joh. 4.24 . socin . prael . c. 11. cajetan . in 1. q. 22. art . 4. s. joh. 17.3 . 1 cor. 6.6 . socin . ad eutrop. p 96 c. wick . c. 11. catech. racov. p. 65. 1 cor. 8.5 . gal. 4.8 . smiglec . de divin . verb. incarn . nat. p. 45. nova monstra , &c. p. 42. joh. 3.16 . v. 13. 1 joh. 4.9 . v. 10. rom. 8.32 . john 1.14 . ch . 3. v. 16. luk. 3.22 . joh. 13.21 . matt. 26.37 , 38. mark 14.33 , 34. luk. 22.44 1 pet. 2.24 . 3.18 . 2 cor. 5.21 . rom. 5.10 . 2 cor. 5.19 . heb. 9.15 . a sermon preached before the king, february the 15, 1683/4 by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1684 approx. 56 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 22 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61615 wing s5655 estc r18638 11939701 ocm 11939701 51249 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61615) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 51249) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 515:32) a sermon preached before the king, february the 15, 1683/4 by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 40 p. printed by j.m. for h. mortlock..., london : 1684. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -o.t. -job xxiii, 15 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-07 melanie sanders sampled and proofread 2004-07 melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the king , february the 15. 1683 / 4. by edward stillingfleet , d.d. dean of s. pauls , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . printed by his majesties command . london , printed by j. m. for henry mortlock at the phoenix in s t paul 's church-yard , and at the white hart in westminster-hall , 1684. job xxiii . 15. when i consider , i am afraid of him . these words were spoken by job ; not in his flourishing and prosperous state , when that extraordinary character was given of him , that there was none like him in the earth , a perfect and an upright man , one that feared god , and eschewed evil ; but , after the devil was permitted to try that malicious experiment upon him , viz. whether the changing his outward condition , would not alter the inward disposition of his mind , as to god and religion . for he suggested , that nothing but interest made him so religious , that all his piety and devotion was owing to the wonderful blessings of god upon him ; and if these were once removed , he would fly out into so much impatience as to curse god to his face ; i. e. to speak evil of his providence , and renounce his service . and this temptation prevailed so far on job's wife , that she became an instrument to carry on the devils design , when she said to him , dost thou still retain thy integrity ? curse god and dye : as though she had said , you see , what all your religion is now come to , and what a condition the providence of god , on which you trusted so much , hath brought you to ; let them serve god , that have ease and plenty , you have nothing left to do now , but in spite of providence , to put an end to such a miserable life . but as it was observed of the old heathen oracles , that they had often a true meaning in them , but it was commonly misapplied ( the devils own knowledge of future events being but probable and conjectural ) so here , it was a shrewd guess that so sudden a change would have such an effect upon some person concerned in it : but he was very much mistaken as to job ; who behaved himself with admirable patience and submission to the will of god , under all his severe afflictions ; insomuch , that he did not suffer an indecent expression to come from him , with respect to god and his providence : in all this job sinned not , nor charged god foolishly . which was no doubt a great disappointment to the devil , who made account he should by jobs impatience have given a terrible blow to religion , by making the world believe , that it was nothing but a grave pretence of some mens seeming to be better than their neighbours . for if a man of so much piety , as job was esteemed , should no sooner be pinched himself with affliction , but he would be quarrelling at gods management of things , the devil would have inferred , that he did plainly discover , how little influence , religion had upon the minds of those , who made the greatest shew of it . this had been a very dangerous snare in that age , to the rest of mankind , among whom the example of so great a person , as job was in the parts of arabia where he lived ( as appears by the sabaeans and chaldaeans his unkind neigbours ) did give a mighty reputation to the practice of religion , especially among such a wild and ungoverned people as the arabs were . and in truth , the world is never so kind to religion , to give a fair interpretation of the failings of those who pretend to it ; but how unreasonable soever it be , they will make religion bear the blame of all their miscarriages who wear its livery . and job himself tells us , there were such profane persons then in the world , who despised and contemned all religion , as a vain impertinent , insignificant thing , therefore they say unto god , depart from us ; for we desire not the knowledge of thy ways . what is the almighty that we should serve him ? and what profit shall we have if we pray unto him ? i. e. they understood or valued nothing but what made for their present interest ; and they were content to let god alone with the disposal of another world , so they might secure this to themselves . but it was not only then a seasonable vindication of religion , that job behaved himself with so much patience under his great calamities ; but it continues so to be as long as the memory of his sufferings remains , which hath lasted for so many ages , that some think the book of job the oldest book in the world ; ( not in the supposed translation into hebrew , but in the original arabic or syriac ) and is now like to be preserved , as long as the christian church endures ; against which the gates of hell will never be able to prevail . but notwithstanding the general evenness of job's temper , and his quiet submission to divine providence , there were two things which touched him more sensibly than all the other circumstances of his afflictions ; and those were , ( 1. ) that god should seem so much displeased with him , as to single him out as a mark to shoot at , when he was not conscious to himself of any such impiety to deserve it , according to the common method of his providence . ( 2. ) that his friends should call in question his sincerity in religion , and suspect him guilty of hypocrisie and secret impiety ; because they concluded that such signal calamities could hardly fall upon any man , that was not guilty of some such great crime towards god. these were a trial of jobs patience indeed ; that those from whom he expected the greatest comfort , should prove his forest enemies ; for if god were angry , who could stand before him ? and if he were false in his religion , how could he expect he should be his friend ? but in answer to both these , he owns his fear of gods displeasure , and denies the charge as to his secret hypocrisie , and both in these few words of the text , when i consider , i am afraid of him . these words may be understood , i. with respect to his apprehension of gods displeasure against him , therefore am i troubled at his presence , saith he immediately before ; not as though job were like those , eliphaz speaks of in the foregoing chapter , which said unto god , depart from us , or that he endeavoured , as profane persons do , to keep god out of his thoughts as much as he could : for what could job have done under all his troubles but for gods presence to support him ? and therefore he declares his firm resolution never to let go his confidence in god whatever became of him ; though be slay me , yet will i trust in him . he also shall be my salvation ; for an hypocrite shall not come before him . but the presence which troubled him , was the great appearance of gods displeasure ; of which again he speaks , v. 24. for god maketh my heart soft , and the almighty troubleth me . as though he had said , all other considerations make no deep impression upon my mind ; but i am no more able to bear up under the sense of gods anger , than the wax is to forbear melting before the fire . and from this sense of his own utter inability to stand before the power of the almighty , he elsewhere argues thus with him ; wilt thou break a leaf driven to and fro ? and wilt thou pursue the dry stubble ? man being as unable to resist the divine power , as a leaf is to stand before a tempestuous wind , or , the dry stubble to stop the rage of a consuming fire . but here are two things to be resolved to make this matter clear before i proceed ; ( 1. ) what it was made job so afraid of god when he considered , seeing . he insists so much upon his own integrity ? ( 2. ) what apprehension then ought we to have of god in our minds , when such a one as job said , when i consider , i am afraid of him . ( 1. ) what it was made job so apprehensive of gods anger that he was afraid of him , when he pleads so much for his own integrity towards god and man ? doth not this seem to lessen the comfort and satisfaction of a good conscience , when such a one as job was afraid of god ? for , from whence comes all the peace of a good conscience , but from him ? and what content can there be from him , the very thoughts of whom make us afraid ? to that i answer , ( 1. ) mankind ought always to preserve an humble and awful apprehension of god in their mind . and that from the sense of the infinite distance between god and us ; as he is our maker , and we are his creatures ; as he is our benefactor , and we his dependents ; as he is our supreme lord , and we his subjects ; as he infinitely exceeds us in all the perfections of his nature . for , what are our shallow and dark and confused conceptions of things , to his divine wisdom ? by which he comprehends all the differences of times at one view ; and all the reasons and connexions and possibilities of things are open and naked before him . what is all the power of mankind , if it were gathered into one , in comparison with that divine power , which gave a being to the world , when it was not ; and rules , and governs , and orders all things in it , with greater ease than we can move a finger ? it is by that , god hath spread out the skies , and ballanced the clouds , and garnished the heavens , and divided the sea , and hanged the earth upon nothing ; as it is elegantly set forth in this book of job . and therefore as job saith to his friends , shall not his excellency make you afraid ? and his dread fall upon you ? for as elihu speaks , with god is terrible majesty : and therefore when we consider , we have reason to be afraid of him . ( 2. ) the best of mankind have guilt enough upon them to make them apprehend gods displeasure under great afflictions . jobs friends insist much upon this , that god may see just cause to lay great punishments upon men , although they may not see it in themselves . for , if he charges his angels with folly , as eliphaz speaks , and the heavens are not clean in his sight ; how much more abominable and filthy is man , which drinketh iniquity like water ? i. e. whose natural propensity to evil , is like that of the thirsty traveller to drink of the brook that he meets in his way . but suppose some to have much greater care to restrain their desires than others ; yet saith he , what is man , that he should be clean ? and he which is born of a woman , that he should be righteous ? i. e. to such a degree as not to deserve afflictions from god. and after all the protestations job makes of his integrity , he confesses , that there is so much natural and contracted impurity in mankind , that god may justly cast them into the furnace to purge and refine them . who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ? not one . and , i have sinned , what shall i do unto thee , o thou preserver of men ? for , thou writest bitter things against me , and makest me possess the iniquities of my youth . he could not deny but he had sinned enough to deserve gods displeasure : but according to the usual method of providence , he could not but think his case very hard , to suffer so much for sins committed before he well knew the nature or danger of his sins ; for sins so long since repented of , and forsaken ( which is the only satisfactory sign of true repentance ) and when so many wicked men in the heighth of their impiety , and contempt of god and religion , go away here unpunished ; whereas he had made it his business and delight to serve him , as he speaks in this chapter , my foot hath held his steps , his way have i kept and not declined ; neither have i gone back from the commandment of his lips : i have esteemed the words of his mouth , more than my necessary food . but after all this , to find gods hand so heavy upon him , made him sometimes complain in the anguish and bitterness of his soul ; why hast thou set me as a mark against thee , so that i am a burden to my self ? and elsewhere , i was at ease , he hath broken me asunder ; he hath also taken me by my neck , and shaken to pieces , and set me up for his mark . nothing sunk his spirit , till he thought god was displeased with him ; and then his heart and courage failed him ; and he beg'd compassion from his hard-hearted friends , have pity upon me , have pity upon me , o ye my friends : for the hand of god hath touched me . which makes good the observation of the wise man , that the spirit of a man will sustain his infirmities ; i. e. a mans natural courage will carry him through a great many troubles , but a wounded spirit who can bear ? i. e. when a mans heart fails him , he becomes a burden to himself ; every thing adds to his trouble , and nothing can give him ease but what can revive his spirit . now , no consideration in the world doth so break in pieces and confound and shatter the spirit of a man , like the apprehension of gods wrath and displeasure against him for his sins ; which made job cry out , like one wounded in the most tender and incurable parts , the arrows of the almighty are within me , the poison whereof drinketh up my spirit ; the terrors of god do set themselves in array against me . but after all this , 3. god may not be so displeased with such persons as lie under great afflictions , as they apprehend him to be . and this was the truth of job's case ; his sufferings were extraordinary , and such an unusal concurrence of so many sad accidents , made him think he had great cause to apprehend an immediate hand of god to be stretcht out against him . but the main design of this book , is to shew that all these afflictions were intended only as trials of his patience , and that god never loved him better than at this time , when he thought him so much displeased with him ; as he shewed in the conclusion . this is a very hard thing for persons under great afflictions to believe , and it is not necessary they should ; nay , sometimes the apprehension of gods displeasure against them for their sins , is one of the most useful parts of afflictions : for without this , they are apt either to inflame mens minds with discontent and unruly passions ; or to stupefie them with the dull and heavy opiates of chance or necessity : but when afflictions are looked on as coming from gods hand , this rouses and awakens our minds , and makes us think it necessary to look about us , to search and examine our ways , to find out the particular sins we have given way to , which may have justly provoked god to shew his displeasure against us . as we have reason above all things , to be afraid of his anger ; so it is our wisdom to apprehend the least change of his countenance towards us , and to make our peace with him , and then we have no cause to fear any thing that may happen to us : for the wise god will then turn all our crosses into such proper remedies for the diseases of our minds , that the sharpest afflictions will tend more to the purging away our sins , and thereby to a more sound and healthful state of our souls , than all the sleeping potions of the intoxicating pleasures and vanities of this world would ever have done . for , luxury and epicurism , with all the arts of heightning the pleasures of life , are things not more delightful to sense than dangerous to mens souls . they are like too frequent use of spirits in a time of health , which weaken the force of nature by raising it too high . so that were it in the choice of a wise man to have and enjoy as much of this world as he pleased , he would see a necessity to restrain his appetite , and to deny himself some of the lawful pleasures of life ; were it only to keep up the relish by variety ; and by enjoying them less , to hope to enjoy them longer . we have certainly then no reason to complain , if god think fit to debar us at all times , any use of unlawful pleasures , and an inordinate use of any ; since he leaves scope enough for the true contentment of life ; and if at some times he judges it necessary to give us physick as well as food , shall we not submit to his will ? for as job saith , shall we receive good at the hand of god , and shall we not receive evil ? as if he had said , shall we think much that our father should be our physician ; that he who hath been hitherto so kind to us to please us , should now be so kind to undertake our cure ? shall we complain that our physician doth not humour our palates , when he designs our health ? god knows what is better for us , than we do for our selves ; and that which seems most evil at present , may turn to the greatest good . i confess afterwards , job being either sowred by the malignity of his distemper , or heated by the impertinency or bitterness of his friends discourses ( for if they had no relation to his case , they were impertinent ; if they had , they were severe and uncharitable ) doth break out sometimes into some expressions of impatience ; but these arose from the clouds upon his mind , which made him then apprehend all these afflictions to come from gods wrath and indignation against him ; the thoughts of which he was not able to bear : but therein he was wholly mistaken , and then only hit upon the truth of his case when he said , when he hath tried me , i shall come forth as gold , i. e. more pure and refined , more bright and glorious . ( 4. ) in the hardest condition good men can be cast into , they have more comfortable hopes towards god than other men can have . job was extremely afflicted to think the best friend he had in the world , and whom he desired to please above all things , should become his enemy , and set himself against him ; but he did not always think so , although his friends represented his condition to him in the blackest and most frightful manner , which startled him and made him resent his sufferings with great bitterness , and express it with a kind of horror ; yet he soon recovered himself out of those agonies , and kept up his trust and confidence in god. and there were two things which supported him under all his dismal apprehensions . ( 1. ) the reflections of a good conscience in the discharge of his duty to god and man ; and therefore he tells his friends , after all their sharp reflections upon him , till i dye , i will not remove my integrity from me ; my righteousness i hold fast , and will not let it go ; my heart shall not reproach me so long as i live . it was this which raised his spirits , and made him stand his ground against the opposition of his friends , and the scorn of his enemies : it was this , which made him despise the meanness of those who courted , admired , and flatter'd him in his former greatness ; but now despised and derided him , making him the subject of their raillery and entertainments : and now i am their song , yea i am their by-word ; even theirs who but a little before , as he at large describes it , kept their distance from him , made way for him as he passed the streets , admired all he spoke as oracles , and all he did as the perfection of wisdom and vertue . but so wise a man could not be surprised to see flattery turned into scorn and derision ; ( for no man thinks to gain by his flattery , who hath not a secret contempt of the person he flatters ) and so good a man could not but forgive the unjust reproaches that were cast upon him , as long as he had the inward satisfaction of his own integrity . and therefore he gives so ample an account of his whole life and actions , both in his publick and private capacities ; not to boast of his vertues , but to be a just vindication of his innocence under all their aspersions ; and to let them see , that the comfort of a good conscience doth not fail , when friends do ; and as the wise man speaks : when the backsliders in heart shall be filled with their own ways ; a good man shall be satisfied from himself . ( 2. ) the expectation of a future recompence ; either in this world , as he seemed to hope , or at least in another . some think , that job spake as to this life , when he said , for i know that my redeemer liveth , and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth ; and though after my skin , worms destroy this body , yet in my flesh i shall see god : and so the meaning of these words is , though at present his case seem'd desperate , and his life past hope , the worms eating through his skin ; yet he had a secret hope , that god would at last redeem him out of his troubles , and that very loathsome carkass of his would hold out so long as to see that day . but the christian church hath generally understood them to refer to the day of resurrection , when he was certain that god would reward his innocency and sincerity : and of a future state , it is plain he had an undoubted expectation , when he saith , what is the hope of the hypocrite , although he hath gained , when god taketh away his soul ? which shews the great folly of hypocrisie , which can never stand a man in stead beyond this world , where he must leave all his riches , and honours , and hopes , and happiness behind him ; and the just expectation good men had , that god would reward them after this life , though they were sufferers in this . and therefore , although job had such dreadful apprehensions of god at present , yet he had very comfortable hopes as to his future condition , when he calls god his redeemer , even the same of whom he here saith , when i consider , i am afraid of him . ( 2. ) but if so good , so vertuous , so sincere a man as job , had such terrible apprehensions of god , what can we wretched sinners think of him ? if when he considered , he was afraid of him ; have not we reason when we consider , to sink into despair ? can we appeal to god as to the sincerity of our hearts in his fear and service , as job did ? can we say with job , that we have not gone back from the commandment if his lips , but have esteemed the words of his mouth more than our necessary food ? have we not rather cast his most just and reasonable commandments behind our backs , and esteemed our vanities , our superfluities , our debaucheries , our follies , above the words of his mouth ? but if we have not despised his laws , yet we cannot say , as job did , that our feet have held his steps , his way have we kept and not declined ; for our consciences cannot but condemn us for the breach of his laws ; and our sins , our great and manifold sins bear witness against us . what apprehensions of god then may we entertain in our minds , when even job was afraid of him ? i answer , ( 1. ) none ought to look upon god as so terrible , as to make them despair . ( 2. ) men ought to have different apprehensions of god , according to the nature and continuance of their sins . ( 1. ) none ought to look upon god as so terrible , as to make them despair . for when our apprehensions of god are such as drive us from him , they overthrow the great end of religion , which is to bring god and man nearer together . none ought to exclude themselves from mercy , whom god hath not excluded from it ; and god excludes none whom he invites to repent , with a promise of forgiveness , if they do it ; and the goodness and long-suffering , and forbearance of sinners , is on purpose design'd to lead them to repentance . so that after all this , to despair , is not only to reject the mercy which god offers , but to question his truth and sincerity , to slight his patience , to disparage his goodness , and to look upon him as a most revengeful and implacable being ; which is , to entertain most dishonourable and unworthy thoughts of the best , the wisest , the most merciful and compassionate being in the world ; who hath proclaimed himself to be a god merciful and gracious , long-suffering , and abundant in goodness and truth , keeping mercy for thousands , forgiving iniquity , transgression and sin , i. e. to all that truly repent of them . so that when we consider , we have no reason to be so afraid of him as to despair . ( 2. ) men ought to have different apprehensions of god , according to the nature and continuance of their sins . for as on the one side , the scripture assures us , that god knoweth our frame , and remembreth that we are dust ; and therefore will make all just and reasonable allowances for the unavoidable infirmities of humane nature , and all circumstances that abate the wilfulness of our evil actions : so on the other side , at the same time when he declared his infinite goodness , he adds , and that will by no means clear the guilty ; not of any kind of sin ; for then none could escape , since all have sinned , and therefore are become guilty before him : but the guilty are such , as add impenitency and obstinacy to their sins ; such as wilfully and presumptuously , not only break , but contemn his laws ; not barely neglect their duty , but despise it ; such as are not meerly cold and indifferent about religion , but are zealously concerned against it , and endeavour to expose it to scorn and contempt . for a very judicious interpreter saith , this severity of god here spoken of , in visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children , &c. is not to be understood of all crimes , but of such as immediately concern the honour of the divine majesty , such as apostasie , idolatry , and consequently atheism and irreligion ; which is a plot against heaven , an attempt to dethrone the divine majesty , or to make his government insignificant in the world. if faults are justly aggravated among men , not so much from other circumstances , as from the dignity of the person against whom they are committed , and from the tendency of them : will not the parity of reason so far hold , as to aggravate those sins which are immediate offences against the divine majesty , and which tend to overthrow his government of the world ? ii. and so i come to the second sense of these words , as they may be taken for jobs vindication of himself from the unjust charge of his friends , as though he were a secret hypocrite , or a contemner of god and religion , under a fair outward shew of piety and devotion . for , eliphaz in plain terms , in the foregoing chapter , tells him , he was one of those who thought god was at too great a distance to take notice of things upon earth . and thou sayest , how doth god know ? can he judge through the dark cloud ? thick clouds are a covering to him , that he seeth not , and he walketh in the circuit of heaven . which is in short , to charge him with denying the providence of god ; and reckons him with those that said unto god , depart from us ; and what can the almighty do for them ? i. e. with such as would have nothing to do with god or religion , looking on it as a foppish useless thing : but however , he gives him good counsel to repent of his folly , and to apply himself yet to god ; acquaint now thy self with him , and be at peace , thereby good shall come to thee . receive i pray thee the law from his mouth , and lay up his words in thine heart : i. e. be perswaded to be religious in good earnest , and to let the fear of god make a deep impression upon your soul , and you will find great benefit and advantage by it . if thou return to the almighty , thou shalt be built up , &c. job finding his friends so often letting fall expressions to this purpose , and knowing no imaginable reason for it , but a groundless suspicion they had entertained , because of his unusual sufferings , makes here in this chapter a solemn protestation of the mighty value and esteem he had for the laws of god , that he constantly observed them , and esteemed them more than his necessary food . and to let them know that this was no sudden heat , he tells eliphaz , that the fear of god in him , came from the most weighty and serious consideration ; when i consider , i am afraid of him : as if he had said , i have spent many thoughts about god and religion , whether there be any just reason for mankind to apprehend and stand in awe of an infinite being above them ; and i do assure you , the more i have fixed my thoughts upon this matter , and laid all things before me , the deeper impression the fear of god hath made upon me : or as some render it , perpendo & paveo , i consider , and i fear him . wherein are two things implied . i. that mens disesteem of religion doth arise from want of consideration . ii. that the more men consider , the more setled and fixed will their minds be in the esteem and practice of religion . i. that mens disesteem of religion doth arise from the want of consideration . which will best appear , by examining the most common and prevailing reasons of mens disesteem of it ; which are chiefly these two ; ( l. ) their looking on religion as a matter of meer interest and design , without any other foundation . ( 2. ) the unaccountable folly and superstitious fears of mankind ; which makes them think more to be in it than really is . ( 1. ) looking on the whole business of relion as a matter of interest and design ; first started by some great politicians to tame and govern mankind , and ever since kept up by a company of priests who lived upon the cheat , and therefore were bound to maintain , and to keep it up ; which otherwise would sink to nothing . this is the worst can be said against religion ; and it is bad enough of all reason , if it were true : and we should deserve all the scorn and contempt , which such men treat us with , if we were but accessary to so great a fraud and imposture . but is there such a thing as reason among mankind ? can we judge of what is true and false ; probable or improbable ; certain or uncertain ? or must some things be run down , without examining ? and others taken up , without any other colour of reason , than because they serve to such a purpose ? for gods sake , and for our own sake then , let us consider these things a little better , before we pronounce against them ; or entertain any doubt or suspicion of them in our minds . and there is this great reason for it , that the wisest , the best , the most considering , the most disinteressed men have taken the part of religion , and been zealous defenders of it ; whereas on the other side , the younger , the looser , the more debauched part of mankind , have been most enclined to atheism and irreligion . but if we have not reason of our side , we are content to give up the cause , and to be thought deceivers ( which goes very hardly down with an ingenuous mind ) : and if on the other side , there be nothing found but false and groundless suppositions , or unreasonable suspicions ; i hope , religion may be fairly acquitted from being thought a meer contrivance of politicians , and we from being the silver-smiths to this diana . ( 1. ) those who make religion to be such a contrivance , must suppose that all mankind were once without any such thing as religion . for , if some crafty politicians did first start the notion of an invisible being among the rude and unthinking multitude , the better to awe them into obedience to government ; then mankind must have lived before those politicians appear'd , with as little sense of god and religion , and with as much security and ease , as to the thoughts of another world , as the very beasts that perish . if this were true , these politicians were so far from consulting the interest of mankind , that they were the greatest enemies to it ; by filling their minds with such unconquerable fears , as rob them of that undisturbed tranquillity which they enjoyed before . but when and where did this race of mankind live , whom these designing men first cheated into the belief of a deity , and the practice of religion ? the eldest writings in the world , without all dispute , are those of the holy scriptures ; and among these , the book of job hath been thought the most antient ; for in all this book we have not one word of the law of moses , or of circumcision ; which makes it very probable to have been written before the children of israels coming out of aegypt ; ( and some arabic writers think that job lived before abraham ; and others , at least in the time of jacob ) however it be , this book of job gives an account of the sense of mankind about religion very early ; and by it we find that the great , and wise , and understanding men of the world , such as job and his three friends were , ( who as far as appears by the story , were all of them independent princes ; such as were common then , and a long time after , in those parts about arabia ) had a mighty sense of god and providence , and the duties of religion upon their minds . and they not only give an ample testimony as to their own times , but they appeal to all the traditions of former times ; enquire i pray thee , of the former age , saith one of job's friends , and prepare thy self to the search of their fathers . for we are but of yesterday , and know nothing . but what is it he appeals to antiquity for , and the observations of all former ages ? it was for this , viz. the bad condition of all that were not sincere in religion : so are the paths of all that forget god , and the hypocrites hope shall perish . and another of his friends speaking of the remarkable judgments of god upon the world , saith to job , hast thou marked the old way which wicked men have trodden ; which were cut down out of time , whose foundation was overthrown with a flood ? i. e. the men of the old world. and what was their great and provoking sin ? a contempt of god and religion , which said unto god , depart from us ; and what can the almighty do for them ? this is the oldest , and truest , and severest instance of such a profane and irreligious temper , and the great mischief it brought upon the world ; which shews , that this is not the original disposition of mankind , but the monstrous degeneracy of it . but if they are unsatisfied with the testimony of job's friends , let them produce any to be mentioned the same day with it , which can pretend to give a truer account of the religion of the first ages of the world : i do not mention moses ( although his authority be unquestionable ) lest he should be thought one of these politicians , who inspired the people of israel with the principles of religion ; but i the rather chuse this instance of the free princes of those parts of the east , who were under subjection to no common authority , yet were so early possessed themselves with such firm principles of religion , and assure us that all good men had the same ; and that they were slighted by none , but such loose and profane wretches , whom god set up for the monuments of his indignation . ( 2. ) suppose we should allow that in a particular nation , some great and wise man should think fit to reclaim a loose and barbarous people by the principles of religion ; how doth this prove religion to be false , or what doth it signifie to the universal consent of mankind ? is it any argument that there is no foundation in nature for justice , charity , and common humanity , because wise men have been put to use variety of methods to reduce canibals to civility ? and it would be as good arguing against all morality from thence , as against religion , because it was judged by wise men a necessary instrument to civilize mankind . and as far as i can observe , religion and civility have risen and sunk together . the roman orator made a bold challenge , as to the then known world , to name any nation so barbarous , that they had no religion among them . and although the romans knew but little of the habitable world in comparison of what is now known ; yet upon the whole matter , the new discoveries add force and strength to the argument ; onely with annexing this observation , that the more improved and civilized any people have been , the more regard they have had to religion ; the more ignorant , sottish , and barbarous they were , although they were not wholly without religion , yet it was in less esteem and honour among them : and this observation will hold , as to all the nations since discovered both in the east and west-indies . but what a mighty number of politicians must spring out of the earth at once , to scatter the seeds of religion , in such a manner , over all the face of the earth ? it is impossible that a few men , though never so subtle , never so experienced , should be able to captivate all mankind in so great a variety of language , and distance of countries . and such an universal effect must have some common and universal cause ; which the invention of a few crafty men could never be . ( 3. ) but suppose this to have happened in some one unlucky age , when the earth brought forth such a fruitful crop of politicians ; yet how comes it to pass , since these have so long been laid in their graves , the effect of this policy should still remain all the world over ? for , every age is apt to condemn the policy of the foregoing ; and whether the men of the present age stand upon the shoulders of the precedent or not , they are very apt to think they see farther than they ; how comes it then in so many ages , as have passed since these deep politicians lived , that no other persons have been able to lay open the artifice of religion so , as to free mankind from the pretended slavery of it ? it cannot be said , that there were none to attempt it ; for that were to own an absolute consent of all mankind as to religion . and we know there were some once at athens , who set up with a design to overthrow religion ; but with so very little success , whatever the roman poet boasts , that they were fain to be very private in their meetings : and the city was so little moved with their discourses , that s. paul saith , the men of athens , were in all things too superstitious . it cannot be said , that there were none ready to joyn in such a design ; for all bad men had rather there were no religion at all ; and their number is never small , and never unwilling to carry it on : how comes it then after all , that religion still prevailed , and the fears of a deity could not be shaken off , no not by the greatest politicians themselves , who thought they understood all the arts of government , as well as any that had been before them ? would not some of the roman emperours , who had none to controul them , have been glad to have eased themselves of the fears of an invisible power ? but they found , after all their strugglings , it was a thing not to be done ; god and conscience were so much too hard for their loose reasonings set up against them , that where men had shaken off the love of religion , they could not shake off the fears that follow the contempt of it . but where mankind have been imposed upon , when once the cheat is discovered , all its force is for ever lost : for men do not love to be deceived , especially in matters that so very nearly concern them ; so that if religion had been a trick of so long standing , assuredly it would have been hooted out of the world long ago ; and nothing would have been so ridiculous as to pretend to it . but thanks be to god , the credit of religion is not yet worn out of the world ; which can be owing to nothing but to those invincible reasons , on which it stands . for there hath wanted nothing of wit or malice in profane persons , to undermine and blow up the reputation of it . but the foundations on which it is built , are so firm and stable , and have endured the violent shocks , and secret attempts of so many ages , that as long as reason and civility hold up in the world , we need not question but religion will. if once i begin to see mankind cast off all the reins of civil government , and run wild and savage , quitting all the conveniences and pleasures of houses , and lands , and cloths , to live naked in the woods , and to feed on roots and acorns , because they suspect that all civil government , was a crafty design of some cunning men to get above others ; i may then begin to think that such suspicions about religion , may prevail upon mankind to cast off the most reasonable obligations to maintain the profession and the practice of it . for although the reasons on which religion is grounded , be independent on civil authority , such as the train of causes , the motion , order , beauty , usefulness of all the parts of the universe ; which remain the same in all ages , and under all revolutions : yet the principles of religion do really give so much strength and support to civil government , that none who have a kindness to the one , can be enemies to the other ; and they who suspect religion to be an imposture , will be as ready to suspect all government to be no better : the consequence whereof will be nothing but barbarism and confusion . ( 2. ) but it may be said , that although the principles of religion in general , are reasonable enough in themselves ; and the things we observe in the world , do naturally lead men to own a deity ; yet when they reflect on the strange folly and superstitious fear of mankind , they are apt still to suspect , that men being puzled and confounded , have frighted themselves into the belief of invisible powers , and performing acts of worship and devotion to them , as appears by so many imaginary deities among the heathen ; and the superstitions which still prevail on so great a part of the world. but this way of reasoning is just as if a man should argue that there is no such thing as true reason in mankind , because imagination is a wild , extravagant , unreasonable thing ; or that we never see anything when we are awake , because in our dreams we fansie we see things which we do not . we cannot deny the follies of mankind about religion , either ancient or modern : but when was it given to all the world to be wise ? it were extremely to be wished , that nothing but pure and undefiled religion should obtain in the world ; or at least , that the christian world were purged from the follies of enthusiasm and superstition . but alas ! the more we consider all the wilful errors , and involuntary mistakes , vicious inclinations , violent passions , foolish opinions , strange prejudices , superficial reasonings , and obstinate resolutions which we incident to mankind , we shall see greater reason to wonder , that there is so much true religion in the world , than that there is no more . nothing but the strong impression god hath made of himself on the souls of men ; nothing but a divine hand could have kept such a flame alive , in the midst of so many contrary winds of mens different passions and interests , and such a rough and tempestuous sea , as the state of this world hath generally been with respect to true religion . but if through the mercy of god it fares better among us , as to outward circumstances ( for which we ought to be very thankful ) let not religion bear the blame of all the follies and indiscretions of those who profess it . it is a hard case , if the common weaknesses of humane nature , and those faults which men commit through the want of religion , shall be laid to the charge of it . but nothing is more apt to incline men of better understandings , to ill thoughts of religion , than to see it made use of , to serve bad purposes and designs , to cover ambitious projects ; and to draw in people the more easily into faction and rebellion ; and while they look on this side of the picture , and see there nothing but the lamentable spectacles of the mischiefs which have been done in the world under the pretence of religion , they are far from thinking those politicians , that invented it ; it being so easily turned upon the government , and being then so dangerous to it . ( which is a farther argument to me , that it could not be a contrivance of such men : for then there would have been no other scheme of religion owned in the world , but that of the leviathan , which being so great a novelty , it is a certain sign , that religion was not framed meerly to serve the ends of government . ) but however , that only true and holy religion which we profess , is so far from giving any encouragement to seditious practices , that it is not possible to contrive a religion , which we must adhere to whatever we suffer for it , that should more effectually recommend the duties of quietness , patience , and submission to authority , than the genuine religion of our saviour doth . as long therefore as the rules of our religion are so plain and easie , so reasonable , so useful and beneficial to mankind , we ought not to lessen our esteem of it , for the sake of any weak , or superstitious , or hypocritical pretenders to it . ii. having thus far shewed , that mens disesteem of religion comes from the want of consideration , i now come to the last thing i designed , as the application of the rest , viz. that the more men do consider , the more they will esteem religion , and apply themselves to the practice of it . and now methinks , i may with greater assurance address my self to all sorts of persons , since all that i shall request , will lie in two very reasonable things , 1. to consider impartially what is fit for them to do in religion . 2. to practise so much of religion , as upon consideration will appear fitting to be done . ( 1. ) to consider impartially what is fit for them to do in religion . i am not going about to perswade you to leave your estates and imployments , and to retire your selves from the world , and to give up your selves wholly to devotion . for i do not deny but that they who serve their prince and their country , and follow their lawful imployments , with an honest and conscientious diligence , and neglect no necessary duties of religion , do carry on the great ends of religion , as well as those , whose time and occasions will give them leave to devote themselves more to fasting and prayer . but let none think the matters of religion to belong to others , and that they have business of another nature to attend upon , as though paying their duty to god , were fit only for those who had nothing else to do . while job was in the height of his prosperity , and was the greatest of all the men of the east ; he tells his friends how much he was employed in doing all the good he could by works of justice and charity ; he was eyes to the blind , and feet to the lame , and a father to the poor : and the cause which he knew not , he searched out ; yet he esteemed the words of gods mouth , or the means whereby his duty was made known to him , more than his necessary food ; he had his set times of offering sacrifice and prayer to god ; and upon extraordinary occasions , he required his children to prepare themselves for the solemn sacrifice by fasting and prayer ; which is meant by sanctifying them . so that not only constant offices of religion , but more solemn acts of devotion at certain seasons , are not only agreeable to the ancient practice of the christian church , but to the most antient principles of natural religion , as they were understood and practised in the time of job ; who was so great a person in gods esteem , that himself , who knew him best , gave that character of him , that there was none like him upon earth ; and therefore we cannot follow a better example . ( 2. ) let us then set our selves to practise all the known duties of our religion , and the more we consider these things , we shall be more resolved to do it . ( 1. ) that god infinitely deserves from us all the service we can do him . ( 2. ) that we cannot serve our selves better , than by faithfully serving him . ( 1. ) that god infinitely deserves from us all the service we can do him . can a man , saith eliphaz , be profitable to god , as he that is wise may be profitable to himself ? i. e. he cannot : but yet if god expects and requires such service from us , we have no reason to enquire farther ; for we are certain all we can do , falls infinitely short of the obligations he hath laid upon us . for let us consider , was it not god who formed us in our mothers womb , and so curiously framed and fashioned all the parts of our bodies ? was it not he , that breathed into us the breath of life , that first set the wheel in motion by the course of the blood , and setled the cistern in the heart to receive and disperse it , and the pitcher at the fountain , to take it at its return from the veins ? was it not he , that fixed the golden bowl in the head that covers the brain , and stretched out the silver cord of the nerves over the whole body , for the admirable use and service of all the parts ? was it not he , that endued us with those noble faculties of understanding , reasoning , reflecting , remembring , discoursing with others , and governing our selves ? was it not he , that made all the parts of the world about us so serviceable and beneficial to us ? was it not he , that preserved us from so many and great dangers which we have been exposed to by open violence , and secret conspiracies ; by fire , and sword , and plague ; by storms at sea , and upon land too ? was it not he , that hath so often scatter'd the clouds , that threatned us , when the face of the heavens gathered blackness , and all things seemed to tend to confusion ? is it not he , who still wonderfully continues our peace and plenty , amidst all the sad complaints , and miserable condition of our neighbours ? yea , who continues our laws , our government , our religion amidst all the fears and conspiracies which have been among us ? and shall we think much to serve so wise , so merciful , so gracious a god ? is it not he , that hath exercised so much patience , and long-suffering , and goodness towards us in order to our repentance ? that still offers to us the most unvaluable blessings of the pardon of our sins , and everlasting happiness upon our sincere repentance ? yea , is it not he , that hath given his own son to dye for our sins , and exposed him to the reproach and pain of an accursed death upon the cross , that he might be a sacrifice of atonement for us ? and will not all these motives prevail with us to fear and serve him , who hath deserved so much more from us , than the service of our whole lives , in the most perfect obedience , would make a requital for ? shall we then grudge him that proportion of sincere obedience , which he is not only willing to accept of , but hath promised to reward with a crown of everlasting glory ? which is the last thing to be considered . ( 2. ) that in serving god faithfully , we do most effectually serve our selves , and promote our own interest . men will praise thee , saith the psalmist , when thou dost well to thy self . not , when thou pamperest thy body , and thereby layest a foundation for lusts and diseases ; not , when thou heapest up riches , and knowest not who shall gather them ; not , when thou givest way to all the vanities and follies of a deceitful world : but when thou takest a just care of thy true and lasting interest . for as job saith , god looked on this as the proper wisdom of mankind , unto man he said , the fear of the lord is wisdom , and to depart from evil is understanding . and that is certainly our true wisdom , whereby , we secure our best friend in all conditions , we disappoint our greatest enemies , we lay the surest foundation for peace and tranquillity in our minds while we live , and a blessed eternity when we dye . to which god of his infinite mercy bring us . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61615-e170 job 1.8 . 2.3 1.9 . 11. job 2.9 . job 1.22 . 2.10 job 1.15 , 17. 21.14 , 15. 22.17 . job 13.15 , 16. 13.25 job 37.18 , 16. 26.12 , 7 13.11 . 37.22 . 4.18 . 15.15.16 . 14. job 14.4 . 7.20 . 13.26 . 23.11 . 12. 7.11.20 . job . 16.12 . 19.21 . prov. 18.14 . 6.4 . job 2.10 23.10 . job 27.5 , 6. job 30.9 . 29.7 , 8 , 9 , 10. ch. 30. and 31. prov. 14.14 . job . 19.25 . 26. 27.8 . exod. 34.6 , 7. psal. 103.14 . h. grot. in loc . job 22.13 , 14. job 22.17 ▪ 21. 22. 23. 23.11 , 12. greg. abulfurai . hist. dynast . p. 13. hier. trad. hebr. in gen. 22. job 8.8 . job . 8.13 . 22.15 , 16. 17. act. 17.22 . job 1.3 . 9.12 , &c. 1.13 , &c. 23.12 1.5 . 16.17 . 1.5 . job 22.2 . eccl. 12.6 . psal. 49.18 . job 28.28 . an answer to the paper delivered by mr. ashton at his execution to sir francis child ... together with the paper itself. fowler, edward, 1632-1714. 1690 approx. 59 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 16 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a40071 wing f1695 estc r30132 11248929 ocm 11248929 47122 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a40071) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 47122) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1441:88) an answer to the paper delivered by mr. ashton at his execution to sir francis child ... together with the paper itself. fowler, edward, 1632-1714. ashton, john, d. 1691. child, francis, sir, 1642-1713. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 31 [i.e. 27] p. printed for robert clavell ..., london : 1690. also attributed to edward stillingfleet. reproduction of the original in the harvard university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng last letters before death. great britain -history -restoration, 1660-1688. 2003-07 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-08 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2003-09 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2003-09 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2003-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion white-hall , march 18. 1690. let this be printed . sydney . an answer to the paper delivered by m r ashton at his execution to sir francis child : sheriff of london , &c. together with the paper it self . london : printed for robert clavell , at the peacock in s. paul's church-yard . 1690. m r. ashton's paper . mr. sheriffe , having observed that the methods of making speeches at the place of execution was not alwayes attended with the designed success ; and thinking it better to imploy my last minutes in devotion and holy communion with my god ; i have prepared this paper to leave in your hands , as well to assert my principles as to testifie my innocency . as to my religion i professe , by god's grace , i dye in the faith into which i was baptized , that of the church of england , in whose communion ( nothing doubting of my salvation thro the merits of my saviour ) i have alwayes thought my selfe safe and happy ; according to her principles and late much esteemed doctrines ( tho now unhappily exploded ) i have regulated my life , beleiving my selfe obliged by my religion to looke upon my rightfull lawfull prince ( whatever his principles were or his practises might be ) as god's vicegerent , and accountable ( if guilty of male-administration ) to god only , from whom he received his power , and alwayes beleiving it to be contrary to the laws of god , the church , and the realme , upon any pretence whatsoever to take up arms against him , and let all the world take notice , in this beleife i dye . but i have more particular obligation to the king my master , whom i have had the honour to serve , and received many signal favours from him , for sixteen years past , so that gratitude ( a thing not much esteemed at this time ) as well as duty and religion commanded the utmost service i could pay him ; and when i add these considerations that we were born his liege subjects , that we have solemnly professed our allegiance , and often confirmed it with oaths , that his majesties usage after the prince of orange's arrival was very hard , severe , ( and if i may so say ) unjust ; and that all the new methods of settling this nation have hitherto made it more miserable poor , and more exposed to foreign enemies . and the religion we pretend to be so fond of preserving , now much more than ever likely to be destroyed : there seems to me no way to prevent the impending evils , and save these nations from poverty and destruction , but the calling home our injured sovereign , who as a true father of his country has ( notwithstanding all his provocations and injuries ) a natural love and tenderness for all his subjects , and i am so far from repining at the loss of my life , that had i ten thousand i should think my self obliged to sacrifice them all rather than omit any just and honest means to promote so good and necessary a work ; and i advise and desire all my fellow subjects to think of their duty and return to their allegiance , before the severe iudgment of god overtake them , for their perjury and rebellion , but certainly the good and interest of these nations , abstracted from all other considerations , will ere long convince them of the necessity of doing it . having thus frankly declared my principles , i know the inference will be , that i have acted accordingly and consequently that am i now justly condemned ; but as i ingenuously own the premisses , so as i positively deny the consequence ; for whatever my inclinations or actions have been , yet , as to the matter i was sentenced to dye for , i declare my self innocent , and will appeal even to the iudges themselves , whether or no , upon my tryal , there appeared the least proof that i knew a tittle contained in the papers , but presumption was , with the iury , thought sufficient to find me guilty , tho i am told , i am the first man that ever was condemned for high treason upon bare suspicion or presumption , and that contrary to my l. coke's and other eminent lawyers opinions . the knowledg of my own innocency , as to the indictment and charge against me , was that that armed me with so much assurance , and occasioned my casting my life upon the first twelve men of the pannel , without challenging any . but tho i have , i think , just reason to complain of the severe charge given by the iudges , and hard measure i have received , not to mention my close imprisonment , the hasty and violent proceedings against me , nor the industry used in the return of fitting persons to pass upon me , the denying me a copy of the pannel , &c. yet , as i hope for pardon and forgiveness at the hands of my god , so do i most heartily pray for , and forgive them , and all my enemies , all the world , nay even that iudg and iury-man who did so signally ( contrary to common iustice ) expose themselves to destroy me . but let the will of god be done : i rely wholly upon his mercy and the merits of my blessed saviour for salvation , i do chearfully and entirely resign my self into his hands , as into the hands of a faithful creator , in sure and certain hopes of a happy resurrection . bless , protect , and strengthen , o lord god , my good and gracious king and master ; in thy due time let the virtue , goodness , and innocency of the queen , my mistress , make all her enemies blush , and silence the wicked and unjust calumnies that malice and envy have raised against her ; make her and these nations happy in the prince of wales , whom from unanswerable and undoubted proofs i know to be her son ; restore them all when thou seest fit to their just rights , and on such a bottom as may support and establish the church of england , and once more make her flourishe , notwithstanding the wounds she hath received of late from her prevaricating sons . forgive , forgive , o lord , all my enemyes , bless all my friends , comfort and support my deare afflicted wife , and poor babes , be thou a husband and a father to them ; for their sakes only i could have wished to live ; but pardon that wishe , o good god , and take my soule into thy everlasting glory . amen . jn o ashton . the answer . the paper which passeth under the name of mr. ashton's speech seems to me to be composed with too much art and care to be the work of one who professeth , he thought it better to employ his last minutes in devotion : and if he was so illiterate and unskilled in the law , as he said at his tryal , fol. 111. one may justly wonder not only at such terms as impending , prevaricating , premisses , and consequènce , &c. but at such a peremptory judgment as he gives about the laws of the realm , in a case that must be acknowledged by all ingenuous men of his own party to have a great deal of difficulty in it . but there are some men who think to bear down all others by their confidence , and would have it taken for granted that the whole nation ( themselves excepted ) is under the guilt of perjury and rebellion . these are the modest terms in this speech , which at least do not become the charity of one just going out of the world. therefore i rather believe it to be drawn up by some persons of more art and leisure ; who thought it best to convey their own sentiments ( as they call them ) under the more popular name of one who suffered for their cause . but the weight of what is said doth not depend on the person , and therefore i shall calmly and impartially consider the things themselves and shew how unjust and unreasonable the insinuations are which respect the present government , and all such who act in obedience to it . there are two things this paper is said to be design'd for , to assert his principles and to testify his innocency . for his principles he professeth , that he dyes in the faith and communion of the church of england . and he might have lived longer in both if he had pleased ; for i cannot see how the faith and communion of the church of england obliged him to do that for which he suffered : but , by the faith of the church of england he means the doctrine of passive obedience . be it so : however he suffered not for his passive obedience , but for the want of it : if he had regulated his life by this principle , he had preserved it ; yet he saith he did so , and dyed for it . there must be certainly then some great mistake about the doctrines and principles of our church . i alwayes thought those are to be found in the articles and constitutions of it . which of these did he suffer for ? they are , he saith , her principles and late much esteemed doctrines tho now unhappily exploded . i know of no doctrines or principles of the church of england which are exploded among us ; and therefore this is unhappily insisted on by a dying man , unless he had given some proof of it . well ; but he believed himself obliged by his religion to look upon his rightful , lawful prince ( whatever his principles were or his practices might be ) as god's vicegerent , and accountable to god only , from whom he received his power . all this he might have done , and have been alive still ; for the matter in dispute is not whether rightful , lawful kings are to be obeyed , but who in our present circumstances is our rightful , lawful sovereign ; not whether kings be not god's vicegerents , ' but whether god doth not sometimes confer the right of sovereignty by a law superiour to the laws of particular countries , that is , by the law of nations , which establisheth such a right upon the success of a just war ; not whether sovereign princes are not accountable only to god , but whether allegiance be not due where the rights of sovereignty are placed , by an extraordinary act of providence and the concurrent consent of the nation . but he goes on ; and alwayes believing it to be contrary to the laws of god , the church , and the realm , upon any pretence whatsoever to take up arms against him , and let all the world take notice in this belief i dye . i had much rathor have taken notice that in this belief he lived ; for i see no reason of his dying for it . for , why must a man be said to die for not taking up arms , who was condemned to die for a design just con●rary , viz. for the subverting the present government by domestick insurrections and foreign power ? so that the question is not about passive obedience but to whom it is due ; i grant that the laws of god and of the realm are to determine the measures of our obedience ; but here lies the only point , whether the rights of sovereignty may not be transferred by the success of a just war and the consent of the people : for if they may , then according to his own principles he suffered justly . and if the directors of his conscience did not speak to this point , they led him into a dangerous error , and have been too much the occasion of his suffering . therefore to clear this whole matter , and to prevent the like mistakes in others ; i shall endeavour to state the present case of our government , so as to shew both that it is our duty to submit to it , and that no principles or doctrins of the church of england are violated thereby . to do this , we must of necessity look back to the occasions of this great revolution : and there were two principal occasions of it . first , great and violent presumptions of an injury to the right of succession . secondly , too great evidence of a formed design to subvert the established religion and civil liberties of the nation . now there are two very material questions which arise from hence . first , whether these were the just occasions of a war ? secondly , whether upon the success of this war the rights of sovereignty were duly transferred ? if these were just occasions of a war , and upon the success thereof the sovereignty was duly transferred , then there can be no dispute left to whom our allegiance is due . it is taken for granted by all who understand these matters , that as there is a law of nature , which determines the rights and properties of particular nations ; and that all private persons are bound to submit to the municipal laws of those societies for their peace and security : so there are other laws which concern those nations , as they make up several independent governments upon each other . and there are several rights which belong to them with respect to one another , which do not belong to private persons as they live in subjection to any particular government . and as there are such rights , so there must be a just and lawful way for reparation of injuries . in particular governments , the thing is plain by established laws and courts of judicature , whose sentence is executed by the civil power ; but in separate nations and independent governments , although there be laws by consent called the law of nations ; yet there is no common judicature to determine of right and wrong , and therefore in case of injury there is an allowance for the injured party by this law of nations to right himself by force , as there would be to every particular person , if there were no laws nor power to see them executed . there is then a right in every sovereign and independent prince to exercise force against another prince , who detains any right from him , or doth any injury to him , or to those he is bound to defend . the question then comes to the iust occasions of such a war , and here are two assigned , first , great and violent presumptions of an injury to the right of succession . this is expresly mentioned and insisted on , in the declaration of the then prince of orange ( our present king ) in these words — but to crown all , there are great and violent presumptions inducing us to believe that those evil counsellors , in order to the carrying on of their ill designs , and to the gaining to themselves the more time , for the effecting of them , for the encouraging their complices , and for the discouraging of all good subjects , hath published that the queen hath brought forth a son ; tho there have appeared both during the queen's pretended bigness and in the manner in which the birth was managed , so many just and visible grounds of suspicion , that not only we our selves , but all the good subjects of these kingdoms do vehemently suspect that the pretended prince of wales was not born of the queen : and it is notoriously known to all the world , that many both doubted of the queens bigness , and of the birth of the child , and yet there was not any one thing done to satisfie them and to put an end to all doubts . and since our dearest and most entirely beloved consort , the princess , and likewise we our selves have so great an interest in this matter , and such a right as all the world knows to the succession to the crown — and since the english nation hath ever testified a most particular affection and esteem both to our dearest confort and to our selves ; we cannot excuse our selves from espousing their interests in a matter of such high consequence , and from contributing all that lies in us , for maintaining both of the protestant religion , and of the laws and liberties of those kingdoms , and for the securing to them the continual enjoyment of all their just rights . here we have an hereditary right to the crown asserted both remoter in himself and nearer in the queen , who was unquestionably the next , if there were no heir male : it was possible this right might be really defeated by a prince of wales , and it was possible it might be pretended to be so when it was not : for there have been many instances in history of suborned and supposititious princes , and therefore there was reason that sufficient evidence should be given in a case of such importance and which was under so great suspicion . but if there was no reasonable care taken to prevent or remove these suspicions , then the parties most concerned have a right to assert their own pretensions in such a way as the law of nations doth allow . and in this case no private depositions or confident affirmations of such as are dependents or otherwise liable to suspicion , can in reason be taken for satisfactory evidence ; for let any one consider what the laws of nations have thought sitting evidence in a case of this nature , and he will soon find how very much short such proofs are of what the nature of the thing hath been thought to require — the civil law is very strict where there is any occasion of suspicion . it requires notice to be given twice a month to the parties concerned that they may receive full satisfaction . that the mother is to be kept in a house by itself : that thirty days before she expects to be delivered , she must give notice of it to those who are most concerned , that they may send such as they can trust to be present : that there ought to be but one door where she is to lie in , and if there be more , they must be done up ; that at that door there are to be three men and three women and two assistants : that all persons are to be searcht who go in , especially at the labor , at which time there must be sufficient light in the room . when the child is born it ought to be first shewn to the parties concerned , and great care is taken about the persons in whose hands he is put , and satisfaction must be given from time to time that it is the same child , and if satisfaction be not given as to these things , the roman law doth not allow any right of possession . by the old common law of england , in case of suspicion , a writ of inspection was allowed , the form whereof is in the books , and if there were any doubt , the woman was to be put into a safe place , where no suspicious persons were to come near her till she was delivered . this was then thought so reasonable a thing , that the old law books have a chapter on purpose de partu supposito , wherein directions are given to prevent and discover a subornation . these things i mention to show what satisfaction is necessary to be given in case of suspicion , and the higher the persons are , and of so much greater importance as the succession is , so much clearer ought the evidence to be , that no occasion of doubt may remain : but if no such care was taken , if the principal persons concerned had not the least satisfaction given them ; if the whole thing were managed with secrecy and suspicious circumstances , then i can see no reason to exclude those who are most concern'd from a right of demanding satisfaction by force of arms. but mr. ashton thinks he hath cleared this matter , when he affirms that he knows there was no supposititious birth by unanswerable undoubted proofs and this is put into his prayer , that it might look like an appeal to god as to the truth of what he said . this is one of the boldest and most artificial strokes of the penner of this speech , not barely to make him af firm it with so much assurance , but to do it in his prayer too . but a matter of so great consequence is not to be determined upon the testimony of any single wittness , although he were the most competent witness as to such a matter , which doth not in the least appear as to mr. ashton : for how could he know it by unanswerable and undoubted proofs ; when considering the circumstances that were in this case , it was hardly possible to produce such proofs , as would pass for unexceptionable evidence upon a legal trial ? for there hath been such a trial here in england within the memory of man , wherein the father and mother and midwife have all sworn to the truth of the birth of a son , and yet the jury upon hearing the whole evidence have given judgment that it was supposititious . therefore bare affirmations of some persons concerned are not evidence sufficient in case of strong and vehemont presumptions to the contrary ; and such evidence ought to have been given as might have either prevented or removed any just grounds of suspicion . but since no such unanswerable undoubted proofs were made to those who were most concerned , the same just right doth remain to the undoubted heir of the crown , as it did in the former case to the next heir at law , who upon a fair trial and the verdict of the country , recovered the estate . but between princes there are no such ways of trial or courts of judicature , and therefore in such cases the right of war is allowed by the general consent of mankind . secondly , there was a further just occasion for that expedition , which was the design to subvort our religion and civil liberties . as to the particulars they are fully set down in the declaration , and need not to be repeated ; that which i am to make out is , that the then prince of orange by his relation to the crown had a just right to concern himself in the vindication of both , and that this is not repugnant to the doctrines and principles of the church of england . it was not thought disagreeable to them for q elisabeth to assist the dutch against the king of spain ; yet she had no such reason for it as our king and queen had to prevent the suppression of their own religion here , and the rights of that people to whom they were so nearly related . for there was nothing in her case so considerable as the growing power of spain and the danger of overturning the religious and civil liberties of a neighbour people . the queens professor of law in oxford at that time saith , that it was then made a question by some whether q. elis. had just reason for that war in assistance of the dutch , and he resolves the lawfulness of it upon 3 grounds : first , that it was to prevent ensuing mischief ; secondly , from the ancient alliance between the two nations ; thirdly , that if the dutch were totally vanquished by the spaniard , they would be made slaves under an arbitrary power . the queen herself owned this as the ground of her resolution , that it was christian piety to relieve them who were of the same religion which she professed , and wisdom to prevent the pernicious designs of her enemies . and in her declaration she published this as the reason of her sending forces to the aid of the netherlanders , that they might peaceably enjoy their ancient freedom . in the latter end of the reign of king iames i. the war broke out in germany wherein the emperor used his utmost endeavour to establish absolute power and popery together . there was occasion offered to try whether the giving assistance against these were against the principles and doctrines of the church of england . for the prince elector palatine was chosen king of bohemia , and sent over for king iames's advice about it : but his designs lay then so much another way , that he had no mind he should engage in it : but the archbishop of canterbury in his letter to sir r. naunton then secretary of state , saith , that god had set up this prince his masters son in law , as a mark of honour throughout all christendom , to propagate the gospel and to protect the oppressed ; that for his own part he dares not but give advice to follow where god leads , apprehending the work of god in this and that of hungary ; that he was satisfied in conscience that the bohemians had a just cause ; that the king's daughter the elector's lady had professed , she would not leave herself one iewel , rather than not maintain so religious and so righteous a cause . in the beginning of the reign of king charles the first , when i suppose it will be granted , that the doctrins and principles of the church of england were understood and followed ; the king of denmark had taken up arms , to settle the peace and liberty of germany , as he declared : but he met with a great defeat . whereupon king charles the first thought himself concerned to give assistance to him : and archbishop laud was then employed ( as dr. heylin confesseth ) by the king's command , to draw up a declaration , to be published in all the parishes of england ; which was read by the king , and approved by the council , wherein the greatness of the danger they were in is set forth , and the people are exhorted to serve god and the king , and to labour by their prayers to divert the danger . wherein lay this danger ? it is there said to be , that by the defeat of the king of denmark , there was little or nothing left to hinder the house of austria from being lord and master of germany . and what then ? why then there will be an open way for spain to do what they pleased in all the west part of christendom . it seems then , it was not thought disagreeable to the principles and doctrins of our church , to hinder the growth of a western monarchy , although it be by assisting subjects against their princes who promote it : and then follow these remarkable words ; you are to know therefore , that to prevent this is the present care of the king and state ; and there is no proba●le way left , but by sending of forces , and other supplies , to the said king of denmark , to enable him to keep the field , that our enemies be not masters of all on a sudden . and not long after — if he be not presently relieved , the cause of religion is not only like to suffer by it in some one part , ( as it hath already in a fearful manner in the palatinate ) but in all places where it hath got any footing . so that if we supply not presently our allies and consederates in this case , it is like to prove the extirpation of true religion , and the replanting of romish superstition in the neighbouring parts of christendom . and the coldness of the state shall suffer in all places , as the betrayers of that religion elsewhere , which it professeth and honoureth at home ; which will be an imputation never to be washed off : and god forbid this state should suffer under it . — and in the last place : you are to call upon god your selves , and to incite the people to joyn with you , in humble and hearty prayers unto god , that he will be pleased now , after long affliction of his dear people and children , to look in mercy both upon them and us ; and in particular for the safety of the king of denmark , and that army which is left him , that god would bless and prosper him against his and our enemies . thus far archbishop laud. let those who now with as much ignorance as confidence , upbraid men with renouncing the doctrins and principles of the church of england , read and consider these passages ; and if any thing will make them more wise and humble , this will. did archbishop laud go off from the church of england , or king charles the first , who both suffered for the sake of it ? but some men have never throughly penetrated into the doctrins and principles of our church , but look only on some principles in opposition to the late times of rebellion , and think there is nothing farther to be looked after . whereas the consideration is very different as to our duties , with respect to our own princes , and those of a more general concernment as to the state of religion and government in the world. but from hence it is plain , that it was then thought not only lawful , but a duty , to prevent the dangerous growth of such a monarchy , which designs to suppress religion and civil liberties ; and not only to give assistance to those who joyn in the same design , but to pray god to bless and prosper it . and accordingly a form of prayer was then appointed for those dangerous times . not long after this a breach with france hapned , and the king published a declaration of the ground of the war ; wherein it is laid down as the first ground , that the house of austria conspiring the ruin of all those of the reformed religion ( as plainly appeared in the affairs of germany ) had such an influence on the councils of france , as to make them break promise in such a manner , as hazarded the loss of the whole party in germany . the next is , " that he had broke his articles with his protestant subjects , when he had been a mediator of peace between them , and they had done nothing to violate them . so that a design to suppress the protestant religion , in a neighbour country , was looked on as a just cause of war , when he was concerned to preserve it . and then another form of prayer was appointed to be used suitable to that occasion ; which plainly evidence , that such a design was no ways thought repugnant to the doctrins and principles of the church of england . but since the french conduct seems to be now admired by this sort of men , i shall bring some remarkable instances from them . it is notorious to the world what powerful assistance the french gave to the confederate princes of germany , against the emperour , their lawful prince , and what defence they made for this . they published an account to the world of the reasons of it , and the chief was this ; viz. that they had reason to suspect , that from charles the fifth's time the difference of religions had been secretly supported by the emperours , in order to their making themselves absolute ; and that the changing the form of government in the empire , was sufficient for a neighbour prince to interpose by force of arms. in the revolt of catalonia from the king of spain , their lawful prince , the french king accepted of the sovereignty over them , being offered him by the states of that country , and caused discourses to be written in justification of their transferring their allegeance : and yet their complaint was nothing but the severity of the spanish government , and a desire of some greater liberties than they enjoyed under it . why then should it be now thought an unjust thing , for a sovereign prince ( so nearly related to the crown of england ) to espouse the cause of our religions and civil interests , when the design was so apparent for the suppressing them ? if that opportunity had been lost , they might before this time have been past all reasonable hopes of recovery . ii. but suppose this were allowed ; yet here is another difficulty ariseth , concerning the transferring allegeance from a lawful prince , to him that met with unexpected success in his design . and here i shall endeavour to make it plain , that this is not against the doctrins and principles of the church of england . if we allow the church of england , to have declared its sense in the matter of government , it can only be with respect to subjects . but i think the measures of our obedience , are not to be taken from the rules of the church ; but from the laws of the realm : because they are not the same in all countries where the same religion is professed ; as is plain in the case of france and poland : the reason of the different measures in these countries is not from the church , but from the different constitution of the kingdoms . and i do not see how the rules of the church can alter the fundamental laws : for the church only enforceth the duty of obedience on the consciences of men ; but it doth not prescribe or limit the bounds of it . whether our monarchy be absolute , or limited ; or if limited , whether in its exercise of power , or in the right of sovereignty ; how far the limitation gives a right of resistance , in case of the breach of it ; are nice questions , but not to be resolv'd by the rules of the church ; but by our legal constitution and the general reason of mankind : and therefore in such cases , where the right of war and a foreign power are concerned , we are not to judge meerly by municipal laws , but we are to proceed by a more general law , viz. that of nations , which takes in the effects of a just war , which the particular laws of a country have n● regard to . but where hath the church of england declared its sense about the right of war ? the articles of our church declare , that the chief government of all estates of this realm , doth appertain to the civil magistrate : but they no where say , that in a just war the supream power cannot be acquired ; or that god doth never confer it in an extraordinary method . the book of homilies is very severe against disobedience and wilful rebellion ; but it is no where said , that where the right of sovereignty is transferred by a successful war , there is no allegeance due to those who possess it : on the contrary it is said in the first part , that if god for their wickedness , had given them an heathen tyrant to reign over them , they were by god's word bound to obey him , and to pray for him . can it then be agreeable to the doctrins and principles of our church , to refuse allegeance to good religious princes , whom god hath made the happy instruments of preserving our religion and liberties ? in the same part , the iews are commended for praying for the king of babylon , when they were in captivity , that they might live under his protection , and do him service , and find favour in his sight . and what is this short of allegeance to one , who had nothing but bare success in war , to plead for his title to it ? if any princes of their own religion had rescued them from that captivity , would they have scrupled allegeance to them , when we see how far the maccabees went in the defence of their religion and laws ? in the second part , the obedience of the iewish nation to augustus is commended ; and it is evident that he had no authority over them , but by the right of war. and our blessed saviour's example is mentioned , who being brought before the roman president , acknowledged his power and authority , to be given him from god. and how was this authority conveyed to him , but by the success of war ? so that we can find nothing , in the certain established doctrin and principles of our church , which is repugnant to our allegeance to the present government . i might easily produce considerable testimonies , of some of the greatest divines of our church , which assert , that soverignty may be transferred by a just war ; but i leave that to others , and proceed . mr ashton saith , that we were born leige subjects to another ; that we have solemnly professed our allegeance , and often confirmed it with oaths . i know no body denies it . but is this all ? is our allegeance so inseparable from the person we have once sworn to , that no case whatsoever , can alter it ? not the case of plain voluntary dereliction ? not the case of putting the kingdom under a foreign power ? not the seeking the utter ruin and destruction of the people ? is allegeance inseparable in these cases , because we were born subjects and did swear allegeance ? if not , then it is not always so , notwithstanding the oaths . for these and several others are allowed , by such who have written the most warmly against the republican principles . but we need not run to any difficult cases : ours is only the case of a just war ; which is allowed by all sorts of casuists , who do agree , that allegeance is due to the party that prevails in it ; and if it be due to one , it cannot be due to another , at the same time , altho' he be living and do not discharge persons from their oaths ; for the obligation of oaths , depends on the nature and reason of things , and not upon the pleasure of those to whom they are made . but where there is a right to govern , there must be a duty of allegeance : and that success in a just war , doth give such a right , i could produce so many testimonies , of all kinds of writers , as would make the reading of them as tedious , as of those in the history of passive obedience . nay , some go so far , as to assert a right of sovereignty to be acquired by success , even in an unjust war : but we need none of these testimonies . but doth not all this resolve this whole controversy into a right of conquest , which is not so much as pretended in our present case ? i answer , that we must distinguish between a right to the government , and the manner of assuming it . the right was founded on the iust causes of the war , and the success in it : but the assuming of it was not by any ways of force or violence , but by a free consent of the people , who by a voluntary recognition , and their majesties acceptance of the government , as it is setled by our laws , take away any pretence to a conquest over the people , or a government by force . thus i have endeavoured to set this matter in as clear a light , and in as little a compass as i could : i now return to mr. ashton's speech . next to his obligation on the point of religion , he mentions that of gratitude to the king his master , whom he had served 16 years , — but this , he adds , is a thing not much esteemed at this time . as little as it is esteemed , i know no body would have blamed his gratitude , if it had not carried him beyond the bounds of his duty . but it is strange , he should be so much for gratitude , and yet should allow none for so great a deliverance . what is 16 years service to the preservation of a nation , from the imminent danger of popery and arbitrary power ? such men look but a very little way , who talk at this rate : and can they imagine a french power , under our circumstances , could secure any thing to us , but ruin ? as to his master's usage , which he saith , after the prince of orange's arrival , was very hard , severe ; and , if he may say it , unjust . i would desire his friends to consider a little better , and to think , if any such thing as severity had been intended , how easy it had been to have executed it , and to have prevented his going away ; and consequently , a great deal of the charge of the war , he complains of immediately after . let them name any one person in such circumstances , who was allowed so great freedom as he had , of disposing of himself : but this is very far for mr. ashton's occasion of suffering . well , but all the new methods of setling , have hitherto , he saith , made the nation more miserable , poor , and exposed to foreign enemies . it is possible such may believe , that the nation would be less miserable and poor under the french power , than it is now . but no man who observes the vast designs of france , and the incredible industry of the french monarch , to inlarge his own power and dominions , can think ( if he thinks twice ) that ever he should undertake so great a work , out of kindness to any but himself ; much less , out of perfect good will to the english nation . hath he given so much evidence to the world of his sincerity in his promises , when the keeping of them hath been prejudicial to his interest ? suppose he should compass his end upon us , and under so fair a colour , make provinces of these kingdoms ; what possible remedy would there be for this , then indeed , poor and miserable nation ? what comfort will it then be to say , they did not think he would have broken his word so with them ? in the mean time , is it not great wisdom and policy , to venture our religion , and all our liberties on the sincerity and kindness of france ? but if there be any present hardship , it is no more than a necessary war involves our neighbours in as well as our selves ; and that in a common cause , for preserving the liberty of europe , against the growing power of france , as it did formerly of spain . but there is another insinuation of a higher nature , viz. that the religion we pretend to be so fond of preserving , is now much more than ever , likely to be destroyed . what is the meaning of this ? what! more in danger than when penal laws and tests were taking away , in order to the taking away our religion after them ? when the design was as plain , and open as a thing of that nature could be , in such a nation ? when some of the factors themselves complained , they made too much haste , and were too eager and forward , to accomplish it . and altho' nothing was then pretended , but the setling liberty of conscience upon a new magna charta , yet all wise men saw through these pretences , and that nothing was really designed but popery ; which the jesuits did not conceal in their letters to each other : one of the which hapned to be intercepted ; and the thing it self , is now fully owned in the kings own letter to the pope , printed at the end of the late trials . so that there must be a design , either to deceive the pope , or the nation ; and which is the more probable , let any man of sense judge . but where lies the danger of our religion now ? have we not the same laws , the same protection , the same encouragement , which we ever had , at any time since the reformation ? if our religion be now in danger , it is by such men who would bring in the french power to establish it ; however it be disguised under another pretext . after this follows a charge of no less than perjury and rebellion , upon his fellow subjects ; whom , he adviseth to return to their allegeance , before the iudgments of god overtake them , for their perjury and rebellion . this is a heavy charge indeed , upon the body of the nation , which hath taken the oaths of allegeance to their majesties : but if it be true , it is accusing the greatest part of mankind of these sins , who have hapned to live in the time of any great revolutions , or changes of government . was the nation forsworn , in the times of william the conqueror , and his two sons , and his nephew ? was it forsworn all the time of king iohn , and the several reigns of the 4th , 5th , 6th and 7th henries ? one would think it better became a dying man to judge more charitably of his fellow subjects . had he never heard of the law of england , requiring allegeance to the king , on account of the possession of the crown ; and that our most eminent lawyers , in peaceable and quiet times , have been of that opinion ? methinks at least , that should make modest men , not so peremptory in such a charge ; for it is to make , such an oath unlawful , which the law makes not only lawful , but a duty . and when the greatest lawyers this nation hath had thought this a part of our law ; shall such who confess themselves unskilful in the law , charge the nation with perjury , for taking an oath , which the law requires ? but if our law did not require it , there is such a general consent in mankind about it , that it seems to me , to be a law of nations , that an oath of fidelity should follow possession ; because otherwise , there would be infinite snares to the consciences of all such who are required to obey , but are not bound to enquire into the rights of war. is it perjury and rebellion in the new french conquests , for the inhabitants to take oaths of fidelity to the french king ? if not , how comes it to be so here ? is there not the same right of war here as abroad ? was it perjury and rebellion in the subjects of the king of spain in portugal , to take a new oath of allegeance to the duke of braganza , when he was declared king ? and yet they were all sworn before , not only to the king of spain , but to his heirs : and even the duke himself , had not only taken this oath ; but the spaniard particularly charged him with perjury , and great ingratitude : yet the obligation to his countries good ▪ was then thought to overrule that personal obligation to the king of spain . but if they were all guilty of perjury and rebellion ; how came the other princes of europe so frankly and readily to own his government ; and the french , as much and as early as any , sending assistance by sea and land to support it ? but in this revolution of portugal , the best title was the success of war , sounded on a remote title to the crown , when the king of spain had enjoyed the possession of that crown to the third generation . but it may be said , that the practices of other people are to be no rule ●o us ; and that we are not to be guided by bad precedents abroad , but by the principles and doctrins of our own church . this were to the purpose , if our church had any where declared , taking such an oath to be perjury . but where is that done ? i confess , i can find no such thing : and if mr ashton ( or his friends ) had made such a discovery , they ought to have told the world of it . but if there be no such declaration to be met with , then we are left to the ▪ general rules of conscience , and the common reason of mankind ; according to which , i see no ground for this heavy charge of perjury and rebellion in our present case . but although mr. ashton be so abundantly satisfied in the design he mentions , that if he had ten thousand lives , he would sacrifice them all in so good and necessary a work ; yet the remainder of his speech is spent in clearing his innocency as to the fact for which he was condemned . if it was so meritorious an act to die in such a cause , a man might have been tempted to be thought guilty . but before he could think fit to die in charity with all the world , he saith several things with a design to blacken the iudges , the iury , and the government . the iudges he accuses of a severe charge , and the hard measure he received — . as to the latter , it is a very odd kind of hard measure , when he was so very little sensible of it then , that he said , he did not complain of the court , fo . 112. and more fully afterwards , fo . 115. i cannot but own i have had a fair trial for my life . where was the hard measure then ? therefore this could not be mr. ashton's sense , unless he would contradict himself ; and those who would free him from it , must take these words to have been written by others , who thought to serve another end by it ; and were not so near giving an account for such calumnies . the severity of the charge lay in applying the statute 25 edw. 3. to his fact. which was a design to carry into france a treasonable scheme and project of an invasion , in order to the deposing the king and queen . this last the judges declared , had been always held to be high-treason . all the question was then , whether such a fact were an overt-act of such a design ; and so it was left to the jury , whether mr. ashton intended to go over with such a design or not . if there be any severity here , it must be in the law ; and that all those who suffer by a law , are apt to complain of . he particularly chargeth that iudge , and that iury-man , who did , he saith , signally contrary to common iustice , expose themselves to destroy him . this is a very hard charge from a dying man , and ought to have great evidence to reconcile it to common charity ; but he offers none . the iury were to act according to their consciences ; and if they did so , how could they expose themselves contrary to common iustice to destroy him ? but what evidence doth he give , that they did not so ? some have told him , that he was the first man that was ever condemned for high treason , upon bare suspicion or presumption , and that contrary to my lord cook and other eminent lawyers opinions . the main point as to the iury , was , whether they were satisfied in their consciences , that mr. ashton intended to go into france with such a design ? and where the fact lies in the intention . there can be no direct evidence ( without seeing the hea●t ; ) but it must be gathered from a concurrence of circumstances , strong enough to determine an honest mans judgment : and such the iury believed to be in his case . my lord cooks words are on the case of treason that the compassing , intent : or imagination , thô secret , is to be tried by the peers , and to be discovered by circumstances precedent , concomitant and subsequent , with all endeavour evermore for the safety of the king. it is true , he saith afterwards , fol. 1● . that conjectural presumptions , or inferences , or strains of wit , are not sufficient , but there must be good and manifest proof ; but still this proof must be such as the thing will bear ; for there can be no direct and plain proof of a secret intention : either therefore no man can be justly condemned for a secret intention , manifested by an overt-act , or there must be such a proof allowed , as is sufficient to satisfie a mans conscience , although it come not up to plain and direct evidence , as it is opposed to the highest degree of presumption . but it may be said , that the presumption lies in judging the intention from the overt act , but that overt-act must be manifestly proved . ▪ the overt-act in this case was the carrying over treasonable papers into france , in order to an invasion . the sole question then was , whether there was manifest proof as to these papers . that the papers were found about him was manifestly proved ; and he owns fol. 110. that they were unfortunately found upon him ; but he saith that he knew not the importance of them . it was manifestly proved , that he had an extraordinary concernment to have these papers thrown over ▪ board ; which he saith was perfectly out of friend ship , and whether that was a true answer , was left to the consciences of the iury , who were to judge of this by all the circumstances antecedent , concomitant and subsequent , by which they did conclude him guilty . and i cannot see how they went against common iustice therein ; especially since mr. ashton well knew ▪ that one of the most material papers taken , was of his own hand writing ; not the first draught , but the copy which was shewed him in the court ; and when it was so , he desired , fol. 106. that the original may be read , and not the copy ; and he had good reason for it : for as far as i can judge , upon perusal of both , it is the very same hand in which this speech was written . but what said mr. ashton to the iury , to clear this matter ? he faith , fol. 129. that his hand was not proved to any of the papers , and therefore there was nothing but supposition or suspicion against him . it is true , there was no direct and plain proof of the hand , as there was in the case of my lord preston ; ( and it is a wonder it was omitted , for that would have been plain proof of his knowing what was in those papers : ) however , all the other circumstances put together , were a sufficient proof of his privity to the contents of them . and i wonder how mr. ashton , could so confidently in his paper declare himself innocent , as to the matter for which he was sentenced to die , when he knew the paper was of his own hand writing , and plain proof hath been since made of his own delivery of it to a third person . can a man be innocent and guilty of the same thing ? the only thing to be taken notice of , which remains , is , a reflection on the government for his close imprisonment , and the hasty and violent proceedings against him . if there were any thing more than usual in such cases , as to his imprisonment , he ought to have mentioned the particulars ; for otherwise it is to arraign the common iustice of the nation . as to the hasty and violent proceedings of his trial ; it was then told him , that the greatest advantage he had , was in putting off his trial : for by that he knew how to lay the papers on my lord preston ; which yet could not clear him ▪ as to those papers which were not written with my lord's hand , nor related any ways to him ; but one of them was written with his own hand . upon the whole matter , i cannot see how he hath either proved his innocency , or that he acted according to the principles and doctrins of the church of england . as to his concluding prayer , i cannot but observe ▪ that in the beginning of the speech the reason he gives why he would not make any to the people , was , because he would employ his last minutes in devotion and holy communion with god : which i hope he did . but those who contrived the speech , were to make a prayer for him too ; but not a prayer of devotion , but rather of faction and sedition : for it hath no other meaning , than that god would overturn this present government , and restore the former , in order to the flourishing of the church of england ; notwithstanding the wounds she hath received from her prevaricating sons . i cannot imagine how a man could joyn these things together in a prayer , unless he could think all those are prevaricating sons , who are against popery . for i know no bottom large enough for popery , and the church of england , to stand upon together . but this i do not think of mr. ashton , and therefore conclude , as i began , that this seems rather the speech of a party , than of mr. ashton ; who made use of his name and hand , to convey into the minds of the people , the most malicious insinuations against this present government , and all who live in obedience to it . a catalogue of some books , lately printed for r. clavell . forms of private devotion for every day in the week , in a method agreeable to the liturgy ; with occasional prayers , and an office for the holy communion , and for the time of sickness . humbly recommended to all the pious and devout members of the church of england . a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , february the fifteenth , 1690 / 1. by henry dove , d. d. chaplain to their majesties . roman forgeries in the councils , during the first four centuries , together with an appendix , concerning the forgeries and errors in the annals of baronius . by thomas comber , d. d. precentor of york . a scholastical history of the primitive and general use of liturgies in the christian church ; together with an answer to mr ▪ david clarkson's late discourse concerning liturgies ; in two parts , in octavo . by the same hand . seasonable reflections on a late pamphlet , entituled , a history of passive obedience since the reformation ; wherein the true notion of passive obedience is setled and secured from the malicious interpretations of ill-designing men. the golden rule , or the royal law of equity explained : by i. goodman , d. d. the frauds of the romish priests and monks set forth in eight letters ; lately written by a gentleman in his journy into italy . a late letter concerning the proceedings in scotland , and sufferings of the episcopal clergy there ; in quarto , price 6 d. political arithmetick , or a discourse concerning the extent and value of lands , people , buildings ; husbandry , manufacture , commerce , fishery , artizans , seamen , soldiers ; publick revenues , interest , taxes , superlucration , registries , banks ; valuation of men , increasing of seamen , of militia's , harbors , situation , shipping , power at sea , &c. as the same relates to every country in general ; but more particularly to the territories of his majesty of great britain , and his neighbors of holland , zealand , and france . by sir william petty , late fellow of the royal society . their present majesties government proved to be throughly setled , and that we may submit to it , without asserting the principles of mr. hobbs ; shewing also , that allegiance was not due to the usurpers , after the late civil war ; occasion'd by some late pamphlets against the reverend dr. sherlock . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a40071-e410 d. 25. tit. 4. bract. l. 2. c. 32. fleta l. 1. c. 15. in the case of one robins's child , at hereford assizes about an. 1668. alberic . gent. de jure bel. l. 1. c. 16. life of archbishop laud , sol . 161. motifs de la france pour la guerre d' allemagne , p. 94 , 95 , 117. a seasonable vindication of the b. trinity being an answer to this question, why do you believe the doctrine of the trinity? : collected from the works of the most reverend, dr. john tillotson, late lord archbishop of canterbury, and the right reverend dr. edward stillingfleet, now lord bishop of worcester. tillotson, john, 1630-1694. 1697 approx. 75 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 58 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a62586 wing t1221 estc r10019 11815295 ocm 11815295 49529 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a62586) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 49529) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 553:8) a seasonable vindication of the b. trinity being an answer to this question, why do you believe the doctrine of the trinity? : collected from the works of the most reverend, dr. john tillotson, late lord archbishop of canterbury, and the right reverend dr. edward stillingfleet, now lord bishop of worcester. tillotson, john, 1630-1694. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. assheton, william, 1641-1711. [4], 105, [2] p. printed for b. aylmer ..., london : 1697. compiled by w. assheton. cf. bmc. reproduction of original in the university of illinois (urbana-champaign campus). library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity -early works to 1800. 2004-08 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-08 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-09 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-09 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a seasonable vindication of the b. trinity . being an answer to this question , why do you believe the doctrine of the trinity ? collected from the works of the most reverend , dr. john tillotson , late lord archbishop of canterbury . and the right reverend , dr. edward stillingfleet , now lord bishop of worcester . london : printed for b. aylmer , at the three pigeons against the royal exchange in cornhill . mdcxcvii . the preface . our modern socinians ( who are pleased to call themselves unitarians ) having not only disputed , but most blasphemously ridiculed the doctrine of the b. trinity ; for the conviction of such gainsayers , and the confirmation of others , it is thought fit to publish the following discourse , faithfully collected from the learned works of archbishop tillotson , and bishop stillingfleet . concerning bishop stillingfleet , i shall say nothing , because he is alive to answer for himself . but as to archbishop tillotson , i hope it will appear even from this collection , that his grace was very far from being a socinian ; however his memory hath been very unworthily reproached in that , as well as other respects , since his death . a vindication of the b. trinity . q. why do you believe the doctrine of the trinity ? a. because it is a very rational doctrine , that is , there is the highest reason to believe it . q. what do you mean by this word trinity ? and , what doctrines concerning it are proposed to our belief ? a. i shall answer this question in the very words of the church of england ; whose doctrine , i am fully perswaded , is orthodox and catholick . there is but one living and true god , everlasting , without body , parts , or passions ; of infinite power , wisdom and goodness , the maker and preserver of all things both visible and invisible . and in unity of this godhead there be three persons , of one substance , power and eternity ; the father , the son , and the holy ghost . art. 1. the catholick faith is this , that we worship one god in trinity , and trinity in unity ; neither confounding the persons ; nor dividing the substance . for there is one person of the father , another of the son , and another of the holy ghost . but the godhead of the father , of the son , and of the holy ghost is all one ; the glory equal ; the majesty coeternal . the father is god , the son is god , and the holy ghost is god. and yet they are not three gods , but one god. athan. creed . it is very meet , right , and our bounden duty , that we should at all times , and in all places give thanks unto thee , o lord almighty , everlasting god. who art one god , one lord ; not one only person , but three persons in one substance . for that which we believe of the glory of the father , the same we believe of the son , and of the holy ghost , without any difference or inequality . pref. on the feast of trinity . o holy , blessed and glorious trinity , three persons and one god , have mercy upon us miserable sinners . lit. this is what we believe concerning the trinity . and that this is very rational doctrine ; and that we have the highest reason thus to believe , i shall endeavour to evince , when i have first explained the nature of faith in general , by shewing , what it is to believe ; and what this act believe doth denote when applied to any object . q. what is faith , or belief in general ? a. belief in general i define to be , an assent to that which is credible as credible . v. bishop pearson on the creed , p. 2. q. what is meant by this word assent ? a. by the word assent is expressed that act or habit of the understanding , by which it receiveth , acknowledgeth , and embraceth any thing as a truth , id. ib. q. but are there not several other kinds of assent , besides faith , by which the soul doth receive and embrace whatsoever appeareth to be true ? a. this assent , or judgment of any thing to be true , being a general act of the understanding , is applicable to other habits thereof as well as to faith. id. ib. q. how then is this assent which we call faith , specified and distinguished from those other kinds of assent ? a. it must be specified as all other acts are , by its proper object . id. ib. q. what is this object of faith ? a. this object of faith is that which is credible as credible . q. why do you repeat the word credible , and say credible as credible ? a. to denote the twofold object of faith , viz. material and formal . q. what is the material object of faith ? a. the material object of faith , is the thing to be believed , or something which is credible . q. what is the formal object of faith ? a. that whereby it is believed , or the reason why it is believed . q. what is it to be credible ? a. that is properly credible , which is not apparent of it self ( either in respect of our senses or understanding ) nor certainly to be collected , either antecedently by its cause , or reversely by its effect , and yet though by none of these ways , hath the attestation of a truth . v. bishop pearson , p. 3. q. what then is that kind of assent , which is called faith ? a. when any thing propounded to us is neither apparent to our sense , nor evident to our understanding in and of it self ; neither certainly to be collected from any clear and necessary connexion with the cause from which it proceedeth , or the effects which it naturally produceth ; nor is taken up upon any real arguments or relations to other acknowledged truths ; and yet notwithstanding appeareth to us true , not by a manifestation but attestation of the truth ; and so moveth us to assent , not of it self , but by virtue of the testimony given to it . in plain terms ; when we therefore acknowledge a thing to be true , for this only reason , because we are told that it is so : then , and in such a case we do properly believe it . and the assent that we give to such a truth thus attested , is neither science nor opinion , but faith. id. ib. q. the nature of faith in general being thus explained , i am now prepared to be instructed by you in this important question ; why do you believe the doctrine of the trinity ? a. though this doctrine of the trinity , viz. that there are three distinct persons in one and the same undivided divine essence , is neither apparent to my sense , nor evident to my understanding ( for being a great mystery , i could never have known it , unless it had been revealed ; and now it is revealed , i am not able to comprehend it ) yet since it is testified and declared by an all-knowing , and most just and faithful god , who can neither deceive nor be deceived , i do therefore give my assent unto it , as a most credible truth , and as such , i do firmly believe it . now that god , who is infinite in wisdom and knowledge , doth fully know himself , and perfectly understand his own nature : and also , that he who is infinitely good and faithful cannot deceive us ( for it is impossible for god to lye ) this i shall not pretend to prove , but can fairly suppose it , as being granted by the socinians themselves . the only thing therefore for us to prove , and which they deny , is this , viz. that the doctrine of the trinity is revealed by almighty god. for if we can make it appear , that an infinitely wise and faithful god hath revealed it ; we shall then easily convince them , that there is the highest reason to believe it . q. how then do you prove that god hath revealed it ? where hath god told us , that there are three distinct persons , in the same undivided divine essence and nature ? a. were i to discourse an atheist , or a deist , then , since all conviction must be ex concessis , i ought to prove these two things , 1. the possibility and necessity of divine revelation . 2. that the books of the old and new testament , which by way of eminency we call the scriptures , do contain this divine revelation . and that in these books god hath revealed so much of his own nature , as is necessary for us to know in order to our salvation . but since these unitarians do profess themselves christians , and consequently to believe the holy scriptures , i shall have so much charity for ▪ them at present , as to suppose it : and shall treat them as such . and then the only thing i am to prove , is this , viz. that the doctrine of the trinity is revealed in the scriptures . q. but neither the word trinity , nor the word person are to be found in scripture . how then can you pretend to prove a trinity of persons from the scriptures ? a. though neither the word trinity , nor perhaps person , in the sense in which it is used by divines when they treat of this mystery , be any where to be met with in scripture ; yet it cannot be denied but that three are there spoken of by the names of father , son , and holy ghost , in whose name every christian is baptized , and to each of whom the highest titles and properties of god are in scripture attributed . and these three are spoken of with as much distinction from one another , as we use to speak of three several persons . so that though the word trinity be not found in scripture , yet these three are there expresly and frequently mentioned . and trinity is nothing but three of any thing . and so likewise though the word person be not there expresly applied to father , son , and holy ghost ; yet it will be very hard to find a more convenient word whereby to express the distinction of these three . for which reason i could never yet see any just cause to quarrel at this term. for since the holy spirit of god in scripture hath thought fit in speaking of these three to distinguish them from one another , as we use in common speech to distinguish ▪ three several persons , i cannot see any reason why in the explication of this mystery , which purely depends upon divine revelation , we should not speak of it in the same manner as the scripture doth . and though the word person is now become a term of art , i see no cause why we should decline it , so long as we mean by it neither more nor less than what the scripture says in other words . v. archbishop tillotson's sermon on 1 tim. 2. 5. p. 19. here then i fix my foot : that there are three differences in the deity , which the scripture speaks of by the names of father , son , and holy ghost , and every where speaks of them as we use to do of three distinct persons . and therefore i see no reason why in this argument we should nicely abstain from using the word person . id. sermon ii. on john 1. 14. p. 120. q. you confess then that the word trinity is not to be found in scripture . however , ( may these unitarians reply ) have you not found it in the athanasian creed ? and because the church of england hath owned this creed , by taking it into her liturgy , that you may approve your selves true sons of the church , therefore , say they , you are resolved to defend it . v. pref. to mr. milb . p. 7. a. we assert three persons in the godhead , not because we find them in the athanasian creed ; but because the scripture hath revealed that there are three , father , son , and holy ghost , to whom the divine nature and attributes are given . this we verily believe , that the scripture hath revealed ; and that there are a great many places , of which we think no tolerable sense can be given without it , and therefore we assert this doctrine on the same grounds , on which we believe the scriptures . and if there are three persons which have the divine nature attributed to them ; what must we do in this case ? must we cast off the unity of the divine essence ? no , that is too frequently and plainly asserted for us to call it into question . must we reject those scriptures which attribute divinity to the son and holy ghost , as well as to the father ? that we cannot do , unless we cast off those books of scripture , wherein those things are contained . v. bishop stillingfleet's vind. of the trinity , p. 112. q. but is it not trifling to prove a doctrine by scripture , which ( as the socinians pretend ) is contrary to reason ? it being a known rule ( which i shall express in the words of bishop stillingfleet ) that , whatever speaks a direct repugnancy to any of the fundamental dictates of nature , cannot be of divine revelation . v. orig. sacr. p. 172. for the law of nature , and of right reason , imprinted in our hearts , is as truly the law and word of god , as is that which is printed in our bibles . v. bishop sanderson's ser. 4. ad cl. p. 78. and therefore since truth is never contrary to it self , is it not impertinent to prove this doctrine of the trinity by the scriptures , which is not only above reason , but plainly contrary to it ? a. as to its being above reason , which they are loth to admit any thing to be ; this i think will bear no great dispute : because if they would be pleased to speak out , they can mean no more by this , but that our reason is not able fully to comprehend it . but what then ? are there no mysteries in religion ? that i am sure they will not say , because god , whose infinite nature and perfections , are the very foundation of all religion , is certainly the greatest mystery of all other , and the most incomprehensible . but we must not , nay they will not for this reason deny , that there is such a being as god. and therefore if there be mysteries in religion , it is no reasonable objection against them , that we cannot fully comprehend them : because all mysteries , in what kind soever , whether in religion , or in nature , so long , and so far as they are mysteries , are for that very reason incomprehensible . vid. archbishop tillotson , serm. ii. on joh. 1. 14. p. 117. i desire it may be considered , that it is not repugnant to reason to believe some things which are incomprehensible by our reason ; provided that we have sufficient ground and reason for the belief of them : especially if they be concerning god , who is in his nature incomprehensible ; and we be well assured that he hath revealed them . and therefore it ought not to offend us , that these differences in the deity are incomprehensible by our finite understandings ; because the divine nature it self is so , and yet the belief of that is the foundation of all religion . there are a great many things in nature which we cannot comprehend , how they either are , or can be . id. ser. on 1 tim. 2. 5. pag. 22. for my own part , i confess it to be my opinion , that we converse every day with very many things , none of which we comprehend . who is he that comprehends either the structure , or the reason of the powers of seminal forms or seeds ? or how the parts of matter hold together ? or how , being in their own nature lifeless and sensless , they do ( for all that ) in some positures and textures , acquire life , sensation , and even volition , memory and reason ? or how the sun and other vast heavenly fires subsist for so many ages , without any nourishment or fuel ; which fire , of all other bodies , most requires ? or how , when the sun arrives at the tropicks , he never goes further , either northward or southward , but returns towards the equator , and thereby preserves the world by his vital warmth ? v. consider . on the trinity , to h. h. p. 4. there are many things likewise in our selves , which no man is able in any measure to comprehend , as to the manner how they are done and performed . as the vital union of soul and body . who can imagine by what device or means a spirit comes to be so closely united , and so firmly link'd to a material body , that they are not to be parted without great force and violence offer'd to nature ? the like may be said of the operations of our several faculties of sense and imagination , of memory and reason , and especially of the liberty of our wills. and yet we certainly find all these faculties in our selves , though we cannot either comprehend or explain the particular manner in which the several operations of them are performed . and if we cannot comprehend the manner of those operations , which we plainly perceive and feel to be in our selves , much less can we expect to comprehend things without us ; and least of all can we pretend to comprehend the infinite nature and perfections of god , and every thing belonging to him . thus you see , by these instances , that it is not repugnant to reason to believe a great many things to be , of the manner of whose existence we are not able to give a particular and distinct account . and much less is it repugnant to reason to believe those things concerning god , which we are very well assured he hath declared concerning himself , though these things by our reason should be incomprehensible . and this is truly the case as to the matter now under debate . we are sufficiently assured that the scriptures are a divine revelation , and that this mystery of the trinity is therein declared to us . now that we cannot comprehend it , is no sufficient reason not to believe it . for if it were a good reason for not believing it , then no man ought to believe that there is a god , because his nature is most certainly incomprehensible . but we are assured by many arguments that there is a god ; and the same natural reason which assures us , that he is , doth likwise assure us that he is incomprehensible ; and therefore our believing him to be so , doth by no means overthrow our belief of his being . in like manner , we are assured by divine revelation of the truth of this doctrine of the trinity : and being once assured of that , our not being able fully to comprehend it , is not reason enough to stagger our belief of it . a man cannot deny what he sees , though the necessary consequence of admitting it , may be something which he cannot comprehend . one cannot deny the frame of this world which he sees with his eyes , though from thence it will necessarily follow , that either that or something else must be of it self : which yet is a thing , which no man can comprehend how it can be . and by the same reason a man must not deny what god says , to be true ; though he cannot comprehend many things which god says : as particularly concerning this mystery of the trinity . it ought then to satisfy us that there is sufficient evidence , that this doctrine is delivered in scripture , and that what is there declared concerning it , doth not imply a contradiction . for why should our finite understandings pretend to comprehend that which is infinite , or to know all the real differences that are consistent with the unity of an infinite being ; or to be able fully to explain this mystery by any similitude or resemblance taken from finite beings ? v. archbishop tillotson's serm. on 1 tim. 2. 5. p. 23. great difficulty i acknowledge there is in the explication of it , in which the further we go , beyond what god hath thought fit to reveal to us in scripture concerning it , the more we are entangled ; and that which men are pleased to call an explaining of it , does , in my apprehension , often make it more obscure , that is , less plain than it was before . which does not so very well agree with a pretence of explication . id. ser. on joh. 1. 14. p. 119. and therefore , though some learned and judicious men may have very commendably attempted a more particular explication of this great mystery by the strength of reason , yet i dare not pretend to that , knowing both the difficulty and danger of such an attempt , and mine own insufficiency for it . all that i ever designed upon this argument , was to make out the credibility of the thing from the authority of the holy scriptures ; without descending to a more particular explication of it than the scripture hath given us : lest by endeavouring to lay the difficulties which are already started about it , new ones should be raised , and such as may , perhaps , be much harder to be removed , than those we have now to grapple withal . nor indeed do i see that it is any ways necessary to do more ; it being sufficient that god hath declared what he thought fit in this matter , and that we do firmly believe what he says concerning it to be true , though we do not perfectly comprehend the meaning of all that he hath said about it . id. ser. on 1 tim. 2. 5. p. 17. q. but these unitarians do urge the matter much further , and pretend ; that this mystery of the trinity , now under debate , is not only above reason , but plainly contrary to reason . for thus they expostulate with the bishop of worcester . he utterly mistakes ( to give you their own words ) in thinking , that we deny the articles of the new christianity , or athanasian religion , because they are mysteries , or because we do not comprehend them ; we deny them , because we do comprehend them ; we have a clear and distinct perception , that they are not mysteries , but contradictions , impossibilities , and pure nonsense . v. consid. on expl. of the trinity , in a letter to h. h. p. 4. now what reply hath his lordship made to this ? a. this is a very bold charge , and not very becoming the modesty and decency of such , who know at the same time that they oppose the religion publickly established , and in such things which they look on as some of the principal articles of the christian faith. v. vind. of the trinity . p. 54. these words contain in them so spiteful , so unjust , and so unreasonable a charge upon the christian church in general , and our own in particular , that i could not but think my self concerned , especially since they are addressed to me , to do what in me lay ( as soon as my uncertain state of health would permit ) towards the clearing the fundamental mystery of the athanasian religion , as they call it , viz. the doctrine of the trinity , which is chiefly struck at by them . v. pref. p. 2. q. 't is a seasonable service to the christian church in general , and our own in particular , that a person so eminent for learning and prudence , hath at this juncture undertaken the defence of the b. trinity . but in what manner doth his lordship propose to defend it ? a. without running into any new explications , or laying aside any old terms , for which he could not see any just occasion . for however thoughtful men may think to escape some particular difficulties better , by going out of the common roads ; yet they may meet with others , which they did not foresee , which may make them as well as others judge it , at last , a wiser and safer course to keep in the same way , which the christian church hath used ever since it hath agreed to express her sense in such terms , which were thought most proper for that purpose . why then are new explications started , and disputes raised and carried on so warmly about them ? we had much better satisfy our selves with that language which the church hath received ▪ and is expressed in the creeds , than go about with new terms , to raise new ferments , especially at a time , when our united forces are most necessary against our common adversaries . no wise and good men can be fond of any new inventions , when the peace of the church is hazarded by them . and it is a great pity , that any new phrases , or ways of expression , should cause unreasonable heats among those who are really of the same mind . vtd. pref. p. 2. and 31. and vind. p. 106. q. but how can these unitarians pretend , that the doctrine of the trinity is contrary to reason ? how , and in what manner have they attempted to prove it ? what grounds have they for such a charge as this , of contradiction and impossibility ? a. i shall draw up the charge in their own words : theirs , they say , is an accountable and reasonable faith , but that of the trinitarians is absurd , and contrary both to reason and to it self ; and therefore not only false but impossible . but wherein lies this impossibility ? that they soon tell us . because we affirm that there are three persons , who are severally and each of them true god , and yet there is but one true god. now , say they , this is an error in counting or numbring , which when stood in , is of all others the most brutal and inexcusable ; and not to discern it , is not to be a man. v. hist. of the unit. p. 9. n. 7. for we cannot be mistaken in the notion of one and three ; we are most certain that one is not three , and three are not one. v. def. of hist. of unit. p. 7. so that here is an arithmetical , as well as grammatical contradiction . for , in ▪ saying , god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost , yet not three gods , but one god ; a man first distinctly numbers three gods , and then in summing them up , brutishly says , not three gods , but one god. v. acts of athanasius , p. 13. which is plainly , as if a man should say , peter , james , and john being three persons , are one man ; and one man is these three distinct persons , peter , james and john. is it not now a ridiculous attempt , as well as a barbarous indignity , to go about thus to make asses of all mankind , under pretence of teaching them a creed ? v. notes on athanasius's creed , p. 11. this is their charge . and 't is very freely spoken , with respect , not merely to our church , but the christian world ; which owns this creed to be a just and true explication of the doctrine of the trinity . but there are some creatures as remarkable for their untoward kicking , as for their stupidity . v. bishop of worcester's defence of the trinity , p. 101. it is strange boldness in men to talk thus of monstrous contradictions in things above their reach . but some have so used themselves to the language of jargon , nonsense , contradiction , impossibility , that it comes from them , as some men swear , when they do not know it . id. p. 76. but that the rudeness of these unitarians , in thus condemning the christian church , may more fully appear , let us proceed very distinctly to examine this matter . do you therefore , first , give their objection its full strength , and then , through divine assistance , i 'll return you my answer . q. are not peter , james , and john , three distinct humane persons ? a. 't is granted . q. are not peter , james , and john , three distinct different men ? a. who doubts it ? q. is it not a contradiction to say , that peter is james , or that james and john are peter ? a. this likewise must be acknowledg'd . q. is it not a contradiction to affirm , that peter , james and john , being three men , are but one man ? and is it not equally absurd to declare , that one man is these three men ? a. sure i cannot be mistaken in the notion of one and three . but am most certain , that one is not three , and three are not one. but what of all this ? q. observe what follows . are not the father , the son , and the holy ghost ( according to the athanasian creed ) three distinct different divine persons ? a. i firmly believe it . q. and if these three divine persons , father , son and holy ghost , are three gods , is it not a contradiction to say , there is but one god ? a. to say , there are three gods , and yet but one god , is doubtless a contradiction . but who affirms , there are three gods ? q. doth not the athanasian creed ? a. no. that creed expresly saith , there are not three gods , but one god. q. if you will not renounce your reason , i do thus prove it to you . the father is god , there is one. the son is god , there is two. the holy ghost is god , there is three . are not here three gods ? do you think me such a fool , that i cannot count , one , two , and three ? a. thus indeed the unitarians do wisely argue . but can these men of sense and reason think , that the point in controversy ever was , whether in numbers , one could be three , or three one ? if they think so , i wonder they do not think of another thing ; which is , the begging all trinitarians for fools ; because they cannot count one , two and three ; and an unitarian jury would certainly cast them . one would think such writers had never gone beyond shop-books ; for they take it for granted , that all depends upon counting . but these terrible charges were some of the most common and trite objections of infidels . st. augustin mentions it as such when he saith ; the infidels sometimes ask us , what do you call the father ? we answer , god. what the son ? we answer , god. what the holy ghost ? we answer , god. so that here the infidels make the same objection , and draw the very same inference . then , say they , the father , son , and holy ghost , are three gods. but what saith st. augustin to this ? had he no more skill in arithmetick , than to say , there are three , and yet but one ? he saith plainly that there are not three gods. the infidels are troubled , because they are not inlightned ; their heart is shut up , because they are without faith. by which it is plain , he look'd on these as the proper objections of infidels , and not of christians . but st. augustin doth not give it over so . when you begin to count , saith he , you go on ; one , two and three . but when you have reckon'd them , what is it you have been counting ? the father is the father , the son the son , and the holy ghost , the holy ghost . what are these three ? are they not three gods ? no. are they not three almighties ? no. they are capable of number as to their relation to each other ; but not as to their essence , which is but one . v. bishop stillingfleet's vindic. of the trin. p. 58. will men never learn to distinguish between numbers and the nature of things ? for three to be one is a contradiction in numbers ; but whether an infinite nature can communicate it self to three different subsistences , without such a division as is among created beings , must not be determined by bare numbers , but by the absolute perfections of the divine nature ; which must be owned to be above our comprehension . id. serm. on 1 tim. 1. 15. p. 16. this is plain and convincing to all modest unprejudiced persons . but it seems our unitarians are not thus to be convinced : who do further object ; that it is as ridiculous to affirm ; that the father , the son , and the holy ghost , being three persons , are one god ; as it is to say , that peter , james , and john , being three persons , are one man. q. if i rightly apprehend them , their argument is this . three human persons are three men , therefore three divine persons are three gods. and this they repeat with great triumph in several of their pamphlets . what answer therefore can you return to this ? a. how can any man of sense be satisfied with such kind of arguments as these ? one would think , they wrote only for such as would take their words ; they join so much confidence with so very little appearance of reason . for is not this great skill in these matters , to make such a parallel between three persons in the godhead , and peter , james and john ? do they think there is no difference between an infinitely perfect being , and such finite limited creatures as individuals among men are ? do they suppose the divine nature capable of such division and separation by individuals , as human nature is ? q. no , they may say , but ye who hold three persons must think so . a. for what reason ? we do assert three persons , but it is on the account of divine revelation , and in such a manner , as the divine nature is capable of it . for it is a good rule of boethius , talia sunt praedicata , qualia subjecta permiserint . we must not say that there are persons in the trinity , but in such a manner as is agreeable to the divine nature ; and if that be not capable of division and separation , then the persons must be in the same undivided essence . id. vind. p. 102. so that herein lies the true solution of the difficulty , by considering the difference between the humane and divine nature . the humane nature , being finite , is capable of division , multiplication and separation . but the divine nature , being infinite , is not capable of any division , multiplication and separation . now the divine essence is that alone which makes god ; that can be but one , and therefore there can be no more gods than one. but because the same scripture , which assures us of the unity of the divine essence , doth likewise join the son and holy ghost in the same attributes , operations and worship , therefore as to the mutual relations , we may reckon three , but as to the divine essence , that can be no more than one. here then is the true reason why we affirm ; that three human persons , peter , james , and john , are three men ; and yet three divine persons , the father , the son , and the holy ghost , are but one god , because , the divine essence is not capable of such division and separation , as the human nature is . id. p. 64 , & 76. q. this is full , and to the purpose ; and hath given great satisfaction to my self , as well as others . but is there nothing further objected against the doctrine of the b. trinity , wherein i may be instructed by you ? a. there is an objection lately started ; and i wonder you have not charged me with it . q. pray let me hear it ? a. 't is this . three divine substances are three gods. but three divine persons , are three divine substances . therefore , three divine persons are three gods. this hath most insultingly been repeated by our unitarians , and hath made no little noise in their late papers and pamphlets . q. who revived this old objection , and how came it now to be brought again upon the stage ? a. to understand this matter rightly , we must consider that when the socinian pamphlets first came abroad , some years since , a learned and worthy person of our church , who had appeared with great vigour and reason against our adversaries of the church of rome in the late reign ( which ought not to be forgotten ) undertook to defend the doctrine of the trinity against the history of the unitarians , and the notes of the athanasian creed : but in the warmth of disputing , and out of a desire to make this matter more intelligible , he suffer'd ▪ himself to be carried beyond the ancient methods ▪ which the church hath used to express her sense by , still retaining the same fundamental article of three persons in one undivided essence , but explaining it in such a manner , as to make each person to have a peculiar and proper substance of his own . v. bishop of worcester's pref. to vind. of trin. p. 20. q. let me hear the opinion of that learned person more distinctly . a. in short it is this : that the same author asserts , ( 1. ) that it is gross sabellianism to say , that there are not three personal minds , or spirits , or substances . ( 2. ) that a distinct substantial person must have a distinct substance of his own , proper and peculiar to his own person . but he owns , that although there are three distinct persons , or minds , each of whom is distinctly and by himself god , yet there are not three gods , but one god , or one divinity . which he saith , is intirely , and indivisibly , and inseparably in three distinct persons or minds . that the same one divine nature is wholly and intirely communicated by the eternal father , to the eternal son , and by the father and son to the eternal spirit , without any division or separation ; and so it remains one still . v. modest exam. p. 15 , 17 , 29 , 30. this is the substance of this new explication , which hath raised such flames , that injunctions from authority were thought necessary to suppress them . v. pref. p. 25. q. pray tell me your thoughts with freedom . is this explication of the trinity , by three distinct infinite minds and substances , orthodox , or not ? a. now to deal as impartially in this matter as may be , i do not think our understandings one jot helped in the notion of the trinity by this hypothesis ; but that it is liable to as great difficulties as any other . q. you begin then to suspect his explication . a. none ought to be fond of it ; or to set it against the general sense of others , and the currant expressions of divines about these mysteries : nor to call the different opinions of others heresy or nonsense , which are provoking words , and tend very much to inflame mens passions , because their faith and understanding are both call'd in question , which are very tender things . v. pref. p. 41. q. is it then your opinion , that this hypothesis , of three distinct substances in the trinity , can scarce be defended ? a. i fear it will be impossible to clear this hypothesis as to the reconciling three individual essences with one individual divine essence ; which looks too like asserting , that there are three gods , and yet but one. id. p. 31. q. will you please to explain this more fully , that i may better understand it ? a. can one whole entire indivisible substance be actually divided into three substances ? for if every person must have a peculiar substance of his own , and there be three persons , there must be three peculiar substances . and how can there be three peculiar substances , and yet but one entire and indivisible substance ? i do not say , there must be three divided substances in place , or separate substances ; but they must be divided as three individuals of the same kind , which must introduce a specifick divine nature , which i think very inconsistent with the divine perfections . ib. p. 29. q. but every person must have his own proper substance , and so the substance must be divided if there be three persons . a. that every person must have a substance to support his subsistence is not denied . but the question is ; whether that substance must be divided , or not ? we say , where the substance will bear it , as in created beings , a person hath a separate substance ; that is , the same nature diversified by accidents , qualities , and a separate existence . but where these things cannot be , there the same essence must remain undivided ; but with such relative properties as cannot be confounded . v. vind. p. 105. when we speak of finite substances and persons , we are certain that distinct persons do imply distinct substances , because they have a distinct and separate existence . but this will not hold in an infinite substance , where necessary existence doth belong to the idea of it . id. p. 261. q. but say our unitarians , a person is an intelligent being : and therefore , three persons must needs be three intelligent beings . so true it is , that whosoever acknowledges three persons in the godhead ( if he takes the word in its proper sense ) ▪ must admit three gods. which the learned doctor cannot avoid , who says they are three distinct minds , three substantial beings , three intelligent beings : therefore unavoidably three gods. v. defence of hist. of unit. p. 5. a. the full and adequate definition of a person ( from which the learned doctor doth . draw his argument , and the unitarians their objection ) is not this , as they suppose , viz. a person is an intelligent substance . for this is but part of the definition . but the full and adequate definition of a person is this . a person is a compleat intelligent substance , with a peculiar manner of subsistence . so that , an individual intelligent substance , is rather supposed to the making of a person , than the proper definition of it . for a person relates to something which doth distinguish it from another intelligent substance in the same nature : and therefore the foundation of it lies in the peculiar manner of subsistence , which agrees to one , and to none else of the kind ; and this is it which is called personality . which doth not consist , i say , in a meer intelligent being , but in that peculiar manner of subsistence in that being , which can be in no other . so that the proper reason of personality , whereby one person is constituted and distinguished from another , it is the peculiar manner of subsistence , whereby one person hath such properties as are incommunicable to any other . v. vind. p. 260 , & 72. from these premises we are instructed , why in the blessed trinity , the father , the son , and the holy ghost , are three persons , and yet but one god. the reason is this , god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost , are but one god ; because the divine essence , nature , and substance , which alone makes god , is intirely one , and is not capable of any separation , multiplication or division . therefore , there can be no more gods than one. but since these three , father , son , and holy ghost , have each of them a peculiar manner of subsistence ; that is , each of these three hath a peculiar property , incommunicable to any other ; therefore as to their mutual relations and personalities they are three , but as to the divine essence and godhead , they are but one. and this is so far from being contrary to reason , as the socinians pretend , that it is highly rational to believe , a trinity in unity . that is , three distinct persons , and yet but one god. as i hope hath been fully proved , and that to your satisfaction . q. before you talk too much of satisfaction , you must answer me a question . a. what is it ? q. do you believe transubstantiation ? a. no , i do not . but what 's this to the purpose ? will you not allow me to believe the trinity , unless i will believe transubstantiation ? and must i renounce the trinity , because i reject transubstantiation ? q. the unitarians pretend that the case is parallel . a. pray give me their objection in their own words ; and then i shall instruct you , what answer to return to these men of sense and reason . q. i find that the belief of a trinity does contradict reason as much as transubstantiation . now who should not scruple an opinion perfectly parallel with transubstantiation , and equally fruitful in incongruities and contradictions ? well then , if the trinity implies no less contradiction than transubstantiation ; why can't we say , that it cannot be contained in scripture ? we say , transubstantiation cannot be found in scripture , because it is a plain contradiction to our reason ; but if the trinity be also a plain contradiction to our reason , why shan't we be allowed to say , that it cannot be contained in scripture ? v. def. of brief hist. of unit. p. 4 , and 6. but oh ! were the press as free for the unitarians , as 't is for other protestants ; how easily would they make it appear , that the follies and contradictions so justly charged on transubstantiation ; are neither for number , consequence , nor clearness , any way comparable to those implied in the athanasian creed ; and that the trinity hath the same , and no other , foundation with transubstantiation ? so that we must of necessity admit both , or neither . v. acts of athanasius , p. 16. this is the sum of what they object . to which i expect an answer according to your promise . a. as preparatory to a just answer , i cannot but observe , how exactly these socinians do symbolize with the papists . for as on the one hand , they of the church of rome are so fondly and obstinately addicted to their own errors , how mishappen and monstrous soever , that rather than the dictates of their church , how absurd soever , should be called in question , they will question the truth even of christianity it self : and if we will not take in transubstantiation , and admit it to be a necessary article of the christian faith , they grow so sullen and desperate that they matter not what becomes of all the rest : and rather than not have their will of us in that which is controverted , they will give up that which by their own confession is an undoubted article of the christian faith , and not controverted on either side : in like manner ; these unitarians are so impertinently zealous in their designs against the trinity , that rather than admit that fundamental article of the christian faith , they will plead for transubstantiation ; and this even contrary to the light and dictate of their own conscience . for the socinians are hearty enemies to transubstantiation , and have exposed the absurdity of it with great advantage . v. arcbishop tillotson ' s serm. on 1 tim. ii. 5. p. 30. q. have you nothing further to say in this matter ? a. you must give me leave to add ; i did not expect to have found this parallel so often insisted upon , without an answer to two dialogues purposely written on that subject , at a time when the doctrine of the trinity was used as an argument to bring in transubstantiation , as that is now now alledged for casting off the other . but i must do them that right to tell the world , that at that time a socinian answer was written to those dialogues , which i saw , and wished it might be printed , that the world might be satisfied about it and them . but they thought fit to forbear . and in all their late pamphlets where this parallel is so often repeated , there is but once , that i can find , any notice taken of those dialogues , and that in a very superficial manner : for the main design and scope of them is past over . v. vind. of trinit . p. 287. and i must needs remind these unitarians , that it is not fair nor scholar-like , so insultingly to repeat the parallel between the trinity and transubstantiation , which hath been so fully confuted in those two dialogues . q. you promised an answer , and you bring me a challenge : which i shall send to the unitarians . who indeed are obliged , in point of honour , to give satisfaction , by a just reply to those two dialogues . a. if they would consult their reputation , and credit their cause , they ought not to defer it . for those two dialogues were writ by an author , who ( to give you the very words of an unitarian ) hath all the properties , for which an adversary may be either feared , or reverenced . he understands perfectly the doctrine of the church ; and the points in question . he will commit no oversights through ignorance , hast , or inadversion . he is too experienced and judicious to hazard his cause , as others have lately done , on the success of a half-thought hypothesis , a crude invention , a pretty new querk . in a word , we can only say of him , since there is no remedy , contenti simus hoc catone . v. consid . &c. in a letter to h. h. p. 3. such an adversary as this is worthy the pens of their ablest writers . if therefore at this juncture , when the press is open , these unitarians shall not answer those dialogues , i must with freedom tell them , it is not because they dare not , but because they cannot . q. leaving these unitarians to defend their parallel at their leasure ; let me now hear your answer which you were pleased to promise . a. i shall endeavour to return a more particular answer to this objection ; and such a one as i hope will satisfy every considerate and unprejudiced mind , that after all this confidence and swaggering of theirs , there is by no means equal reason either for the receiving , or for the rejecting of these two doctrines of the trinity and transubstantiation . vid. archbishop tillotson's serm. on 1 tim. ii. 5. p. 30. q. first ; let us examine , whether there be equal reason for the belief of these two doctrines ? a. if this suggestion of theirs be of any force , we must suppose that there is equal evidence and proof from scripture for these two doctrines . q. how do you prove there is not ? a. from the confession of our adversaries themselves . for several learned writers of the church of rome have freely acknowledged , that transubstantiation can neither be directly proved , nor necessarily concluded from scripture . but this the writers of the christian church did never acknowledge concerning the trinity , and the divinity of christ ; but have always appealed to the clear and undeniable testimonies of scripture for the proof of these doctrines . and then the whole force of the objection amounts to this ; that if i am bound to believe what i am sure god says , though i cannot comprehend it ; then i am bound by the same reason to believe the greatest absurdity in the world , though i have no manner of assurance of any divine revelation concerning it . q. you think then , that as there is not equal reason for the believing , so neither is there equal reason for the rejecting of these two doctrines . a. this the objection supposes ; which yet cannot be supposed but upon one or both of these two grounds . either 1. because these two doctrines are equally incomprehensible . or , 2. because they are equally loaded with absurdities and contradictions . q. as to the first ; is not the trinity as incomprehensible as transubstantiation , and as such equally to be rejected ? a. it is not good ground of rejecting any doctrine , merely because it is incomprehensible ; as i have abundantly shewed already . but besides this , there is a wide difference between plain matters of sense , and mysteries concerning god. and it does by no means follow , that if a man do once admit any thing concerning god which he cannot comprehend , he hath no reason afterwards to believe what he himself sees . this is a most unreasonable and destructive way of arguing , because it strikes at the foundation of all certainty , and sets every man at liberty to deny the most plain and evident truths of christianity , if he may not be humoured in having the absurdest things in the world admitted for true . the next step will be to persuade us , that we may as well deny the being of god , because his nature is incomprehensible by our reason , as deny transubstantiation because it evidently contradicts our senses . id. ib. p. 32. q. as transubstantiation evidently contradicts our senses ; so these unitarians pretend , that the trinity as evidently contradicts our reason . and then , say they , are not these two doctrines loaded with the like absurdities and contradictions ? a. so far from this , that the doctrine of the trinity , as it is delivered in the scriptures , and hath already been explained , hath no absurdity or contradiction either involved in it , or necessarily consequent upon it . but the doctrine of transubstantiation is big with all imaginable absurdity and contradiction . as the unitarians themselves do acknowledge : and therefore i am not now concerned to prove it . q. however you are concerned to defend the trinity . the contradictions and absurdities of which ( as these unitarians pretend ) are as great as those of transubstantiation . a. i cannot help their pretences . but if their prejudices will allow them to examine my reasons , i shall yet further endeavour their conviction . and that i may do it the more effectually , i shall desire you ( as their advocate , and in their name ) to produce those absurdities which appear the most dreadful . q. i shall reduce all to these two , which comprehend the rest . 1. how there can be three persons , and but one god. 2. how these can agree in a third , and not agree among themselves . for the first , it seems very absurd , that there should be three persons really distinct , whereof every one is god , and yet there should not be three gods. for nothing is more contradictious , than to make three not to be three ; or three to be but one. a. i hope now you will give me leave to make an answer to your difficulty , as distinct as possible . it is very true , that according to arithmetick , three cannot be one , nor one three . but we must distinguish between the bare numeration , and the things numbred . the repetition of three units , certainly makes three distinct numbers ; but it doth not make three persons to be three natures . and therefore as to the things themselves , we must go from the bare numbers to consider their nature . we do not say , that three persons are but one person , or that one nature is three natures ; but that there are three persons in one nature . if therefore one individual nature be communicable to three persons , there is no appearance of absurdity in this doctrine . and on the other side , it will be impossible there should be three gods , where there is one and the same individual nature . for three gods must have three several divine natures , since it is the divine essence which makes a god. v. two dial. part. ii. p. 24. but of this there hath been given so full an account in this collection , that those who shall seriously and attentively consider it , will , i hope , through god's blessing , receive satisfaction . q. but yet you have not answer'd the other great difficulty in point of reason , viz. that those things which agree or disagree in a third , must agree or disagree one with the other . and therefore if the father be god , the son god , and the holy ghost god ; then the father must be son and holy ghost , and the son and holy ghost must be the father . if not , then they are really the same , and really distinct ; the same as to essence , distinct as to persons ; and so they are the same , and not the same , which is a contradiction . a. now i think you have drawn out the most refined spirits of socinianism , to make the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation parallel , because , you say , it implies a contradiction ; which is the nearest parallel you have yet offered at . but this terrible argument is grounded on this mistaken supposition , viz. that the divine essence is no more capable of communicating it self to three distinct persons , than any created being is . the reason of that axiom being , that created things , by reason of their finite nature , cannot diffuse or communicate themselves to more than one ; and therefore those which agree in a third , must agree together . but supposing it possible that the same finite nature could extend it self to several individuals , it would be presently answered ; the axiom did hold only , where they did adequately and reciprocally agree , and not where they did agree only in essence , but differ'd in the manner of subsistence . for where a different manner of subsistence is supposed possible , in the same individual nature , the agreement in that cannot take away that difference which is consistent with it ; which we attribute to the unlimitedness and perfection of the divine nature . q. but you can bring no other instance but the thing in question ; and therefore this is a petitio principii , or taking that for granted which is in dispute . a. i do not think it to be so , where the reason is assigned from the peculiar properties of the divine nature , to which there can be no parallel . and i think it very unreasonable in the socinians , to send us to created beings for the rules and measures of our judgment , concerning a being acknowledg'd to be infinite . q. are not the divine persons infinite , as well as the divine nature ? and therefore as created persons do take in the whole nature , so infinite persons will do the infinite nature . a. no question , but the persons are infinite in regard of the nature which is so ; but if an infinite nature be communicable to more persons than one , every such person cannot appropriate the whole nature to it self . q. if the difference be on the account of infinity , then there must be an infinite number of persons in the divine essence . a. i answer ; that infiniteness of number is no perfection ; and as to the number of persons , we follow not our own conjectures , nor the authority of the church ; but divine revelation , which hath assured us , that there is but one god , and yet there are three that are one. which depends not merely on the place of st. john , but the form of baptism is remarkable to this purpose ; which joyns together the father , the son , and the holy ghost ; without any other distinction besides that of order and relation : and it is against the fundamental design of christianity , to joyn any created beings together with god in so solemn an act of religion . and st. paul joyns them together in his benediction : the grace of our lord jesus christ , and the love of god ▪ and the communion of the holy ghost be with you all . amen . 2 cor. 12. 14. from whence the christian church hath always believed a trinity of persons in the unity of the divine nature . v. two dial. part ii. p. 31. the close . the unitarians themselves cannot deny , that many things certainly are , the particular manner of whose existence we can neither comprehend nor explain . therefore , though the particular manner of the existence of these three differences or persons in the divine nature , expressed in scripture by the names of father , son , and holy ghost , is incomprehensible by our finite understandings , and inexplicable by us ; that is , though the manner of the union and distinction between them , is above our reach and comprehension ; yet considering the infinite perfections of the divine nature , which are so far above our reach , god may justly oblige us to believe those things concerning himself , which we are not able to comprehend . and of this , i hope , i have given a sufficient account in the foregoing discourse . finis . the contents . the doctrine of the trinity is a very rational doctrine . p. 1 what is meant by this word trinity , and what doctrines concerning it are proposed to our belief ? 2 what is faith or belief in general ? 5 why we believe the doctrine of the trinity ? 10 how it can be proved that god hath revealed it ? 12 object . neither the word trinity , nor the word person are to be found in scripture . answer'd . 14 object . 't is the doctrine of the athanasian creed , therefore , the clergy of the church of england are resolved to defend it . answer'd . 19 object . 't is above reason . answ. 22 't is not repugnant to reason to believe some things which are incomprehensible by our reason . 24 object . 't is contrary to reason . answ. 44 object . three divine persons , are three divine substances , therefore three gods. answ. 59 the parallel between the trinity and transubstantiation largely considered . 75 the close . 104 catalogue of some books printed for b. aylmer . a conference with an anabaptist . being a defence of infant-baptism . in 8vo . price 12 d. a theological discourse of last wills and testaments . in 8vo . price 12 d. a discourse concerning a death-bed repentance . price 6 d. a seasonable vindication of the b. trinity . being an answer to this question , why do you believe the doctrine of the trinity ? collected from the works of the most reverend , dr. john tillotson , late lord archbishop of canterbury . and the right reverend , dr. edward stillingsteet , now lord bishop of worcester . price 12 d a short exposition ( of the preliminary questions and answers ) of the church catechism . being an introduction to a defence of infant-baptism . price 2 d. directions in order to the suppressing of debauchery and prophaneneness . 2 d. a discourse against blasphemy . being a conference with m. s. concerning 1. the rudeness of atheistical discourse . 2. the certainty and eternity of hell-torments . 3. the truth and authority of the holy scripture . 2 d. a discourse against 1. drunkenness . 2. swearing and cursing . 2 d. the plain man's devotion . part 1. being a method of daily devotion , fitted to the meanest capacities . 2 d. the plain man's devotion . part 2. being a method of devotion for the lord's-day . 2 d. these are the price of each of these small books single ; but for the encouragement of those that are so charitably inclined to give away some quantities of them , they may have them at ten shillings a hundred , at brab . aylmer ' s , in cornhill . these above , all writ by the reverend william assheton . d. d. six sermons concerning the divinity and incarnation of our blessed saviour ; his sacrifice and satisfaction : and of the unity of the divine nature in the b. trinity . by his grace , john , late lord archbishop of canterbury . in 8vo . certain propositions by which the doctrine of the h. trinity is so explained , according to the ancient fathers , as to speak it not contradictory to reason . a second defence of the propositions . both by edward , lord bishop of glocester . a brief exposition on the creed , the lord's prayer , and ten commandments . to which is added the doctrine of the sacraments . by isaac barrow , d. d. and late master of trinity college , cambridge . this on the creed never before published : being very different from the volume of sermons on it . in 8vo . now in the press . a defence of the blessed trinity . by isaac barrow , d. d. never before printed . price 1 s. notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a62586-e340 interrogant enim nos aliquando infideles , & dicunt , patrem quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum . filium quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum . spiritum sanctum quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum . ergo inquiunt , pater & filius , & spiritus sanctus tres sunt dii . respondemus , non. turbantur , quia non illuminantur , cor clausum habent quia clavem fidel non habent . aug. in job . tr. 39. ubi cogitare coeperis , incipis numerare : ubi numeraveris , quid numeraveris , non potes respondere . pater , pater est ; filius filius ; spiritus sanctus , spiritus sanctus est . quid sunt isti tres ? non tres dii ? non. non tres omnipotentes ? non , sed unus omnipotens . hoc solo numerum insinuant , quod ad invicem sunt , non quod ad se sunt . id. ib. a sermon preach'd before the king, feb. 24, 1674/5 by ed. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1675 approx. 65 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 24 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2007-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61608 wing s5647 estc r5021 12898779 ocm 12898779 95214 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61608) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 95214) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 728:25) a sermon preach'd before the king, feb. 24, 1674/5 by ed. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 44 p. printed by rob. white for hen. mortlock ..., london : 1675. marginal notes. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -hebrews iii, 13 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2005-12 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2006-10 ali jakobson sampled and proofread 2006-10 ali jakobson text and markup reviewed and edited 2007-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preach'd before the king feb. 24. 1674 / 5. by ed. stillingfleet d. d. chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . printed by his majesties special command . london , printed by rob. white , for hen. mortlock at the phoenix in s t. paul's church-yard , and at the white hart in westminster hall. 1675. heb. iii. 13. — lest any of you be hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . when the iewish christians had formed themselves into an established church , and were become considerable for their number as well as for their zeal and devotion , their obstinate brethren thought it high time for their own security , at least to weaken and divide them , if they could not wholly suppress and destroy them . for this end , they made use of different instruments and means , according to the different seasons , and dispositions of men . sometimes , when they had any encouragement , or connivence from the roman power , they set upon them with rage and fury , spoiling their goods , and threatning their lives : but this hard usage did only heighten the courage , and unite the affections of the more zealous christians . sometimes , they suggested to them the mighty veneration , which their whole nation alwayes had for moses and the law , and what an infinite scandal and dishonour it would be to them all , to have that law , which was delivered by angels , confirmed by miracles , established by prophets , admired by the gentiles , and had continued among them for so many ages , now of a sudden to be laid aside for the sake of a new institution , that expressed no more regard to them than to any other nation in the world. and so great was the love which the iews had to their own countrey and religion , such an opinion was generally received among them of the peculiar favour of god towards them , that they who could not be shocked by persecution , were in danger of being overcome by flattery . from hence the author of this epistle make it his business to shew the excellency of christ above moses , and of his institution above that of the law , in respect of the priesthood and sacrifices , and the benefits which come by them ; and that although this new and living way were but lately discovered , yet it was that which was alwayes designed by god , foreseen by the patriarchs , foretold by the prophets , and longed for by good men as the consolution of israel : and it could be no more disparagement to moses and the prophets to yield to the glories of the kingdom of the messias , than it is to the stars not to be seen when the light of the sun appears . but besides these , there were some among them capable of being wrought upon by other kind of arguments , such i mean , who out of a sudden transport of zeal , and being convinced by the miraculous operations of the holy ghost , had declared themselves christians , but yet retained a secret love to their sins , and the pleasures of this world : these were the persons whom the apostle , not without reason , expresses the greatest jealousie of , as in danger of apostasie : and therefore in many places of this epistle , he represents to them the dreadful consequences of such an apostasie , for it was no less than crucifying the son of god afresh and putting him to an open shame ; it was counting the blood of the covenant wherewith they were sanctified an unholy thing , and doing despight unto the spirit of grace ; nay it was not only crucifying , but treading under foot the son of god ; and therefore he bids them consider , what punishment such persons would deserve at the hands of god into which they must fall , and what hopes there could be of pardon for those who so openly rejected the only means of obtaining it ; for if they did herein sin wilfully after they had received the knowledge of the truth , there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin , but a certain fearful looking for of judgement , and fiery indignation which shall devour the adversaries . but he not only sets before them the sad effects of apostasie , but as one that loved their souls , and designed to prevent their ruine , he gives them the best advice and counsel against it : he knew well enough , it was not the dissatisfaction of mens reason , which was the ground of their infidelity : but , as mens more open designs are governed by such springs which are least discovered ; so , whatever these warping christians might pretend , as to zeal for the law , and their ancient religion , the bottom of all was a principle of infidelity , not arising from want of sufficient reason to convince them , but from a close and secret love of sin which made them willing to quarrel with what ever was so repugnant to it , as the doctrine of christ. to this end , he puts them in mind of the case of their fore-fathers in the wilderness , who wanted no arguments to convince them of gods goodness and providence ; yet nothing would satisfie them , but they were still murmuring and complaining , till at last god sware in his wrath that they should not enter into his rest . and since you all acknowledge , they had reason enough to be satisfied , but out of an obstinate and stubborn humour hardned their hearts in the day of temptation in the wilderness ; take heed brethren , saith the apostle , lest there be in any of you such an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living god ; and do not look upon this advice as vain and needless to you that are called the believing iews , but you have cause to be very watchful over one another , especially in this tempting age , exhorting one another daily while it is called to day , lest any of you be hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . as though he had said to them , you who now glory in the name of believers , and are hitherto as forward as any in the profession of christianity , do not think your selves to be above the need of any helps to confirm your faith , and to arm you against the assaults of temptations , for your very security may betray you ; but consider the sin that doth so easily beset you on every side , the various artifices it makes use of to deceive men , and when it hath once gotten admission , how strangely it bewitches and infatuates the minds of men , how unwilling they are to be convinced of their sins , how much more unwilling to part with them , and how naturally the love of sin brings men to infidelity , and then you will see how great reason there is , why you should be exhorting one another daily while it is called to day , lest any of you be hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . in which words , are these three things considerable . 1. the danger they are in of being hardned through the deceitfulness of sin , who have the most powerful motives and engagements against it . 2. the manner whereby sin doth prevail upon men to harden them , through the deceitfulness of sin . 3. the care that all christians ought to have to prevent being hardned through the deceitfulness of sin : lest any of you , &c. 1. the danger men are in of being hardned through the deceitfulness of sin , though they have the most powerful motives and engagements against it . for never any persons had greater arguments against returning to the practice of sin , than these to whom this epistle was written . they had embraced among the first principles of the doctrine of christ , the foundation of repentance from dead works , and of faith towards god , of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of hands ( for the miraculous gifts of the holy ghost ) and of the resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgement . and what can we suppose to have greater force and efficacy to restrain men from sin , than what is contained in these fundamentals of christianity ? but we shall find that no motives have ever been great enough to restrain those from sin , who have secretly loved it , and only sought pretences for the practice of it . such is the frame and condition of humane nature considered in it self , so great are the advantages of reason and consideration for the government of our actions , so much stronger are the natural motives to vertue that to vice , that they who look no farther , would expect to find the world much better than it is . for why should we suppose the generality of mankind to betray so much folly , as to act unreasonably and against the common interest of their own kind ? as all those do , that yield to the temptations of sin : for if we set aside the consideration of a divine law , to sin is nothing else but to act foolishly and inconsiderately . but on the other side , if men first look into the practice of the world , and there observe the strange prevalency of vice , and how willing men are to defend as well as to commit it ; they would be apt to imagine that either there is no such thing as reason among men , or that it hath very little influence upon their actions ; and that the talk of vertue was first found out by some great enemy to the felicity of mankind . such different apprehensions would men have from the different wayes of beholding the picture of humane nature ; either as it is in its own frame , or as it is to be seen in the world. they who have with the greatest judgement and care searched into the nature and first principles of humane societies , have all agreed that the chief end and design of men in joyning together was , for the mutual benefit and advantage of each other ; and that in order to this , certain laws of iustice , equity , mercy , truth , gratitude , temperance , as well as of subjection to government , ought to be inviolably observed by men . and since these things have the universal consent of mankind to be for their general good , how comes it to pass , that men being joyned in these societies for such ends , make so little conscience of the practice of them ? how come so many to live , as it were , in open defiance to these fundamental laws of nature ? how come others , only to make use of the pretence of vertue to deceive , and of honesty and integrity to cover the deepest dissimulation ? if they be not good , why are they pretended ? if they are good , why are they not practised ? so that whether we consider mankind in it self , or in society ; we find the motives to vertue to be much more weighty , and considerable than those to sin ; and yet that the practice of men is directly contrary . but it may be said , that all this might happen in the world for want of wit and education to polish and improve the natural faculties of mens minds , and to direct and encourage the practice of vertue . i wish the world had not so many instances that men of the greatest wit have not been men of the best morals ; but if wit , and education , and philosophy had been the most effectual means to reclaim men from sin , where should we have looked more for the flourishing of vertue , than in greece and rome ? and yet in those times , when all the accomplishments of wit were at the highest in those places , the manners of men were sunk into the greatest filth of debauchery . it would make one astonished to read the admirable discourses of their philosophers , and to consider the strange height that eloquence and wit were arrived to among their orators and poets ; and then to compare the account given of the manners of the gentile world , not only by their own satyrists , but by the apostles in their several epistles : what a monstrous catalogue of sins do we meet with in the first chapter to the romans ? of sins of so deep a dye , and of so horrid a nature , and such an inventory of all sorts of wickedness , that one might imagine the apostle had been rather describing some vision of hell than the seat of the roman empire . to the same purpose he speaks of the corinthians and ephesians , who thought themselves behind none of the greeks of that age in the breeding then most in vogue ; but we need not instance in particulars , when s. peter calls it in general the will of the gentiles , to live in lasciviousness , lusts , excess of wine , revellings and banquetings , as well as abominable idolatries ; and s. iohn in short saith , the whole world lyeth in wickedness . it might be worth our while to consider how so universal a degeneracy of manners should happen in those ages , when men pretended more to wit and learning , than they had done in any time before . and for this , it were very unreasonable to assign any cause that were equally common to all other ages , such as the corruption of human nature ; which , how great soever it be , is the same at all times ; neither do i think it reasonable to lay it wholly on the bad examples of the teachers of vertue , knowing how malicious the worst of men are in endeavouring to make those who seem to be better , to be as bad as themselves : but there are some peculiar reasons for it , and i wish they had been only proper to those times : as , 1. separating religion and morality from each other . when their religion was placed in some solemn rites , and pompous ceremonies , and costly sacrifices ; but all the matters of morality were confined to their schools , there to be enquired after by those that had leisure and curiosity for them . as though god were more concerned for the colour , and age , and pomp of their sacrifices , for the gestures and shews of their devotion ; than for the purity of their hearts , the sincerity of their minds , or the holiness of their lives . when once the people had swallowed that pernicious principle , that morality was no part of their religion , they had no great regard to the good or evil of their actions , as long as a little charge , and four looks , and going to their temples at certain times were thought sufficient to expiate their sins . and they were much more encouraged in wickedness , when the gods they worshipped were represented on the stage as acting all manner of villanies : and no doubt , they thought it a great comfort to them in their debaucheries , that their gods were as good fellows as themselves . and what could all the precepts of philosophers , or sayings of wise men signifie to those who were so far from looking on vertue as any necessary part of their religion , that they thought those fit to be worshipped for gods , whom they never believed to have been good men ? 2. when they had thus rendred vertue unnecessary , by making it no part of their religion , the next thing was to make it appear ridiculous ; which was a certain way to make fools out of love with it ; who do not consider , what is fit to be laughed at , but what is so . when socrates at athens undertook with many sharp and cutting ironies to reprove the vices of his age ; and with a great deal of wit and reason to perswade men to the sober practice of vertue , the licentious people knew not what to do with him , for they were not able to withstand the force of his arguments ; at last aristophanes ( having a comical wit whereby he was able to make any thing seem ridiculous although he knew very well the wisdom and learning of socrates ; yet ) to please and humour the people , he brings him upon the stage , and represents his grave instructions after such a manner , as turn'd all into a matter of laughter to the people of athens : which did more mischief to the reputation of vertue among them , than the taking away his life did . for , his dying convinced the people he was in good earnest , and brought a great veneration to his memory ; whereas the other exposed him only to scorn and contempt ; and the people were made judges whether it were with cause or no : who besides their ignorance and want of judgement , were too much parties to be judges . this is the method which men take , when they set their wits against vertue and goodness ; they know it is impossible to argue men out of it ; but it is very easie by ridiculous postures , and mimical gestures , and profane similitudes , to put so grave and modest a thing as vertue is out of countenance , among those who are sure to laugh on the other side . i do not think such things can signifie any thing to wise men ; but when was the world made up of such ? and therefore it signifies very much to the mischief of those , who have not the courage to love despised vertue ; nor to defend a cause that is laughed down . and to these i may now add , 3. the bad examples of others , especially of those to whom it belonged to teach and encourage vertue , above others . no man will pretend , that it is ground enough for him to do a thing meerly because he sees another do it ; yet in all ages men have seen and complained that the power of examples hath outdone that of laws . some that think themselves more subtle than others , question whether those mean what they say , who speak one thing and do another ; and therefore they will do what they think the others mean ; which were a good plea if their actions were better than their words . others think , that all discourses of vertue , and honesty , and true honour , are meer matter of talk for men to entertain some idle hours with , and that men are universally agreed in nothing but in speaking well and doing ill . these look on vertue as a kind of phoenix , a thing often talked of , and believed by some , but never seen by any : but such find all things so very bad at home , that out of charity to themselves , they believe the whole world to be like them . others have so much natural modesty and sense of shame that they have not the courage to commit a great wickedness , unless they were hardned to it by the example of greater sinners before them . but the most common reason of the prevalency of example is , that men find in themselves a strong propensity and inclination to do evil , and are willing to meet with such a pretence for committing it , that they do but as others do ; and therefore i cannot think that bare example were enough to corrupt the world if there were not some antecedent inclination in humane nature to the practice of evil . for since there is less reason to follow bad examples than good , why should one prevail more than the other in the world , if there were nothing but the bare example to move ? but that inclination being considered , we may easily give an account of the ill consequence which the bad examples of those who are to direct and encourage others in vertue , must needs be of to the rest of mankind . xenophon was not without reason so much displeased , when he saw some of the best of socrates his disciples , make their court to dionysius in sicilie ; knowing how inconsistent the reputation of vertue is , with the very suspicion of flattery : and that nothing makes great men more suspicious of vertue , than when they see philosophers become flatterers , and carrying on the restless designs of ambition under the pretence of teaching the art of contentment to others . it was this which made the very name of them become so odious at rome , that even vertue it self was hated for their sakes : so that the very teachers of vertue contributed to the increase of vice . especially , when by their endless disputes & wranglings about words & terms of art , they made the people suspect they did but play prizes before them ; and only pretended to quarrel , but were well enough agreed to cheat and deceive them . upon such grounds as these , all the motives to vertue contained in the writings and instructions of philosophers lost their due force and efficacy on the minds of the people , who were rather more hardned in their sins by these disadvantages which attended the means that were used to reclaim them from the practice of them . but when all other motives proved ineffectual by these disadvantages , what could be more reasonably expected , than that the motives of the gospel should prevail with men , being of so great weight in themselves , and recommended with so much advantage to the world , by the examples of those who delivered them ? the great arguments of christianity against the practice of sin are not drawn from any uncertain topicks , or nice and curious speculations ; but from the influence mens good or evil actions in this world will have upon their happiness or misery in another . and what concerns another state is revealed with much more clearness , and confirmed by stronger evidence , and enforced by more moving considerations , than ever it was before among the best and wisest of the gentiles . the doctrine of christianity is plain and peremptory in this matter , that god will render to every man according to his works : and that the wrath of god is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men . and however prone men are to be deceived with vain words , yet let them look to themselves , god will not be mocked , ( however men may be ) for because of these things the wrath of god will come upon the children of disobedience . no sacrifices , no prayers , no penances , no vows and promises will keep off this wrath of god without a hearty repentance and timely reformation . never any religion or institution in the world made it so much its business to keep men from doing evil , and to perswade them to do good , as the christian doth . the apostles thought it the greatest contradiction to their profession , for any men to be called christians , and to live in the practice of their former sins , let the time past of your life suffice you , saith s. peter , to have wrought the will of the gentiles , i. e. that time past when you were no christians . to be a christian then was all one as of a loose , profane , dissolute person to become sober , religious , exact in his conversation to put on christ , was but another phrase , for making no provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof ; to learn christ , was all one as to put off as concerning the former conversation the old man , which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts ; and to put on the new man , which after god is created in righteousness and true holiness . those were the blessed dayes of christianity , when it was no hard matter to understand what it was to be a christian ; when the niceties of disputes , and the subtle artifices of men of corrupt minds had not yet debauched the notion of christianity , to reconcile it with the lusts of men . to be a christian then , was not to be versed in the subtilties of the schools ; or to be able to swallow contradictions without chewing them ; or to be as fierce and earnest for every doubtful opinion and uncertain custome , as if the substance of christianity were like epicurus his world made up of a great number of very small and restless atomes . to be a christian , was not to fight for the faith , but to live by it ; not to quarrel for good works , but to practise them ; in short , to be a christian was to depart from iniquity and to do good , to be meek , and humble , and patient , and peaceable towards all men ; to be charitable , and kind ; to be sober and temperate in all things , to be holy , sincere , and innocent in his actions towards god and men . this is the true idea of a christian , and not a meer idea ; but such as every one that owns himself to be a christian is bound by the most sacred vow of christianity in baptism to be like ; so that if either the consideration of their own eternal welfare , or the nature , design , or honour of christianity , or their own most solemn engagements can restrain men from the practice of sin , we see that those who are christians , are under the most powerful motives and engagements against it . but yet such there have been ( i wish i could not say such there are ) who have broken through all these things , and have been hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . one might have thought , if any persons had been out of this danger , they had been such as the apostle makes this exhortation to ; who had seen the miraculous operations of the holy ghost for confirming the doctrine and motives of christianity ; nay who had themselves been made partakers of the holy ghost , and had tasted of this heavenly gift , and of the good word of god , and of the powers of the world to come : who had testified their repentance for their former sins in the most publick and solemn manner , and had entred into the most sacred vow of baptism , never to return more to the practice of it : who had done this in the heat of persecution , which they endured with courage and rejoycing ; yet after all these things , the apostle expresses a more than ordinary jealousie lest any of them should fall away , and their hearts be hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . when critias and alcibiades had forsaken the paths of vertue , which they seemed very forward in , while they continued under the instructions of socrates , xenophon saith , there were some that contended that they never had any vertue at all , because those who once had it could never lose it : but for his part , he saith , he was by no means satisfied with their opinion : for as men by discontinuing bodily exercises make themselves uncapable of doing those things which they were most expert in before ; so men by the neglect of improving their minds in vertue ; and giving way to the temptations of honour and pleasure ( which was the case of critias and alcibiades ) may by degrees lose the force of all the motives to vertue and consequently the vertue it self . it is agreed by all men who understand any thing in these matters , that even grace , although it be the effect of a divine power on the minds of men , is of it self capable of being lost ; the great dispute is , whether it may be lost past all recovery ? but as we have no more reason to set any bounds to the grace of god in mens recovery , than as to their first repentance ; so we ought to consider , that there is such a falling away mentioned by the apostle , of those who have been once enlightned , of which , he saith , it is impossible to renew them again to repentance : and that scripture deals with all persons in its exhortations , and adomonitions , and threatnings , as if they were capable of falling to the utmost degree : and to suppose that thing impossible to be done , which the gravest counsels , and the most vehement perswasions are used to keep men from the doing of , is to make a severe reflection on the wisdom of them that give them . and the apostle here leaves none of them out ; but bids the most forward believers beware of an evil heart of unbelief ; and those who had been most softned by repentance , take heed of being hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . so that we see , how powerful soever the motives to vertue are ; how great soever the engagements against sin ; yet the apostle thought it needful to give them warning against the deceitfulness of sin . 2. but what kind of deceitfulness is this in sin , that the best and wisest men are so much caution'd against it ? what irresistible charms doth it use to draw men into its snares ? with what infusion doth it so far intoxicate mankind to make them dote upon it , against the convictions of reason , and dictates of conscience , and the power of perswasion , and the most solemn and repeated vows and promises against it ? nay to make men pursue it , to such a degree as rather to be damned for it than forsake it ? if we were to consider this only by reason , we could imagine nothing less than that sin at one time or other hath laid such a mighty obligation on mankind , that rather than part with it , the greater part of men , out of meer gratitude , would be content to suffer for ever with it : or , that it is a thing so absolutely necessary to the comfort of mens lives , that they cannot live one good day without it : whereas in truth , the whole race of mankind hath suffered extreamly and continually by it : and it is so far from being necessary to the comfort of mens lives , that the greatest troubles and vexations of life have risen from it ; and men may enjoy far greater satisfaction , and more real contentment ; and more noble , and solid , and lasting pleasures if they did utterly renounce and forsake it . but this still makes the difficulty so much the greater , how it should so far be witch and infatuate the far greatest part of mankind ; and of those who know how dearly they must suffer for it in another world ? and yet to assoil this difficulty , we have only two accounts to give how sin comes to deceive mankind so generally , so fatally ; and those are 1. by subtle insinuations ; 2. by false reasonings . 1. by subtle insinuations . the great masters of pleading in ancient times have told us , that there are some causes which are never to be managed by plain and downright reasonings , ( because they are too weak to bear that method of handling ) and then they bid men have a care in their beginning , of coming close to the business ; but they must fetch a compass about , and by secret arts and degrees insinuate themselves into the good opinion of the judges before they are aware of it . this is the very method which is made use of by the deceitfulness of sin ; it dares not stand the examination of any close reasoning , for all its artifices would presently be discover'd then ; but it makes use of these arts of insinuation . 1. it endeavours to raise a good opinion of it self by false colours and representations of things . 2. when it hath done that , it draws men on by degrees to the practice of it . 3. when men are engaged in the practice of sin , then it represents to them how much it is their own interest to defend it , and so brings them from the counsel of the ungodly , and the way of sinners , to the seat of the scornful . 1. it endeavours to raise a good opinion of it self by false colours and representations of things . the first precept of insinuation is to remove prejudice ; for while that continues , all that can be said will be of no force . while men look on sin as vile , and loathsome ; as mean and unworthy of a man ; as inconsistent with the peace and contentment of their minds , so long temptations are easily resisted : all arts must therefore be used to make it appear with all the address and flattery which is most apt to entice a poor deluded sinner . then , the fetters and shackles which it brings to enslave men with , must be looked on and admired as ornaments ; it s most sordid and filthy pleasures must be thought great and manly ; and a little present honour and advantage appear more valuable than an eternal state of happiness and glory . these are things we should think it very hard for men to be deceived with ; and yet every day we find they are so ; and which is far more , they are ready to take it very ill of those who go about to undeceive them . in other cases , if a man tells another , that he is like to be deceived with a false and counterfeit jewel instead of a true one ; or to buy a bad title to an estate instead of a good one , he thinks himself very much obliged to him for his fidelity and kindness ; only in the case of mans beloved sins , although they will prove the greatest cheats in the world to him , yet he cannot well endure to be told so ; but his blood is apt to fire and enflame him into a passion against him that doth it ; and although it be meant with the greatest innocency and kindness , it is ready to be interpreted to be only the effect of malice and ill will. for now sin hath insinuated it self so far into him , that no one can be thought a friend to the person , who is not so to his sins ; and they are then come to that height of friendship and community of interests , to have common friends and common enemies . now all the discourses of the freedom , and pleasure , and satisfaction of a mans mind in the practice of vertue appear very dull and insipid things ; and fit only for learned fools or philosophers to talk of . nothing deserves the name of liberty with them , but a power of doing what they please . what nonsense and contradiction doth it seem to them for those to be accounted free , who are under any bonds or restraints ? no matter to them , whether they be from god , or nature , from reason or conscience , as long as they are restraints , they look on them as inconsistent with their notion of liberty . and next to those who threaten men with punishments in another world for what they do amiss in this , they account those the greatest fools that first found out the distinction of good and evil , and just and unjust in the actions of men , what fools ( say they ) were they to fasten dishonourable and reproachful names on some of the most pleasant and beneficial actions of life ? for thus a man is debarred that noble and manly vice of drunkenness for fear of losing the reputation of sobriety ; and the extravagancies of lust , for fear of doing injury to his neighbours bed ; and supposing a man hath never so much advantages in his hands to enrich himself by defrauding another , yet he must not do it , because although an estate be in the keeping of a fool , yet another must not be a knave to get it from him . thus do these miserable slaves to vice pitty the weakness of those who have so little wit ( as they think ) not to understand the liberty they enjoy : but thus do mad men pitty the dulness of those that are in their wits , that do not sing , and rant , and despise the world , as they do : and fancy themselves to be kings and princes , while they are tyed fast in their chains , and lye in straw . and upon such grounds as these , the most rude and barbarous indians did better understand the liberty of mankind , than the most civilized nations . for all civility is a debarring men of some part of this natural liberty , i. e. of those things which men have a power to do ; and upon this ground all antient law-givers and wise men , who by degrees brought several nations to order and government , and to live by laws , ought to be hated as the greatest tyrants and usurpers upon the liberties of mankind : and the natural consequence of this would be the overthrow of all laws , and order , and government in the world. but if there must be some restraints upon men , then we are to consider what restraints are just and reasonable , within whose bounds we are to contain our selves ; and whatever tends to the dishonour of god , to the injury of others , or to our own destruction , it is all the reason in the world we should abstain from . and if men would but do this , they would be kept from the practice of sin : and so this imaginary notion of a boundless liberty will appear to be only one of the false colours that sin puts upon evil actions , on purpose to tempt men to the commission of them . but there is another poison which more subtilly and dangerously insinuates it self into the hearts of men , and by which sin gets the possession there , and that is the love of pleasure ; i do not mean the pleasure of the mind , or the pleasure of a good conscience , for there is no danger in these ; but it is the love of sensual pleasure which is most apt to ensnare men in the practice of sin . it is under this representation chiefly , that sin deceives , betrayes , entangles , bewitches , destroyes the souls of men : it is this which fills the imagination , and darkens the understanding with filthy steams and vapours , and hurries a man on with the impetuous violence of passions , without considering the mischievous consequence which attends it , either as to his honour in this world , or his salvation in another . this danger which attends the pleasures of sin was well represented in one of the eastern parables , of a man violently pursued by wild beasts to the top of a precipice , where there was a tree growing on the side of a great lake , and at the foot of it a prodigious serpent lying ready to devour him ; the man being in this astonishment gets upon the first branch of the tree he could reach ; but he was no sooner there , but his horrour increased at the apprehension of his danger on every side of him ; and that which added the most to his consternation was that the very branch on which he stood was almost eaten off ; while he was in this terrible fright , he looks up to the top of the tree , and there sees some wild honey trickling down the body of the tree , which he was so taken with , and so pleased with the sweetness of it , that he forgets his danger , till of a sudden the branch breaks , and down he drops into the lake without recovery . this is the true representation of the pleasures of sin , which men are so much entertained with , that they never consider the hazard they run , and scarce think of their danger till they drop into that state of misery from whence there is no redemption . but besides these soft and voluptuous sinners , ( who are easily deceived and hardly drawn out of the snares they fall into ) there are others of a more busie , restless , and designing temper , and to these sin appears under another shape to deceive them , with all the advantages of external splendour and greatness . and thus they who possibly might escape the baits of pleasure , are carryed away by the more plausible temptations of riches and honour . it is supposed by some , that when the devil tempted christ with the offers of the kingdoms of this world , if he would fall down and worship him , he did not know , who he was , but had a mind to try him by the most probable way of discovering what was within him : but surely the devil thought him some extraordinary person , or else he would never have made so large an offer at first , viz. of no less than all the kingdoms of the world , whereas very much less than one of these hath served to corrupt and debauch the minds of many who have been great pretenders to piety and vertue . it was indeed somewhat a hard condition the devil joyned with his offer , to fall down and worship him , because he then designed not only a victory but a triumph ; but with others he conceals the condition and draws them on by degrees , still rising higher and higher in his temptations , thereby feeding and enlarging their desires ; till the love of this world hath gotten such an entire possession of their hearts , that they scarce ever in good earnest think of another till their souls are passing into it . and then it may be , they sadly reflect on their own folly , in that they have preferred the deluding scenes and pompous shews of worldly greatness , before the compleat and endless felicity of another life . but it very often happens , that it is not so long , as till their leaving this world , that men come to understand the restless folly of ambition . for the things of this world are like epicurus his atoms , alwayes moving and justling one against another ; and one mans ambition serves to supplant anothers , and they who cannot raise themselves may yet help to ruine others ; and oft-times those very designs by which they most hoped to advance themselves , prove the occasion of their fall and destruction . the mahumetans have a story to this purpose ; in the time of iesus three men in a journey hapned to find a treasure ; but being hungry , they sent one of their number to buy provisions ; he consults how he might get this treasure to himself , and for that end resolves to poison their meat , the other two agreed to share it between them , and to kill the third assoon as he returned ; which they did , and themselves soon after dyed of the poisoned meat . iesus passing by with his disciples , said , this is the condition of this world ! see what the love of it hath brought these men to ! wo be to him that looks for any other usage from it . this is the first way whereby sin doth insinuate into the minds of them ; viz. by false colours and representations of things . 2. but when sin hath so far insinuated it self to bring men to a better opinion of it , it doth not presently hurry them on to the greatest height of wickedness ; but leads them gently and by easie steps and degrees , lest they should start back presently with the fright of some dreadful sin . which will appear if we consider , how one comes to be corrupted by sin that hath had the advantage of a modest and vertuous education : if those who design to debauch him speak out at first in plain words what they aim at , a sudden horrour seizes upon him at the apprehension of it , and it may be he hates their company for ever after . but there is so much a sense of shame left in humane nature , that men dare not tempt others to sin , at least at first , in plain terms ; and the same temptation which being represented one way would affright , appearing with greater art and dissimulation may easily prevail . and sin is a thing , that men hate to be forced , but too much love to be cheated into the practice of it . how doth a young sinner struggle with himself , and would if it were possible get out of the noise of his own conscience , when he hath offered force and violence to it ! he is very uneasie to himself , and wisheth a thousand times he had never committed the sin , rather than to feel such horrour and disquiet in his mind , upon the sense of it . but if this doth not make him presently repent , and resolve never to be guilty again of the same folly , ( as in all reason it ought to do ) then by time and company he wears off the impression of his guilt , and the next occasion of sinning makes him forget the wounds of his conscience , and the smart he endured before ; and the fresh temptation revives the sense of his former pleasure , and then he is able to withstand no longer ; and thus by repeating the same acts , by degrees he becomes a very hopeful sinner , and the reports of his conscience are but like that of sounds at a greater distance ; they lessen still more and more , till at last they cannot be heard at all . and when he hath thus mastered his conscience , as to any one sin , which at first he was fearful of committing , and hath found such an ice upon his conscience as will bear him , he goes on still farther and farther , till nothing be too hard for him . he that at first started and trembled at the hearing of an horrid oath , now can hear whole volleys of them discharged without shrinking ; and can bear his part in that hellish concert : and he that was so hardly brought to be wicked himself , may in a little time ( as some men are strange proficients in wickedness ) tempt and encourage others to the practice of it . 3. and when men are arrived to an habitual continuance in sin , then for their present ease and security , they cast about for any wayes to defend it . for whatever is become of conscience , they may have such a sense of reputation left , that they would not be thought fools , and be contemned and despised by others . but although it be impossible for such to avoid scorn and contempt among all those who have any true regard to vertue or honour , yet they will endeavour rather to defend themselves in doing ill , than recover their reputation by repentance . and because it would puzzle the wits of the most subtle and concerned persons to find out pretences and excuses for some kinds of sins ; therefore the easiest way is to represent all the world as alike bad , although not alike cunning ; and although it may be not in the same way , yet in something as ill in it self , but more agreeable to their age , temper , and condition of life . thus the greatest sinners love to herd themselves in a croud , and think it some poor defence for their sins , that they would have others believed to be as bad as they : as though a man were in the less danger by the plague , because it is a general contagion . but if it happen that some persons in the world should have any reputation for vertue among them , then all the weaknesses , and indiscretions of such , are sure to be enquired after , that so what is accounted vertue , may be thought only natural sourness of temper , or want of wit to be otherwise . but if any such should be found in a miscarriage , what joy and triumph doth this make ? what load of circumstances and aggravations do they lay upon them ; as though one single miscarriage of such persons were to weigh down a thousand enormities of theirs . and because it is impossible to defend their extravagant courses by reason , the only way left for them is to make satyrical invectives against reason ; as though it were the most uncertain , foolish and ( i had almost said ) unreasonable thing in the world : and yet they pretend to shew it in arguing against it : but it is pitty such had not their wish , to have been beasts rather than men , ( if any men can make such a wish that have it not already ) that they might have been less capable of doing mischief among mankind ; by representing all the excellencies of humane nature , which are reason , and vertue , and religion , but as more grave and solemn fopperies . but how hard are such men put to defend their vices , that cannot do it , without trampling under foot the most noble perfections of their own nature ! these however are the more ingenuous sort of sinners , that yield reason and religion to be of vertues side ; but there are others that make use of some shallow pretences of reason to excuse themselves in their sins : which is the second way whereby sin deceives men , viz. 2. by false reasonings : and those taken either , 1. from their present impunity : 2. or from their future repentance . 1. from their present impunity in sinning , men are apt to deceive themselves into a continuance in it . this is the account the wise man hath long since given of mens being hardned in sin ; because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily ; therefore the hearts of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil . it seems somewhat hard to understand the consequence , why men should grow more desperately wicked , because god gives them a space to repent ? is it necessary that if god doth punish at all , he must do it presently ? that would seem to be rage and fury , or a necessity of nature , and not justice . cannot judgement be duly executed , unless the judge break open the prison doors , and torment the malefactor in his chains ? why may not god respite the punishment of sinners , when he pleases , to another state , since he hath declared that he hath appointed a day wherein he will judge the world in righteousness ? what incongruity is there in this to any principle of reason or justice ? will not this time of gods patience , be a sufficient vindication of his lenity and goodness in order to the drawing men to repentance ? and will not the day of his future judgement be a full vindication of his justice ? will not the insupportable honours of a miserable eternity discover far more gods abhorrence of sin , than present sufferings in this life , which , the greater they are , the less they continue ? but all this false way of reasoning ariseth from that gross piece of self-flattery that such do imagine god to be like themselves ; i. e. as cruel and revengeful as they are : and they presently think , if any persons did offend them at the rate that sinners are said to offend god , and they had so much power in their hands to punish them as he has , without any fear of revenge upon themselves , they would be sure to dispatch them presently ; but because they see god doth it not , therefore they conclude that all the talk of gods anger and hatred against sin is without ground : and from hence they take encouragement to sin . so the psalmist saith in gods name , these things thou didst and i kept silence ; and they presently took his silence for consent ; for it follows , and thou thoughtest that i was altogether such a one as thy self : but the psalmist adds , how ill he took this at mens hands , and that he would one day make them know the difference between the forbearance of sinners , and the love of their sins ; but i will reprove thee , and set them in order before thee . and therefore he bids them be better advised , and consider this while they forget god , lest he tear them in pieces , and there be none to deliver . 2. men are hardned by the deceitfulness of sin , from the hopes of their future repentance . for that is one of the great cheats of sin , that every one thinks he can repent and shake off his sins when he hath a mind to do it . sin doth not lye like a heavy weight upon their backs , so that they feel the load of it ; and therefore they think it is easily removed , if they would set themselves to it . most of those that believe a god and a judgement to come , and yet continue in sin , do it upon this presumption , that one time or other , they shall leave their sins , and change the course of their lives before they go out of this world . they have not only thoughts of repentance , but general purposes of doing the acts of it at one time , or other ; but that time is not come , and god knows whether it ever will or no. for sin entices them and draws them on still ; and when any motions towards repentance come into their minds , that presently suggests , it is time enough yet ; why so much haste ? there will be trouble enough in it when you must do it , what need you bring it so fast upon you ? are not you likely to hold out a great many years yet ? what pitty it is to lose so much of the pleasure of life , while you are capable of enjoying it ? there is old age coming , and when you will be good for nothing else , then will be time enough to grow wise and to repent . but o foolish sinner , who hath bewitched thee to hearken to such unreasonable suggestions as these are ! for 3. in the last place , it ought to be our present , our constant , our greatest care to prevent being hardned by the deceitfulness of sin . for to this end , it is not enough to consider of it at one time or other in our lives , but we must be exhorting one another daily , while it is called to day , lest any of us be hardned through the witchcraft and deceitfulness of sin : and if it be so much the duty of others to shew that regard to one anothers souls ; how much more doth it become us to do it , who expect to be called to an account at the great day for the discharge of our trust in this matter ? it is a dreadful passage we read of in the prophet ezekiel , and enough to make our ears to tingle at the repeating it , when i say unto the wicked , o wicked man thou shalt surely dye , if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way , that wicked man shall dye in his iniquity , but his blood will i require at thine hand . we would fain believe this to have been some particular and extraordinary commission given to the prophet by god himself , which doth not concern us ; for what will become of us , if not only our own faults ( which god knows are too many ) but other mens shall be charged upon us ? when either through neglect , or flattery , or fear of displeasing , or for any mean and unworthy ends , we betray our trust , and instead of preventing prove the occasion of mens being too much hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . but although we neither pretend to be prophets , nor apostles , yet it is our office to take care of the souls of men , and can we discharge that , as we ought to do , if we do not with all faithfulness warn men of the danger they run into through the deceitfulness of sin ? it were happy for us if we could say , that all the lords people are holy ; for then we should have nothing to do , but to praise and commend their vertues , which were an easie and a delightful task : but what pleasure is it to rake into the sores , or to reprove the vices of a degenerate age ? to be thought troublesome and impertinent , if we do our duty ; and men of no conscience , if we do it not ? but our work is neither to libel our auditors , nor to flatter them ; neither to represent them as better , nor worse than they are ; nor to charge them with more guilt than their own consciences do charge them with : but our business is , to beseech and exhort them by the mercies of god , by the sufferings of christ , by the love and tenderness they have for their immortal souls , that they would to day , while it is called to day , take heed lest they be hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . and that will appear to be very reasonable on these considerations . 1. that none are out of the danger of it , while they live in this tempting world. what need have we to take care of being deceived by that , which hath been too hard for the best , the wisest , and the greatest of men ? man in his best state , even that of innocency , was deceived by the insinuations of sin : when there was no matter within for the temptation to work upon , no reason suggested that could move a common understanding , no interest or advantage that could sway him ; no other moving cause appears to us of that fatal apostasie of adam , but either the imagination of some unknown pleasure , or the bare curiosity of trying an experiment what the effects would be of tasting the forbidden fruit . and ever since so general hath the corruption of mankind been , so successful have the artifices and deceits of sin been in the world , that the best of men have not wholly escaped them ; but have sometimes fallen in those very graces which have been most remarkable in them , as abraham in his trust in god , moses in his meekness , iob in his patience , peter in his zeal for christ. what cause then have others to look to themselvs ! if wisdom and experience would have secured men , we should have thought , of all men in the world , solomon the least in danger of being deceived by the insinuations of sin , who had given such excellent cautions against those very snares he fell into himself ; and that to such a degree , that his case is left disputable to this day , whether he ever recovered by repentance or no. what numbers are there upon record of those mighty men , who have made the earth to tremble at the noise of their armies ; who have led kings in chains after their triumphal chariots , and have been served by those whom others have adored ; yet have , notwithstanding all this , been enslaved themselves by some mean lust , and destroyed by the power of an effeminate passion ? what can be strong enough to resist those charms , which neither innocency , nor wisdom , nor power are sufficient security against ? nothing , but the grace of god , and continual care of our selves . 2. the less men suspect their danger , the more cause they have to be afraid of it . none are more fatally deceived by sin , than those who apprehend no danger in it , or think they can escape it when they please . how strangely infatuated are those through the deceitfulness of sin , who think with themselves , that after they have spent their lives in sin , they shall make god amends by a few dying groans , and such a repentance as can have no amendment of life ? most men , who are the greatest slaves to their sins , are so much deceived by them , as to think they have them wholly at their command , and can when they please cast them off : and such imaginations keep them faster in subjection to them . for if they did apprehend themselves under such slavery , as really they are , they would grow weary and impatient of the yoak ; whereas now because they are not forced to commit their sins , they suppose they can with ease forsake them . but none are such incurable fools , as they that think themselves wise ; and none are so miserably deceived as they that think themselves too cunning for their sins . if it be so easie to shake off your sins , remember that your condemnation will be so much more just , if you do it not ; for god required no hard thing for you to do : and if it be so easie , why is it not hitherto done ? why do you mock god so often , and pretend every year to repent , and yet are every year as bad , if not worse than other ? why are not the fruits of repentance seen in the amendment of life for one year , or a moneth , or one bare week ? is it not worth while to do so little for him , that hath done so much for you ? methinks , common ingenuity might prevail with men , at least to let god have some part of their lives entire to himself , without interfering with the devil . but therein lyes a great part of the deceitfulness of sin , that it falls out here , as in some malignant diseases , men seldom understand their danger , till they are almost past recovery . 3. none are so likely to be hardned in sin , as those who delay and put off their repentance . for the very putting it off is a sign that sin hath a greater power , than the convictions of conscience : for why should men ever intend to repent , if they did not think it necessary ? and if they think it necessary and yet do it not , it is plain there is something within them stronger than conscience , which keeps them from it . so that he that intends to repent , and yet lives in sin , hath that aggravation of sin above others , that he sins against his conscience all that time . tell me then , o thou subtle sinner , that hopest to be too hard for god and for sin too , by enjoying thy sins as long as thou canst , and then repenting at last , to escape the vengeance of god : dost thou in good earnest intend ever to repent or no ? if thou dost not , never deceive thy self ; god will not accept these pretences and promises instead of real repentance . if thou dost intend it sincerely , what makes thee to intend it ? is it not , that thou art convinced it is much better to be done than not , but canst not find it in thy heart to do it yet ? thou knowest all this while it were much better to leave thy sins , than to live in them , it were far better to be sober , and temperate , and pious , and devout , than to be debauched and profane ; and yet for all this , thou dost not repent , but goest on in the same course . consider then , that this very circumstance deeply aggravates every sin that is committed after it . for it is not a bare neglect of repentance , which thou art guilty of , but a contempt of god and goodness ; it is , not only not repenting , but it is an obstinate and wilful resolution of sinning : for there is no medium between living in sin and forsaking of it ; and nothing deserves the name of repentance , that is short of that . and if thou art so wilful and unreasonable now , as notwithstanding thy resolutions to repent , to live still in thy sins , how canst thou ever hope to repent at last , when thy heart will be so much more hardned by continuance in sin ? 4. lastly , consider the sad condition of those who are hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . they are said in scripture to be past feeling , and to be given over to a reprobate mind , i. e. to have lost all sense of their danger , and of the ill condition they are in ; they despise all means of instruction , and scorn all those who would do them good , and who mean them no other injury but to perswade them to be happy . with what disdain and contempt do those proud and lofty sinners , who are once arrived at this height of wickedness , look down upon all those , who endeavour by reason and scripture to convince them of their sins ! as though it were not possible for any thing to make men seem more ridiculous to them , than to see them concerned to plead the cause of vertue and religion . to what purpose is all this ado about repentance ? why should not men be let alone to do as they think fit ? for let them preach their hearts out , men will do as they please . this is the language of those who are already hardned in their sins ; but god forbid , it should be so of any here present ; who make it our prayer to god to be delivered from hardness of heart , and contempt of his word and commandments . and we have great reason so to do ; for there is no judgement short of hell , like to the being given up to a reprobate sense : for all the most weighty arguments and most forcible perswasions are to such but like showres falling upon a rock , that make some noise and slide off again , but make no impression or entrance into them . god almighty give us all his grace to understand our danger and to repent in time , that none of us be hardned through the deceitfulness of sin . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61608-e140 heb. 10. 32 , 34. heb. 6. 6. 10. 20. 26. 27. heb. 3. 11. 12. heb. 6. 1 , 2. rom. 1. 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32. 1 cor. 6. 10. ephes. 4. 17 , 18. 1 pet. 4. 3. 1 joh. 5. 19. xen. ep . ad aesch. rom. 2. 6. 1. 18. gal. 6. 7. eph. 5. 6. 1 pet. 4. 3. rom. 13. 14. eph. 4. 20 , 21 , 24. heb. 6. 4 , 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . p. 416. heb. 6. 4 , 6. perzoes proleg . 3. c. 10. ad specim . sapient . vet . indorum . mat. 4. 8 , 9. warn . prov. persic . p. 33. eccl. 8. 11. act. 17. 31. psal. 50. 21. v. 22. ezek. 33. 8. eph. 4. 19. rom. 1. 28. of the nature of superstition a sermon preached at st dunstans west, march 31, mdclxxxii / by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1682 approx. 72 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 25 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61578 wing s5614 estc r18667 11939716 ocm 11939716 51250 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61578) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 51250) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 515:31) of the nature of superstition a sermon preached at st dunstans west, march 31, mdclxxxii / by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 46 p. printed for h. mortlock..., london : 1682. reproduction of original in university of pennsylvania library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -colossians ii, 23 -sermons. superstition -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-04 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion of the nature of superstition . a sermon preached at s t dunstans west , march 31. mdclxxxii . by edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean of s. paul's , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . london , printed for h. mortlock at the phoenix in s. paul's church-yard , and at the white hart in westminster-hall , 1682. coloss. 2. 23. which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will-worship , and humility , and neglecting of the body , not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh . saint paul was now a prisoner at rome for the sake of the gospel , when he wrote this epistle to the colossians , but his mind was at liberty ; and the compass of his thoughts and cares was so far from being confined within the walls of a prison , that it reached not only to the churches of asia planted by himself , as those of ephesus and galatia ; but to those which had never seen him , as the colossians and laodiceans . for , saith he , i would that ye knew what great conflict i have for you , and for them at laodicea , and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh . had not he trouble enough with the churches of rome and greece , and those he had conversed with in other parts , but he must take upon him to interpose in the affairs of those churches he had never seen ? but such was the largeness of the apostle's mind , the fervour of his zeal , the extent of his charity , that the care of all the churches was upon him ; but especially those which had been planted by his means , although not by his personal endeavours ; among which , in all probability , this of the colossians was one . for this epaphras whom st. paul calls a faithful minister of christ to them , was imploy'd as an evangelist under him ; and particularly in the cities of laodicea , hierapolis , and colosse , which were not far distant from each other in phrygia ; and for the churches there setled , s. paul testifies , that he had a mighty zeal and concernment : from whence it arose , that hearing of s. pauls imprisonment at rome , he resolves to take a journey thither to acquaint him with the state of those churches , and to desire his advice and direction in the present danger they were in , of being seduced from the simplicity of the gospel , by the plausible insinuations of false teachers , who pretended to give them a more refined systeme of religion , by a composition of law and gospel and philosophy all together . s. paul understanding by him the dangerous circumstances they were in , although epaphras himself was made a fellow-prisoner with him ; as appears by the epistle to philemon , sent at the same time with this ; yet he finds means by tychicus and onesimus to convey this epistle to them . wherein by an admirable art of insinuation , far above the eloquent exordiums of the heathen orators , he lets them understand , how passionately he was concerned for their welfare ; and what an agony he suffered in his own breast for their sakes , lest under some artificial colours and very fair pretences , they should be drawn off from the love and unity and sincerity of the gospel . for after he had told them what conflict he had for them that had not seen his face in the flesh , he immediately adds , that it was , that their hearts might be comforted , being knit together in love , and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding , to the acknowledgment of the mystery of god and of the father and of christ. in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge . and when he hath thus set forth the excellency and sufficiency of the gospel ; he then le ts fall an intimation of his design , and this i say , lest any man should beguile you with enticing words . but lest they should suspect from hence that ill offices had been done them , and they had been misrepresented to s. paul ; in the next verse he tells them , that at that distance , he did rejoice , beholding their order , and the stedfastness of their faith in christ. and therefore exhorts them , as they had received christ jesus the lord , so to walk in him : i. e. to adhere to that faith which they at first embraced ; as he explains it , in the seventh verse . having thus removed all jealousy and suspicion as to their present stedfastness , he doth more openly address himself to them ; in giving them caution against the most dangerous and deceitful errours . beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit , after the tradition of men , after the rudiments of the world , and not after christ. not as though there were the least prejudice to christianity to be imagined by mens searching into the works of god , or the nature of moral actions , or the digesting our own thoughts or conceptions of things , which is all that is understood by true philosophy ; but that the model of religion which they were in so much danger of being deceived by , was made up , partly of philosophical precepts , and partly of jewish traditions and ritual observations ; by which the false teachers endeavoured to corrupt and adulterate the gospel of christ. accordingly in the following discourse , the apostle first disputes against the necessity of keeping the ceremonies of the law , now under the gospel , and sums up the force of it , v. 17. which are a shadow of things to come , but the body is of christ. and having thus dispatched the hardest question about the obligation of the law of moses , he enters upon the debate about other inventions , which they endeavoured to recommend to christians . ( 1. ) about the worshipping of angels , as mediators between god and men ; which was an opinion then generally received among the corrupters of christianity , the gnosticks and judaizing christians ; who were not so vain in their imaginations , to believe them to be supreme and independent deities ; for this they utterly denied ; owning one only supreme god the father of all : but they thought access to him was to be had by the mediation of angels , and therefore they brought in the worship of them . baronius indeed denies , that the gnosticks introduced any worship of angels ; but therein he is justly confuted by some late writers of the roman church . for tertullian condemns the gnosticks for a magical service of angels ; and epiphanius saith , that their impure sacrifices were supposed to be offer'd up by principalities and powers , to the supreme father of all . which doth evidently prove , that the gnosticks did give worship to angels as mediators . and although baronius endeavours likewise to clear the cerinthians from this guilt ( lest the church of rome should be found to tread in their steps ) because cerinthus acknowledged one supreme power above angels , and because he had a bad opinion of the angel which gave the law ; yet , why might not they worship the angels as mediators between that supreme power and them ; and even that angel which gave the law as well as the rest , since they contended for the necessary observation of the law ? but besides , all the judaizing christians were not followers of cerinthus , there being different sects among them ; as appears by irenaeus , epiphanius and others ; and baronius himself grants that the pharisaical jews of that and following ages did worship angels as the host of heaven . and the essens had their angels of prayer ; and made their prayers to the rising sun , whom they looked on as on the rest of the stars , as animated and intelligent beings . and why the judaizing christians should not retain their former superstitions , as well as their other traditions and observations , i do not understand . especially , since theodoret so expresly affirms , that those who then pleaded for the keeping of the law brought in the worship of angels , which custom , he saith , continued a long time in phrygia and pisidia ; and at last the council of laodicea , made a canon against praying to angels . those of the church of rome are so sensible of the force of this testimony of theodoret against their practice , that they are driven to desperate shifts to avoid it . bellarmine saith , that he speaks against the gnosticks ; whereas theodoret mentions only those who were for keeping the law. baronius saith in plain terms , theodoret was mistaken , and that there were no such hereticks then ; but this is so gross , that bellarmin and others contradict him in it . others therefore say , that the worship of angels here spoken against , is the worshipping of them as makers of the world. but that is more than st. paul saith , for he speaks againstthat worship which arises from humility , and nothing so proper for that , as the worshipping them as mediators between god and us . some think it is when angels are preferred before christ , which is likewise more than the apostle saith ; and they who chuse other mediators , by whom god is more accessible by us , do prefer them in use , though not in dignity : others , as the jansenists in their new testament , say it is , when angels are set up as mediators in opposition to christ ; but that cannot be the apostles meaning ; for then his great business would have been to have proved christ to be the true mediator , and not angels ; and if any religious worship of angels had been agreeable with the christian doctrine , the apostle would never have thus in general condemned it , but with such restrictions and limitations as made it to be evil . therefore to avoid these difficulties , some conclude that by the worship of angels is understood such a worship as was introduced by a pretended revelation of angels ; but against this , we have the concurrent testimony of st. chrysostome , st. hierome , st. ambrose , oecumenius , theophylact , who all agree that it is to be understood of the worship given to angels . so impossible it is for those who either give themselves , or justifie and allow the giving by others , any religious worship to angels , to escape falling under the apostles censure , of being seducers and corrupting the gospel of christ. ( 2. ) about stricter abstinence and greater severity of life . for these seducers gave out that the christian churches were yet very defective in this matter : and that there were several societies of men , both among the jews and heathens , which went very far beyond them : as the essens , the pythagoreans , the gymnosophists and others ; who far outstript the christians in watchings and fastings , in the hard usage of their bodies , and a total abstinence from wine and flesh , and other lawful pleasures of life . on which account these false teachers represented the christianity , as yet received in these churches , as too soft and gentle an institution , and not answering the character that was given of it ; but if they had a mind to set it off with advantage , it would be necessary for them to take in some of the strictest precepts of those societies , especially relating to meats and marriage , touch not , taste not , handle not : which they magnified as the greatest instances of true religion , self-denyal , humility , mortification ; without which they despised the christian institution as a mean and ordinary thing , requiring only the belief of some great things done and suffered by jesus christ in judea , and the adhering thereto till death , and doing those offices of humanity and kindness to each other , and those duties of religion to god , which all mankind thought fit and reasonable to be done . but these pretended refiners of christianity , were not contented with such common things ; they must set up for something singular , and extraordinary ; so epiphanius observes of the gnosticks in the beginning , that they condemned marriage , and abstained from flesh , that under these pretences they might draw others into their snares . and likewise of the ebionites , one of the sects of judaizing christians , that they carefully abstained from all flesh , and were every day baptised , and celebrated the eucharist only in water , for fear of being defiled with the taste of wine ; wherein they were followed by the encratitae , aquarij , and several others , who affected something out of the way , as a badge of more than ordinary sanctity . and there are scarce any of those who are mentioned as the authors of great mischief to the church , but were remarkable for something of this nature ; as appears by marcion , montanus , manichaeus , severus , and others . and which is observable , this sort of singularity prevailed no where more , than in these parts of phrygia ; where the encratitae very much encreased and continued so to do in the days of epiphanius . so very little effect had this wise and timely caution , given by the apostle in this place , upon those who were willing to be deceived in that , or following generations . cajetan confesses himself to seek what sort of men those were the apostle discourses against ; but it seems most probable to me , that they were a sort of judaizing christians , who endeavoured to introduce the customs of the jewish essens into the christian church . for when st. paul speaks of the jewish customs he mentions no other , but such as were in esteem among them ; he takes no notice of sacrifices which were disesteemed among them ; but let no man judge you in meat , which among them was only bread and salt ; or in drink , which was only water ; or in respect of a holyday or new moon , or the sabbath days ; which as philo relates , they were great observers of . and when he speaks of the customs they would bring among the christians , they were no other than such as were strictly observed among them , viz. great abstinence , hard usage of their bodies , and some religious rites with respect to angels . concerning which the apostle delivers his judgment two ways . 1. he grants that these things have a shew of wisdom in them ; i. e. that they make so good an appearance to men , as is apt to raise an esteem of those persons in whom it is . first , because they seem to flow from a forwardness in religion , so i render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which we call will-worship ; but that being a thing of an ill name , doth not so well answer to the shew of wisdom ; for what shew of wisdom is there in doing an ill thing ? this is therefore a readiness of mind to do any thing in religion which men think pleasing to god , whether required by him or not . so hesychius expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and other greek words of a like composition , do imply no more than a voluntary inclination ; as in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which plato useth for a service out of good will , and free inclination : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in xenophon : and st. augustine observes , that in his time , a man that affected to be rich , was called thelo-dives , and he that desired to be thought wise thelo-sapiens ; so according to this analogy , a man that would be thought very religious , would then have been called thelo-religiosus ; taking religiosus in the sense of massurius sabinus , and not of nigidius figulus : i. e. in a good , and not in a bad sense . and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is a desire of appearing more religious than ordinary ; which is not a thing evil in it self , but depends on circumstances . the next is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , humility , a vertue so graceful , so becoming mankind , with a respect to god and to each other , that whatever makes a shew of that , doth so of wisdom too . the third is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not sparing the body , but using it with hardship to keep it under . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . which words have such a hardness in their construction , as hath caused great variety of interpretations ; which i shall not repeat . that which seems most natural , is , that honour implies a regard to the body and so it only explains what was meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; the sense being , not with any regard to the flesh for its satisfaction : which hath a farther appearance of wisdom , not barely in the subjection of the body to the mind ; but as it seems to argue a mind so elevated above the body , that it hath little or no regard to the necessities of it . 2. notwithstanding all this fair shew of wisdom , the apostle doth really condemn these things as not pleasing to god , nor suitable to the christian religion . for , ( 1. ) he saith they have only a shew of wisdom . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith st. chrysostome , who certainly understood the force of the words ; the shew , saith he , not the power , therefore not the truth of wisdom . imaginem rationis , humanaeque sapientiae , saith st. jerom. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith theodoret ; so that notwithstanding the fair shew they make , they have no real wisdom in them . ( 2. ) this new way of worship , though it hath such a specious shew of devotion and humility ; yet it reflects on the honour of christ , as mediator ; and therefore the apostle charges the introducers of it , with not holding the head. if the cerinthians did advance the angels above jesus christ , they were so much the more guilty ; but if these judaizers did only look on them as nearer and more agreeable mediators to us , yet therein they brought a great disparagement upon him , whose office it was to be the sole mediator between god and men. mankind was very excusable in comparison , for finding out other mediators , before god had declared to the world that he had appointed his son to be our only advocate and intercessor ; but for those who own his mediatorship , to make choice of others besides him , is to call in question the wisdom of the father , or the sufficiency , interest or kindness of the son. for if god hath appointed him for this end , and he be able to go through his work , and willing to help all that address themselves to him ; what need to call in other assistants ? yea , what a dishonour is it for him to stand by , and applications be made to them to do that office , which he was appointed alone to discharge ? ( 3. ) these new inventions though never so plausible , are a disparagement to the gospel , as not containing sufficient , or at least not the most sublime and perfect directions for humility and mortification . for our blessed saviour was so far from being remarkable for these affected singularities , that the freedom and easiness of his conversation , was a great offence to those who understood little or nothing of religion beyond these things . the son of man came eating and drinking , and they say , behold a man gluttonous , and a wine-bibber , a friend of publicans and sinners . not that he gave way to any thing like luxury , or intemperance , who was the most exact pattern of all true and real vertues ; but because they saw nothing extraordinary as to the severity of his life in these matters , they looked on him but as one of the common sort of men , making no appearance of more than usual sanctity , as to eating and drinking . and when johns disciples who were bred up with greater austerity , were really offended that christs disciples did not fast as they did : our saviour puts them off with a parabolical answer ; can the children of the bride-chamber fast , as long as the bridegroom is with them ? which answer might puzzle them more , as not understanding why fasting should be inconsistent with his corporal presence ; yet to let them see that he did not look on fasting , as a duty unsutable to his religion , he tells them , the days would come , when his disciples should have their times of fasting . but the days will come when the bridegroom shall be taken from them , and then shall they fast . so that it is not occasional or anniversary days of fasting , which are condemned here by the apostle , as will-worship , or neglecting the body ; but the imposing a new and severer course of life upon christians , as a way of greater perfection of mortification , than what was required by christ or his apostles . this is that which the apostle calls being subject to ordinances ; and living after the commandments and doctrines of men. theodoret observes that he doth not mean the law by this , but the unseasonable doctrine of these seducers ; and it is evident from the foregoing part of the 20. v. wherefore if ye be dead with christ from the rudiments of the world : i. e. if ye are freed from the yoke of the law , what reason is there ye should submit to another , which depends only on the authority and invention of men ? but what then ? doth s. paul make it unlawful to submit to any orders or rites appointed by the church in which we live ? by no means . for neither doth the apostle speak of those who had lawful authority , but of seducers ; nor doth he speak of things appointed meerly for order and decency ; but of such things which are supposed by the imposers to have more of true perfection and sanctity in them ; more humility and mortification ; and consequently to be more pleasing to god , than bare obedience to the precepts of christ and his apostles . whoever introduce any such things into the christian church , and maintain any such opinions of them , are justly censured by the apostle here , and fall under the condemnation of seducers . ( 4. ) these things , whatsoever shew of wisdom and humility they make , are really the effects of pride and folly. ( 1. ) of pride : which appears , 1. by a great presumption of their great skill and knowledge in the mysteries of religion , and of what is most pleasing to god ; intruding into those things which he hath not seen , vainly puft up by his fleshly mind . so that here was a great outward appearance of humility and mortification ; but within nothing but pride and vanity . it hath been long observed , that those who strive to exceed others in the outward shews and appearances of humility and neglect of the body , have been most liable to the temptations of sp ritual pride ; i. e. to a high opinion of themselves , and a contempt of others , which they have manifested by an invincible stiffness in maintaining their own opinions ; a readiness to impose them upon others ; and impatience of contradiction from any . 2. by an affectation of greater humility , than appears in others . these seducers , we see , pretended to nothing more than humility . their worship of angels was from humility ; their neglect of the body from humility too : they made so much shew of it , as gave reason to suspect pride lay at the bottom . for it is more real humility to be contented to be thought proud unjustly , than to labour for such an opinion of more than ordinary humility , as these seducers did . ( 2. ) of folly ; in two things . 1. in placing the main of their religion in things that would not bear the weight of it , which the apostle intimates in those words , which all are to perish with the using : i. e. as the greek interpreters explain it , the matters of eating and drinking are no such great things , that so much ado should be made about them . for as our saviour saith , not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man ; for it goeth into the belly , and is cast out into the draught . and therefore saith the apostle , the kingdom of god is not meat and drink , but righteousness and peace , and joy in the holy ghost ; for he that in these things serveth christ , is acceptable to god , and approved of men. 2. in supposing the following their own inventions to be more pleasing to god , than the observing his own commands . for this seems to be at the bottom of all ; these seducers made no question , but they had found out ways much more pleasing to god , than those which were in common esteem and practice in the christian churches . so that which is called here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is by the latins rendered in superstitione : i. e. in an opinion of pleasing god by some particular rites of their own ; in making much of their religion to lye in forbearing some things and doing others , which god never required , and are made no parts of the christian religion by christ or his apostles . so that here are two parts of the superstition here spoken of . 1. forbearing some things as unlawful , which god never made unlawful by any prohibition , touch not , taste not , handle not . the root of their superstition did not lie , as some imagin , in supposing the things which they did forbear as in themselves abominable , as some hereticks did ; but in an opinion , that god would be so much pleased with the meer forbearance of them , that those who design to please god , were bound to abstain from them , although he had never forbidden them . and there is a material difference between these three things . ( 1. ) abstaining from things as in themselves unlawful to be used . ( 2. ) preferring the abstinence before the use , on some particular seasons and occasions . ( 3. ) making the forbearance of them as unlawful ( though not sorbidden ) as necessary to the pleasing of god. there were such who did utterly forbid the use of marriage and meats , of whom the apostle speaks , 1 tim. 4. 3. and the christian church , as s. augustine observes , doth not fall under this censure of the apostle , when in some cases it prefers abstinence from both . ille prohibet , saith he , qui hoc malum esse dicit , non qui huic bono , aliud melius anteponit . but yet there may be a superstitious abstinence , without that superstitious opinion ; or else the christian church had no reason to condemn the abstinence of the montanists , who , as tertullian pleads for them , utterly rejected that opinion . neither was it meerly because montanus wanted authority to make laws of abstinence . but tertullian acquaints us with other arguments against it , chiefly from the unsuitableness of it to the design of christianity . and to impose such abstinence as necessary to the pleasing god , is that which the church condemned in montanus ; and the believing it is a superstitious opinion ; though of another sort from that wh ch made the use of them in it self unlawful . for they did it upon an extravagant fancy , that no living creatures were of gods making , but were produced by some other powers in opposition to him ; as appears by the gnosticks , the marcionists , the manichees , and the en●ratitae . but the same reason could not hold as to those judaizing christians , who believed the world and all living creatures were produced by the power of god. for irenaeus saith , that the ebionites did hold that god was the maker of the world ; and therein they differ'd from the cerinthians , as well as in some other opinions ; yet these ebionites pretended to be christians , and universally abstained from flesh , as epiphanius saith : not that they had any reason to account flesh abominable ; but they had learnt from the essens to abstain from it , and thought it greater sanctity so to do . 2. their superstition did lie in supposing that god would be mightily pleased with their doing some things of their own invention , as the worship of angels was ; which was so far from being commanded by god in the law of moses , that they had thence many arguments against it : but notwithstanding they thought there was so much of humility and complement to god almighty in it , that he could not but be very much pleased with it . and when men lay a great weight of religion upon doing or forbearing things , neither commanded nor forbidden by the law of god , that is so far from being a pleasing worship of god , that it deserves no other name but that of superstition and will-worship ; as they do imply a shew of wisdom , without the truth and power of it . but here arises the main difficulty ; how shall we put a difference between what is pleasing to god , and what is not ; or between true religion and superstition ? for since the apostle implies that some things may have a shew of wisdom in them , i. e. may seem pleasing to god , which are not so ; and other things may be more pleasing to god , which do not make such a shew of wisdom to men ; it seems to be a matter of as great difficulty as concernment to us , to understand the just and true bounds between religious and superstitious worship . this is an enquiry of so great moment and consequence , for the easing our minds of many trouble ome doubts and fears , and setling in them a true notion of religion ; that i shall from hence apply my self to the consideration of the true difference between the reasonable worship of god , and superstition . superstition in the general , is nothing else but an unpleasing worship of god. i do not speak of that worship which relates to a false object ; which is more properly idolatry ; but when that worship is ultimately referred to a true object , as in the worship of angels as mediators , then it is superstition too ; it being an undue way of giving worship to the true god. i shall not trouble my self with an enquiry into the etymology of the words in greek or latin , it being well observed by aquinas , that in this matter we are not so much to observe the etymology of superstition , as the use of the word . and that hath been different according to mens notions concerning religion . those who believed no god at all , or at least no providence , accounted all religion to be nothing but superstition . and it is a weak and silly apology a late commentator on lucretius makes for his saying , so much mischief hath been done by religion ; by religion , saith he , he meant superstition ; for he accounted all religion to be nothing else but superstition . and those in our age , who can find no other difference between them ; but that one is allowed , and the other not ; or one is what we like , and the other what we dislike ; do destroy any real difference between them ; and make only religion a superstition in fashion ; and superstition a religion out of fashion . whereas if there be a god and providence , there must be such a thing as true religion : i. e. there ought to be some acts in us agreeable to the conceptions we have of the divine nature . for , his majesty and power requires our fear ; not an amazing , confounding , unaccountable fear , arising from a perplexity and disorder of our imaginations ; but a just , reasonable , prudent fear , springing from our most serious thoughts and deepest consideration of things . for , if it be impossible for any thinking man to satisfie himself in the train of causes , but he must come to this thought at last , that there is some cause , whereof there is no former cause , but is eternal ; which is that we call god ; then it is impossible if this man pursues his own thoughts , but the first consequence from hence will be , that if this god be the first cause of all things , his power and majesty is so great , as to command a due reverence and fear from us his creatures . this is not such a fear as men have in a storm , or when a sudden calamity seizeth upon them , which makes them at their wits end , and to run they know not whither for present help ; but it is a settled , calm , composed temper of mind ; a fear without consternation ; an awe and reverence of the divine majesty , without terrour and astonishment . for , as the mighty power of god begets fear in us , so the infinite goodness and wisdom of god , not only keep up mens minds from sinking into slavish fear , and horrible despair ; but fills them with comfortable hopes , and a patient and humble trust and confidence in his never-failing providence . and this is the nature of true religion in the minds of men. but because it tends to the honour of our maker , and the incouraging one another to acts of piety and devotion , that this inward sense of our minds be expressed by such external actions as are agreeable thereto , from thence came the necessity of the publick offices of religion , wherein we offer up our prayers and praises to the divine majesty in acknowledgment of our dependence upon him for what we have , or are , or hope for . and there is nothing in all this , but what is highly just and reasonable , and this is true natural religion . but then we cannot deny , that there is too great a natural proneness in mankind to superstition . for , when men cannot shake off the apprehension of a deity , and yet are conscious to themselves that they have offended him ; the very thoughts of him prove so uneasie to them , that they would be glad to believe there were none at all , and give all the advantage to atheistical objections which a willing mind can do : and as plutarch observes of superstitious men , they would be atheists if they durst . but finding still an inward dissatisfaction , and an impossibility of rooting out the fears of a deity ; the next thing is , to think upon some ways to please him , and to mitigate his displeasure against them . and we can hardly imagine any thing so pompous and ceremonious , so mean and servile , so cruel and barbarous , so ridiculous and foppish , but mankind have made use of it to atone the anger of their gods. for , the first effect of superstition , on mens minds , was ; that they durst not make immediate applications to the supreme being , as being too great and powerful for them : therefore they pitched on some inferiour beings to mediate , and to offer up their devotions and sacrifices to him , whom they thought it too great presumption to approach . when thus superstition in the most proper sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had in a great measure supplanted true religion in the world ; then it proceeded to find out such ways and methods of worship , as they thought would be most pleasing to these inferiour deities . they erected temples and altars to them , and set out their images with all the art and splendor they were capable of ; and upon extraordinary occasions they were carried with wonderful pomp and solemnity through the streets , all orders of men attending them with supplications and prayers and costly sacrifices to avert their wrath and displeasure . and they were not content with promiscuous sacrifices , but they studied by all possible means to find out what sacrifices would please them best ; if they fancied it must be something very dear and precious to them , they stuck not at offering up their very children to appease them ; and contrived by loud musick to stop their ears from hearing the hideous cries of their children while they were roasting in the flames . and in their ordinary sacrifices , they were extremely scrupulous , lest any spot or blemish , or number , or unfit season , or so much as colour should be displeasing to the gods they offered them to : some must have white and uneven ; others black and even sacrifices ; some must have their sacrifices offerd at the rising , some at the setting of the sun ; some must have one sort of beasts , and some another ; and some no less than mans flesh would satisfy ; which inhumane sacrifices , on some occasions , did almost universally obtain , before the christian religion prevailed in the world. but again , other deities were presumed to be so nice and squeamish , that nothing was to be offered them but milk , and wine , and honey , and some fruits of the earth . it were infinite to relate the rites and customs of their sacrifices , and all the ways they used to please their gods , and to find out whether they were pleased or not ; by the posture , the tongue , the entrails of their beasts ; by the flying of birds , the feeding of chickens , the falling of a staff , the holes of a sieve , &c. and innumerable ways of divination , by which they flatter'd themselves that they understood the good will and pleasure of their gods , which did not so much satisfy their curiosity , as fill them with perpetual fears , and oppress them with the horrible bondage of superstition ; which exalted almost every thing to the honour of a deity , and made themselves miserable by seeking to please them . but although this were the deplorable state of mankind , forsaken of god and left to their own inventions ; yet such is the weakness and folly of men , that when god himself had given a law to the israelites to regulate their worship , with as much condescension to their weakness , as the wisdom of his laws would permit ; yet so great was the witchcraft of superstition , that they were always almost hankering after the dotage of their neighbour nations . and although they often smarted severely for it ; yet the rod was no sooner off , but they were ready to return to their former superstitious vanities , and were so obstinately bent upon them , that nothing could move them ; not their former experience ; not the unreasonableness of the thing ; not the terrible denunciations of gods heavy judgments against them ; till at last , when there was no remedy , the whole people were carried into captivity ; from whence the greatest part never returned , and their very memory is lost by a mixture with other nations . those who returned , have been so wise ever since , as to abhor that provoking sin of idolatry ; which their ancestors suffered so much for : but by degrees they fell into other kinds of superstitions . for it was thought a mean thing among them to keep to the law ; but the traditions of their elders were looked upon as precious things ; and happy was the man that was strictest in the observance of them . their frequent washings , their additional fastings and prayers , their garments , their postures , their very looks had such an appearance of sanctity above other mens ; that a man who kept only to the law , was of no regard or esteem for piety and devotion . this was the state of religion among the jews when christ appeared , who laid open the foppery and hypocrisie of these great pretenders to extraordinary sanctity . he directed men to the love of god and their neighbours , as the main substantial parts of true religion . and next to his making a propitiation for the sins of mankind by the sacrifice of himself , his great end was to restore true religion to the world , which had been so long buried under the heap of superstitions . and there needed so great an authority as his was , to assure mankind , that nothing was so pleasing and acceptable to god , as unaffected piety , and universal goodness ; which comprehends under it all the duties of temperance , righteousness and charity . and it is one great argument of the providence of god watching over his church , that he hath caused the discourses of our blessed saviour to be preserved by the writings of the evangelists ; without which in all likelihood , the christian religion had been long since lost in the world. for the jewish christians who corrupted christianity , had represented st. peter as so favourable to them ; and so misrepresented st. paul ; that unless christs doctrine had been preserved in his own words , and that by the concurrent testimony of different writers , the christian religion had preserved little more than its name in the world. and yet with all this advantage , such was still the fondness of mankind for their own inventions , that even under the apostles eyes , most of the churches began to be tainted with these corruptions ; partly by the judaizing christians ; and partly by the followers of simon and menander . but they all agreed in something new and mysterious , and more pleasing to god , than the dull and common way of faith and obedience . after the apostles decease , the corruptions still multiplied , and any new pretence to revelations and mysteries , especially being joined with greater abstinence and severity of life , took wonderfully among weak and injudicious christians , and made them apt to despise the churches devotions , as too cold and flat , and not having that life and spirit , that strictness and austerity which appeared among the new pretenders . what disturbance on this account did the spirit of montanus give to the churches of phrygia , galatia , and cappadocia ? the meer pretence to revelation had never done it , had it not been for the stricter laws of fasting and mortification , and greater severity of discipline than was used in the catholick church . it was this which made tertullian swallow the bait he had despised before ; and the force of all his arguments against the church is , we are stricter than you . but notwithstanding all these pretences , the christian church still kept it self within its bounds , making nothing necessary to salvation , but what christ and his apostles had made so ; yet recommending the practice of fasting , as there were just occasions , especially before the great solemnity of easter ; wherein both the sacraments were administred with more than ordinary devotion , and the penitents reconciled to the communion of the church . if we look at this day into the state of the christian world ; how great a part of it is relapsed into almost heathen superstitions , in the worship of images , and saints , and angels as mediators ? and no great difference in the outward solemnities and processions , save that their sacrifices are turned into a consecrated wafer , which is carried in procession , as the heathen gods were wont to be . it is true , there are great pretences to will-worship , and humility , and neglecting the body in several orders of men ; and those are looked on as ways of greater perfection , than living in the world , and doing good in it . which we have no reason to think agreeable to the doctrine of christ or our apostle here . but where there is not only sanctity and merit , placed in such observations , but supererogation too , they flatly contradict s t paul ; for if that be true , these things have far more than the shew of wisdom ; for what wiser thing can any man do , than not only to provide for his own salvation , but for others too ? in the eastern churches , the best part , i fear , of their remaining christianity , lies in the strict observing the fasts and feasts of the church . they mightily despise the fasting practised in the roman church , as not deserving the name of fasting , because they end it at noon , and allow wine and fish for their repasts . although it is said that of late the greeks break the strict fast at noon ; but in st. chrys. and st. basils time they accounted it no fast wherein they did not totally abstain till night . the more eastern christians allow neither fish , nor wine , nor oyl in their lents , and they keep more in the year than the latin church * in the church of england , which approacheth nearest of any in the world to the primitive church , the duty of fasting is recommended upon its true grounds , not as though there were any peculiar sanctity or merit in it , which are superstitious conceits , but to keep the body in subjection to the spirit . it lays no snares upon the consciences of men ; it gives no countenance to hypocritical pretences to fasting ; but it sets before us the example and practice of the primitive church , and according to the temper and moderation then used , leaves persons to judge of their own strength , occasions , times , manner and degrees of fasting ; excepting the fast on good friday or the true antepaschal fast ( which some kept longer than others ) which tertullian saith , was universally observed by the christian church , as a necessary fast , and had been so from the apostles times ; but as to other times a greater liberty was allowed , laxus ac liber modus abstinendi ponitur cunctis ; neque nos severus terror impellit ; sua quemque cogit velle potestas . yet even this church , that is so wise , so moderate , cannot escape the charge of will-worship and superstition , for the orders that are observed in it . but wherein is it that we are liable to this charge ? do we make the orders of the church any parts of our religion ? or think that god is any otherwise displeased with others violation of them , than as it argues a froward , restless , unpeaceable spirit ? but what is it then ? god , say they , hath not commanded these things , therefore they are will-worship and superstition . this is an objection , which for the honour of our church i must remove , before i proceed to what remains . the true case among us is this , the church appoints such orders to be observed in it , which have no express command in scripture ; some utterly refuse them as unlawful , though no where forbidden in scripture ; the question is , whether of these two sorts , those who practise according to these orders , or those who utterly refuse , are liable to the charge of will-worship and superstition ? to clear this , we must state the notion of will-worship and superstition as they are here used by the apostle , and then apply it to the present case . ( 1. ) will-worship i have shew'd , is nothing but a forwardness to do something that relates to the pleasing of god ; and is said by the apostle to have a shew of wisdom , and therefore can be no more evil in it self , than humility , or neglecting the body ; but whether it be good or evil is to be determin'd by circumstances . ( 2. ) those circumstances which make it ill are , when men make those things a part of their religion , which god hath neither commanded nor forbidden ; and think god is pleased with their meer doing or abstaining from doing them , and this is true superstition . for there are two things necessary to the notion of it . 1. that the matter about which it is conversant relate to the pleasing of god. superstition i grant , hath been taken by plutarch and others from him , for a dreadful apprehension of the deity ; but that is rather the foundation of superstition , than the definition of it . for a superstitious man doth both think god to be angry without just cause , and beyond reason ; and to be pleased again without reason . if he thought god inexorable upon his displeasure , he must presently despair ; but because he thinks he may be easily pleased again , therefore he bethinks himself in what way he may best do it ; and so devises several ways of his own , and useth any means suggested by others , though never so unreasonable in themselves , in hopes to please god by them . thence plutarch mentions such mens , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , uncouth ways of worship ; and he observes , that at the same time , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they flatter and reproach god ; they think unworthily of him , as of one that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very easily provoked ; and yet that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as easily changed ; and that is the reason why a superstitious fear puts men upon finding out any ways and methods to please him , though never so unreasonable ; for they looking upon god as a peevish , angry , humoursome being , they have no certain rule to judge what will please him , and therefore follow their own fancy and imagination about it . 2. that they be mistaken in their judgment concerning what they believe to be pleasing to god , that is , that they judge that to be so , which really is not . so superstition is an excess or over-doing in the matter of worship ; that which doth modum legitimum cultus superstare & excedere , saith vossius ; which etymology he thinks much better than any other . cicero saith , that religion is pius cultus , superstition timor inanis deorum ; i. e. one is a reasonable , the other an unreasonable worship . so a. gellius saith , it is inepta & importuna religio ; a foolish and troublesome religion . festus applies it to those things which are done , praeter morem civitatis ; against the custom prescribed by law. as those of the church of rome do , to things done against the commands of the church : and so not fasting upon saturdays , and fasting upon sundays are both superstitious in their account ; but all the trumpery of the mass , and follies of their worship are by no means superstitious , because required by the church . which however helps us with a good argument to prove that the worship of images , and saints , and angels are required by their church ; or else by their own confession they must be superstitious . but their divines do all agree with aquinas , that men may be guilty of superstition in the worship of the true god ; i. e. when men make choice of something unfit or unreasonable to express their worship of god. and suarez quotes cajetan , as allowing this text to be extended to all superstitious worship not founded in right reason . and cajetan upon the place saith , that although they have a shew of wisdom ; yet not in any honour , saith he , i. e. they deserve no esteem , being only for the satisfying of the flesh : i. e. of a carnal desire as to these external observations . ( 3. ) the superstition here condemned , lay in the supposing god to be pleased with the forbearance of lawful things ; touch not , taste not , handle not . which if we understand either of meats or marriage , was a forbearance of things in themselves lawful ; but they supposed god would be far better pleased with their forbearance of them . i do not say , it is superstition for any man to abstain from doing what he apprehends to be unlawful by vertue of a general command : for that is a moral duty , and obedience to those places of scripture which bid us abstain from all kind and appearance of evil . but yet it is plain here was a negative superstition in the forbearance of lawful things : and so it was in the dispute between christ and the pharisees about healing on the sabbath day ; they thought it unlawful : christ declares it to be lawful to do good on the sabbath days . here was no positive observance on the pharisees part ; yet here was superstition in them ; and therefore the true notion of superstition doth extend to the forbearance of things in themselves lawful as displeasing to god. but how shall we know , when such a forbearance is superstitious ? by these rules : 1. if such a forbearance be thought to bring some special honour to god. for then , even dr. ames himself grants it to be superstition , to abstain from lawful things though accounted unlawful by the persons who abstain ; when some singular service and honour is by that abstinence intended : for then he grants it to be a kind of ceremonious worship . the question then is , when this case happens ; for our abstinence from popish or mahumetan superstitions , is not any special act of service , or honour to god. but if we lived where those acts of worship were required by lawful authority ; and we refused to comply with them , that would be a special act of honour and worship to god ; it being a declaration of our minds , that we thought god dishonoured by such acts , and therefore durst not comply with them . it was once a great question among the papists , whether they might lawfully come to our churches , or not ; and if not to our prayers and sacraments , yet to our sermons , to avoid the severe penalties of the laws . and after great debate both by a committee of the council of trent , and afterwards at rome ; it was resolved in the negative , upon this reason , because in our circumstances , it was signum distinctivum cultûs , a mark of distinction as to religious worship , and therefore it was an act of special honour and service to god to forbear . to abstain from pouring out wine , and throwing incense in the fire , is in it self no act of worship ; but when the heathen emperours commanded the christians to do it , in token of compliance with their religion ; their abstaining then from it , was a singular act of worship to god. so in the present case , when men are required by lawful authority , to do things which in themselves are lawful , to testifie their union and conjunction with us in religion ; their refusal in this case is a special act of worship ; and being without ground , is nothing else but superstition . 2. when men value and esteem themselves as more holy and more in the favour of god on the account of such forbearance . as the pharisees did on the account of their traditions , who believed that god had no such people upon earth as they were ; and despised others who were far nearer to the kingdom of god than themselves , as mere publicans and sinners . and it is very natural to mankind to set a great value upon themselves , for the sake of their affected singularities in religion ; and in a transport of pride and vanity , to tell god himself , as the pharisee did , that they are not like other men : but this is a certain sign , whatfoever they pretend , that they look on the forbearance of the things which others do , as a part of holiness ; and if they do so , it is undoubtedly superstition . for , on this ground we charge the papists with superstition in their ceremonies , because they place holiness in them . it is true , they say they are the instruments to convey some degrees of holiness to them ; but this makes no material difference ; for those who account themselves more in god's esteem for the sake of such things , do attribute some real efficacy to such distinctive characters of themselves , as to the obtaining the favour of god. 3. when they forbear necessary duties of religion rather than comply with others in lawful things , as communion with the church they live in , in prayers and sacraments : which cannot be denied to be necessary duties ; but if men resolve rather to forbear these , than to join in such ceremonies and prayers as do accompany the performance of them , it is a sign they prefer the following their own imaginations before the joining in communion with the church in the most unquestionable duties of religion : as in the case of the encratitae of old , who thought it unlawful to taste of wine ; and therefore refused to communicate in the eucharist , unless they might have it in water alone . was not this a great superstition in them , rather to forbear communicating with the church , than not to observe their own fancies in what they thought most pleasing to god , as to the manner of doing it ? now to apply this to our own case . we are often blamed for laying too great weight on the ceremonies of this church . but certainly , never any church laid less weight upon its own orders , supposing that it believes them to be just and reasonable . it places no holiness , no merit , no efficacy in them , as to the obtaining the grace and favour of god : it expects obedience only for order and peace-sake ; it hath taken great care by prefaces and canons and rubricks , to prevent any misinterpretation of its intention and design . but on the other side , those who dissent from us , lay so great weight on their scruples , that they will rather hazard breaking a church in pieces , ruining our religion by our differences , losing all the benefit of communion with a church , whose doctrine they approve in all the duties of religious worship ; than they will yield to the allowance of those circumstances of our communion which our church requires . and now on which side the charge of superstition more justly lyes , let all that are impartial judge . so much i thought necessary on this occasion to speak , in vindication of our church from this common imputation of superstition , by those who so little understand what it means . nothing now remains , but to make application of all to our selves . you see how much mischief the shew of wisdom was like to do in the apostolical churches ; let us all have a care of being deceived by it . it was long since observed by menander , that things which were like truth were more easily believed by the generality of mankind , than truth it self . so i am afraid it is about religion , which is the wisdomhere spoken of , that which makes a great shew of it to the world , is more apt to prevail among persons of weak and well disposed minds than true wisdom . for the shew of wisdom strikes more upon the fancy and inclination of such persons , than sober , calm and well-weighed religion ; which seems dull and flat to those who have more warmth and zeal than judgment and discretion . and i do not at all question , but many of the corruptions of the christian church came in , from an apprehended necessity of complying with the heat of some over-zealous people ; who were not contented with the plain and excellent religion of jesus christ ; but they must , as they thought , heighten and improve it , till they had mixed with it the freaks of enthusiasm , or the dotages of superstition . in the church of rome there is in many things a shew of wisdom , in will-worship and humility , and neglecting the body ; and in some of our sects , that seem to abhor will-worship so much , that for fear of it they will not give civil respect to men ; yet they pretend to shew of wisdom in humility and neglecting the body , but after a different manner : others have a shew of wisdom too in a wonderful , i had almost said , superstitious zeal , against what they call will-worship and superstition . but what is to be done in this case ? how shall we avoid being led aside by such a shew of wisdom , on every side ? i shall only lay down some directions , and so conclude . ( 1. ) fix a true notion of god and the christian religion in your minds . if you judge aright of the divine nature , it will ease your minds of many uneasie thoughts , troublesome fears and superstitious fancies . he is not capable of being flattered or deceived by us ; god is neither taken with outward appearances , nor is he pleased with any thing we do , merely because it is displeasing to our selves , the righteous god loveth righteousness ; and he is pleased best with the innocency , integrity and holiness of our hearts and lives . and for the christian religion , take not your notion of it from the different and uncertain opinions of men , but from the doctrines of christ and his apostles . men do not read the scriptures as they ought to do , with a design to know their religion by them ; but to justifie what they take to be religion from them . one would think it were impossible for any one that considered the sayings of christ or his apostles , to place his religion in being for or against any particular modes or ceremonies of worship ; whereby he may so easily see that it lies chiefly in an excellent temper of mind , holy , spiritual , humble , calm , peaceable , charitable , and a suitableness of action to this temper . this is so plain and easie to be understood , that he must read the new testament with a very ill mind , that doth not find it out . and if you have settled this notion of true religion , it will be a continual touchstone about you to judge of all pretenders . ( 2. ) set not an equal value on things that are good in order to other things , that you do upon things that are good in themselves . for the one are but the instruments of religion , the other are properly the duties of it . he hath shewed thee , o man , what is good , viz. to do justly , and to love mercy , and to walk humbly with thy god. and this was spoken when very costly sacrifices were offered instead of it ; no less than thousands , and ten thousands ; yea the first-born , and the fruit of their bodies . and therefore god sets a high value on these duties , and so ought we . no one that hath any sense of religion can despise the immediate duties of divine worship ; it being a good saying of pythagoras , mention'd by cicero and plutarch , that we are never better than when we approach to god ; or , as cicero expresses it , when we do rebus divinis operam dare , are employed in the duties of divine worship : but yet to do good is better than sacrifice , and to forgive an injury than the fat of rams . it is a wise observation of maimonides , that the intention of the law of god is to keep men within the just bounds of vertue ; but when men found a stronger inclination to one extreme than to another , they made use of remedies proper to reduce themselves from that extreme , by great severities towards themselves , by watchings , and extraordinary fastings , and other hardships : but when fools saw wise men do these things , they imagined presently that there was an excellency in the things themselves , and that if they did the same things , they should pass for very good men , and be highly in the favour of god. which , saith he , is just like an ignorant fellow , who observing the physicians prescribing physick to his patients , and forbidding eating to them , and finding them to recover upon it , should presently conclude , that surely it is the best way to live upon scammony and aloes , and such like , and to keep himself with the same strictness that was prescribed to the sick ; which instead of preventing a disease , would certainly bring one : so , saith he , do those who use the remedies of diseased minds in a state of health , they spoil a good constitution of their souls , and make it uneasie and troublesome . ( 3. ) judge of mens pretences , not by their outward shew and appearance , but by the spirit and temper that goes along with them . this was the course the apostle here took ; he regarded not their shew of wisdom and great appearance of humility and mortification ; but he pursued these things to their fountain-head , and there he found nothing but spiritual pride , and vanity of mind . we must not judge easily nor rashly concerning this ; but where the evidence is notorious , we have great reason to sleight and contemn the most sanctimonious appearance , i. e. if there be great uncharitableness and censoriousness towards all who do not comply with them ; great scorn and contempt of all other ways but their own ; great malice and spight against all who go about to oppose them ; where these are , whether in the church of rome , or elsewhere , whatever the shew of wisdom be , this wisdom descendeth not from above , but is earthly , sensual , devilish . but the wisdom that is from above , is first pure , then peaceable , gentle , and easie to be entreated , full of mercy and good fruits , without partiality , and without hypocrisie . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61578-e160 coloss. 2. 1. coloss. 1. 7. 4. 13. philem. 23. coloss. 2. 2 , 3. v. 4. v. 5. v. 6. v. 8. a. d. 60. n. 17. christian. lup. in tertul . de praescript . c. 33. nat. alex. saec. 1. p. 52. tertull. de praescript . c. 33. epiph. haer . 21. p. 58. bar. ib. n. 20. n. 16. bell. de s. b. c. 20. jansen . preface ep. aux . coloss. chrys. in l. hier. algas . q. 10. epiph. haer. 23. p. 63. haer. 30. p. 139. epiph. haer . 47. p. 339. philo p. 876. epiph. p. 42. v. 16. philo p. 877 , 899. plato sym. xen. cyr. paed. 2. aug. ep. 59. a. g●ll. l. 4. c. 9. v. 19. matt. 12. 19. matt. 9. 12 , 13. v. 20. v. 18. v. 22. vid. theod. theophyl . matt. 15. 11. 17. rom. 14. 17 , 18. aug. c. faust. l. 30. c. 6. tert. de jej. c. 15. iren. l. 1. c. 26. epiph. haer . 30. p. 139. aq. 2. 2. q. 92. tan. fabr. not. p. 294. leviath . ch . 6. ch . 11. mich. nau. eccl. graec. effig . p. 260. bas. hom . de jejun . chris. hom . 6. ad pop. antioch . * v. job . ludolph . hist. aethipic . l. 3. c. 6. n. 8● . thom. à jesu de convers. omnium gent. l. 7. c. 18. cotovic . itiner . hierosolymit . & syriac . p. 207. franc. quaresm . elucid . terrae sanctae l. 1. c. 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58. eustrat . zialouski de eccles. orient . graec. p. 39. metroph . critopul . c. 18. haud scio , inquit methodius graecus ( apud mich. nau. in eccles. graecae effigie dial. 13 ) unde factum sit ut vos latini a reliquis christianorum nationibus , sic in jejunando recesseritis , ut nulla vobis nè maronitana quidem , quae tota vestra est , consentiat . jejunatis sabbato , feriâ 4. non abstinetis ab esu carnium ; pisces , & quibusdam in locis , lacticinia , quadragesimali tempore comeditis , solvitis meridie jejunium , &c. de jei. c. 2. prudent . 1. cath. hymn . post jejun . v. tert. de jejun . c. 2. 13. hier. ep . 54. ad marcel . aug. c. faust. manich. l. 30. c. 5. ad casul . ep. 86. epiph. in expos. fidei cath. n. 23. socr. l. 5. c. 22. victor . antioch . in marc. 2. cassian . coll. 21. c. 30. voss. etym. cic. l. 1. de n. d. fest v. religios . aq. 2. 2. q. 92. art. 2. q. 98. art. 3. suarez de rel. tr . 3. l. 2. c. 1. matt. 12. 10. 12. fresh suit , p. 101. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men. mic. 6. 8. plutarch de superst . cic. de legib . l. 2. c. 9. porta mosis p. 201. ver. 18. jam. 3. 15. ver. 17. the reformation justify'd in a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel septemb. 21, 1673, before the lord major and aldermen, &c. / by edw. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1674 approx. 72 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 29 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61590 wing s5626 estc r14334 13142423 ocm 13142423 97985 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61590) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 97985) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 752:2) the reformation justify'd in a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel septemb. 21, 1673, before the lord major and aldermen, &c. / by edw. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 51 p. printed by robert white for henry mortlock ..., london : 1674. marginal notes. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng reformation -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 jonathan blaney sampled and proofread 2004-04 jonathan blaney text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the reformation justify'd : in a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel septemb. 21. 1673. before the lord major and aldermen , &c. by edw. stillingfleet , d. d. chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . london , printed , by robert white , for henry mortlock , and are to be sold at the white hart in westminster hall , and at the phoenix in st. pauls church-yard . 1674. hanson major . cur. special . tent . in festo s. michaelis archang . 1673. annoque regis caroli secundi angliae , &c. xxv . it is ordered by this court , that d r. stillingfleet be earnestly desired to print his sermon lately preached at the guild-hall chappel before the lord major and aldermen of this city . wagstaffe . acts xxiv . 14. but this i confess unto thee , that after the way which they call heresie , so worship i the god of my fathers , believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets . in the beginning of this chapter we find st. paul brought to his tryal before felix the roman governour , wherein ( if we only except the unfitness of the judge ) all other things concurred , which could make such an action considerable , viz. the greatness of the cause , the quality of the persons , and the skill which was shewed in the management of it . the cause was not common and ordinary , such as were wont to be tryed before the governours of provinces , but of an unusual and publick nature ; not a question of words and names , as gallio thought it , but of a matter of the highest importance to the world : which being managed by st. paul , with that zeal and industry , which was agreeable to it , gave occasion to his malicious countreymen to accuse him before the roman governour , as one guilty of faction and sedition . under this colour , they hoped easily to gain the governours good will to their design ; being a person that more regarded the quiet of his province , than all the concernments of truth and religion . but that this design might be carried on with the greater pomp and shew of justice and piety , they do not commit the care of it to the rage of the people , or some furious zealots ; but the high priest and some members of the sanhedrin go down on purpose from hierusalem to caesarea , and carry with them one of their most eloquent advocates called tertullus to manage the accusation against paul. who was no sooner called forth , but the orator begins to shew his art , by a flattering insinuation , which is most apt to prevail with men of mean and corrupt minds ; seeing that by thee , saith he , we enjoy great quietness , and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by thy providence ; we accept it alwayes and in all places , most noble felix , with all thankfulness : having thus prepared his judge , he presently falls upon the matter , and charges st. paul with being a pestilent and seditious person , a disturber of his nation in all parts , a prophaner of the temple ; but the main point of all , and in which the rest were comprehended , was , that he was a ringleader of the sect of the nazarenes . ( so the christians were then called among the jews , from our saviour's abode in the town of nazareth . ) but although the writer of this history gives us only the short heads of his accusation ; yet we may easily suppose by st. pauls answer , that he insisted more largely on this , than on any of the rest : representing to felix , that when the jewish church had been at first established by god himself under laws of his own making , when he had so settled the several orders and degrees of men among them , that the priests lips were to preserve knowledge , and the law to be sought at their mouths ; when under this government , their religion had been preserved for many hundreds of years , and after many revolutions they enjoyed one common and publick worship among them , though there were several distinct orders of religious men ( such as the pharisees and essens ) yet all agreed in the same divine worship ; but now at last to their great regret and horror appears one jesus of nazareth , a person of obscure parentage and mean education , who pretended to discover many corruptions in the doctrine and practices of our best men ; and without any authority from the high priest or sanhedrin he gathered disciples , and drew multitudes of people after him ; till at last the wisdom of our governours thought it fit to take him off , and make him an example for reformers ; notwithstanding this , his bold and forward disciples after his death carried on the same design , pretending that the time of reformation was come ; and accordingly have formed themselves into a sect , vigorous and active , of high pretences , and dangerous designs , which if it continues and increases can end in nothing short of the ruine of our antient jewish catholick church ; which hath had so constant and visible a succession in all ages ; that hath had so many martyrs and confessors in it ; so many devout and religious persons as the pharisees are ; so excellent an order and government , so much unity and peace before this new sect of nazarenes arose in opposition to that authority with which god had invested the high priest and rulers of the people . and among all the promoters of this new sect , there is none more factious and busie than this paul whom we here accuse ; and whom some of our nation found in the temple profaning of it , and there we would presently out of meer zeal to our religion have taken and destroyed ; but he was violently rescued out of our hands , and sent hither to be tryed ; and these things , which i have spoken , is the sense of all those who are come down as witnesses ; for so we read , v. 9. and the jews also assented and said , that these things were so . st. paul being thus accused , and having leave given him to answer for himself , was so far from being daunted by the greatness of his enemies , or the vehemency of their accusation , that he tells the governour , that he did with all cheerfulness undertake his defence : and there being two parts of his accusation , 1. his tumultuous and profane carriage in the temple ; this he utterly denies , v. 11 , 12 , 13. and plainly tells them , they can never prove it against him . 2. but as to the other and main part of the charge , his being a ringleader of the sect of the nazarenes ; although he would not , out of his great modesty , take upon himself to be one of the heads or chiefs among them , yet as to the owning of that way , notwithstanding all the imputations they had cast upon it , he doth it with the greatest freedome and courage in the presence of his judge and accusers ; and not only so , but defends himself therein , that he had done nothing contrary to the laws of god , or the most antient religion of his countrey : all which particulars are contained in the words of the text ; but this i confess unto thee , that after the way which they call heresie , so worship i the god of my fathers , believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets . wherein we have these three things considerable . 1. the imputation which christianity suffered under in its first appearance : after the way , which they call heresie . 2. the way taken by st. paul to remove this false imputation ; viz. by appeal to scripture and antiquity ; so worship i the god of my fathers , believing all things that are written in the law and the prophets . 3. the courage of st. paul in so freely owning his religion in the presence of his greatest enemies , and when they were in hopes to destroy him for it : this i confess unto thee , that after the way , &c. 1. i begin with the false imputation which christianity suffered under at its first appearance ; after the way which is called heresie ; the same word which is translated sect , v. 5. and although the word be indifferent in it self , yet where it is taken for a combination of men together against an established religion and lawful authority ( as it was by the jews when they charged the christians under this name ) then it implies in it a twofold accusation : 1. of novelty and singularity . 2. of faction and sedition . 1 of novelty . a sect of heresie in this sense implies in it , mens setting up with a new doctrine which was not heard of before ; and making that thefoundation of a new society separate and distinct from the established church , and consequently they must charge the church they are divided from with errors and corruptions , or they make themselves guilty of schism , i. e. unnecessary separation . now upon these two grounds the jews laid the imputation of a new sect upon the nazarenes or christians , 1. because they could not shew a visible succession in all ages : 2. because they could not prove the jewish church to be guilty of such errors and corruptions as to need a reformation . 1. they could not shew a succession in all ages of such persons who agreed in all things with them . for where ( say they ) were the men to be found in former ages , that taxed the jewish church with such errors and corruptions as jesus of nazareth did ? that bid men beware of the leaven of the scribes and pharisees , i. e. of the most learned and holy men . had not god alwayes a visible church among them ? they could produce the names of their high priests in every age , and shew them all the marks of a visible church : for in judah was god known , and his name was great in israel . hath not god said , that in his house at hierusalem he would put his name for ever ; and his eyes and his heart should be there perpetually ? how is it then possible but there must be a constant and visible succession in all ages ? since god would alwayes have a people to dwell among ; and that might be known to be his people by the outward marks and signs of a true church . but if the christians pretences held good , god must for several ages have wanted a church amongst them . for none of those things which they charged the jews with , were newly crept in among them , but had been delivered down to them by the tradition of their fore-fathers , in an uninterrupted manner , as they thought , from the very time of moses . this was their rule whereby they guided themselves in their actions of religion , and in the sense of obscure places of the law and the prophets ; and in that time after the cessation of prophecy , when the christians supposed these corruptions to have come in among them , they could draw down a constant succession from the men of the great synagogue , of persons eminent for learning and piety that never charged them with any such corruptions as jesus of nazareth and his disciples did . would god ever suffer such dangerous errors , hypocrisie , and superstitions to prevail in his own church , and raise up no persons to discover these things , till these new teachers and reformers arose ? were not hillel and shammai that so accurately discussed all the niceties of the law , able to find out such gross and open corruptions , if any such had been among us ? might not we say , that not only the teachers , but god himself had slept all that time , if he raised up no one person to discover the coming in of such errors and corruptions ? where had god then any true church in the world , if not among his people of the jews ? and would he suffer that to be overspread with such a leprosie , and send none of his priests to discover it ? and even by the confession of the christians themselves , they were once the beloved and chosen people of god , how or when was it that they ceased to be so ? do not themselves acknowledge , that they receive the law and the prophets from our hands ? and that to us were committed the oracles of god , and that to us pertained the adoption , and the glory , and the covenants , and the giving of the law , and the service of god and the promises , and that ours are the fathers ? how is it then possible after all these priviledges , to suppose this church to fall into such a degeneracy , as at last to be cast off by god , and a new church to arise out of the ashes of it ? thus we may reasonably suppose the jews to have argued for themselves ; and on the other side , they trampled upon and despised this new sect of the nazarenes , that had nothing of the pomp and splendour of their church : they had only a company of mean and illiterate persons at first to joyn with them ; the disciples of their master were a sort of poor fishermen and inconsiderable persons , men of no authority , or reputation for extraordinary sanctity or learning : even their master himself was one of no great severity of life , that did not retire from the world , and lead an abstracted life , but conversed with publicans and sinners , and put not his disciples upon fasting and long prayers ; whereas the pharisees were men of great austerity and mortification , much exercised in devotion , making frequent and long prayers , at certain hours ; and in whatever place those hours took them . now how is it possible to believe , that such devout persons as these are mistaken , and the sect of the nazarenes only in the right ? but besides all this , where was their church before jesus of nazareth ? we offer to produce a personal succession on our side , that joyned in constant communion with us at the temple at hierusalem ; let the christians shew any number of men before themselves , that joyned with them in believing what they do , and rejecting the abuses which they tax among us : if they cannot do this , let them then suffer under the just imputation of novelty . 2. but supposing they do not think it necessary to assign a number of men distinct from our society , but say it is enough that though they joyned with them in the worship of god , yet they did not in their corruptions : yet to vindicate themselves , they must shew how it was possible for such corruptions to come in , and no more notice be taken of them : such things could not be introduced without some notable alteration ; and in such a one , the author , the time , the place , the manner may be assigned : we can tell , say they , all these circumstances in the idolatries of jeroboam , ahab , and manasseh ; if so great alterations have hapned in the state of our church , that there is a necessity of reforming it ; name us the persons , the time , the place , the manner how all these corruptions came in . when came men first to forsake the letter of the scripture , and adhere to tradition ? who first brought in the pharisaical superstitions ? what was his name , where was his abode , who first opposed and condemned him ? were all men asleep then to suffer such alterations , and to say nothing at all against them ? what , could one generation conspire to deceive the next ? and if not , how could such changes happen in matters of religion , and no one take care to discover it and prevent the infecting of posterity by it ? had no persons any regard to god and the purity of religion then ? if they had , would they suffer strange fire to come upon gods altar , and take no notice at all of it ? why did not jesus of nazareth , when he so frequently and vehemently declaimed against the pharisaical hypocrisie and superstitions , and false doctrines , shew to the people , when , and where , and how these things came into the church of god ? he only condemns them , and speaks sharply against them , but he saith not one word to satisfie the scientifical men among them , how it was possible for corruptions to come in , and prevail to such a degree , and yet no circumstances of time or place be assignable of it . thus the jews still believed themselves to be the only true , antient , visible catholick and infallible church of god , and despised the poor christians , as a novel and upstart sect of nazarens ; which is the first imputation the christians suffered under . 2. they suffered under the imputation of faction and sedition ; which is the second thing implyed in the name of sect or heresie here mentioned ; and that they charged upon them two wayes . 1. for not submitting to the churches authority . 2. for disturbing the peace and quiet of the people . 1. for not submitting to the churches authority : not , that the disciples of our lord did out of humour , or fancy , or only to make a party , break with the jews in matters meerly of order and indifferency : no , on the contrary we find them extreamly cautious of giving any offence in such matters , which temper they learnt of their lord and master , who complyed with many things , that others might not take advantage by his omission of them , to slight and contemn them ; thus when others were baptized of john , he would be so too ; not , that he had any need of washing away of sin : but he would not make use of a particular priviledge to bring any discountenance upon a general duty . thus we see , he went up at the solemn feasts to hierusalem as others did ; and not only was present in the temple , but vindicated by a miracle the order and decency of it , by driving out the buyers and sellers from the outward parts of it , although they had a fair pretence of being ready at hand to serve the necessities of such as were to sacrifice to god in the temple ; nay , st. mark tells us , that he would not suffer any vessell to be carried through the temple : and this he did not upon any reason peculiar to the levitical law , but because it was a house of prayer . and this example his apostles followed , who after they had the holy ghost poured upon them , yet they attended the temple at the hours of prayer . but most remarkable to this purpose , is the instance of st. paul at that very time when he was seized upon , and like to be destroyed by the fury of the jews . for , understanding at hierusalem from st. james , that there were many thousands of believing jews that were still zealous of the law , and were informed that st. paul among the gentiles slighted circumcision and the levitical customs ; he to give them all reasonable satisfaction that he intended to make no unnecessary breach among them about indifferent matters , submits himself to a legal purification in the temple for seven dayes together ; before the end of which , the jews made a tumult and seized upon him , and so he was brought to answer the accusations against him in this chapter . thus careful st. paul was to give no ground for suspicion that he delighted in disorders and separations ; this example he did leave to all prudent christians , rather to submit to things which they have no great value for ( as no doubt at this time st. paul had very little for the levitical customs ) than to hazard the breaking the peace of the church for such matters . but notwithstanding all this care of the first christians , they could not avoid the imputation of faction ; because they would not entirely submit their judgements to the authority of the jewish church . for this was the great pretence they stood upon , that they were the governours of the church by gods own institution , that they were to explain and interpret the law and the prophets ; and this was expressed in the beginning of their law , that in all cases of difficulty they were to go up to the place which the lord their god should chuse ; and to go to the priests , and the levites , and to the judge , and they shall shew thee the sentence of judgement . and thou shalt do according to the sentence which they of that place ( which the lord shall chuse ) shall shew thee , and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee ; and the man that will do presumptuously , and will not bearken to the priest , ( that standeth to minister there before the lord thy god ) or unto the judge , even that man shall dye , and thou shalt put away the evil from israel . upon this place , they might certainly much better establish the infallibility of their own church , than others draw an argument for infallibility in the christian church from it . however , absolute obedience would serve their turn , to charge the christians with faction , in not submitting to their authority . for , was not this a matter of difficulty , whether the messias were to be a temporal prince or not ? concerning what time , and place , and person the prophecies were to be understood ? who were the competent judges in this case , but those whom god had established by his law ? if the scribes and pharisees were charged with false glosses , and corrupting the law by their traditions , the christians were not to take upon themselves to judge of them ; but to appeal to the high priest and the sanhedrin , who were the only lawful judges in these matters : their duty was submission and patience ; but by no means ought they upon their own authority to begin a new church , and to broach new doctrines directly contrary to the judgement of the high priest and sanhedrin ; yea , after they had pronounced sentence against jesus of nazareth , and condemned him to death ; and excommunicated his followers , and punished as many as they could get into their power ; what could it ( in their opinion ) be but the spirit of faction and disobedience thus to oppose the authority of their church , in believing contrary to its decrees , and reforming without any power derived from it ? we see in our saviours time how severely they checked any of the people who spake favourably of christ and his doctrine ; as though the poor ignorant people were fit to judge of these matters ! to understand prophecies , and to know the true messias , when he should appear ! and therefore when some of their officers that had been sent to apprehend him , came back with admiration of him , and said , never man spake like this man , they take them up short and tell them , they must believe as the church believes ; what , they take upon them to judge of such matters ! no , they must submit to their governours : have any of the rulers , or pharisees believed on him ? but this people which know not the law are cursed . i e. when they set up their own judgement in opposition to the authority of the church . and after our saviours death at a solemn council at hierusalem , when peter and john were summoned before them ; the first question they asked was , by what power , or by what name have ye done this ? they never enquired , whether the miracle were wrought or no , or whether their doctrine were true ; all their question was about their mission , whether it were ordinary or extraordinary ; or what authority they could pretend to , that were not sent by themselves ; but let the things be never so true , which they said , if they could find any flaw in their mission according to their own rules and laws , this they thought sufficient ground to forbid them to preach any more , and to charge them with faction if they disobeyed . 2. they charged the christians with faction in being so active and busie to promote christianity to the great disturbance of the jews in all parts . this tertullus accused st. paul of , that he was a mover of sedition among all the jews throughout the world ; and accordingly the jews at thessalonica take the christians by force and carry them to the rulers of the city , crying , those that have turned the world upside down are come hither also . this they knew was the most effectual course to render them odious to all governours , who are apt to suspect all new things as dangerous , and think no truth can compensate the hazard of alterations . thus it was especially among the roman governours , who had learnt from the counsel given to augustus , to be particularly jealous of all innovations in religion ; and had much rather the people should continue quiet under an old error , than have the peace disturbed for the greatest truth . this was really the greatest difficulty in the way of christianity , it came no where , but people were possessed before hand with quite other apprehensions of religion , than the christians brought among them . the jewish and pagan religions were in possession in all places , and the people were at ease in the practice of them . what then must the christians do ? must they let them alone and not endeavour to convince them of the truth of their own doctrine ? if so , they are unfaithful to their trust , betrayers of truth , and false to the souls of men : if they go about to perswade men out of their religion , they know , such is the fondness most men have for their own opinions , especially in religion , that where they might hope to convince one , they might be sure to enrage many ; especially of those whose interest lay in upholding the old religion . how little doth reason signifie with most men , where interest is against it ! truth and falshood are odd kind of metaphysical things to them , which they do not care to trouble their heads with ; but what makes for or against their interest , is thought easie and substantial . all other matters are as gallio said , questions of names and words , which they care not for ; but no men will sooner offer to demonstrate a thing to be false , than they who know it to be against their interest to believe it to be true . this was the case of these great men of the jews that came down to accuse paul ; they easily saw whither this new religion tended , and if it prevailed among their people , farewell then to all the pomp and splendour of the high-priesthood at hierusalem ; farewell then to the glory of the temple and city whither all the tribes came up to worship thrice a year ; farewell then to all the riches , and ease , and pleasure which they enjoyed : and what was the greatest truth and best religion in the world to them , in comparison with these ? these were sufficient reasons to them to accuse truth it self of deceiving men , and the most peaceable doctrine of laying the foundation of faction and sedition . thus we have considerd the false imputations which were cast upon christianity at first , implyed in these words , after the way which is called heresie . 2. i now come to the way taken by st. paul to remove these false imputations , which he doth , 1. by an appeal to scripture , as the ground and rule of his faith , believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets . 2. by an appeal to the best and purest antiquity , as to the object of worship ; so worship i the god of my fathers , not bringing in any new religion , but restoring it to its primitive purity . 1. by an appeal to scripture as the ground and rule of his faith . the jews pleaded possession , tradition , authority of the present church : against all these st. paul fixes upon a certain and unmoveable foundation , the law and the prophets . he doth not here insist upon any particular revelation made to himself , but offers the whole matter in dispute to be tryed by a common rule that was allowed on both sides . and his meaning is , if they could prove that he either asserted , or did any thing contrary to the law and the prophets , then they had some reason to accuse him of innovation , or beginning of a new sect ; but if the foundation of his doctrine and practice lay in what themselves acknowledged to be from god , then they had no cause to charge him with introducing a new sect among them . but the great question here is , what ground st. paul had to decline the authority of the present church ? since god himself had appointed the priests to be the interpreters of the law ; and therefore in doubtful cases resort was to be made to them ; and not the judgement left to particular persons about the sense of scripture ; and yet in this case it is apparent st. paul declined all authority of the present church ; for at that very time the high-priests and elders came down to accuse him , and he takes not the least notice of their judgement in this matter . i shall therefore now shew that st. paul had very great reason so to do , and to appeal only to scripture . 1. because the authority of the present church was more lyable to error and mistake , than the rule of scripture was . 2. because it was lyable to more partiality , than that was . 1. because it was more lyable to error and mistake , than the rule of scripture was . it was agreed on both sides , that the law was from god , and that the prophets spake by the inspiration of the holy ghost ; all that was now left was only to find out the true meaning of them , and to compare prophecies with events . as in the case of the messias , if the circumstances foretold by the prophets had their exact accomplishment in christ , as might appear to those who carefully compared them ; if he were born at bethlehem , of the tribe of judah , when the scepter was departed from it , and during the second temple , and all other circumstances agreeing ; then though the ordinary judgement concerning true prophets belonged to the sanhedrin , yet it was far more reasonable to believe that they were mistaken , than that all the prophecies should be accomplished in a person that was not the true messias . for those prophecies were not intended only for the priests and rulers , but for directions to the people , that they might be able to judge of the accomplishment of them : otherwise when the authority of the jewish church condemned our saviour , the people could have no reason to believe him to be the messias ; if they were bound in the sense of scripture to submit their judgement wholly to the churches authority . it is plain then , that the sense of scripture may be so evident to private capacities , that they are not to submit in it to the present authority of a church . for notwithstanding all the promises made to the jewish church , and the command of submitting to the sentence of their priests and rulers , in a matter of the highest concernment , viz. concerning the true messias , men were bound to believe directly contrary to the present authority in the church . for the people were bound to believe christ to be the true messias ; although the high priest and elders had condemned him for a deceiver and malefactor . but besides this particular case , there may be several others wherein men may lawfully reject the authority of the present church ; and those are , when that authority shall go about to overthrow those things which must be supposed antecedent to the belief of any such authority : as , 1. the common sense of mankind . 2. the force of a divine law. 3. the liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood . all these must necessarily be supposed before any authority of a church ; but if any church goes about to overthrow these , it thereby forfeits its own authority over men . 1. if it requires things contrary to common sense ; as in that instance wherein some of the jewish rabbies required submission to their authority , viz. in believing the right hand to be the left , or the left to be the right , if they determined so ; or supposing the jews to have required the people to deny that they ever saw any miracle wrought by christ ; or in the miracle of the loaves , that what they saw and handled , and tasted , to be bread was true bread ; or to say , that the same individual body might be in a thousand places at once , or that things whose nature it is to be in another , can subsist without their proper subject ; what church soever requires such things as these from its members to be believed , gives them just reason to reject its authority . 2. if it requires things contrary to the force and reason of a divine law : as the jews themselves would have acknowledged , if any authority among them had gone about either to have left out the second commandment , or made it lawful to give religious worship to images , under any distinctions whatsoever : or if the priests had taken away from the people their share in the sacrifices , under pretence of the unsanctified teeth , or the long beards of the laity , which were not fit to touch what had been offered in sacrifice to god. but we need not put cases among them , for our saviour therefore bids men have a care of the leaven of the scribes and pharisees , because by their traditions they made the commandment of god of none effect : as in their corban , if they made a vow to god they thought themselves excused from relieving their parents ; and in this way our saviour generally deals with them , shewing that though they pretended to keep the letter of the law ; yet by their corrupt additions and false glosses they overthrew the scope and design of it : which he thought sufficient reason to reject their authority ; and therefore when he bids his disciples , observe and do what soever the scribes and pharisees bid them ; it must be supposed to be only while they keep to the letter and reason of the law ; for if he had intended an absolute obedience , he would never elsewhere bid his disciples beware of their doctrine . 3. if it takes away all liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood in religion . for this is a natural right which every man hath to judge for himself : and they that take this away , may as well command all men to put out their eyes , that they may better follow their guides . but the other is so much worse , because it is an assault upon our understandings , it is a robbing us of the greatest talent god hath committed to our management , it is a rape upon our best faculties , and prostituting them to the lusts of spiritual tyrants ; it is not captivating our understandings to the obedience of faith , but enslaving them to the proud and domineering usurpations of men ; wherein they would do by us as the philistins did by sampson ; they would put out our eyes , that we might grind in their prison , and make them sport . i would not be mistaken , it is the liberty of judgement i plead for , and not of practice ; that may be justly restrained by the laws of the church , where the other is allowed ; because the obligations to peace and unity are different from those to faith and inward assent . and that no absolute submission of judgement could be required by the law of moses , notwithstanding the command of outward obedience in the cases mention'd , deut. 17. 8 , 9 , &c. is most evident from hence , because that law makes provision for a sin-offering in case the whole congregation of israel sin through ignorance , and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly , or supream council , and they have done something against the commandment of the lord : which had been a law made to no purpose , if it had been impossible for their chief authority to have erred or been mistaken in their judgement . from hence we see st. paul had great reason to appeal from the high priest and elders to the law and the prophets , because they were subject to errour and mistake , but these are not . 2. because the law and the prophets are less liable to partiality , than a living judge , or the authority of the present church . i have oft-times wondered to hear men speak so advantageously of a living judge , before an infallible rule , in order to the end of controversies . if all they mean be only that an end be put to them no matter how , i confess a living judge in that case hath much the advantage , but so would any other way that persons would agree upon , as the judgement of the next person we met with , or lottery , or any such thing ; but if we would have things fairly examined and heard , and a judgement given according to the merits of the cause , the case will be found very different here from what it is in civil causes . for here the judge must be a party concerned , when his own authority and interest is questioned ; and lyable to all those passions which men are subject to in their own cases . which will be notoriously evident in the case before us , between the high priest and elders on one side , and st. paul on the other : they pleaded , that if any difficulty arose about the sense of the law , it belonged to them to judge of it ; st. paul declines their judgement , and appeals only to the law and the prophets : had it been reasonable in this case for felix to have referred the judgement to them who were the parties so deeply concerned ? a living judge may have a great advantage over a bare rule to put an end to controversies ; but then we must suppose impartiality in him , freedom from prejudice , an excellent judgement , diligence and patience in hearing all the evidence , and at last delivering sentence according to the sense of the law ; if any of these be wanting , the controversie may soon be ended , but on the wrong side . i suppose none of those who would have controversies in religion ended by a living judge , will for shame say , they would have them ended right or wrong ; but if they would have truth determined , they must give us assurance , that these judges shall lay aside all partiality to their own interests , all prejudice against their adversaries , shall diligently search , and examine , and weigh the evidence on both sides , and then shall determine according to the true sense of the law. how likely this is will appear by the living judges in our saviours time ; was there ever greater partiality seen than was in them , or more obstinate prejudice , or more wilful errors , or a more malicious sentence than came from them in the cause of our lord and saviour ? they would not believe his miracles , though told them by those that saw them ; when they saw them , they would not believe they came from god , but attributed them to the devil ; they would not so much as enquire the true place of his nativity , but ran on still with that wilful mistake , that he was born in galilee ; and by this they thought to confound nicodemus presently , search and look , for out of galilee ariseth no prophet . if they had searched and looked themselves , they would have found , that christ was born in bethlehem , and not in galilee . but where men are strongly prejudiced , any thing serves for evidence and demonstration ; whereas all the arguments on the other side shall be despised and contemned . how captious were they on all occasions towards our saviour , lying in wait to entrap him with questions , to pervert his words , and draw blasphemy out of the most innocent expressions ? and when none of all these things could do , they use all the wayes of fraud , malice and injustice to destroy the saviour of the world as a malefactor and blasphemer . was not here now a mighty advantage , which the authority of the present church among the jews of that time had , above the guidance of the law and the prophets ? and the knowledge st. paul had of the same temper being in them still might justly make him decline their judgement , and appeal only to the law and the prophets , for the ground and rule of his faith . 2. for the object of his worship , he appeals to the best antiquity , i worship the god of my fathers . i. e. i bring no new religion among you , but the very same in substance with that which all the jews have owned ; so some render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deo patrio , the god whom all my brethren acknowledge , but he rather understands it of the same god that was worshipped by abraham , and isaac , and jacob , quem majores nostri coluerunt ; so st. peter in his preaching to the people concerning the resurrection of christ , to avoid the imputation of novelty , saith , the god of abraham , and of isaac , and of jacob , the god of our fathers hath glorified his son jesus ; and again to the sanhedrin he saith , the god of our fathers raised up jesus ; and st. paul , the god of our fathers hath chosen thee ; in the use of which expressions they purposely declare that they had no thoughts of bringing in any new religion among them , contrary to what god had of old declared to the patriarchs . the main things in which the jews objected innovation to them , did either concern the bringing in some new doctrine , or the reformation of corruptions among them . 1. for their doctrine ; that either concerned the messias , or a future state . for the doctrine of the messias it was as antient as the records of any revelation from god were . it was the great promise made to the patriarchs long before the law of moses ; and even moses himself speaks of him , as st. steven proves to them ; and david , and isaiah , and jeremiah , and ezekiel , and daniel , and micah , and malachi , as the apostles at large prove in their writings . why should this then be accounted any new doctrine which they all believed and received ? if the question be only whether christ were that messias or no ; for that , they desire nothing more than the testimony of the law and the prophets , and the miracles wrought by him ; but they had no reason to quarrel with them upon their belief , for such an alteration of the state of things which themselves believed must be when the messias came ; for in him not only the nation of the jews , but all the nations of the earth were to be blessed ; which was inconsistent with supposing the ceremonial law to continue in its force and obligation ; being particularly suited to one people lying within such a compass as they might three times a year attend upon the service in the temple at hierusalem . if their quarrel was , concerning a future state , as though that were a new doctrine , st. paul adds in the next verse , that themselves also allow , that there shall be aresurrection of the dead both of the just and the unjust . and in his defence before agrippa he saith , and now i stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of god unto our fathers , unto which promise our twelve tribes instantly serving god day and night hope to come . so that the apostle produces antiquity , universality and consent in these fundamental articles of the christian religion ; only a late busie and politick faction of the sadducees opposed this doctrine ; but why should their opposition signifie any thing against so full a stream running down from the first and purest antiquity ? thus much for the positive part of their faith and doctrine . 2. for the negative pare , or the reformation of abuses and corruptions among them ; this was s. pauls plea ; let them shew where the god of our fathers imposed any of those heavy burdens which the scribes and pharisees place so much of their religion in . what ground is there in the law and the prophets , for the pharisaical superstitions , and vows , and severities to themselves in fetching blood and knocking their heads against the walls , and different garbs and dresses to appear more holy unto men , with many other customs of theirs , the observation of which was made so great a part of the religion of their devoutest men ? and it is a strange thing they should think it impossible such things should come in among them , without great notice being taken of it ; for although sudden and violent changes may have all the circumstances known , yet it is not to be expected in more in sensible & gradual alterations . a man may tell when a violent feaver seized upon him and inflamed his blood , but he cannot do so by a hectick or a consumption ; must he therefore believe himself well , because he cannot tell the punctual time when he fell sick . we may casily describe the circumstances of a landflood which overflows the banks , and bears all before it , but we cannot do so by the coming in of the tide , which steals in secretly and insensibly , and no man can assign the place where the salt and fresh water first mix together . superstition is a hectick feaver to religion , it by degrees consumes the vitals of it , but comes on insensibly , and is not easily discovered till it be hard to be cured . at first , it may be some devout but indiscreet men made way for it , who love to find out some modes of devotion different from the rest of the world , which are greedily embraced by such who admire and follow them ; this example taking , another begins and sets up for a more refined way than the former ; and so the design spreads , till at last true piety and goodness be swallowed up by superstitious fopperies . which is the most probable account of all the pharisaical corruptions ; some of whose observations might be begun at first with a good mind , and by the devout persons of that time ; but afterwards , every one that had a sowrer look and a worse nature than ordinary , thought it not enough to follow the example of others , but like a great physician he must have his nostrum's , something of his own finding out , a new garb , or ceremony , or posture of devotion , whereby he may be taken notice of , and admired for his sanctity . thus that fardle of superstitious rites was gathered up among the scribes and pharisees in our saviours time , whom he most severely upon all occasions rebukes for their hypocrisie , in placing so much of their religion in them . and thus much for the way taken by st. paul to vindicate christianity from the imputations of being a new sect or heresie , by an appeal to scripture and the best antiquity . 3. there remains only , the freedom and courage expressed by him in owning his religion , notwithstanding these false imputations . but this i confess unto thee , that after the way which is called heresie , &c. he abhorred that mean and base-spirited principle , which makes it lawful for men to deny their religion when it brings them into danger ; he studied no secret arts of complyance with his adversaries to securehimself ; he did not decline appearing , though to the hazard of his life , in so just a cause . he valued his religion beyond his own safety , and regarded not all the calumnies and reproaches of his enemies , as long as he made this his constant exercise , to keep a conscience void of offence , both towards god and towards men . and this he elsewhere saith afforded him more inward comfort and satisfaction , than all the crafts and policy in the world could give him . for our rejoycing is this , saith he , the testimony of our conscience , that in simplicity and godly sincerity , not with fleshly wisdom , but by the grace of god we have had our conversation in the world . there is nothing inspires men with so much courage , as integrity and uprightness of mind doth ; and such persons who have the comfort of that , have not only better hopes as to another world , but oft-times escape better as to this , than others do ; for even their enemies cannot but esteem them : whereas the fawning , sneaking and flattering hypocrite that will do or be any thing for his own advantage , is despised by those he courts , hated by good men , and at last tormented by his own conscience , for being false to god and religion . but we may see here in st. paul a great instance of true christian magnanimity ; he was sensible how great both the malice and quality of his enemies were ; he knew he was to answer before a judge , that regarded nothing either of justice or religion ; yet he neither flatters his judge , nor betrayes any distrust of him : he doth not bespatter his enemies , nor discover any fear of them ; but with a modest freedom and manly courage owns the main part of their accusation , and effectually vindicates his own innocency and his religion together . for even felix himself , although a man otherwise very capable of being wrought upon by some wayes of address , of which we read , ver. 26. yet the high priest and the elders with their eloquent tertullus were forced to return as they came , and leave st. paul under the name of a prisoner , but enjoying the conveniencies of liberty , ver . 23. i have now gone thorough all the parts of the text , with a respect to st. paul and the authority of the jewish church , which was engaged against him ; it may now be justly expected that i make application of what i have said to our own state and condition . thanks be to god , we are not brought to such a tryal as st. paul was , we enjoy the liberty of speaking for our selves and our religion , and not only speaking for it , but professing and owning it . and , may we ever do so ! but we have busie and restless adversaries abroad , the factors of the high priest and elders at rome , who have as much spight and malice against us , as ever those of hierusalem had against st. paul ; and they have their tertullus's too , men of art and insinuation , and who manage their cause against us just as he did against st. paul , they charge us with bringing in new sects under the pretence of reformation ; or with rejecting the authority of the present church which we were bound to obey , and thereby laying the foundation of faction ●nd schism . these are heavy charges , but they are no other than those the high priest and the elders made against st. paul ; and thanks be to god , his defence and vindication is ours too , for we appeal to scripture and the best and purest antiquity ; and desire to be judged according to these . these three things therefore i shall speak to , before i conclude . 1. that the same reasons which they produce against the reformation would have held against the spreading of christianity at first . 2. that the same defence which st. paul made for christianity will justifie the reformation . 3. that we have all reason to follow the courage of st. paul in owning and defending our religion , not with standing the imputations which are cast upon it . 1. that the same reasons which they produce against the reformation would have held against christianity at first . what have all the clamours of our adversaries for above a hundred years come to , but the very same which i have already mentioned as the jews objections against christianity , viz. novelty , and faction ? where was your church before the reformation ? produce your succession in all ages of persons who agreed in all things with you . where were those distinct bodies of men who found fault with those corruptions that you pretend to reform ? our church hath had a constant and glorious succession of bishops , and martyrs , and consessors , and religious orders of men , virgins , and widows . but supposing such a distinct succession were not necessary , yet shew how it was possible for so many errors and corruptions to come into the church , and no one take notice of them and discover them . where was the watchfull eye of providence over the church all this while ? what , all the pastors asleep at once ! or all conspiring together to deceive their posterity ! besides , how can the protestants ever answer their rejecting the authority of the present church which they lived under ? and to whom god had promised his infallible spirit ? how can they clear themselves from faction and disturbing the peace of the christian world , which lived in so great unity and peace before ? this is the summ of their objections against the reformation , which are the very same we have mention'd before , as produced by the jews against christianity . if the arguments are good now , they were so then ; if they were good then , for all that i can see the high priest and elders were in the right , and st. paul in the wrong ; if they were not good then , but are now , some remarkable disparity must be shewed between their case and ours ; and that must lye in shewing these three things . 1. that the christian church hath greater infallibility promised than the jewish had . 2. that the first christians had greater reason to reject the authority of that church , than the reformers had , as to the church of rome . 3 that the causes of corruptions in the jewish church , could not hold in the christian . but if none of these can be made good , then the case will appear to be the very same . 1. it cannot be proved that the christian church hath greater infallibility promised than the jewish had . of which we have this plain evidence , that one of the strongest arguments produced for the infallibility of the christian church is taken from the promises made to the jewish . how often hath deut. 17. 8 , 9 , 10. been made use of to prove infallibility in the christian church ? if they had any better arguments in the new testament , would they ever run so far back to a command that most evidently relates to the jewish constitution ? where hath ever god promised that he would dwell in st. peters at rome , as he did , that he would dwell in his temple at hierusalem ? what boastings and triumphs would there have been , if any such words had been in the gospel concerning rome , as there were of old concerning hierusalem ; viz. that god had sanctified it , that his name might be there for ever ; and his eyes and his heart should be there perpetually ? what pittiful proofs in comparison of this , are all those brought out of the new testament for the authority and infallibility of the roman church ? what are all the promises of the spirit made to the apostles , and remarkably accomplished in them , to this plain promise of gods particular presence in that place for ever ? suppose st. peter had priviledges above the rest of the apostles ; how comes the entail to be made to all his successors , and only at rome and no where else ? where are the deeds kept , that contain this gift ? why are they not produced during all this contest ? and yet we see in the jewish church where such a promise was made to a particular place , no such thing as infallibility was implyed in it . 2. it cannot be shewed , that the first christians had greater reason to reject the authority of the jewish church , than our reformers had to reject that of the church of rome . i know here it will be presently said , that the apostles saw the miracles of christ , and wrought many themselves , and received an immediate commission from jesus christ in whom the churches infallibility was then seated . all which i grant to be true in it self , but cannot be pleaded by them who contend for absolute obedience to the present churches authority as infallible . my reason is , because upon this principle they could not believe christ to be the true messias ; for his being the true messias depended upon two things , viz. the fulfilling of prophecies , and the truth of his miracles ; now according to their principles , no man could be certain of either of these without the authority of the church ; for the fulfilling of prophecies depended upon the sense of many obscure places of scripture , about which they say there is a necessity of an infallible judge ; and for miracles , they tell us , that there is no certain way of judging true and false , but by the authority of the church . now if these things be so , what ground could the first christians have to believe christ to be the true messias , when in both these , they must oppose the authority of the present church ? 3. they can never prove , that the same causes of corruptions do not hold as to the christian , which did as to the jewish church . for the christian church in those ages which we charge with introducing the corruptions , was degenerated into greater ignorance , barbarism , luxury and superstition , than the jewish church in the time of its darkness from the cessation of prophecy till the coming of christ. our adversaries themselves confess , that for a long time , there was nothing either of learning or humanity among them ; nothing but ease , and luxury , and ambition , and all manner of wickedness among the chief rulers among them ; nay , even at rome there was a succession of fifty of their high priests , so remarkable for their wickedness , that annas and caiaphas ( setting only aside their condemning christ ) were saints in comparison of them . and is it now any wonder that such errors and corruptions should come into that church , as those we charge them with ? nay , rather the greatest wonder seems to be , that any thing of christianity should be preserved among them . but besides the sottishness of those times , we have many other causes to assign of the corruptions introduced among them ; as , a complyance with gentilism in many of their customs and superstitions ; affectation of new modes of devotion , among indiscreet zealots ; ambition and constant endeavour to advance the authority and interests of the priesthood above all secular power ; and when for a long time these had been gathering the rude materials together , then the moorish philosophy happening to creep in among them , the monks began to busie themselves therein , and by the help of that , a little better to digest that mass and heap of corruptions , and to spend the wit they had to defend and improve them . 2. but against all these , we stand upon the same defence that st. paul did : we appeal to scripture , and the best and purest antiquity . we pretend to bring in no new doctrines , and therefore no miracles can be required of us ; which the apostles wrought to confirm christs being the true messias who was to alter that state which god himself had once appointed : all that we plead for , is that the religion established by christ may serve our turn , and that which is recorded by the apostles and evangelists ; to these we make our constant appeal , and have the same reason to decline the authority of the roman church , that st. paul had as to the high priest and elders , when he appealed to the law and the prophets : nay , we have somewhat more reason ; because god had once appointed the high priests and rulers of the people among them , but the supremacy of the roman church was a meer usurpation begun by ambition , advanced by forgery , and defended by cruelty . but we do not only believe all that is written in the law and the prophets , but we worship the god of our fathers ; of the fathers of the first and purest ages of the christian church ; we are not only content to make use of their authority in these matters , but we make our appeal to them ; and have begged our adversaries ever since the reformation , to prove the points in difference between us , by the testimony of the first six hundred years ; but from that time to this , they are as far from proving any one point , as ever they were . 3. what then follows from all this , but that we should imitate st. pauls courage in owning and defending our religion , notwithstanding all the false imputations which are cast upon it . what a shame would it be for us , meanly and basely to betray that cause , for which our ancestors sacrificed their lives ? is the romish religion any thing better than it was then ? what error in doctrine , or corruption in practice have they ever reformed ? nay , have they not rather established and confirmed them more ? are they any thing kinder to us than they have been ? no. notwithstanding all their late pleadings for evangelical peace and charity , they can at the same time tell us , that the statutes against hereticks are still in force against us , as condemned hereticks ; and we are not so dull , not to apprehend the meaning of that ; viz. that were it in their power they could lawfully burn us to morrow . and is not this the height of evangelical love and sweetness ? who can but admire the perswasiveness of such arguments to gospel-meekness , and melt at the tenderness and bowels of an inquisition ? let us not deceive our selves ; it is not the mean complyance of any in going half way towards them , will serve their turn : there is no chewing their pills , all must be swallowed together , or as good in their opinion to have none at all . for not only plain hereticks , but the favourers and suspected of heresie are solemnly excommunicated every year in the famous bull of coena domini ; and lindwood their english canonist , tells us whom they account suspected of heresie , viz. all that shew common civility to hereticks , or give alms to them , or that once hear their sermons . this last indeed hath been mitigated by a considerable party among them ; for notwithstanding the opposition of the jesuits in this matter , and seven briev's obtained by their means from several popes forbidding all roman-catholicks to come to our churches ; yet the secular priests have contended for it as a thing lawful for them not only to come to our prayers , and hear our sermons , but to partake of our sacraments too . which they may allow , while they hope to carry on their interest better that way ; but if once , ( which god forbid ) the tide should turn with them , then the old laws of their church must prevail , and nothing will be thought so wholsome as an inquisition . which it is strange , their advocates for liberty of conscience , should call only , laws in catholick countreys against hereticks , and not laws of the church , when there are extant above a hundred bulls and briev's of popes establishing , confirming , and enlarging the inquisition . since then no favour is to be expected from their church ( for whatever they pretend , all the severity comes from thence , all the favour and mitigation from the clemency and wisdom of princes ) let us endeavour to strengthen our selves , by a hearty zeal for our religion , and using the best means to confirm and uphold it . and since the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light ; there are some things practised among them which may deserve our imitation : and those are , 1. a mighty industry and zeal in promoting their cause ; they have learn'd of their predecessors to compass sea and land to gain one proselyte . they insinuate themselves into all companies , stick at no pains , accommodate themselves to all humours , and are provided one way or other to gratifie persons of all inclinations ; for they have retirement for the melancholy , business for the active , idleness for the lazy , honour for the ambitious , splendour for the vain , severities for the sowre and hardy , and a good dose of pleasures for the soft and voluptuous . it is not their way , but their zeal and industry i propound to our imitation ; i know not how it comes to pass ; but so it often happens , that they who are most secure of truth on their side , are most apt to be remiss and careless ; and to comfort themselves with some good old sayings , as god will provide , and truth will prevail , though they lye still , and do nothing towards it ; but certainly such negligence is inexcusable , where the matter is of so great importance , the adversaries so many , and an account must be given shortly in another world , of what men have done or suffered for their religion in this . 2. submission and obedience to their spiritual governours ; the greatest strength of that prevailing faction lyes in the close union and cohesion of all the parts together , by a settled subordination of one to another ; which though not alwayes effectual , yet the contrivance is so laid , as if there were as much truth and reason as policy in it , cannot be denyed to be fit for upholding the interest of a church . but we plead not for their blind and absolute obedience ; but sure the apostles had some meaning when they bid the christians obey them that had the rule over them , and submit themselves , for they watched for their souls ; and esteem them very highly in love for their works sake : not , be ready on all occasions to reproach and contemn them , and be glad of any idle stories wherewith to bespatter them . if men would once understand and practise the duties of humility , modesty , and submission to the government which god hath set over us , we might have greater hopes to secure the interest of our church and religion , than without it we can ever have . for spiritual pride , conceitedness in religion , and a spirit of contradiction to superiours are to be reckoned among some of the worst symptoms of a declining church . 3. lessening of differences among themselves ; for although with all their care they cannot prevent them , yet they still endeavour to extenuate them , as much as possible , and boast of their unity among strangers to their churches affairs . the great wisdom of the court of rome lyes in this , that as long as persons are true to them in the main points wherein the difference lyes , they can let them alone in smaller differences among themselves ; and not provoke either of the dissenting parties , unless they are sure to suppress them , lest they give them occasion to withdraw from their communion . they can allow different rites and ceremonies in the several orders of religion among them , and grant exemptions and priviledges in particular cases ; as long as they make them serviceable to their common interest by upholding and strengthning them . would to god we could at last learn this wisdom from our enemies , not to widen our own differences by inveterate heats , bitterness and animosities among our selves ; but to find out wayes whereby even the dissenters in smaller things may be made useful for the maintaining the common interest of our church and religion . and it is a vain thing in any to go about to separate these ; or ever to hope that the protestant religion can be preserved among us without upholding the church of england . for if once that bullwark be demolished , our adversaries will despise all the lesser sconces and pallisado's ; they will be but like romulus his walls , which they will easily leap over at their pleasure . i pray god then ( and i hope you will all joyn with me in it ) that he would vouchsafe to our governours the spirit of wisdom and peace , to find out the most proper means for the establishment of our church and religion ; and i pray god give us all a spirit of knowledge to understand the things which belong to our peace , and of love and unity to endeavour after them . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61590-e270 act. 18. 15. ver. 1. ver. 2 , 3. ver. 5 , 6. mal. 2. 7. heb. 9. 10. ver. 10. psal. 76. 1. deut. 12. 11. 2 kings 21. 7. 2 chron. 7. 16. v. bell. de not . eccles. l. 4. c. 5. §. praeterea . rom. 3. 2. 9. 4 , 5. mat. 3. 15. mat. 21. 12. mar. 11. 16. acts 3. 1. acts 21. 20 , 21. ver. 7. deut. 17. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. joh. 7. 46 , 47 , 48 , 49. acts 4. 7. ver. 5. acts 17. 6. mat. 15. 6. 16. 6. mat. 23. 3. màt . 16. 12. lev. 4. 13. john 7. 52. acts 3. 13. 5. 30. 22. 14. acts 7. 37. acts 26. 6 , 7. ver. 16. 2 cor. 1. 12. 2 chron. 7. 16. advocat of conscience-liberty , p. 236. 247. lindwood provinc . l. 5. tit . de haeret . p. 162. 2. vertum. rom. p. 104 , 105. advoc. for lib. p. 24. v. append. ad nicol. eyneric . director . inquisit . ven. 1607. heb. 13. 17. 2 thess. 5. 13. an answer to some papers lately printed concerning the authority of the catholick church in matters of faith, and the reformation of the church of england stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1686 approx. 75 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 37 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-05 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61526 wing s5562 estc r14199 13589077 ocm 13589077 100625 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61526) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100625) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 851:29) an answer to some papers lately printed concerning the authority of the catholick church in matters of faith, and the reformation of the church of england stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [6], 72, [2] p. printed for ric. chiswel ..., london : 1686. written by edward stillingfleet. cf. nuc pre-1956. advertisement on p. [2] at end. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng catholic church -controversial literature. church of england -doctrines. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-03 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2004-03 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion imprimatur . z. isham r. p. d. hen. episc. lond. à sacris . 1685. an answer to some papers lately printed , concerning the authority of the catholick church in matters of faith , and the reformation of the church of england . london , printed for ric. chiswel at the rose and crown in s t paul's church-yard . mdclxxxvi . an advertisement . if the papers , here answered , had not been so publickly dispersed through the nation , a due respect to the name they bear , would have kept the author from publishing any answer to them . but because they may now fall into many hands , who without some assistance may not readily resolve some difficulties started by them , he thought it not unbecoming his duty to god and the king , to give a clearer light to the things contained in them . and it can be no reflection on the authority of a prince , for a private subject to examine a piece of coyn as to its just value , though it bears his image and superscription upon it . in matters that concern faith and salvation , we must prove all things , and hold fast that which is good . an answer to the first paper . if all men could believe as they pleased , i should not have fail'd of satisfaction in this first paper ; the design of it being to put an end to particular disputes ; to which i am so little a friend , that i could have been glad to have found , as much reason in it to convince , as i saw there was a fair appearance to deceive . but there is a law in our minds distinct from that of our inclinations ; and out of a just and due regard to that , we must examine the most plausible writings , though back'd with the greatest authority , before we yield our assent unto them . if particular controversies about matters of faith could be ended by a principle , as visible as that the scripture is in print , all men of sence would soon give over disputing ; for none who dare believe what they see , can call that in question . but what if the church , whose authority , it is said , they must submit to , will not allow them to believe what they see ? how then can this be a sufficient reason to perswade them to believe the church , because it is as visible as that the scripture is in print ? unless we must only use our senses to find out the church , and renounce them assoon as we have done it . which is a very bad requital of them , and no great honour to the church which requires it . but with all due submission , it is no more visible that the roman church is the catholick church , than it is , that a part is the whole , and the most corrupt part , that one church , which christ hath here upon earth . it is agreed among all christians , that christ can have but one church upon earth , as there is but one lord , one faith , one baptism . and this is that church we profess to believe in the two creeds . but if those , who made those creeds for our direction , had intended the roman catholick church , why was it not so expressed ? how came it to pass that such a limitation of the sense of christs catholick church to the roman , should never be put to persons to be baptized in any age of the church ? for i do not find in the office of baptism , even in the roman church , that it is required that they believe the roman catholick church , or that they deny the validity of baptism out of the communion of the roman church . from whence it is to me as visible as that the scripture is in print , that the church of rome it self doth not believe that it is , the one catholick church mentioned in the two creeds . for then it must void all baptism out of its communion , which it hath never yet done . and as long as baptism doth enter persons into the catholick church , it is impossible , that all who have the true form of baptism , though out of the communion of the roman church , should be members of the catholick church , and yet the communion of the roman and catholick be all one ; as it must be if the roman church , be the catholick and apostolick church professed in the creeds . if we had been so happy to have lived in those blessed times , when the multitude of them that believed were of one heart , and of one soul , it had been no difficulty to have shewed that one visible church , which christ had here upon earth . but they must be great strangers to the history of the church , who have not heard of the early and great divisions in the communion of it . and there was a remarkable difference in the nature of those schisms , which happened in the church ; which being not considered hath been the occasion of great misaplication of the sayings of the antients about the one catholick church . some did so break off communion with other parts of the catholick church , as to challenge that title wholly to themselves ; as was evident in the case of the novatians and donatists ; for they rebaptiz'd all that embraced their communion . others were cast out of communion upon particular differences ; which were not supposed to be of such a nature , as to make them no members of the catholick church . so the bishops of rome excommunicated the bishops of asia for not keeping easter when they did ; and the bishops both of asia and africa , for not allowing the baptism of hereticks . but is it reasonable to suppose , that upon these differences they shut out all those holy bishops and martyrs from the possibility of salvation , by excluding them from their communion ? if not , then there may be different communions among christians , which may still continue parts of the catholick church ; and consequently no one member of such a division ought to assume to it self the title and authority of the one catholick church . but if any one part doth so , though never so great and conspicuos , it is guilty of the same presumption with the novatians and donatists , and is as much cause of the schisms , which happen thereupon in the church , as they were . for a long time before the reformation , there had been great and considerable breaches , between the eastern and western churches ; insomuch that they did renounce each other communion . and in these differences four patriarchal churches joined together against the fifth , viz. that of the bishop of rome . but the eastern patriarchs sinking in their power , by the horrible invasion of the enemies of the christian faith ; and the bishops of rome advancing themselves to so much authority , by the advantages they took from the kindness of some princes , and the weakness of others , they would hear of no other terms of accommodation with the eastern churches , but by an intire submission to the pope as head of the catholick church . which all the churches of the east refused , however different among themselves ; and to this day look on the pope's supremacy as an innovation in the church , and usurpation on the rights of the other patriarchs and bishops . in all those churches the two creeds are professed , true baptism administred , and an undoubted succession of bishops from the apostles ; how then come they to be excluded from being parts of the one catholick and apostolick church ? and if they be not excluded , how can the roman church assume to it self that glorious title ? so that it seems to me as visible as that the scripture is in print , that the roman church neither is , nor can be that one church , which christ left upon earth . and this principle being removed ( which ought to be taken for granted , since it can never be proved ) we must unavoidably enter into the ocean of particular disputes . and i know no reason any can have to be so afraid of it , since we have so sure a compass , as the holy scripture to direct our passage . but the reason of avoiding particular disputes is , because the evidence is too clear in them , that the church of rome hath notoriously deviated from this infallible rule . and it is as impossible for a church , which hath erred , to be infallible , as for a church really infallible , to err . but if a church pretend to prove her infallibility by texts , which are not so clear , as those which prove her to have actually erred ; then we have greater reason to recede from her errors , than to be deceived with such a fallible pretence to infallibility . well! but it is not left to every phantastical mans head to believe as he pleases , but to the church . and is it indeed left to the church to believe as it pleases ? but the meaning i suppose is , that those , who reject the the authority of the roman catholick church , do leave every man to believe according to his own fancy . certainly those of the church of england , cannot be liable to any imputaion of this nature . for our church receives the three creeds , and embraces the four general councils , and professes to hold nothing contrary to any universal tradition of the church from the apostles times . and we have often offered to put the controversies between us and the church of rome upon that issue . and do not those rather believe as they please , who believe the roman church to be the catholick church , without any colour from scriptures , antiquity or reason ? do not those believe as they please , who can believe against the most convincing evidence of their own senses ? do not those believe as they please , who can reconcile the lawfulness of the worship of images , with gods forbidding it , the communion in one kind with christ's institution , and the praying in an unknown tongue with the 14 ch. of the first epistle to the corinthians ? but all these and many other absurdities may go down by vertue of the churches authority , to whom , it is said , christ left the power upon earth to govern us in matters of faith. we do not deny that the church hath authority of declaring matters of faith , or else it never could have condemn'd the antient heresies . but then we must consider the difference between the universal church in a general and free council , declaring the sense of scripture in articles of faith , generally received in the christian church from the apostles times , as was done when the nicene creed was made ; and a faction in the church assuming to it self the title of catholick , and proceeding by other rules , than the first councils did , and imposing new opinions and practices , as things necessary to the communion of the catholick church . and this is the true point in difference between us , and those of the roman church about the churches authority in matters of faith , since the council of trent . for we think we have very great reason to complain , when a party in the church , the most corrupt and obnoxious , takes upon it self to define many new doctrines , as necessary points of faith , which have neither scripture , nor universal tradition for them . it were a very irrational thing , we are told , to make laws for a country , and leave it to the inhabitants to be interpreters and iudges of those laws ; for then every man will be his own iudge , and by consequence no such thing , as either right or wrong . but is it not as irrational to allow an usurper to interpret the laws to his own advantage , against the just title of the prince , and the true interest of the people ? and if it be not reasonable for any private person to be his own iudge , why should a publick invader be so ? but we hope it will be allowed to the loyal inhabitants of a country , so far to interpret the laws , as to be able to understand the duty they owe to their king , and to justifie his right against all the pretences of usurpers . and this is as much as we plead for in this case . can we therefore suppose , that god almighty would leave us at those uncertainties , as to give us a rule to go by , and leave every man to be his own iudge ? and can we resonably suppose , that god almighty should give as a rule not capable of being understood by those to whom it was given , in order to the great end of it , viz. the saving of their souls ? for this was the main end of the rule , to direct us in the way to heaven , and not meerly to determine controversies . the staff , which a man uses , may serve to measure things by , but the principal design is to walk with it . so it is with the holy scripture , if controversies arise : it is fit to examine and compare them with this infallible rule ; but when that is done , to help us in our way to heaven is that which it was chiefly intended for . and no man can think it of equal consequence to him , not to be mistaken , and not to be damned . in matters of good and evil , every mans conscience is his immediate judge , and why not in matters of truth and falshood ? unless we suppose mens involuntary mistakes to be more dangerous than their wilful sins . but after all , we do not leave every man to be his own iudge , any further than it concerns his own salvation , which depends upon his particular care and sincerity . for to prevent any dangerous mistakes by the artifice of seducers , we do allow the assistance of those spiritual guides , which god hath appointed in his church , for the better insturcting and governing private persons : we embrace the ancient creeds , as a summary comprehension of the articles of faith ; and think no man ought to follow his own particular fancy against doctrines so universally received in the christian church , from the apostles times . i do ask any ingenuous man , whether it be not the same thing to follow our own fancy , or to interpret scripture by it . if we allowed no creeds , no fathers , no councils , there might have been some colour for such a question . but do we permit men to interpret scripture according to their own fancy , who live in a church , which owns the doctrine of the primitive church more frankly and ingenuously , than any church in the world besides , without setting up any private spirit against it , or the present roman church to be the interpreter of it . and now i hope i may have leave to ask some questions of any ingenuous man ; as , whether it be not the same thing for the church of rome to make the rule , as to assume to it self the fole power of giving the sense of it ? for what can a rule signifie without the sense ? and if this were the intention of almighty god , had it not been as necessary to have told us , to whom he had given the power of interpreting the rule , as to have given the rule it self ? whether it be reasonable for the church of rome , to interpret those texts , wherein this power of interpreting , is to be contained ? for this is to make it iudge in its own cause , which was thought an absurdity before . and whether it be not as mischievous to allow a prosperous usurper the power of interpreting laws , according to his own interest , as any private person , according to his own fancy ? whether it be possible to reform disorders in the church , when the person principally accused is supream judge ? whether those can be indifferent judges in councils , who before-hand take an oath , to defend that authority which is to be debated ? whether tradition be not as uncertain a rule , as fancy , when men judge of tradition according to their fancy ? i would have any man shew me , where the power of deciding matters of faith is given to every particular man. if by deciding matters of faith be understood the determining them in such a manner , as to oblige others , i do not know where it is given to every particular man , nor how it should be . for then every particular man would have a power over every particular man ; and there would want a new decision , whose should take place . but if by deciding matters of faith , no more be meant , but every mans being satisfied of the reasons , why he believes one thing to be true , and not another ; that belongs to every man , as he is bound to take care of his soul , and must give an account both to god and man of the reason of his faith. and what can be meant in scripture by proving all things , and holding fast that which is good , 1 thess. 5. 21. by trying the spirits , whether they be of god , 1 john 4. 1. by judging of themselves what is right , luke 12. 57. unless god had given to mankind a faculty of discerning truth and falshood in matters of faith. but if every man hath not such a power , how comes he to be satisfied about the churches autority ? is not that a matter of faith ? and where ever any person will shew me , that every man hath a power to determine his faith in that matter , i 'le undertake to shew him the rest . christ left his power to his church ▪ even to forgive sins in heaven , and left his spirit with them , which they exercised after his resurrection . but where then was the roman-catholick church ? and how can it be hence inferred , that these powers are now in the church of rome , exclusive to all others , unless it be made appear that it was heir-general to all the apostles ? i suppose it will be granted , that the apostles had some gifts of the spirit , which the church of rome will not in modesty pretend to ; such as the gift of tongues , the spirit of discerning , prophesie , miraculous cures and punishments . now , here lyes the difficulty , to shew what part of the promise of the infallible spirit ( for the ordinary power of the keys relates not to this matter ) was to expire with the apostles , and what was to be continued to the church in all ages . a promise of divine assistance is denied by none but pelagians : but how far that extends , is the question . in the souls of good men it is so as to keep them in the way to heaven , but not to prevent any lapse into sin ; and it were worth our knowing , where god hath ever promised to keep any men more from error , than from sin. doth he hate one more than the other ? is one more disagreeing to the christian doctrine than the other ? how came then so much to be said for the keeping men from error , when at the same time , they confess they may not only commit great sins , but err very dangerously in the most solemn manner , in what relates to the doctrine of manners . would any have believed the apostles infallible , if they had known them to be persons of ill lives ; or that they had notoriously erred in some rules of great consequence to the welfare of mankind ? now , all this is freely yielded , as to the pretence of infallibility in the church of rome . it is granted , that the guides of that church have been very bad men ; and that in councils they have frequently erred about the deposing power , being only a matter of practice , and not of faith. whether it be so or not , i now dispute not ; but it is granted , that notwithstanding this infallible spirit , the roman church may grosly err in a matter of mighty consequence to the peace of christendom ; and yet it cannot err in decreeing the least matters of faith. as for instance , it can by no means err about the seven sacraments , or the intention of the priest about them ; but it may err about deposing princes , and absolving subjects from their allegiance : which in easier terms is , they can never err about their own interest , but they may about any other whatsoever . i pass over the next paragraph , the sense being imperfect , and what is material about the creeds , hath been spoken to already . that which next deserves consideration , is , that the church was the iudge even of the scripture it self , many years after the apostles , which books were canonical , and which were not . we have a distinction among us of iudges of the law and iudges of the fact : the one declare what the law is , the fact being supposed ; the other gives judgment upon the fact , as it appears before them . now in this case about the canonical books , the church is not judge of the law. for they are not to declare whether a book appearing to be canonical ought by it to be received for canonical ; ( which is taken for granted among all christians ) but all they have to do , is to give judgment upon the matter of fact , i. e. whether it appear upon sufficient evidence to have been a book written by divine inspiration . and the church of rome hath no particular priviledge in this matter , but gives its judgment as other parts of the christian world do : and if it takes upon it to judge contrary to the general sense of the christian church , we are not to be concluded by it ; but an appeal lyes to a greater tribunal of the universal church . and if they had this power , then i desire to know , how they came to lose it ? who are meant by they ? and what is understood by this power ? it is one thing for a part of the church to give testimony to a matter of fact , and another to assume the power of making books canonical , which were not so . this latter no church in the world hath , and therefore can never lose it . the former is only matter of testimony , and all parts of the church are concerned in it , and it depends as other matters of fact do , on the skill and fidelity of the reporters . and by what autority men separate themselves from that church ? what church ? the catholick and apostolick ? we own no separation from that ; but we are dis-joyned from the communion of the roman church , that we may keep up the stricter union with the truly catholick and apostolick church . and this is no separating our selves , but being cast out by an usurping faction in the church ; because we would not submit to the unreasonable conditions of communion imposed by it ; the chief whereof is owning all the usurpation , which hath by degrees been brought into it . to make this plain by an example : suppose a prosperous usurper in this kingdom had gained a considerable interest in it , and challenged a title to the whole , and therefore required of all the kings subjects , within his power , to own him to be rightful king : upon this , many of them are forced to withdraw , because they will not own his title : is this an act of rebellion , and not rather of true loyalty ? schism in the church is like rebellion in the state. the pope declares himself head of the catholick church , and hath formed himself a kind of spiritual kingdom in the west ; although the other parts of the christian world declare against it , as an usurpation . however , he goes on , and makes the owning his power a necessary condition of being of his communion . this many of the western parts , as well as eastern , disown and reject , and therefore are excluded communion with that church , whereof he is owned to be the head. the question now is , who gives the occasion to this separation ? whether the pope , by requiring the owning his usurpation , or we , by declaring against it ? now , if the conditions , he requires , be unjust and unreasonable ; if his autority , he challenges , over the catholick church , be a meer usurpation ( for which we have not only the consent of the other parts of the christian world , but of scripture and the ancient church ) then we are not to be condemned , for such a separation , which was unavoidable , if we would not comply with the pope's usurpation . and upon this foot the controversie about schism stands between us and the church of rome . the only pretence i ever heard of , was , because the church hath fail'd in wresting and interpreting the scripture contrary to the true sense and meaning of it ; and that they have imposed articles of faith upon us , which are not to be warranted by gods word . i do desire to know who is to be iudge of that , whether the whole church , the succession whereof hath continued to this day without interruption ; or particular men , who have raised schisms for their own advantage . the whole force of this paragraph depends upon a supposition , which is taken for granted , but will never be yielded by us , and we are sure can never be proved by those of the church of rome , viz. that in the new imposed articles , the whole church in a continued succession hath been of the same judgment with them , and only some few particular men in these last ages have opposed them . whereas the great thing we insist upon next to the holy scripture , is , that they can never prove the points in diference , by an universal tradition from the apostles times , either as to the papal supremacy , or the other articles defined by the council of trent . vve do not take upon our selves to contradict the universal sense of the christian church from the apostles times in any one point . but the true reason of the proceeding of the church of england was this . vvhile the popes authority was here received and obeyed , there was no liberty of searching into abuses , or the ways of reforming them . but when men were encouraged to look into the scripture , and fathers , and councils , they soon found the state of things in the church extreamly altered from what they ought to have been , or had been in the primitive church : but they saw no possibility of redress , as long as the popes autority was so absolute and inviolable . this therefore in the first place they set themselves to the accurate examination of , and the result was , that they could find it neither in the scriptures , nor fathers , nor councils , nor owned by the eastern churches : and therefore they concluded it ought to be laid aside , as an usurpation . our church being by this means set free ( even with the consent of those , who joyned with the church of rome in other things ) a greater liberty was then used in examining particular doctrines and practices , which had crept into the church by degrees , when ignorance and barbarism prevail'd ; and having finish'd this enquiry , articles of religion were drawn up , wherein the sense of our church was delivered , agreeable to scripture and antiquity , though different from the modern church of rome ; and these articles are not the private sense of particular men , but the publick standard whereby the world may judge , what we believe and practise ; and therefore these are the sense of our church , and not the opinions or fancies of particular men. and those who call the retrenching the popes exorbitant power by the name of schism , must by parity of reason call the casting off an usurper rebellion . but certainly those who consider the mighty advantages and priviledges of the clergy in the church of rome , can never reasonably suspect any of that order should hope to better themselves by the reformation . and if we judge of mens actings by their interest , one of the most surprising considerations at this day is , that the clergy should be against , and princes for the church of rome . an answer to the second paper . it is a sad thing to consider , what a world of heresies are crept into this nation . but is it not a strange thing to consider , that no distinction is here put between the religion by law established , and the parties disowned by it , and dissenting from it ? and yet many of these , though justly liable to the charge of schism , embrace no heresies against the four or six first general councils . but if the dissenters were guilty of never so many heresies , how comes the church of england to bear the blame of them ; when the weakning its power and authority was the occasion of such an overflowing of schisms and heresies among us ? and it is indeed a sad thing to consider how many ways and means have been used by all parties to introduce and keep up schisms and divisions amongst us , and then how the church of england is blamed for not being able to suppress them . but if all doctrines opposite to the church of rome be accounted heresies , then we desire to be informed , how the church of rome came to have this power of defining heretical doctrines ; or how any doctrine comes to be heresie by being contrary to its definitions . for heresie is an obstinate opposing some necessary article of faith. it must therefore be proved , that what the church of rome declares , doth thereby become a necessary article of faith , or it is very unreasonable to lay the imputation of heresie upon us . and this can never be maintained , without proving that the church of rome hath a power to make doctrines not necessary before , to become necessary by her definition : which is the same thing with making new articles of faith. but these can never be proved to be such by universal tradition ; which the church of rome pretends for all her articles of faith. every man thinks himself as competent a iudge of scripture , as the very apostles themselves . doth every man among us pretend to an infallible spirit ? and yet every man owns that the apostles had it . but what is meant by being a iudge of scripture ? if no more be understood , then that every man must use his understanding about it , i hope this is no crime nor heresie . the scripture must be believed in order to salvation , and therefore it must be understood ; for how can a man believe , what he understands not the sense or meaning of ? if he must understand the sense he must be iudge of the sense ; so that every man , who is bound to believe the scripture in order to his salvation , must be judge of the sense of the scripture , so far as concerns his salvation . but if by being a iudge of the scripture be meant giving such a judgment , as obliges others to submit to it , then among us no particular man doth pretend to be a competent iudge of scripture , so as to bind others to rely upon his authority in expounding scripture . we own the authority of guides in the church , and a due submission to them , but we do not allow them to be as competent iudges of scripture as the very apostles . and 't is no wonder it should be so , since that part of the nation , which looks most like a church , dares not bring the true arguments against the other sects , for fear they should be turned against themselves , and confuted by their own arguments . this is directly level'd against the church of england , which is hereby charged with insincerity or weakness in dealing with the dissenters . but we must consider the meaning of this charge . it is no wonder it should be so , i. e. that every man should think himself as competent a iudge of scripture , as the very apostles , because the church of england dares not use the true arguments against the sects . whence it appears that this true argument is the churches infallible authority , and the obligation of all members of the church to submit their judgments intirely thereto . i confess that if the church of england did pretend to this against the sectaries , they might justly turn it against her ; because in our articles , though the churches authority be asserted , yet infallibility is denyed . if there can be no authority in a church , without infallibility ; or there can be no obligation to submit to authority , without it , then the church of england doth not use the best arguments against sectaries . but if there be no ground for infallibility , if the church which hath most pretended to it , hath been most grosly deceived ; if the heads of that church have been not barely suspected of heresie , but one of them stands condemned for it in three general councils , own'd by that church ; then for all that i can see , the church of england hath wisely disowned the pretence of infallibility , and made use of the best arguments against sectaries from a just authority , and the sinfulness and folly of the sectaries refusing to submit to it . the church of england ( as 't is called ) would fain have it thought , that they are the iudges in matters spiritual , yet dare not say positively , there is no appeal from them . is not the church of england really what it is called ? i would fain know what it wants to make it as good a church , as any in the christian world ? it wants neither faith ( if the creed contain it ) nor sacraments , ( and those entire ) nor succession of bishops , ( as certain as rome it self ) nor a liturgy , ( more agreeing to primitive worship , then is any where else to be found . ) why then the church of england , as 't is called ? well! but what is this church now blamed for ? they pretend to be iudges in matters spiritual , and yet dare not say there is no appeal from them . how then ? are there no true judges , but such as there lies no appeal from ? there lies an appeal from any judges in the kings courts to the court of parliament ; are they not therefore true judges in westminster-hall ? there lay an appeal from bishops to metropolitans , from them to patriarchs , from patriarchs to general councils , according to the antient polity of the church . were there therefore no true judges , but general councils ? what follows relating to the churches authority , and every mans following his own judgment , hath been answered already . i proceed therefore , to what further concerns this matter of appeal . what country can subsist in quiet , where there is not a supreme iudge , from whence there can be no appeal ? the natural consequence from hence appears to be , that every national church ought to have the supream power within it self . but how come appeals to a foreign jurisdiction to tend to the peace and quiet of a church ? they have been always complained of in the best ages of the church , and by the best men ; such as s. cyprian , and s. augustine , and the whole african churches . the worst men began them , and the worst church encouraged them , without regard to the peace of the christian church , so it increased its own grandeur by them . we have had these hundred years past , the sad effects of denying to the church , that power in matters spiritual , without an appeal . and our ancestors for many hundred years last past , found the intolerable inconveniencies of an appeal to foreign jurisdiction . whereby the nation was exhausted , justice obstructed , the clergy oppressed , and the kings prerogative greatly diminished . but these were slight things in comparison to what we have felt these hundred years past for want of it . have not the kings courts been open for matters of law and justice , which have been fill'd with men of as great abilities and integrity , since the reformation , as ever they were before ? hath not the appeal to the king in his high court of chancery been as much for the king and people , as ever the appeal was to the court of rome ? have not all the neighbour princes been forced for the preserving their own dignity to set bounds and limits to appeals to rome , and to orders or bulls that come from thence ? how then comes the want of such an appeal to be thought to produce such sad effects here ? all christendom groans under the sad effects of them ; and it is a very self-denying humour for those to be most sensible of the want of them , who would really suffer the most by them . can there be any iustice done , where the offenders are their own iudges , and equal interpreters of the law , with those that are appointed to admister iustice ? and is there any likelihood , justice should be better done in another country , by another authority , and proceeding by such rules , which in the last resort , are but the arbitrary will of a stranger . and must such a one , pretending to a power he hath no right to , be iudge in his own cause , when he is the greatest offender himself ? but how is this applied to the protestants in england ? this is our case , here in england , in matters spiritual ; for the protestants are not of the church of england , as 't is the true church , from whence there can be no appeal ; but because the discipline of that church is conformable at present to their fancies ; which , as soon as it shall contradict or vary from , they are ready to embrace or joyn with the next congregation of people , whose discipline or worship agrees with the opinion of that time. the sense of this period is not so clear , but that one may easily mistake about it . that which is aimed at , is , that we of the church of england , have no tie upon us , but that of our own judgments ; and when that changes , we may join with independents or presbyterians , as we do now with the church of england . and what security can be greater , than that of our judgments ? if it be said to be nothing , but fancy and no true iudgment , we must beg leave to say , that we dare appeal to the world , whether we have not made it appear , that it is not fancy , but iudgment which hath made us firm to the church of england . might it not as well have been said , that the protestants of the church of england , adhered to the crown in the times of rebellion out of fancy , and not out of iudgment ? and that if their fancy changed , they might as well have joined with the rebels ? will not this way of reasoning hold as strongly against those of the church of rome ? for why do any adhere to that , but because it is agreeable to their judgment so to do ? what evidence can they give , that it is iudgment in them , and only fancy in us ? if reason must be that which puts the difference , we do not question , but to make ours appear to be iudgment , and theirs fancy ? for what is an infallible iudge , which christ never appointed , but fancy ? what is their unwritten word , as a rule of faith to be equally received with the scriptures , but fancy ? what is giving honour to god by the worship of images , but fancy ? what is making mediators of intercession , besides the mediator of redemption , but fancy ? what is the doctrine of concomitancy , to make amends for half the sacrament , but fancy ? what is the substantial change of the elements into the body of christ , but fancy ? for both senses and reason are against it . what is the deliverance of souls out of purgatory , by masses for the dead , but meer fancy ? but i forbear giving any more instances . so that according to this doctrine , there is no other church nor interpreter of scripture , but that which lies in every man 's giddy brain . let mens brains be as giddy , as they are said to be , for all that i can see , they are the best faculties they can make use of , for the understanding of scripture , or any thing else . and is there any infallible church upon earth , which must not be beholding to mens giddy brains for believing it ? and it may be , never the less giddy for doing it ? for god-sake why do any men take the church of rome to be infallible ? is it not , because their understandings tell them they ought so to do ? so that by this consequence , there is no infallible church , but what lies in every mans giddy brain . i desire to know therefore of every serious considerer of these things , whether the great work of our salvation ought to depend on such a sandy foundation as this ? i thank god i have seriously considered this matter , and must declare that i find no christian church built on a more sandy foundation , than that , which pretends to be setled upon a rock ; i mean , so far as it imposes the new faith of trent , as a necessary condition of salvation . had we no other reason to embrace christianity , than such as they offer for these new doctrines , i am much afraid christianity it self , to all inquisitive men , would be thought to have but a sandy foundation . but what is this sandy foundation we build upon ? every man 's private judgment in religion ? no understanding man builds upon his own judgment , but no man of understanding can believe without it . for i appeal to any ingenious man , whether he doth not as much build upon his own judgment , who chuseth the church , as he that chuseth scripture for his rule ? and he that chuseth the church , hath many more difficulties to conquer than the other hath . for the church can never be a rule without the scriptures , but the scriptures may without the church . and it is no such easy matter to find the churches infallibility in the scripture . but suppose that be found , he hath yet a harder point to get over , viz. how the promises relating to the church in general , came to be appropriated to the church of rome . which a man must have an admirable faculty at discerning , who can find it out , either in scripture , or the records of the ancient church . the places of scripture which are brought about christ's being with his church to the end of the world , about the power to forgive sins ; about the clergy being god's labourers , husbandry , building , having the mind of christ ; do as effectually prove infallibility of the church of england , as the church of rome ; for i cannot discern the least inclination in any of them to favour one against the other . and pray consider on the other side , that those who resist the truth , and will not submit to his church , draw their arguments from implications , and far-fetch'd interpretations , at the same time that they deny plain and positive words : which is so great a disingenuity , that 't is not almost to be thought that they can believe themselves . this is a very heavy charge ; to resist the truth , to deny plain and positive words of scripture ; to be guilty of great disingenuity , so as not to believe our selves , are faults of so high a nature , as must argue not only a bad cause , but a very bad mind . and god forbid , that those of the church of england , should ever be found guilty of these things . but to come to particulars ; is it resisting truth , or arguing from implications , and denying plain and positive words of scripture , to say , we must not worship images ; we must make god alone the object of holy worship ; we must give the eucharist in both kinds according to christ's express institution ; we must understand our prayers , when st. paul's words are so clear about it ? so far at least we have plain and positive words of scripture on our side . and for implications , and far fetch'd interpretations , commend me to the pope's bulls , especially when they have a mind to prove their authority from scripture ; which they can do from in the beginning , to the end of the apocalypse . but that which seems to be aimed at here , is , this is my body ; wherein the words seem to be plain and positive on their side , and our sense to be from implications , or far-fetched interpretations . to which i answer , that there are expressions in scripture as plain and positive as this , which none think themselves bound to understand in their literal sense . for then we must all believe , that god hath eyes and ears , a face , hands and feet , as firmly , as that the bread was then turned into christ's body , when he spake those words . and i would know , whether the christian church rejecting the doctrine of those who made god to be like to man , was not chargeable with the same resisting the truth , and denying plain and positive words of scripture , as we are ? and yet i hope the christian church did then believe it self . suppose any should assert , that the rock in the wilderness , was really changed into christ's body ; would not he have the very same things to say against those who denied it ? for are not the words as plain and as positive , that rock was christ ? but sacramental expressions , by the consent of the christian church , and the very neture of the things , are of a different sense from logical propositions . and if this had been intended in the plain and literal sense , st. paul would never have as plainly and positively called it bread after consecration ; nor the cup be said to be the new testament in his blood. the conclusion is : is there any other foundation of the protestant church , but that if the civil magistrate pleases , he may call such of the clergy as he thinks fit for his turn at that time , and turn the church either to presbytery , or independency , or indeed what he pleases ? this was the way of our pretended reformation here in england . and by the same rule and authority , it may be altered into as many shapes and forms as there are fancies in mens heads . this looks like a very unkind requital to the church of england , for her zeal in asserting the magistrate's power against a foreign jurisdiction ; to infer from thence , that the magistrate may change the religion here which way he pleases . but although we attribute the supream iurisdiction to the king ; yet we do not question , but there are inviolable rights of the church , which ought to be preserved against the fancies of some , and the usurpations of others . we do by no means make our religion mutable , according to the magistrate's pleasure . for the rule of our religion is unalterable , being the holy scripture ; but the exercise of it , is under the regulation of the laws of the land. and as we have cause to be thankful to god , when kings are nursing fathers to our church ; so we shall never cease to pray for their continuing so ; and that in all things we may behave our selves towards them , as becomes good christians , and loyal subjects . an answer to the third paper . the third paper is said to be written by a great lady , for the satisfaction of her friends , as to the reasons of her leaving the communion of the church of england , and making her self a member of the roman catholick church . if she had written nothing concerning it , none could have been a competent judg of those reasons or motives she had for it , but her self : but since she was pleased to write this paper to satisfy her friends ; and it is thought fit to be published for general satisfaction , all readers have a right to judg of the strength of them ; and those of the church of england , an obligation to vindicate the honour of it , so far as it may be thought to suffer by them . i am sensible how nice and tender a thing it is , to meddle in a matter wherein the memory of so great a lady is so nearly concern'd ; and wherein such circumstances are mentioned , which cannot fully be cleared , the parties themselves having been many years dead : but i shall endeavour to keep within due bounds , and consider this paper with respect to the main design of it , and take notice of other particulars so far as they are subservient to it . the way of her satisfaction must needs appear very extraordinary ; for towards the conclusion she confesses , she was not able , nor would she enter into disputes with any body . now where the difference between the two churches lies wholly in matters of dispute , how any one could be truly satisfied , as to the grounds of leaving one church , and going to the other , without entring into matter of dispute with any body , is hard to understand . if persons be resolved before-hand what to do , and therefore will hear nothing said against it , there is no such way , as to declare they will enter into no dispute about it . but what satisfaction is to be had in this manner of proceeding ? how could one bred up in the church of england , and so well instructed in the doctrines of it , ever satisfy her self in forsaking the communion of it , without enquiring into , and comparing the doctrines and practices of both churches ? it is possible for persons of learning , who will take the pains of examining things themselves , to do that , without entring into disputes with any body ; but this was not to be presumed of a person of her condition . for many things must fall in her way , which she could neither have the leisure to examine , nor the capacity to judg of , without the assistance of such who have made it their business to search into them . had she no divines of the church of england about her , to have proposed her scruples to ? none able and willing to give her their utmost assistance in a matter of such importance , before she took up a resolution of forsaking our church ? this cannot be imagined ; considering not only her great quality , but that just esteem they had for her whilst she continued so zealous and devout in the communion of our church . but we have more than this to say . one of the * bishops who had nearest relation to her for many years , and who owns in print , * that he bred her up in the principles of the church of england , was both able and willing to have removed any doubts and scruples with respect to our church , if she would have been pleased to have communicated them to him . and however she endeavoured to conceal her scruples ; he tells her , in his † letter to her ( which he since printed for his own vindication ) that he had heard much discourse concerning her wavering in religion , and that he had acquainted her highness with it , the lent before the date of this paper ; and was so much concerned at it , that he obtained a promise from her , that if any writing were put into her hands by those of the the church of rome , that she would send it either to him , or to the then bishop of oxford , whom he left in attendance upon her . after which , he saith , she was many days with him at farnham ; in all which time she spake not one word to him of any doubt she had about her religion . and yet this paper bears date , aug. 20. that year , wherein she declares her self changed in her religion : so that it is evident she did not make use of the ordinary means for her own satisfaction , at least as to those bishops who had known her longest . but she saith , that she spoke severally to two of the best bishops we have in england , who both told her , there were many things in the roman church , which it were much to be wished we had kept ; as confession , which was no doubt commanded of god ; that praying for the dead , was one of the ancient things in christianity ; that for their parts they did it daily , though they would not own it . and afterwards , pressing one of them very much upon the other points ; he told her , that if he had been bred a catholick , he would not change his religion ; but that being of another church , wherein he was sure were all things necessary to salvation , he thought it very ill to give that scandal , as to leave that church wherein he received his baptism . which discourses , she said , did but add more to the desire she had to be a catholick . this , i confess , seems to be to the purpose ; if there were not some circumstances and expressions very much mistaken in the representation of it : but yet suppose the utmost to be allow'd , there could be no argument from hence drawn for leaving the communion of our church , if this bishop's authority or example did signify any thing with her . for supposing he did say , that if he had been bred in the communion of the church of rome , he would not change his religion : yet he added , that being of another church , wherein were all things necessary to salvation , he thought it very ill to give that scandal , as to leave that church wherein he had received his baptism . now why should not the last words have greater force to have kept her in the communion of our church , than the former to have drawn her from it ? for why should any person forsake the communion of our church , unless it appears necessary to salvation so to do ? and yet this yielding bishop did affirm , that all things necessary to salvation were certainly in our church ; and that it was an ill thing to leave it . how could this add to her desire of leaving our church ? unless there were some other motive to draw her thither , and then such small inducements would serve to inflame such a desire . but it is evident from her own words afterwards , that these concessions of the bishop could have no influence upon her : for she declares , and calls god to witness , that she would never have changed her religion , if she had thought it possible to save her soul otherwise . now what could the bishop's words signify towards her turning , when he declares just contrary , viz. not only that it was possible for her to be saved without turning , but that he was sure we had all things necessary to salvation ; and that it was a very ill thing to leave our church ? there must therefore have been some more secret reason , which encreased her desire to be a catholick after these discourses : unless the advantage were taken from the bishop's calling the church of rome the catholick religion ; if he had been bred a catholick , he would not have chang'd his religion . but if we take these words so strictly , he must have contradicted himself ; for how could he he sure we had all things necessary to salvation , if we were out of the catholick church ? was a bishop of our church , and one of the best bishops of our church , as she said , so weak as to yield , that he was sure all things necessary to salvation were to be had out of the communion of the catholick church ? but again ; there is an inconsistency in his saying , that he thought it very ill to leave our church ; which no man of common sense would have said , if he had believed the roman church to be the catholick , exclusive of all others that do not join in communion with it . the utmost then that can be made of all this , is , that there was a certain bishop of this church , who held both churches to be so far parts of the catholick church , that there was no necessity of going from one church to another . but if he asserted that , he must overthrow the necessity of the reformation , and consequently not believe our articles and homiles , and so could not be any true member of the church of england . but the late bishop of winchester hath made a shorter answer to all this ; for he first doubts , whether there ever were any such bishops who made such answers ; and afterwards he affirms , that he believes there never was , in rerum naturâ , such a discourse as is pretended to have been between this great person , and two of the most learned bishops of england . but , god be thanked , the cause of our church doth not depend upon the singular opinion of one or two bishops in it , wherein they appareently recede from the establish'd doctrine of it . and i am sure those of the church of rome take it ill from us , to be charged with the opinion of particular divines , against the known sentiments of their church . therefore supposing the matter of fact true , it ought not to have moved her to any inclination to leave the church of england . but after all , she protests , in the presence of almighty god , that no person , man or woman , directly or indirectly , ever said any thing to her ( since she came into england ) or used the least endeavour to make her change her religion ; and that it is a blessing she wholly ows to almighty god. so that the bishops are acquitted from having any hand in it , by her own words ; and as far as we can understand her meaning , she thought her self converted by immediate divine illumination . we had thought the pretence to a private spirit had not been at this time allowed in the church of rome . but i observe , that many things are allowed to bring persons to the church of rome , which they will not permit in those who go from it . as the use of reason in the choice of a church ; the judgment of sense ; and here , that which they would severely condemn in others as a private spirit , or enthusiasm , will pass well enough if it doth but lead one to their communion . any motive or method is good enough which tends to that end ; and none can be sufficient against it . but why may not others set up for the change as to other opinions upon the same grounds , as well as this great person does , as to the change from our church to the church of rome ? and we have no pretenders to enthusiasm among us , but do as solemnly ascribe the blessing wholly to almighty god ; and look on it as the effect of such prayers as she made to him in france and flanders . but i wonder a person , who owed her change so wholly to almighty god , should need the direction of an infallible church ; since the utmost they can pretend to , is no more than to have such an immediat conduct ; and the least that can be meant by it , is , that she had no assistance from any other persons . which may not exclude her own endeavours : but supposing them to be employed , and an account to be here given of them ; yet there is no connexion between any of the premisses , and the conclusion she drew from them ; and therefore it must be immediate impulse , or some concealed motive which determin'd her choice . the conclusion was , that she would never have changed , if she could have saved her soul otherwise . if this were true , she had good reason for her change ; if it were not true , she had none ; as it is most certain it was not . now let us examine how she came to this conclusion ; and i will suppose it to have been just in the method she sets it down in . first , she saith , she never had any scruples till the november before ; and then they began upon reading dr. heylin's history of the reformation ; which was commended to her as a book to settle her ; and there she found such abominable sacriledg upon henry the 8th's divorce , king edward's minority , and queen elizabeth's succession , that she could not believe the holy ghost could ever be in such counsels . this was none of the best advices given to such a person , to read dr. heylin's history for her satisfaction . for there are two distinct parts in the history of our reformation ; the one ecclesiastical , the other political : the former was built on scripture and antiquity , and the rights of particular churches ; the other on such maxims which are common to statesmen at all times , and in all churches , who labour to turn all revolutions and changes to their own advantage . and it is strange to me that a person of so great understanding , should not distinguish these two . whether hen. 8. were a good man or not ; whether the d. of somerset raised his estate out of the church lands , doth not concern our present enquiry ; which is , whether there was not sufficient cause for a reformation in the church ? and if there was , whether our church had not sufficient authority to reform it self ? and if so , whether the proceedings of our reformation were not justifiable by the rules of scripture and the ancient church ? these were the proper points for her to have considered , and not the particular faults of princes , or the miscarriages of ministers of state. were not the vices of alexander the 6th , and many other heads of the church of rome for a whole age together , by the confession of their own greatest writers , as great at least as those of henry the 8th ? and were these not thought sufficient to keep her from the church of rome ; and yet the others were sufficient to make her think of leaving our church ? but henry the eighth's church was in truth the church of rome under a political head , much as the church of sicily is under the king of spain . all the difference is , henry the 8th took it as his own right ; the king of spain pretends to have it from the pope , by such concessions , which the popes deny . and suppose the king of spain's pretence were unlawful to that jurisdiction which he challengeth in the kingdom of sicily ; were this a sufficient ground to justify the thoughts of separation from the church of rome ? but the duke of somerset raised his estate out of church-lands , and so did many courtiers in the reign of queen elizabeth . are there not miscarriages of the like nature in the church of rome ? what is the popes making great estates out of the church-lands , for their nephews to be princes and dukes ? a thing not unheard of in our age. and is it not so much worse to be done by the head of the church ? these she confesses were but scruples ; but such as occasioned her examining the points in difference by the holy scripture . now she was in the right way for satisfaction , provided she made use of the best helps and means for understanding it ; and took in the assistance of her spiritual guides . but it seems , contrary to the doctrine of the church of rome , she found some things so easy there , that she wondered she had been so long without finding them out . and what were these ? no less than the real presence in the blessed sacrament ; the infallibility of the church , confession , and praying for the dead . these were great discoveries to be made so easily , considering how those of the church of rome , who have been most vers'd in these matters , have found it so difficult to make them out from thence . ( 1. ) as to the real presence ; as it is in the dispute between us and the church of rome , it implies the real and substantial change of the elements into the body and blood of christ. but where do our saviour's words , in calling the sacrament his body and blood , imply any such thing ? the wisest persons of the church of rome have confessed , that the bare words of our saviour can never prove it ; but there needs the authority of the church to interpret them in that sense . how then could she so easily find out that , which their most learned men could not ? but there is nothing goes so far in such discoveries as a willing mind . ( 2. ) as to confession . no doubt the word is often used in scripture , and therefore easily found . but the question between us , is not about the usefulness or advantage of confession in particular cases , but the necessity of it in all cases , in order to remission of sins . and i can hardly believe any bishop of our church would ever say to her , that confession in this sense was ever commanded by god. for then he must be damned himself if he did not confess every known sin to a priest. but some general expressions might be used , that confession of sin was commanded by god ; confess your sins one to another : but here is nothing of a particular confession to a priest , necessary in order to forgiveness of sin. ( 3. ) as to praying for the dead ; it is hard to find any place of scripture which seems to have any tendency that way , unless it be with respect to the day of iudgment , and that very doubtfully . but how came this great person to think it not possible to be saved in our church , unless we prayed for the dead ? how did this come to be a point of salvation ? and for the practice of it , she saith , the bishops told her they did it daily . whether they did it or not , or in what sense they did it , we cannot now be better informed : but we are sure this could be no argument for her to leave the communion of our church , because she was told by these bishops they did it , and continued in the communion of it . ( 4. ) lastly ; as to the infallibility of the church . if this , as applied to the roman church , could be any where found in scripture , we should then indeed be to blame not to submit to all the definitions of it . but where is this to be found ? yes , christ hath promised to be with his church to the end of the world. not with his church , but with his apostles : and if it be restrained to them , then the end of the world is no more than always . but suppose it be understood of the successors of the apostles ; were there none but at rome ? how comes this promise to be limited to the church of rome ; and the bishops of antioch and alexandria , and all the other eastern churches ( where the bishops as certainly succeeded the apostles , as at rome it self ) not to enjoy the equal benefit of this promise ? but they who can find the infallibility of the church of rome in scripture , need not despair of finding whatever they have a mind to there . but from this promise she concludes , that our saviour would not permit the church to give the laity the communion in one kind , if it were not lawful so to do . now in my opinion , the argument is stronger the other way ; the church of rome forbids the doing of that , which christ enjoyned ; therefore it cannot be infallible , since the command of christ is so much plainer than the promise of infallibility to the church of rome . but , from all these things laid together , i can see no imaginable reason of any force to conclude , that she could not think it possible to save her soul otherwise , than by embracing the communion of the church of rome . and the publick will receive this advantage by these papers , that thereby it appears , how very little is to be said by persons of the greatest capacity , as well as place , either against the church of england , or for the church of rome . finis . an advertisement of books printed for richard chiswell . the history of the reformation of the church of england . by gilbert bvrnet , d. d. in two volumes , folio . the moderation of the church of england , in her reformation , in avoiding all undue compliances with popery and other sorts of phanaticisms , &c. by timothy pvller , d. d. octavo . a dissertation concerning the government of the ancient church : more particularly of the encroachments of the bishops of rome upon other sees . by william cave , d. d. octavo . an answer to mr. serjeants [ sure footing in christianity ] concerning the rule of faith : with some other discourses . by william falkner , d. d. 40. a vindication of the ordinations of the church of england ; in answer to a paper written by one of the church of rome , to prove the nullity of our orders . by gilbert bvrnet , d. d. octavo . the history of the gunpowder treason , collected from approved authors , as well popish as protestant . with a vindication of the said history , and of the proceedings and matters relating thereunto , from the exceptions which have been made against it , and more especially of late years , by the author of the catholick apology , and others . 40. a relation of the barbarous and bloody massacre of about an hundred thousand protestants , begun at paris , and carried on over all france , in the year 1572. collected out of mezcray , thuanus , and other approved authors . 40. the apology of the church of england ; and an epistle to one signior scipio , a venetian gentleman , concerning the council of trent . written both in latin , by the right reverend father in god , iohn iewel lord bishop of sarisbury : made english by a person of quality . to which is added , the life of the said bishop ; collected and written by the same hand , octavo . a letter writ by the last assembly general of the clergy of france to the protestants , inviting them to return to their communion . together with the methods proposed by them for their conviction . translated into english , and examined , by gilb . bvrnet , d. d. 80. the life of william bedel , d. d. bishop of kilmore in ireland . together with certain letters which passed betwixt him and iames waddesworth ( a late pensioner of the holy inquisition in sevil ) in matter of religion , concerning the general motives to the roman obedience . 40. the decree made at rome the second of march , 1679. condemning some opinions of the iesuits , and other casuists . quarto . a discourse concerning the necessity of reformation , with respect to the errors and corruptions of the church of rome . quarto . first part. — the second part of the same discourse ; shewing the vanity of the pretended reformation of the council of trent , and of r. h's vindication of it ; [ in his fifth discourse concerning the guide to controversies . ] 40. in the press , and will be published in few days . a discourse concerning the celebration of divine service in an unknown tongue . quarto . a papist not misrepresented by protestants . being a reply to the reflections upon the answer to [ a papist misrepresented and represented ] . quarto . an exposition of the doctrine of the church of england , in the several articles proposed by the late bishop of condom , [ in his exposition of the doctrine of the catholick church ] . quarto . a catechism explaining the doctrine and practices of the church of rome . with an answer thereunto . by a protestant of the church of england . octavo . in the press . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61526-e4640 * morley bp of winchester . * preface to his treatise . p. 5. † letter to her royal highness from the bp of winton . p. 3 , 4. blandford , pag. 14. sheldon a. b. of canterb . blanford bp of worcester . blandford bishop of worcester . preface , p. 2. p. 4. a discourse concerning the power of excommunication in a christian church, by way of appendix to the irenicum by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1662 approx. 91 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61546 wing s5583 estc r38297 17288836 ocm 17288836 106329 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61546) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 106329) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1103:8) a discourse concerning the power of excommunication in a christian church, by way of appendix to the irenicum by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. irenicum. [2], 31 p. printed for henry mortlock ..., london : 1662. reproduction of original in the cambridge university library. includes bibliographical references. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng church of england -government. excommunication. church polity. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-06 melanie sanders sampled and proofread 2004-06 melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a discourse concerning the power of excommunication in a christian church ▪ by way of appendix to the irenicum . by edward stillingfleet , rector of sutton in bedfordshire . london , printed for henry mortlock , at the sign of the phoenix in st. pauls church-yard , neer the little north-door . 1662. a discourse concerning the power of excommunication in a christian church . it is a matter of daily observation and experience in the world , how hard it is to keep the eyes of the understanding clear in its judgement of things , when it is too far engaged in the dust of controversie . it being so very difficult to well manage an impetuous pursuit after any opinion , nothing being more common then to see men outrun their mark , and through the force of their speed to bee carryed as farr beyond it , as others in their opinion fall short of it . there is , certainly , a kind of ebriety of the mind , as well as of the body , which makes it so unstable and pendulous , that it oft times reeles from one extream unto the quite contrary . this , as it is obvious in most eager controvertists of all ages , so especially in such , who have discovered the falsity of an opinion they were once confident of , which they think they can never after run farr enough from : so that while they start at an apparition they so much dread , they run into those untroden paths , wherein they lose both themselves and the truth they sought for . thus wee find it to be in the present controversie , for many out of their just zeal against the extravagancies of those who scrued up church power to so high a peg , that it was thought to make perpetuall dis●ord with the common-wealth , could never think themselves free from so great an inconvenience , till they had melted down all spiritual power into the civil state , and dissolved the church into the common-wealth . but that the world may see i have not been more forward to assert the just power of the magistrate in ecclesiasticalls , as well as civills , then to defend the fundamental rights of the church , i have taken this opportunity , more fully to explain and vindicate that part of the churches power , which lies in reference to offenders ? it being the main thing struck at by those who are the followers of that noted physitian , who handled the church so ill , as to deprive her of her expulsive faculty of noxious humours , and so left her under a miserere mei . i shall therefore endeavour to give the church her due , as well as caesar his , by making good this following principle or hypothesis , upon which the whole hinge of this controversie turnes , viz. that the power of inflicting censures upon offenders in a christian church , is a fundamentall right , resulting from the constitution of the church , as a society by jesus christ , and that the seat of this power is in those officers of the church , who have derived their power originally from the founder of this society , and act by vertue of the laws of it . for the cleare stating of this controversie , it will bee necessary to explain , what that power is , which i attribute to the church , and in what notion the church is to be considered as it exerciseth this power . first , concerning the proper notion of power , by it i cannot see any thing else to bee understood , then a right of governing , or ordering things which belong to a society . and so power implies only a moral faculty in the person enjoying it , to take care ne quid civitas detrimenti capiat , whereby it is evident that every well constituted society must suppose a power within its self of ordering things belonging to its welfare , or else it were impossible , either the being or the rights and priviledges of a society could bee long preserved . power then in its general and abstracted notion , doth not necessarily import either meer authority , or proper coaction , for these to any impartial judgement , will appear to bee rather the severall modes whereby power is exercised , then any proper ingredients of the specifick nature of it ; which in generall , imports no more then a right to govern a constituted society , but how that right shall bee exercised , must bee resolved not from the notion of power , but from the nature and constitution of that particular society in which it is lodged and inherent . it appears then from hence to bee a great mistake and abuse of well natured readers , when all power is necessarily restrained , either to that which is properly coercive , or to that which is meerly arbitrary and onely from consent . the originall of which mistake is , the stating the notion of power from the use of the word , either in ancient roman authors , or else in the civil laws , both which are freely acknowledged to bee strangers to the exercise of any other power , then that which is meerly authoritative and perswasive , or that which is coactive and penal . the ground of which is , because they were ignorant of any other way of conveyance of power , besides external force and arbitrary consent , the one in those called legal societies or civitates , the other collegia and hetaeriae . but to us that do acknowledge that god hath a right of commanding men to what duty hee please himself , and appointing a society upon what terms best please him , and giving a power to particular persons to govern that society , in what way shall tend most to advance the honour of such a society , may easily bee made appear , that there is a kind of power neither properly coactive nor meerly arbitrary , viz. such a one as immediately results from divine institution , and doth suppose consent to submit to it as a necessary duty in all the members of this society . this power , it is evident , is not meerly arbitrary either in the governours or members , for the governours derive their power , or right of governing from the institution of christ and are to bee regulated by his laws in the execution of it , and the members , though their consent bee necessarily supposed , yet that consent is a duty in them , and that duty doth imply their submission to the rulers of this society : neither can this power bee called coactive , in the sense it is commonly taken , for coactive power , and external force are necessary correlates to each other , but wee suppose no such thing as a power of outward force to bee given to the church as such , for that properly belongs to a common-wealth . but the power which i suppose to bee lodged in the church , is such a power as depends upon a law of a superiour , giving right to govern , to particular persons over such a society , and making it the duty of all members of it to submit unto it , upon no other penalties , then the exclusion of them from the priviledges , which that society enjoys . so that supposing such a society , as the church is , to bee of divine institution , and that christ hath appointed officers to rule it , it necessarily follows , that those officers must derive their power , i. e. their right of governing this society , not meerly from consent and confederation of parties , but from that divine institution , on which the society depends . the want of understanding the right notion of power in the sense here set down , is certainiy the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of erastianisme , and that which hath given occasion to so many to question any such thing as power in the church , especially , when the more zealous then judicious defenders of it have rather chosen to hang it upon some doubtful places of scripture , then on the very nature and constitution of the christian church , as a society instituted by jesus christ. this being then the nature of power in general , it is , i suppose clear , that an outward coactive force is not necessary in order to it ; for if some may have a right to govern , and others may bee obliged to obedience to those persons antecedently , to any civil constitution ; then such persons have a just power , to inflict censures upon such as transgress the rules of the society , without any outward force . it is here very impertinent to dispute , what effects such censures can have upon wilful persons without a coactive power ; if i can prove , that there is a right to inflict them in church officers , and an obligation to submit to them in all offenders , i am not to trouble my self with the event of such things as depend upon divine institutions . i know it is the great objection of the followers of erastus , that church censures are inflicted upon persons unwilling to receive them , and therefore must imply external and coactive force , which is repugnant to the nature of a church . but this admits ( according to the principles here established ) of a very easie solution ; for i deny not , that churchpower goes upon consent , but then it s very plain here was an antecedent consent to submit to censures in the very entrance into this society , which is sufficient to denominate it a voluntary act of the persons undergoing it ; and my reason is this , every person entring into a society , parts with his own freedome and liberty , as to matters concerning the governing of it , and professeth submission to the rules and orders of it : now a man having parted with his freedome already , cannot reassume it when hee please , for then hee is under an obligation to stand to the covenants made at his entrance ; and consequently his undergoing what shall bee laid upon him by the laws of this society , must bee supposed to bee voluntary as depending upon his consent at first entrance , which in all societies must bee supposed to hold still , else there would follow nothing but confusion in all societies in the world , if every man were at liberty to break his covenants when any thing comes to lye upon him according to the rules of the society , which hee out of some private design would bee unwilling to undergo . thus much may serve to settle aright the notion of power ; the want of understanding which , hath caused all the confusion of this controversie . the next thing is , in what notion wee are to consider the church , which is made the subject of this power ? as to which wee are to consider ; this power either as to it 's right or in actu primo , or as to it's exercise , or in actu secundo : now if wee take this power as to the fundamental right of it , then it belongs to that universal church of christ , which subsists as a visible society , by vertue of that law of christ , which makes an owning the profession of christianity the duty of all church members . if wee consider this power in the exercise of it then ( it being impossible that the universal church should perform the executive part of this power relating to offences ) i suppose it lodged in that particular society of christians , which are united together in one body in the community of the same government ; but yet , so as , that the administration of this power , doth not belong to the body of the society considered complexly , but to those officers in it , whose care and charge it is , to have a peculiar oversight and inspection over the church , and to redress all disorders in it . thus the visive faculty is fundamentally lodged in the soul , yet all exterior acts of sight are performed by the eyes , which are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 overseers of the body , as the other are of the church , so that the exercise and administration of this power , belongs to the special officers and governours of the church , none else being capable of exercising this power of the church as such , but they on whom it is setled by the founder of the church it 's self . this society of the church may bee again considered , either as subsisting without any influence from the civil power , or as it is owned by , and incorporated into a christian state . i therefore demand , whether it bee absolutely necessary for the subsistence of this christian society , to bee upheld by the civil power or no ? and certainly none who consider the first and purest ages of the christian church , can give any entertainment to the affirmative , because then the church flourished in it's greatest purity , not only when not upheld , but when most violently opposed by the civil power ; if so , then it 's being united with the civil state is only accidental , as to the constitution of a church ; and if this bee only accidental , then it must bee supposed furnished with every thing requisite to it 's well ordering , antecedenty to any such union , and abstractly from it . for can wee imagine our blessed saviour should institute a society , and leave it destitute of means to uphold it's self , unless it fell into the hands of the civil power ? or that hee left every thing tending thereto , meerly to prudence , and the arbritrary constitutions of the persons joyning together in this society ? did our saviour take care there should bee a society , and not provide for means to uphold it ? nay , it is evident , hee not only appointed a society , but officers to rule it ; had those officers then a right to govern it or no , by vertue of christs institution of them ? if not , they were rather bibuli than caesares , cyphers than consuls in the church of god. if they had a power to govern , doth not that necessarily imply a right to inflict censures on offenders ? unless 〈◊〉 will suppose that either there can bee no offenders in a christian church , or that those offenders do not violate the laws of the society , or there bee some prohibition for them to exercise their power over them ( which is to give power with one hand , and take it away with the other ) or that this power cannot extend so far as to exclude any from the priviledges of the church , which is the thing to bee discussed . having thus cleared our way , i now come to the resolution of the question its self , in order to which i shall endeavour to demonstrate with what evidence the subject is capable of these following things . first that the church is a peculiar society in its own nature , distinct from the common-wealth . secondly , that the power of the church over its members doth not arise from meer confederation or consent of parties . thirdly , that this power of the church doth extend to the exclusion of offenders from the priviledges of it . fourthly , that the fundamental rights of the church do not escheat to the common-wealth upon their being united in a christian state. if these principles bee established , the churches power will stand upon them , as on a firm and unmoveable basis . i begin with the first . that the church is a peculiar society in its own nature , distinct from the common-wealth , which i prove by these arguments . 1 those societies , which are capable of subsisting apart from each other , are really , and in their own nature , distinct from one another , but so it is with the church and common-wealth . for there can bee no greater evidence of a reall distinction than mutual separation ; and i think the proving the possibility of the souls existing , separate from the body , is one of the strongest arguments to prove it to bee a substance really distinct from the body , to which it is united ; although wee are often fain to go the other way to work , and to prove possibility of separation from other arguments evincing the soul to bee a distinct substance ; but the reason of that is for want of evidence as to the state of separate souls , and their visible existence which is repugnant to the immateriality of their natures . but now , as to the matter in hand , wee have all evidence desirable , for wee are not put to prove possibil●●y of separation , meerly from the different constitution of the things united , but wee have evidence to sense of it , that the churh hath subsisted when it hath been not onely separated from but persecuted by all civil power . it is with many men as to the union of church and state , as it is with others , as to the union of the soul and body , when they observe how close the union is , and how much the soul makes use of the animal spirits in most of its operations , and how great a sympathy there is between them , that , like hyppocrates his twins , they laugh and weep ' together , they are shrewdly put to it , how to fancy the soul to bee any thing else then a more vigorous mode of matter ; so these observing how close an union and dependence there is between the church and state in a christian common-wealth , and how much the church is beholding to the civil power in the administration of its functions , are apt to think that the church is nothing but a higher mode of a common-wealth , considered as christian. but when it is so evident that the church hath , and may subsist supposing it abstracted from all civil power , it may bee a sufficient demonstration that however neer they may be when united , yet they are really and in their own nature , distinct from each other . which was the thing to bee proved . 2 those are distinct societies , which have every thing distinct in their nature from each other , which belong to the constitution or government of them ; but this is evident , as to the church and common-wealth , which will appear , because their charter is distinct , or that which gives them their being as a society : civil societies are founded upon the necessity of particular mens parting with their peculiar rights , for the preservation of themselves , which was the impulsive cause of their entring into societies , but that which actually speaks them to bee a society , is the mutual consent of the several parties joyning together , whereby they make themselves to bee one body ; and to have one common interest . so cicero de repub. defines populus , to bee caetus multitudinis , juris consensu et utilitatis communione sociatus . there is no doubt , but gods general providence , is as evidently seen in bringing the world into societies and making them live under government , as in disposing all particular events which happen in those societies ; but yet the way , which providence useth in the constitution of these societies , is by inclining men to consent to associate for their mutual benefit and advantage : so that natural reason consulting for the good of mankinde , as to those rights which men enjoy in common with each other , was the main foundation upon which all civil societies were erected . wee finde no positive law enacting the beeing of civil societies , because nature it's self would prompt men for their own conveniencies to enter into them . but the ground and foundation of that society , which we call a church , is a matter which natural reason and common notions can never reach to ; and therefore an associating for the preserving of such , may bee a philosophical society , but a christian it cannot bee : and that would make a christian church to bee nothing else but a society of essens or an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of pythagorians , who do either not understand or not consider whereon this christian society is founded ; for it is evident they look on it as a meerly voluntary thing , that is not at all setled by any divine positive law. the truth is , there is no principle more consistent with the opinion of those who deny any church power in a christian state , then this is , and it is that , which every one , who will make good his ground must bee driven to ; for it is evident , that in matters meerly voluntary , and depending only on consideration , such things being lyable to a magistrates power , there can be no plea from mutual consent to justifie any opposition to supream authority in a common-wealth . but then , how such persons can bee christians , when the magistrates would have them to bee otherwise , i cannot understand ; nor how the primitive martyrs were any other then a company of fools or mad-men , who would hazard their lives , for that which was a meer arbritrary thing , and which they had no necessary obligation upon them to profess . mistake mee not , i speak not here of meer acts of discipline , but of the duty of outward professing christianity ; if this bee a duty , then a christian society is setled by a positive law , if it bee not a duty , then they are fools who suffer for it : so that this question resolved into it's principles , leads us higher than wee think for , and the main thing in debate must bee , whether there bee an obligation upon conscience for men to associate in the profession of christianity or no ? if there bee , then the church , which is nothing else but such an association , is established upon a positive law of christ ; if there bee not , then those inconveniencies follow , which are already mentioned . wee are told indeed by the leviathan with confidence enough , that no precepts of the gospel are law , till enacted by civil authority ; but it is little wonder , that hee , who thinks an immaterial substance implies a contradiction , should think as much of calling any thing a law , but what hath a civil sanction . but i suppose all those , who dare freely own a supreme and infinite essence to have been the creator , and to bee the ruler of the world , will acknowledge his power to oblige conscience , without being beholding to his own creature to enact his laws , that men might bee bound to obey them . was the great god fain to bee beholding to the civil authority hee had over the jewish common-wealth ( their government being a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) to make his laws obligatory to the consciences of the jews ? what , had not they their beings from god ? and can there bee any greater ground of obligation to obedience , than from thence ? whence comes civil power to have any right to oblige men more , than god , considered as governour of the world , can have ? can there bee indeed no other laws according to the leviathans hypothesis , but only the law of nature and civil laws ? but i pray whence comes the obligation to either of these , that these are not as arbitrary , as all other agreements are ? and is it not as strong a dictate of nature as any can bee ( supposing that there is a god ) that a creature which receives it's being from another , should bee bound to obey him , not only in the resultancies of his own nature , but with the arbitrary constitutions of his will : was adam bound to obey god or no , as to that positive precept of eating the forbiden fruit , if no civil sanction had been added to that law ? the truth is , such hypotheses as these are , when they are followed close home , will bee found to kennel in that black den , from whence they are loath to bee thought to have proceeded . and now , supposing , that every full declaration of the will of christ , as to any positive institution , hath the force and power of a law upon the consciences of all , to whom it is sufficiently proposed : i proceed to make appear , that such a divine positive law there is , for the existence of a church , as a visible body and society in the world ; by which i am far from meaning such a conspicuous society , that must continue in a perpetual visibility in the same place ; i finde not the least intimation of any such thing in scripture ; but that there shall alwaies bee some where or other , in the world , a society owning and professing christianity , may bee easily deduced from thence ; and especially on this account , that our saviour hath required this , as one of the conditions in order to eternal felicity , that all those who beleeve in their hearts , that jesus is the christ , must likewise confess him with their mouths to the world : and therefore , as long as there are men to beleeve in christ , there must bee men that will not bee ashamed to associate , on the account of the doctrine hee hath promulged to the world . that one phrase in the new testament , so frequently used by our blessed saviour , of the kingdome of heaven ( importing a gospel state ) doth evidently declare a society , which was constituted by him , on the principles of the gospel covenant . wherefore should our saviour call disciples , and make apostles , and send them abroad with full commission to gather and initiate disciples by baptism ; did hee not intend a visible society for his church ? had it not been enough for men to have cordially beleeved the truth of the gospel , but they must bee enter'd in a solemn visible way , and joyn in participation of visible symbols of bread and wine , but that our saviour required external profession and society in the gospel as a necessary duty , in order to obtaining the priviledges conveyed by his magna charta in the gospel . i would fain know , by what argument wee can prove , that any humane legislator , did ever intend a common-wealth to bee governed according to his mode , by which wee cannot prove that christ by a positive law , did command such a society , as should be governed in a visible manner , as other societies are ? did he not appoint officers himself in the church , and that of many ranks and degrees ? did hee not invest those officers with authority to rule his church ? is it not laid as a charge on them , to take heed to that flock over which god had made them overseers ? are there not rules laid down for the peculiar exercise of their government over the church in all the parts of it ? were not these officers admitted into their function by a most solemn visible rite of imposition of hands ? and are all these solemn transactions a meer peece of sacred pageantry ? and they will appear to bee little more , if the society of the church bee a meer arbitrary thing , depending onely upon consent and confederation , and not subsisting by vertue of any charter from christ , or some positive law , requiring all christians to joyn in church society together . but if now from hence it appears ( as certainly it cannot but appear ) that this society of the church doth subsist by vertue of a divine positive law , then it must of necessity be distinct from any civil society , and that on these accounts , first because there is an antecedent obligation on conscience to associate on the account of christianity , whether humane laws prohibit or command it . from whence , of necessity it follows , that the constitution of the church is really different from that of the common-wealth ; because whether the common-wealth bee for , or against this society , all that own ir are bound to profess it openly , and declare themselves members of it . whereas were the church and common-wealth really and formally the same , all obligation to church society would arise meerly from the legislative power of the common-wealth . but now there being a divine law , binding in conscience , whose obligation cannot bee superseded by any humane law , it is plain and evident , where are such vastly different obligations , there are different powers ; and in this sense i know no incongruity in admitting imperium in imperio , if by it wee understand no external coactive power , but an internal power laying obligation on conscience , distinct from the power lodged in a common-wealth considered as such . an outward coactive power was alwayes disowned by christ , but certainly not an internall power over conscience to oblige all his disciples to what duties hee thought fit . secondly i argue from those officers , whose rights to govern this society are founded on that charter , whereby the society its self subsists . now i would willingly know why , when our saviour disowned all outward power in the world , yet he should constitute a society and appoint officers in it , did hee not intend a peculiar distinct society from the other societies of the world . and therefore the argument frequently used against church-power , because it hath no outward force with it by the constitution of christ , is a strong argument to mee of the peculiarity of a christian society from a common-wealth , because christ so instituted it , as not to have it ruled at first by any outward force or power . when christ saith his kingdome was not of this world ; hee implies , that hee had a society that was governed by his laws in the world , yet distinct from all mundane societies : had not our saviour intended his church to have been a peculiar society , distinct from a common-wealth , why our saviour should interdict the apostles the use of a civil coactive power : or why instead of sending abroad apostles to preach the gospel , hee did not imploy the governours of common-wealths to have inforced christianity by laws and temporal edicts , and the several magistrates to have impowred several persons under them to preach the gospel in their several territories ? and can any thing bee more plain , by our saviours taking a contrary course , then that hee intended a church society to bee distinct from civil , and the power belonging to it , ( as well as the officers ) to bee of a different nature from that which is settled in a common-wealth . i here suppose , that christ hath by a positive law established the government of his church upon officers of his own appointment ; which i have largely proved elsewhere , and therefore suppose it now . thirdly , i argue from the peculiar rights belonging to these societies . for if every one born in the common-wealth , have not thereby a right to the priviledges of the church ; nor every one by being of the church , any right to the benefits of the common-wealth ; it must necessarily follow , that these are distinct from one another . if any one by being of the common-wealth , hath right to church priviledges , then every one born in a common-wealth may challenge a right to the lords supper without baptism or open professing christianity , which i cannot think any will bee very ready to grant . now there being by divine appointment the several rights of baptisme and the lords supper , as peculiar badges of the church as a visible society , it is evident , christ did intend it a society distinct from the common-wealth . fourthly , i argue from the different ends of these societies , a common-wealth is constituted for civil ends , and the church for spiritual : for ends are to be judged by the primary constitution , but now it is plain , the end of civil society is for preservation of mens rights as men ( therefore magistracy is called by st. peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) but this christian society doth not respect men under the connotation of men but as christians . the answer given to this is very short , and insufficient when it is said , that every man in a common-wealth , is to act upon spiritual accounts and ends : for there is a great deal of difference between christianities having an influence upon mens actings in a common-wealth , and making a society the same with a common-wealth . to argue therefore from one to another , is a shortness of discourse i cannot but wonder at : unless it could bee proved , that christianity aimed at nothing else but regulating men in the affairs of a common-wealth , which is a taske i suppose will not bee undertaken . lastly , i argue from the peculiar offences against this society , which are , or may bee distinct from those against a common-wealth , i deny not , but most times they are the same ; but frequently they differ , and when they are the same , yet the consideration of them is different in the church and common-wealth , for which i shall suppose the six arguments produced in the last chapter of the first part to stand good , which will strongly hold to excommunication in the christian church , though there produced only for the jewish . i would fain know what is to bee done in many offences , known to bee against the laws of christ , and which tend to the dishonour of the christian society , which the civil and municipal laws , either do not , or may not take cognizance of ? thus much may serve , as i think to make evident , that the church in it's own nature is a peculiar society distinct from a common-wealth , which was the first proposition to bee proved . the second is , that the power of the church over it's members in case of offences , doth not arise meerly from confederation and consent , though it doth suppose it . this church power may bee considered two waies . either , first , as it implies the right in some of inflicting censures . or secondly , as it implies in others , the duty of submitting to censures inflicted ; now as to both these , i shall prove that their original is higher than meer confederation . 1. as to the right of inflicting censures , on these accounts . first , what ever society doth subsist by vertue of a divine constitution , doth by vertue thereof derive all power for it's preservation , in peace , unity , and purity ; but it is plain , that a power of censuring offenders , is necessary for the churches preservation in peace and purity ; and it is already proved , that the church hath it's charter from christ , and therefore from him it hath a power to inflict punishments on offenders , suitable to the nature of the society they are of . i am very prone to think that the ground of all the mistakes on this subject have risen from hence , that some , imprudently enough , have fixt the original of this power on some ambiguous places of scripture , which may , and it may bee , ought to bee taken in a different sense ; and their adversaries , finding those places weak and insufficient proofes of such a power , have from thence rejected any such kinde of power at all ; but certainly if wee should reject every truth that is weakly proved by some who have undertaken it , i know no opinion would bid so fair for acceptance as scepticisme , and that in reference to many weighty & important truths ; for how weakly have some proved the existence of a deity , the immortality of the soul , and the truth of the scriptures , by such arguments , that if it were enough to overthrow an opinion to bee able to answer some arguments brought for it , atheism it's self would become plausible . it can bee then no evidence , that a thing is not true , because some arguments will not prove it ; and truly , as to the matter in hand , i am fully of the opinion of the excellent h. grotius , speaking of excommunication in the christian church : neque ad eam rem peculiare praeceptum desideratur , cum ecclesiae caetu , a christo semel constituto , omnia illa imperata censeri debent , sine quibus ejus caetûs puritas retineri non potest . and therefore men spend needless pains to prove an institution of this power by some positive precept , when christs founding his church , as a particular society , is sufficient proof hee hath endowed it with this fundamental right , without which the society , were arena sine calce , a company of persons without any common tye of union among them ; for if there bee any such union , it must depend on some conditions , to bee performed by the members of that society , which how could they require from them , if they have not power to exclude them upon non-performance ? 2. i prove the divine original of this power from the special appointment and designation of particular officers by jesus christ , for the ruling this society . now i say , that law which provides there shall bee officers to govern , doth give them power to govern , suitable to the nature of their society : either then you must deny , that christ hath by an unalterable institution appointed a gospel ministry , or that this ministry hath no power in the church , or that their power extends not to excommunication . the first i have already proved , the second follows from their appointment , for by all the titles given to church officers in scripture ; it appears they had a power over the church , ( as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ) all which as you well know , do import a right to govern the society over which they are set . and that this power should not extend to a power to exclude , convict offenders , seems very strange , when no other punishment can bee more suitable to the nature of the society than this is ; which is a debarring him from the priviledges of that society , which the offender hath so much dishonoured . can there bee any punishment less imagined towards contumacious offenders then this is , or that carries in it less of outward and coactive force , it implying nothing but what the offender himself freely yeilded to at his entrance into this society ? all that i can find replyed by any of the adversaryes of the opinion i here assert , to the argument drawn from the institution and titles of the officers of the church , is , that all those titles which are given to the ministers of the gospel in the new testament , that do import rule and government , are all to bee taken in a spirituall sense , as they are christs ministers and ambassadors to preach his word and declare his will to his church . so that all power such persons conceive to lye in those titles , is onely doctrinal and declarative ; but how true that is , let any one judge , that considers these things . 1. that there was certainly a power of discipline then in the churches constituted by the apostles , which is most evident not only from the passages relating to offendors in saint pauls epistles , especially to the corinthians and thessalonians , but from the continued practice of succeeding ages , manifested by tertullian , cyprian , and many others . there being then a power of discipline in apostolical churches , there was a necessity it should be administred by some persons who had the care of those churches ; and who were they but the several pastors of them ? it being then evident that there was such a power , doth it not stand to common sense it should be implyed in such titles which in their natural importance do signifie a right to govern , as the names of pastors and rulers do ? 2. there is a diversity in scripture made between pastors and teachers , ephes. 4.11 . though this may not ( as it doth not ) imply a necessity of two distinct offices in the church , yet it doth a different respect and connotation in the same person ▪ and so imports that ruling carries in it somewhat more then meer teaching , and so the power implyed in pastors to be more then meerly doctrinal , which is all i contend for , viz. a right to govern the flock committed to their charge . 3. what possible difference can be assigned between the elders that rule well , and those which labour in word and doctrine , ( 1 tim. 5.17 . ) if all their ruling were meerly labouring in the word and doctrine ? and all their governing nothing but teaching ? i intend not to prove an office of rulers distinct from teachers from hence ( which i know neither this place , nor any other will do ) but that the formal conception of ruling , is different from that of teaching . 4. i argue from the analogy between the primitive churches and the synagogues , that as many of the names were taken from thence where they carried a power of discipline with them , so they must do in some proportion in the church ; or it were not easie understanding them . it is most certain the presbyters of the synagogue had a power of ruling ; and can you conceive the bishops and presbyters of the church had none , when the societies were much of the same constitution , and the government of the one was transcribed from the other , as hath been already largely proved ? 5. the acts attributed to pastors in scripture , imply a power of governing , distinct from meer teaching ; such are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , used for a right to govern , matth. 2.6 . revel . 12.5 . — 19.15 . which word is attributed to pastors of churches in reference to their flocks . acts 20.28 . 1 pet. 5.2 . and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is applyed to ministers , when they are so frequently called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which notes praesidentiam eum potestate ; for hesychius renders is by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at athens had certainly a power of government in them . 6. the very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is attributed to those who have over-sight of churches , 1 cor. 12.8 . by which it is certainly evident , that a power more then doctrinal is understood , as that it could not then be understood of a power meerly civil . and this i suppose may suffice to vindicate this argument from the titles of church-officers in the new testament , that they are not insignificant things , but the persons who enjoyed them had a right to govern the society over which the holy-ghost hath made them over-seers . 3. i argue that church power ariseth not meerly from consent , because the church may exercise her power on such who have not actually confederated with her ; which is in admitting members into the church : for if the church-officers have power to judge whether persons are fit to be admitted , they have power to exclude from admission such whom they judge unfit , and so their power is exercised on those who are not confederated . to this it may be answered , that the consent to be judged , gives the church power over the person suing for admission . i grant it doth , as to that particular person , but the right in general of judging concerning admission , doth argue an antecedent power to an actual confederation . for i will suppose that christ should now appoint some officers to found a church , and gather a society of christians together , where there hath been none before : i now ask , whether these officers have power to admit any into the church or no ? this i suppose cannot be denyed , for to what end else were they appointed ? if it be granted they have power to admit persons , and thereby make a church , then they had power antecedently to any confederation ; for the confederation was subsequent to their admission ; and therefore they who had power to admit , could not derive their power from confederation . this argument , to me , puts the case out of dispute , that all church-power cannot arise from meer confederation . and that which further evidenceth that the power of the church doth not arise from meer consent , is that deed of gift whereby our blessed saviour did confer the power of the keyes on the apostle peter , as the representative in that action of the whole colledge of the apostles and governours of the church , of which power all the apostles were actually infeoffed , john 20.23 . by which power of the keyes is certainly meant some administration in the church , which doth respect it as a visible society , in which sense the church is so frequently called , as in that place , the kingdom of heaven ; and in all probability the administration intended here by the power of the keyes , is that we are now discoursing of , viz. the power of admission into the church of christ in order to the pardon of the sins of all penitent believers , and the shutting out of such who were manifestly unworthy of so holy a communion . so that the power of the keyes doth not primarily respect exclusion out of the church , and receiving into it again upon absolution , but it chiefly respects the power of admission into the church , though by way of connotation and analogy of reason it will carry the other along with it . for if the apostles as governours of the church were invested with a power of judging of mens fitness for admission into the church as members of it , it stands to the highest reason that they should have thereby likewise a power conveyed to them , of excluding such as are unworthy after their admission , to maintain communion with the church . so that this interpretation of the power of the keyes , is far from invalidating the power of the church , as to its censuring offendors ; all that it pretends to , is only giving a more natural and genuine sense of the power of the keyes , which will appear so to be , if we consider these things . 1. that this power was given to saint peter before any christian church was actually formed , which ( as i have elsewhere made manifest ) was not done till after christs resurrection ; when christ had given the apostles their commission to go preach and baptize , &c. matth. 28.19 . is it not therefore far more rational that the power of the keyes here given , should respect the founding of a church and admission into it , then ejection out of it ( before it was in being ) and receiving into it again ? and this we find likewise remarkably fulfilled in the person of the apostle peter , who opened the door of admission into the christian church , both to jews and gentiles . so the jews by his sermon at pentecost , when about 3000. souls were brought into the church of christ. so the gentiles , as is most evident in the story of cornelius , acts 10.28 . who was the first fruits of the gentiles . so that if we should yield so far to the great inhancers of saint peters power , that something was intended peculiar to his person in the keyes given him by our saviour , we hereby see how rationally it may be understood without the least advantage to the extravagant pretensions of saint peters pretended successors . 2. the pardon of sin in scripture is most annexed to baptism and admission into the church , and thence it seems evident that the loosing of sin should be by admitting into the church by baptism , in the same sense by which baptism is said to save us , and it is called the washing of regeneration , respecting the spiritual advantages which come by admission into the church of christ ; and so they are said to have their sins bound upon them , who continue refractory in their sins , as simon magus is said to be in the bonds of iniquity . 3. the metaphor of the keyes referrs most to admission into the house , and excluding out of it , rather then ejecting any out of it , and re-admitting them . thus when eliakim is said to have the keyes of the house of david , it was in regard of his power to open and shut upon whom he pleased . and thus cyprian , as our learned mr. thorndike observes , understands the power of binding and loosing in this sense , in his epistle to john , where speaking of the remission of sins in baptism , he brings these very words of our saviour to peter as the evidence of it ; that what he should loose on earth should be loosed in heaven ; and concludes with this sentence . vnde intelligimus non nisi in ecclesiâ praepositis & in evangelicâ lege ac dominicâ ordinati●ne fundatis licere baptizare , & remissam peccatorum dare ; foris autem nec ligari aliquid posse nec solvi , ubi non sit qui ligare possit aut solvere . that which i now inferr from this discourse is , that the power of the church doth not arise from meer consent and confederation , both because this power doth respect those who have not actually consented to it , and because it is settled upon the governours of the church by divine institution . thus it appears that the right of inflicting censures doth not result meerly ex confederatâ disciplinâ , which was the thing to be proved . the like evidence may be given , for the duty of submitting to penalties or church-censures in the members of the church : which that it ariseth not from meer consent of parties , will appear on these accounts . 1. every person who enters this society , is bound to consent , before he doth it , because of the obligation lying upon conscience to an open profession of christianity , presently upon conviction of the understanding of the truth and certainty of christian religion . for when once the mind of any rational man is so far wrought upon by the influence of the divine spirit , as to discover the most rational and undoubted evidences which there are of the truth of christianity , he is presently obliged to profess christ openly , to worship him solemnly , to assemble with others for instruction and participation of gospel-ordinances ; and thence it follows that there is an antecedent obligation upon conscience to associate with others , and consequently to consent to be governed by the rulers of the society which he enters into . so that this submission to the power of church-officers in the exercise of discipline upon offendors , is implyed in the very conditions of christianity , and the solemn professing and undertaking of it . 2. it were impossible any society should be upheld , if it be not laid by the founder of the society as the necessary duty of all members to undergo the penalties which shall be inflicted by those who have the care of governing that society , so they be not contrary to the laws , nature , and constitution of it . else there would be no provision made for preventing divisions and confusions which will happen upon any breach made upon the laws of the society . now this obligation to submission to censures , doth speak something antecedently to the confederation , although the expression of it lies in the confederation its self . by this i hope we have made it evident that it is nothing else but a mistake in those otherwise learned persons , who make the power of censures in the christian-church to be nothing else but a lex cenfederatae disciplinae , whereas this power hath been made appear to be derived from a higher original then the meer arbitrary consent of the several members of the church associating together : and how far the examples of the synagogues under the law , are from reaching that of christian churches in reference to this , because in these the power is conveyed by the founder of the society , and not left to any arbitrary constitutions , as it was among the jews in their synagogues . it cannot be denyed but consent is supposed , and confederation necessary , in order to church power , but that is rather in regard of the exercise , then the original of it ; for although i affirm the original of this power to be of divine institution , yet in order to the exercise of it in reference to particular persons ( who are not mentioned in the charter of the power its self ) it is necessary that the persons on whom it is exerted , should declare their consent and submission either by words or actions , to the rules and orders of this society . having now proved that the power of the church doth not arise from meer consent of parties , the next grand inquiry is concerning the extent of this power , whether it doth reach so far as to excommunication ? for some men who will not seem wholly to deny all power in the church over offendors , nor that the church doth subsist by divine institution , yet do wholly deny any such power as that of excommunication , and seem rather to say that church officers may far more congruously to their office inflict any other mulct upon offendors , then exclude them from participation of communion with others in the ordinances and sacraments of the gospel : in order therefore to the clearing of this , i come to the third proposition . that the power which christ hath given to the officers of his church , doth extend to the exclusion of contumacious offendors from the priviledges which this society enjoyes . in these terms i rather choose to fix it , then in those crude expressions , wherein erastus and some of his followers would state the question , and some of their imprudent adversaries have accepted it , viz. whether church-officers have power to exclude any from the eucharist , ob moralem impuritatem ? and the reasons why i wave those terms , are , 1. i must confess my self yet unsatisfied as to any convincing argument , whereby it can be proved that any were denyed admission to the lords supper , who were admitted to all other parts of church-society , and owned as members in them . i cannot yet see any particular reason drawn from the nature of the lords supper above all other parts of divine worship , which should confine the censures of the church meerly to that ordinance ; and so to make the eucharist bear the same office in the body of the church , which our new anatomists tell us the parenchyme of the liver doth in the natural body , viz. to be colum sanguinis , to serve as a kind of strainer to separate the more gross and faeculent parts of the blood from the more pure and spirituous ; so the lords supper to strain out the more impure members of the church from the more holy and spiritual . my judgement then is , that excommunication relates immediately to the cutting a person off from communion with the churches visible society , constituted upon the ends it is ; but because communion is not visibly discerned but in administration and participation of gospel ordinances , therefore exclusion doth chiefly refer to these , and because the lords supper is one of the highest priviledges which the church enjoyes , therefore it stands to reason that censures should begin there . and in that sense suspension from the lords supper of persons apparently unworthy , may be embraced as a prudent , lawful and convenient abatement of the greater penalty of excommunication , and so to stand on the same general grounds that the other doth ; for qui potest majus , potest etiam minus , which will hold as well in moral as natural power , if there be no prohibition to the contrary , nor peculiar reason as to the one more then to the other . 2. i dislike the terms ob moralem impuritatem , on this account , because i suppose they were taken up by erastus ▪ and from him by others as the controversie was managed concerning excommunication among the jews , viz. whether it were meerly because of ceremonial , or else likewise because of moral impurity . as to which i must ingenuously acknowledge erastus hath very much the advantage of his adversaries , clearly proving that no persons under the law were excluded the temple-worship because of moral impurity . but then withall i think he hath gained little advantage to his cause by the great and successful pains he hath taken in the proving of that ; my reason is , because the temple-worship or the sacrifices under the law were in some sense propitiatory , as they were the adumbrations of that grand sacrifice which was to be offered up for the appeasing of gods wrath , viz. the blood of christ ; therefore to have excluded any from participation of them , had been to exclude them from the visible way of obtaining pardon of sin ( which was not to be had without shedding of blood , as the apostle tells us ) and from testifying their faith towards god , and repentance from dead works . but now under the gospel those ordinances , which suppose admission into the church by baptism , do thereby suppose an alsufficient sacrifice offered for the expiation of sin , and consequently the subsequent priviledges do not immediately relate to the obtaining of that , but a grateful comemmoration of the death of christ , and a celebration of the infinite mercy and goodness of god in the way of redemption found out by the death of his son. and therefore it stands to great reason that such persons , who by their profane and unworthy lives dishonour so holy a profession , should not be owned to be as good and sound members of the society founded on so sacred a foundation , as the most christian and religious persons . to this , i know nothing can be objected , but that first , the passeover was commemorative among the jews ; and secondly , that the priviledges of that people were then very great above other people , and therefore if god had intended any such thing as excommunication among his people , it would have been in use then . to these i answer . 1. i grant the passeover was commemorative as to the occasion of its institution ; but then it was withall typical and annunciative of that lamb of god who was to take away the sins of the world , and therefore no person who desired expiation of sins , was to be debard from it ; but the lords supper under the gospel hath nothing in it propitiatory , but is intended as a feast upon a sacrifice and a federal rite , as hath been fully cleared by a very learned person in his discourse about the true notion of the lords supper . 2. i grant the jews had very many priviledges above other nations : nay so far , that the whole body of the people were looked upon as gods chosen , and peculiar and holy people ; and from thence i justly infer that whatever exclusion was among the people of the jews from their society , will far better hold as an argument for excommunication under the christian church , then if it had been a meer debarring from their levitical worship . and that i should far sooner insist upon , from the reason assigned , as the ground of excommunication , then the other infirm and profligated argument ; and so the exclusion out of the camp of israel and the cerith among the jews ( whatever we understand by it ) may à pari hold to a ground of exclusion from the christian society : in imitation of which , i rather suppose that exclusion out of the synagogues was after taken up , rather then as a meer out-lawry , when they were deprived of civill power . the question then being thus clearly stated , it amounts to this , whether under the gospel , there be any power in the officers of the church by vertue of divine institution to exclude any offenders out of the christian society , for transgressing the laws of it ? and according to our former propositions , i suppose it will be sufficient to prove that power to be of divine institution , if i prove it to be fundamentally and intrinsecally resident in the society its self . for what ever doth immediately result from the society it self , must have the same original which the subject hath , because this hath the nature of an inseparable property resulting from its constitution . for the clearing of which , i shall lay down my thoughts of it as clearly and methodically as i can ; and that in these following hypotheses . 1. where there is a power of declaring any person to be no true member of the society he is in , there is a formal power of excommunication : for this is all which i intend by it , viz. an authoritative pronouncing virtute officii , any convict offender to have forfeited his interest in the church as a christian society : and to lose all the priviledges of i● : so that if this power be lodged in any church officer , then he hath power formally to excommunicate . 2. where the enjoyment of the priviledges of a society is not absolute and necessary , but depends upon conditions to be performed by every member , of which the society is judge , there is a power in the rulers of that society to debarr any person from such priviledges , upon non-performance of the conditions . as supposing the jus civitatis to depend upon defending the rights of the city ; upon a failing in referente to this in any person admitted to citizen-ship , the rulers of the city have the same power to take that right away , which they had at first to give it ; because that right was never absolutely given , but upon supposition that the person did not overthrow the ends for which it was bestowed upon him . 3. the church is such a society in which communion is not absolute and necessary , but it doth depend on the performance of some conditions , of which the governours of it are the competent judges : and that appears , 1. because the admission into the church , depends upon conditions to be judged by pastors , as in case of adult persons requiring baptism , and the children of infidels being baptized : in both which cases it is evident that conditions are prerequisite , of which the pastors are judges . 2. because the priviledges of this society do require a separation from other societies in the world , and calls for greater holiness and purity of life ; and those very priviledges are pledges of greater benefits which belong only to persons qualified with suitable conditions ; it would therefore be a very great dishonour to this society , if it lay as common and open as other societies in the world do , and no more qualifications required from the members of it . 3. we have instances in the sacred records of apostolical times , of such scandals which have been the ground of the exclusion of the persons guilty of them from the priviledges of the christian society . and here i suppose we may ( notwithstanding all the little evasions which have been found out ) fix on the incestuous person in the church of corinth . as to which i lay not the force of the argument upon the manner of execution of the censure then , viz. by delegation from an apostle , or the apostolical rod , or delivering to satan ; for i freely grant that these did then import an extraordinary power in the apostles over offenders ; but i say the ground and reason of the exercise of that power in such an extraordinary manner at that time , doth still continue , although not in that visible extraordinary effect which it then had . and whatever practice is founded upon grounds perpetual and common , that practice must continue as long as the grounds of it do , and the churches capacity will admit ; ( which hypothesis is the only rational foundation on which episcopal government in the church doth stand firm and unshaken , and which in the former discourse i am far from undermining of , as any intelligent reader may perceive ) now i say that it is evident that the reasons of the apostles censure of that person , are not fetched from the want of christian magistrates , but from such things which will hold as long as any christian church : which are the dishonour of the society . 1 corinth . 5 , 1. the spreading of such corruptions further , if they pass uncensured . 1 corinth . 5.6 . and amendment of the person , 1 cor. 5.5 . upon these pillars the power of censures rests it self in the church of god , which are the main grounds of penalties in all societies whatsoever , viz. the preservation of the honour of them , and preventing of further mischief , and doing good to the offending party . and that which seems to add a great deal of weight to this instance , is , that the apostle checks the corinthians that before the exercise of the apostolical rod , they were not of themselves sensible of so great a dishonour to the church as that was , and had not used some means for the removing such a person from their society . and ye are puffed up , and have not rather mourned that he that hath done this deed may be taken away from among you , 1 corinth . 5.2 . therein implying , that whether there had been such a thing in the church , or no , as the apostolical rod , it had been the duty of a christian society to have done their endeavour in order to the removing such a person from their number . but further , i cannot understand , how it should be a duty in christians to withdraw from every brother who walketh disorderly , and church-officers not to have power to pronounce such a person to be withdrawn from , which amounts to excommunication . it is not to me at all material , whether they did immediately relate to civil or sacred converse , ( concerning which there is so much dispute ) for in which soever we place it , if church-officers have a power to pronounce such a person to be withdrawn from , they have a power of excommunication ; so we consider this penalty as inflicted on the person in his relation to the society as a christian ; and withall , how nearly conjoyned their civil and spiritual eating were together , 1 corinth , 11.20 , 21. and how strongly the argument will hold from civil to sacred , viz. à remotione unius ad remotionem alterius , not from any fancyed pollution in sacris from the company of wicked men , but from the dishonour reflecting on the society from such unworthy persons partaking of the highest priviledges of it . thus from these three hypotheses this corollary follows , that where any persons in a church do by their open and contumacious offences , declare to the world that they are far from being the persons they were supposed to be in their admission into the church , there is a power resident in the pastors of the church to debar such persons from the priviledges of it , and consequently from communion in the lords supper . 1. because this expresseth the nearest union and closest confederation , as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the grecian common-wealths did . 2. because this hath been alwayes looked on with greatest veneration in the church of god ; and therefore it is least of all fit those persons should be admitted to the highest priviledges of the church , which are unworthy of the lowest of them . there remain only some few objections which are levelled against this opinion concerning the power of excommunication , which from the question being thus stated and proved , will be soon removed . the first is that this excommunication is an outward punishment , and therefore belongs not to church-officers , but to the magistrate . 2. because it neither is nor ever was in the power of any church-officer to debar any offending member from publick worship , because any heathens may come to it . 3. it cannot lie as to exclusion from the lords supper , because christ is offered as spiritual food , as well in the word preached as in the sacrament . to these i answer . 1. i do not well understand what the objectors mean by an outward punishment ; for there can be no punishment belonging to a visible society , ( such as the church is here considered to be ) but it must be visible , i. e. outward , or a thing to be taken notice of in the world ; and in this sense i deny that all visible punishment belongs only to the magistrate ; but if by outward , be meant forcible punishment , then i grant that all coactive power belongs to the magistrate ; but i deny that excommunication formally considered , is a forcible punishment . 1. because every person at his entrance into this society , is supposed to declare his submission to the rules of the society ; and therefore whatever he after undergoes by way of penalty in this society , doth depend upon that consent . 2. a person stands excommunicate legally and de jure , who is declared authoritativly to be no member of the society , though he may be present at the acts of it ; as a defranchised person may be at those of a corporation . 3. a person falling into those offences which merit excommunication , is supposed in so doing , voluntarily to renounce his interest in those prviledges , the enjoyment of which doth depend upon abstaining from those offences which he wilfully falls into ; especially if contumacy be joyned with them , as it is before excommunication ; for then nothing is done forcibly towards him ; for he first relinquisheth his right , before the church-governour declares him excluded the society . so that the offendor doth meritoriously excommunicate himself , the pastor doth it formally , by declaring that he hath made himself no member by his offences and contumacy joyned with them . to the second i answer , that i do not place the formality of excommunication in exclusion from hearing the word , but in debarring the person from hearing tanquam pars eoclesiae , as a member of the church , and so his hearing may be well joined with that of heathens and infidels , and not of members of the church . to the third i answer , that exclusion from the lords supper is not on the accounts mentioned in the objection , but because it is one of the chiefest priviledges of the church , as it is a visible society . having thus cleared and asserted the power of excommunication in a christian church , there remains only one enquiry more , which is , whether this power doth remain formally in the church , after its being incorporated into the common-wealth , or else doth it then escheate wholly into the civil power ? the resolution of which question mainly depends on another spoken to already ; viz. whether this power was only a kind of widows estate , which belonged to it only during its separation from the civil power , or was the church absolutely infeoffed of it as its perpetual right , belonging to it in all conditions whatsoever it should be in ? now that must appear by the tenure of it , and the grounds on which it was conveyed , which having been proved already to be perpetual and universal , it from thence appears that no accession to the church can invalidate its former title . but then as in case of marriage , the right of disposal and well management of the estate coming by the wife , belongs to the husband ; so after the church is married into the common wealth , the right of supream management of this power in an external way doth fall into the magistrates hands . which may consist in these following things . 1. a right of prescribing laws for the due management of church-censures . 2 a right of bounding the manner of proceeding in censures , that in a settled christian state , matters of so great weight be not left to the arbitrary pleasure of any church-officers , nor such censures inflicted but upon an evident conviction of such great offences which tend to the dishonour of the christian church , and that in order to the amendment of the offendors life . 3. the right of adding temporal and civil sanctions to church-censures and so enforcing the spiritual weapons of the church , with the more keen and sharp ones of the civil state . thus i assert the force and efficacy of all church-censures in foro humano to flow from the civil power , and that there is no proper effect following any of them as to civil rights , but from the magistrates sanction . 4. to the magistrate belongs the right of appeals in case of unjust censures ; not that the magistrate can repeal a just censure in the church , as to its spiritual effects ; but he may suspend the temporal effect of it : in which case it is the duty of pastors to discharge their office and acquiesce . but this power of the magistrate in the supream ordering of ecclesiastical as well as civil causes , i have fully asserted and cleared already . from which it follows , that as to any outward effects of the power of excommunication , the person of the supream magistrate must be exempted , both because the force of these censures doth flow from him in a christian state , and that there otherwise would be a progress in infinitum , to know whether the censure of the magistrate were just or no. i conclude then , that though the magistrate hath the main care of ordering things in the church , yet ( the magistrates power in the church being cumulative , and not privative ) the church and her officers retain the fundamental right of inflicting censures on offenders : which was the thing to be proved . dedit deus his quoque finem . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61546-e100 §. 1. §. 2. §. 3. §. 4. §. 5. §. 6. §. 7. §. 8. §. 9. §. 10. §. 11. §. 12. apud . agust . de civit. de l. 2. c. 21. §. 13. §. 14. §. 15. §. 16. iren. p. 2. c. 3. iren. p. 1. c. 8. §. 4. §. 17. in luk. 6.22 §. 18. §. 19. matth. 16.19 . iren. p. 2. ch 5. §. 5. p. 212. acts 2.41 . 1 pet. 3.21 . tit. 3.5 . acts 8.33 . isa. 22.20 . cypr. ep. 73. sect . 6. §. 20. §. 21. heb. 9.22 . §. 22. 1 cor. 5.11 . 2 thess. 3.14 . §. 23. iren. p. 1. c. 2. sect . 7. proposals tender'd to the consideration of both houses of parliament for uniting the protestant interest for the present, and preventing divisions for the future together with the declaration of k. charles ii, concerning ecclesiastical affairs, and some proposals of terms of union between the church of england and dissenters / long since published by the reverend dean of s. pauls. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1689 approx. 80 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61586 wing s5621 estc r8098 13725651 ocm 13725651 101594 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61586) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101594) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 852:1) proposals tender'd to the consideration of both houses of parliament for uniting the protestant interest for the present, and preventing divisions for the future together with the declaration of k. charles ii, concerning ecclesiastical affairs, and some proposals of terms of union between the church of england and dissenters / long since published by the reverend dean of s. pauls. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. charles ii, king of england, 1630-1685. england and wales. sovereign (1660-1685 : charles ii). declaration to all his loving subjects of his kingdom of england and dominion of wales concerning ecclesiastical affairs. 36 p. printed for henry clark and sold by the booksellers of london and westminister, london : 1689. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng dissenters, religious -england -early works to 1800. dissenters, religious -early works to 1800. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 rachel losh sampled and proofread 2004-05 rachel losh text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion proposals tender'd to the consideration of both houses of parliament , for uniting the protestant interest for the present ; and preventing divisions for the future . together with the declaration of k. charles ii. concerning ecclesiastical affairs . and some proposals of terms of union between the church of england and dissenters , long since published by the reverend dean of s. pauls . london , printed for henry clark , and sold by the book-sellers of london and westminster , m dc lxxx ix . humble and modest proposals for uniting the protestant interest . i doubt not but every pious and sober protestant of this nation , cannot but be heartily troubled to observe those passionate differences and unchristian dissentions which daily increase among brethren , who are united in one and the same doctrin of their religion , and reformed from the errors and superstitions of the church of rome : upon the due consideration of which , every one who wisheth peace and prosperity to the kingdom he lives in , ought to consider what should be the occasion of those unhappy and ruinous divisions we have so long suffered under , and to offer probable means for composing them . as to their first rise , i doubt not but they ow their original to the different manner of the reformation , and the establishing of the orders which each church did think fit and convenient for it self , ( as the reverend and pious mr. hooker acquaints us ) which were so peremptorily established under that high commanding form , which rendered them to the people as things everlastingly required by the law of that lord of lords , against whose statutes there is no exception to be taken ; by which means it came to pass , that one church could not but accuse and condemn another of disobedience to the will of christ , in those things where manifest difference was between them : whereas the self-same orders allowed , but yet established in more wary and suspense manner , as being to stand in force till god should give the opportunity of some general conference what might be best for them afterwards to do ; this , i say , had both prevented all occasion of just dislike which others might take , and reserved a greater liberty unto the authors themselves of entring into farther consultation afterwards ; which , though never so necessary , they could easily now admit , without some fear of derogation from their credit : and therefore that which once they had done , they became for ever after resolute to maintain . now if we consider the shortness of that time wherein our first reformation continued under edward the sixth ; and the persecution in queen mary's reign , which forced many pious and learned clergymen of the church of england , to flee into foreign countries ( as zurick , embden , basil , strasburg , frankford , geneva , &c. ) for the preservation of their religion and lives , where they frequently conversed with those eminent divines , who were the great reformers there ; 't is no wonder that some of them should return better pleased with their discipline than their own , especially considering that several of them had intimate acquaintance and conversation with one of the reformers , whom the reverend mr. hooker thought incomparably the wisest man man that ever the french church did enjoy since the hour it enjoyed him . in queen elizabeth's , king iames , and k. charles the first 's reigns , 't is well known how our differences increased , until that unhappy war broke out ; by which the non-conforming interest prevailed ; so that the presbyterian discipline was endeavoured to be fixed as the established form of government in this nation ; our universities , preachers , writings , education , &c. were generally modelled thereto ; by which means , the greatest number of the trading part of the kingdom , several of the gentry , and some few of the nobility ( observing the precepts and practices , lifes and deaths of many of that clergy to be pious and exemplary ( joyned with them of this , or the like perswasion . since which time , it pleasing god to restore king charles ii. the parliament thought it convenient to establish the same discipline which our first reformers judged prudential , and that ( as the dissenters do complain ) upon stricter subscriptions than formerly , not abating or laying aside any of those ceremonies which have been matters of dispute and contention betwixt them and the church of england ever since our blessed reformation from popery and superstition : upon which account , many of the non-conforming divines laid down their livings , and the old controversies began afresh to be revived ; and so are like to be continued , until we be either ruined by popery , or healed by moderation , which is the only salve to cure the churches wounds , and that admirable remedy formerly proposed to the wisdom of superiours by the reverend dr. stillingfleet ; who having highly commended the prudence and temper of the french churches in composing their publick forms of prayer , that they were so far from inserting any thing controversial into them , that papists themselves would use them . and saith he , the same temper was used by our reformers in the composing our liturgy in reference to the papists , to whom they had an especial eye , as being the only party then appearing ; whom they desired to draw into their communion , by coming as near them as they well and safely could . and certainly those holy men who did seek by any means to draw in others at such a distance from their principles as the papists were , did never intend by what they did for that end , to exclude any truly tender consciences from their communion . that which they laid as a bait for them , was never intended by them as a hook for those of their own profession . but the same or greater reason which made them at that time yield so far to them then , would now have perswaded them to alter and lay aside those things which yield matter of offence to any of the same profession with themselves now : for surely none will be so uncharitable toward those ; of his own profession , as not to think there is as much reason to yield in compliance with them , as with the papists . and it cannot but be looked upon as a token of god's severe displeasure against us , if any , though unreasonable proposals of peace between us and the papists , should meet with such entertainment among many , and yet any fair offers of vnion and accomodation among our selves be so coldly embraced and entertained . thus far our reverend and learned dean of pauls delivered his opinion as to these matters of dispute near thirty years a-gone , before the laws were established against dissenters . and in his book , entituled , the unreasonableness of separation , ( wrote twenty years after the former ) he hath given the world such a testimony of his real kindness to dissenters , ( notwithstanding his hard usuage from them ) and of his sincere and hearty desire to heal our unhappy breaches , and unite our unchristian divisions , as will for ever consecrate his memory to posterity . upon these and some other like considerations , i should humbly propose to the wisdom of this present parliament , some probable means to put an end to our present differences , and to unite us for the future ; that so we may become a flourishing nation , free from the factions and divisions of former ages . proposals for our present vniting . 1. i humbly propose , that the ceremonies at present enjoyned by law , might be left to the liberty of the clergy to use or lay aside , and that , because the dissenters on the one hand are perswaded that their conformity to them would be sinful ; and the church of england on the other hand hath declared at several times that they are things indifferent , and may be changed . upon our first reformation in the account she hath given of ceremonies , why some be abolished , and some retained , she saith thus , that as those ceremonies were taken away which were most abused , and did burthen mens consciences without any cause ; so the other that remain are retained for discipline and order , which ( upon just causes may be altered , and changed . again , since his majesties restauration , in her preface to the common-prayer , are these words , that the particular forms of divine worship , and the rites and ceremonies appointed to be used , being things in their own nature indifferent and alterable , and so acknowledged ; it is but reasonable that upon weighty and important considerations , according to the various exigency of times and occasions , such changes should be made therein , as to those that are in place of authority , should from time to time seem either necessary or expedient . accordingly we find that in the reigns of several princes of blessed memory since the reformation , the church upon just and weighty considerations her thereunto moving , hath yielded to make such alterations in some some particulars , as in their respective times were thought convenient . thus far the church of england . and of late i find that a very eminent member thereof , the reverend dean of canterbury , hath aequainted us in a publick sermon preached by him at the yorkshire-feast , that though it was not for private persons to undertake in matters of publick concernment , yet he thought he had no cause to doubt but the governours of our church ( notwithstanding all the advantages of authority and reason too , as they thought , on their side ) were persons of that piety and prudence , that for peace sake , and in order to a firm vnion amongst protestants , they would be content , if that would do it , not to insist upon little things , but to yield them up , whether to the infirmity or importunity , or , perhaps , in some very few things , to the plausible exceptions of those who differed from them . the reverend dr. sherlock , in a sermon lately preached before the lord mayor , hath likewise most charitably and piously declared his thoughts about these matters of difference in the following words . we have reason to hope , that the church of england , which at the beginning of the reformation took such prudent care not to offend the papists going farther from them , than was necessary ; will , whenever it is likely to do good , condescend a great deal farther than it is necessary to reform , to meet the dissenter ; for while the external decency , gravity , and solemnity of worship is secured ; no wise and good man will think much to change a changeable ceremony , when it will heal the breaches and divisions of the church . and let us all heartily pray to god that there may be this good and peaceable disposition of mind in all conformists , and non-conformists towards a happy re-union ; and all considering men will think it time to lay aside such little disputes , when it is not meerly the church of england , nor any particular sect of protestants , whose ruin is aimed at , but the whole protestant faith. and as a farther confirmation of the readiness , not only of our divines , but of the fathers of our church to incourage so glorious a work , his grace of canterbury , and the rest of the petitioning bishops , did in their famous petition ( for which they were sent prisoners to the tower ) assure his majesty , that they did not refuse to distribute and publish his declaration for liberty of conscience , from any want of due tenderness to dissenters ; in relation to whom they were willing to come to such a temper , as should be thought fit , when that matter should be considered and setled in parliament and convocation . and not long after another company of bishops who were sent for by the late king iames , to give him their advice , ( in ( in several important affairs of the nation ) among other things , proposed , that a free parliament should establish a due liberty of conscience . the archbishop of canterbury was to earnest to promote this so christian design , that among those admirable articles recommended by his grace to all the bishops within his province , ( which were to be more fully insisted upon in their addresses to the clergy and people of their respective diocesses ) this was one : that they also walk in wisdom towards those that are not of our communion : and if there be in their parishes any such , that they neglect not frequently to confer with them in the spirit of meekness , seeking by all good ways and means to gain and win them over to our communion : more especially that they have a very tender regard to our brethren the protestant dissenters ; that upon occasion offered , they visit them at their houses , and receive them kindly at their own , and treat them fairly wherever they meet them ; perswading them ( if it may be ) to a full compliance with our church , or at least , that whereunto we have already attained , we may all walk by the same rule and mind the same thing . and in order hereunto , that they take all opportunities of assuring and convincing them , that the bishops of this church are really and sincerely irreconcilable to the errors , superstitions , idolatries and tyrannies of the church of rome . and that they warmly and most affectionately exhort them , to joyn with us in daily fervent prayer to the god of peace , for an vniversal blessed vnion of all the reformed churches both at home and abroad , against our common enemies , and that all they who do confess the holy name of our dear lord , and do agree in the truth of his holy word , may also meet in one holy communion , and live in perfect vnity and godly love. now seeing the church of england once and again declared her excellent temper and moderation for the preservation of peace and unity ( the great end and design of all church-government ) we have little reason to question her readiness ( at such a time as this is ) to comply with so modest a proposal , as a liberty of using or refusing those ceremonies , which she saith , in their own nature are indifferent and alterable , and upon weighty and important considerations , may be changed , &c. or to grant her consent to such a subscription , in relation to those articles which concern the government and discipline of the church , as are proposed by the learned dean of s. paul's , in the appendix ; especially considering that by this condescention of hers , she will certainly bring into her communion a great number of pious , moderate , and more considerative non-conformists : which will not only add strength to her self , but give a great joy and content to all those who have wish'd well to the peace , unity , and prosperity of this our church and nation ; to which end it would not be amiss that a strict injunction should be laid on the clergy and people to forbear all harsh and unchristian language one towards another , and to observe the apostles rule , of not judging one another . 2. i would likewise humbly propose , that the rest of the protestant dissenters might be indulged by act of parliament ; provided they neither preached , wrote , nor discours'd against the doctrine or government of the church as by law established ; and that , because charity , which is kind , and thinks no evil , would oblige a sober and indifferent person to believe that the reason of their separation from our church , did chiefly proceed from a tenderness of conscience ( impressed upon them by the force of their education , study , conversation , &c. ) lest in complying with the present established form of worship , they should sin against god , and wound the peace of their own souls : for otherwise , their own present quiet and interest must necessarily have obliged ▪ them to a compliance , they having been under a continual danger and hazard of the execution of the laws established against them ; whereby they have been not only deprived of that maintenance which by the countenance of authority they might otherwise have expected and publickly enjoyed , but exposed to many wants , difficulties , and sufferings . proposals for preventing future divisions . i humbly propose to the wisdom of this present parliament , that an act might be passed , whereby every person ( after a limited term of years ) intending to take holy orders should be incapacitated for any church-preferment , or for a license to preach in private congregations ; who could not give a satisfactory account to the bishop of the diocess where he intended to settle , of his proficiency and ability in church-history and primitive learning , whereby he might be able to give a clear and plain account of what discipline and order were used in the church of god nearest our saviour's and the apostles days ; when differences and errours in doctrine or church-government began first to arise ; with the authors , occasion , and effects thereof . the advantages which must necessarily attend the making of such a law , would be very great both to our interest in church and state ; amongst which i beg leave to name the following . 1. we might hereby ( for the future ) more assuredly hope for , and expect peace and union amongst our church-men , who having been all well acquainted with primitive learning and practice , with the rise and growth of all heresies , schisms , and divisions in the church , and with the fatal consequences which have attended them ; they would not more rationally than unanimously make choice of one and the same form of worship and discipline , but most heartily unite in their affections to one another , endeavouring with all their strength and power to maintain the church in peace and unity . 2. by this means we might be assured to enjoy the most learned clergy that ever this nation brought forth , who would not only prove a great bulwark against popery on the one hand , but schism and faction on the other ; and being to well accomplished for the ministerial function ( before they enter into it ) might much more assuredly engage the affection and hearts of their people , by spending ( in private ) the greatest part of the week in instructing them in the principles , and encouraging them in the practice of the christian religion ; a duty , alas , too much neglected in our days ! 3. we may then hope for preferments to answer every man's merit ; one of the principal reasons why we have more clergy-men than livings , seeming to be this , that a great number of ordinary tradesmen and farmers do send their children to the universities ( being ambitious to make them gentlemen ) though they are unable to maintain them there above three or four years ; in which time such accomplishments are not to be attained as are required by this proposal ; if therefore such a law ( as this ) were once established , they would be willing to bring them up to honest professions and trades , much more suitable for them ; and persons of better estate and quality would be encouraged to bring up their children in the universities , and continue them there until they arrived to that pitch of learning , which would not only render them the honour of their own , but the envy of foreign nations , and also capacitate them for the enjoyment of a preferment suitable to their parents charge , and their own pains and industry ; especially if the king would appropriate the first-fruits and tenths of all ecclesiastical preferments ; or the parliament should think fit to raise a sum of mony for the purchasing impropriations , and endowing livings with such a competency as might enable the incumbents to provide comfortably for themselves and families , and to keep up decent hospitality in their neighbourhood , and would annex those impropriations ( when purchased ) to the bishops and chapters of each diocess , who are to be presumed to be the most competent judges of the abilities of all persons to be entrusted with the care of souls : and for the more effectual success of this important affair , let the bishops be obliged every year to call upon the universities for the names of the most pious , learned and industrious persons in their several colleges . in short , i heartily wish that we might often and seriously remember our blessed saviours prediction , that a kingdom divided against it self , cannot stand ; and likewise consider that fate which attended the faction and division of the iews ; which grew to that height , that they could not forbear destroying each other , even when their declared enemies the romans were coming to besiege their city . from which , good lord deliver us . appendix . his majesty's declaration to all his loving subjects of his kingdom of england and dominion of wales , concerning ecclesiastical affairs . charles r. how much the peace of the state is concerned in the peace of the church , and how difficult a thing it is to preserve order and government in civil , whilest there is no order or government in ecclesiastical affairs , is evident to the world ; and this little part of the world , our own dominions , hath had so late experience of it , that we may very well acquiesce in the conclusion , without enlarging our self in discourse upon it , it being a subject we have had frequent occasion to contemplate upon , and to lament , abroad as well as at home . in our letter to the speaker of the house of commons from breda , we declared how much we desired the advancement and propagation of the protestant religion ; that neither the unkindness of those of the same faith towards us , nor the civilities and obligations from those of a contrary profession ( of both which we have had abundant evidence ) could in the least degree startle us , or make us swerve from it , and that nothing can be proposed to manifest our zeal and affection for it , to which we will not readily consent , and we said then , that we did hope in due time , our self to propose somewhat for the propagation of it , that will satisfie the world , that we have always made it both our care and our study , and have enough observed what is most like to bring disadvantage to it . and the truth is , we do think our self the more competent to propose , and with god's assistance to determine many things now in difference , from the time we have spent , and the experience we have had in most of the reformed churches abroad , in france , in the low-countries , and in germany , where we have had frequent conferences , with the most learned men , who have unanimously lamented the great reproach the protestant religion undergoes from the distempers and too notorious schisms in matters of religion in england : and as the most learned among them have always with great submission and reverence acknowledged and magnified the established government of the church of england , and the great countenance and shelter the protestant religion received from it , before these unhappy times ; so many of them have with great ingenuity and sorrow confessed , that they were too easily misled by mis-information and prejudice into some dis-esteem of it , as if it had too much complyed with the church of rome ; whereas they now acknowledg it to be the best fence god hath yet raised against popery in the world ; and we are perswaded they do with great zeal wish it restored to its old dignity and veneration . when we were in holland , we were attended by many grave and learned ministers from hence , who were looked upon as the most able and principal assertors of the presbyterian opinions , with whom we had as much conference as the multitude of affairs which were then upon us would permit us to have ; and to our great satisfaction and comfort found them persons full of affection to us , of zeal for the peace of the church and state , and neither enemies ( as they have been given out to be ) to episcopacy or liturgy , but modestly to desire such alterations in either , as without shaking foundations , might best allay the present distempers , which the indisposition of the time , and the tenderness of some mens consciences had contracted ; for the better doing whereof , we did intend , upon our first arrival in this kingdom to call a synod of divines , as the most proper expedient to provide a proper remedy for all those differences and dis-satisfactions which had or should arise in matters of religion ; and in the mean time , we published in our declaration from breda a liberty to tender consciences , and that no man should be disquieted or called in question for differences of opinion in matter of religion , which do not disturb the peace of the kingdom , and that we shall be ready to consent to such an act of parliament as upon mature deliberation shall be offered to us , for the full granting that indulgence . whilest we continued in this temper of mind and resolution , and have so far complyed with the perswasion of particular persons , and the distemper of the time , as to be contented with the exercise of our religion in our own chapel , according to the constant practice and laws established , without enjoyning that practice , and the observation of those laws in the churches of the kingdom ; in which we have undergone the censure of many , as if we were without that zeal for the church which we ought to have , and which by god's grace , we shall always retain ; we have found our self not so candidly dealt with as we have deserved , and that there are unquiet and restless spirits , who without abating any of their own distemper in recompence of the moderation they find in us , continue their bitterness against the church , and endeavour to raise jealousies of us , and to lessen our reputation by their reproaches , as if we were not true to the professions vve have made : and in ●●der thereunto , they have very unseasonably caused to be printed , published , and dispersed throughout the kingdom a declaration heretofore printed in our name during the time of our being in scotland , of which we shall say no more than that the circumstances by which we were enforced to sign that declaration , are enough known to the world ; and that the worthiest and greatest part of that nation did even then detest and abhorr the ill usage of us in that particular , when the same tyranny was exercised there by the power of a few ill men , which at that time had spread it self over this kingdom , and therefore we had no reason to expect that we should at this season , when we are doing all we can to wipe out the memory of all that hath been done amiss by other men , and , we thank god , have wiped it out of our own remembrance , have been our self assaulted with those reproaches ; which we will likewise forget . since the printing this declaration , several seditious pamphlets and quaeries have been published and scattered abroad , to infuse dislike and jealousies into the hearts of the people , and of the army , and some who ought rather to have repented the former mischief they have wrought , than to have endeavoured to improve it , have had the hardiness to publish , that the doctrine of the church , against which , no man with whom we have conferred hath excepted , ought to be reformed as well as the discipline . this over-passionate and turbulent way of proceeding , and the impatience we find in many for some speedy determination in these matters , whereby the minds of men may be composed , and the peace of the church established , hath prevailed with us to invert the method we had proposed to our self , and even in order to the better calling and composing of a synod ( which the present jealousies will hardly agree upon ) by the assistance of god's blessed spirit , which we daily invoke and supplicate , to give some determination our self to the matters in difference , until such a synod may be called , as may without passion or prejudice , give us such farther assistance towards a perfect union of affections , as well as submission to authority , as is necessary : and we are the rather induced to take this upon us , by finding upon the full conference we have had with the learned men of several perswasions , that the mischiefs , under which both the church and state do at present suffer , do not result from any form'd doctrine or conclusion which either party mainta●● 〈◊〉 avows , but from the passion and appetite , and interest of particular persons , who contract greater prejudice to each other , from those affections , than would naturally rise from their opinions ; and those distempers must be in some degree allayed , before the meeting in a synod can be attended with better success , than their meeting in other places , and their discourses in pulpits have hitherto been ; and till all thoughts of victory are laid aside , the humble and necessary thoughts for the vindication of truth cannot be enough entertained . we must for the honour of all those of either perswasion with whom we have conferred , declare that the professions and desires of all for the advancement of piety and true godliness , are the same ; their professions of zeal for the peace of the church , the same ; of affection and duty to us , the same ; they all approve episcopacy ; they all approve a set form of liturgy ; and they all disprove and dislike the sin of sacriledge , and the alienation of the revenue of the church ; and if upon these excellent foundations , in submission to which there is such a harmony of affections , any superstructures should be raised , to the shaking those foundations , and to the contracting and lessening the blessed gift of charity , which is a vital part of christian religion , we shall think our self very unfortunate , and even suspect that we are defective in that administration of government , with which god hath entrusted us. we need not profess the high affection and esteem we have for the church of england as it is established by law ; the reverence to which hath supported us with gods blessing , against many temptations ; nor do we think that reverence in the least degree diminished by our condescentions , not peremptorily to insist on some particulars of ceremony , which , however introduced by the piety and devotion ; and order of former times , may not be so agreeable to the present , but may even lessen that piety and devotion , for the improvement whereof they might happily be first introduced , and consequently may well be dispensed with ; and we hope this charitable compliance of ours will dispose the minds of all men to a chearful submission to that authority , the preservation whereof is so necessary for the unity and peace of the church ; and that they will acknowledge the support of the episcopal authority , to be the best support of religion , by being the best means to contain the minds of men within the rules of government : and they who would restrain the exercise of that holy function within the rules which were observed in the primitive times , must remember and consider , that the ecclesiastical power being in those blessed times always subordinate and subject to the civil ; it was likewise proportioned to such an extent of jurisdiction as was most agreeable to that ; and as the sanctity and simplicity , and resignation of that age , did then refer many things to the bishops , which the policy of succeeding ages would not admit , at least did otherwise provide for ; so it can be no reproach to primitive episcopacy , if where there have been great alterations in the civil government , from what was then , there have been likewise some difference and alteration in the ecclesiastical , the essence and foundation being still preserved . and upon this ground , without taking upon us to censure the government of the church in other countries , where the government of the state is different from what it is here , or enlarging our self upon the reasons why , whilst there was an imagination of erecting a democratical government here in the state , they should be willing to continue an aristocratical government in the church ; it shall suffice to say , that since by the wonderful blessing of god , the hearts of this whole nation are returned to an obedience to monarchick government in the state , it must be very reasonable to support that government in the church which is established by law , and with which the monarchy hath flourished through so many ages , and which is in truth as ancient in this island as the christian monarchy thereof ; and which hath always in some respects or degrees been enlarged or restrained , as hath been thought most conducing to the peace and happiness of the kingdom ; and therefore we have not the least doubt but that the present bishops will think the present concessions now made by us to allay the present distempers , very just and reasonable , and will very chearfully conform themselves thereunto . 1. we do in the first place declare our purpose and resolution is and shall be , to promote the power of godliness , to encourage the exercises of religion , both publick and private , and to take care that the lord's day be applied to holy exercises , without unnecessary divertisments ; and that insufficient , negligent , and scandalous ministers be not permitted in the church ; and that as the present bishops are known to be men of great and exemplar piety in their lives , which they have manifested in their notorious and unexampled sufferings during these late distempers ; and of great and known sufficiency of learning ; so we shall take special care , by the assistance of god , to prefer no men to that office and charge , but men of learning , vertue , and piety , who may be themselves the best examples to those who are to be governed by them ; and we shall expect , and provide the best we can , that the bishops be frequent preachers , and that they do very often preach themselves in some church of their diocess , except they be hindred by sickness , or other bodily infirmities , or some other justifiable occasion , which shall not be thought justifiable if it be requent . 2. because the diocesses , especially some of them , are thought to be of too large extent : we will appoint such a number of suffragan bishops in every diocess as shall be sufficient for the due performance of their work . 3. no bishop shall ordain , or exercise any part of jurisdiction which appertains to the censures of the church , without the advice and assistance of the presbyters ; and no chancellors , commissaries , or officials , as such , shall exercise any act of spiritual jurisdiction in these cases ( viz. ) excommunication , absolution , or wherein any of the ministry are concerned , with reference to their pastoral charge . however our intent and meaning is to uphold and maintein the profession of the civil law so far and in such matters as it hath been of use and practice within our kingdoms and dominions ; albeit as to excommunication , our will and pleasure is , that no chancellor , commissary , or official shall decree any sentence of excommunication or absolution , or be judges in those things wherein any of the ministry are concerned , as is aforesaid . nor shall the arch-deacon exercise any jurisdiction without the advice and assistance of six ministers of his arch-deaconcy , whereof three to be nominated by the bishop , and three by the election of the major part of the presbyters within the arch-deaconry . 4. to the end that the deans and chapters may be the better fitted to afford counsel and assistance to the bishops , both in ordination and the other offices mentioned before ; we will take care that those preferments be given to the most learned and pious presbyters of the diocess ; and moreover that an equal number ( to those of the chapter ) of the most learned , pious , and discreet presbyters of the same diocess , annually chosen by the major vote of all the presbyters of that diocess present at such elections , shall be always advising and assisting , together with those of the chapter , in all ordinations , and in every part of jurisdiction which appertains to the censures of the church , and at all other solemn and important actions in the exercise of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction , wherein any of the ministry are concerned : provided that at all such meetings , the number of the ministers so elected , and those present of the chapter shall be equal , and not exceed one the other , and that to make the numbers equal , the juniors of the exceeding number be withdrawn that the most ancient may take place : nor shall any suffragan bishop ordain or exercise the fore-mentioned offices and acts of spiritual jurisdiction , but with the advice and assistance of a sufficient number of the most judicious and pious presbyters annually chosen as aforesaid within his precincts : and our will is that the great work of ordination be constantly and solemnly performed by the bishop and his aforesaid presbytery , at the four set times and seasons appointed by the church for that purpose . 5. we will take care that confirmation be rightly and solemnly performed , by the information , and with the consent of the minister of the place ; who shall admit none to the lord's supper , till they have made a credible profession of their faith , and promised obedience to the will of god ; according as is expressed in the considerations of the rubrick before the catechism ; and that all possible diligence be used for the instruction and reformation of scandalous offenders , whom the minister shall not suffer to partake of the lord's table , until they have openly declared themselves to have truly repented and amended their former naughty lives , as is partly exprest in the rubrick , and more fully in the canons ; provided there be place for due appeals to superiour powers . but besides the suffragans and their presbytery , every rural dean ( those deans , as heretofore , to be nominated by the bishop of the diocess ) together with three or four ministers of that deanery , chosen by the major part of all the ministers within the same , shall meet once in every month , to receive such complaints as shall be presented to them by the ministers or church-wardens of the respective parishes ; and also to compose all such differences betwixt party and party , as shall be referred unto them by way of arbitration , and to convince offenders , and reform all such things as they find amiss by their pastoral reproofs and admonitions , if they may be so reformed : and such matters as they cannot by this pastoral and perswasive way compose and reform , are by them to be prepared for , and presented to the bishop ; at which meeting any other ministers of that deanery , may , if they please , be present and assist . moreover , the rural dean and his assistants are in their respective divisions to see that the children and younger sort be carefully instructed by the respective ministers of every parish , in the grounds of christian religon , and be able to give a good account of their faith and knowledge , and also of their christian conversation conformable thereunto , before they be confirmed by the bishop , or admitted to the sacrament of the lord's supper . 6. no bishop shall exercise any arbitrary power , or do or impose any thing upon the clergy or the people , but what is according to the known law of the land. 7. we are very glad to find , that all with whom we have conferred , do in their judgments approve a liturgy , or set form of publick worship , to be lawful ; which in our judgment , for the preservation of unity and uniformity , we conceive to be very necessary : and though we do esteem the liturgy of the church of england , conteined in the book of common prayer , and by law established , to be the best we have seen ; and we believe that we have seen all that are extant and used in this part of the world , and well know what reverence most of the reformed churches , or at least the most learned men in those churches have for it ; yet since we find some exceptions made against several things therein . we will appoint an equal number of learned divines of both perswasions , to re-view the same , and to make such alterations as shall be thought most necessary ; and some additional forms ( in the scripture phrase , as near as may be ) suited unto the nature of the several parts of worship , and that it be left to the ministers choice to use one or other at his discretion . in the mean time , and till this be done , although we do heartily wish and desire , that the ministers in their several churches , because they dislike some clauses and expressions , would not totally lay aside the use of the book of common prayer , but read those parts against which there can be no exception ; which would be the best instance of declining those marks of distinction , which we so much labour and desire to remove ; yet in compassion to divers of our good subjects , who scruple the use of it , as now it is . our will and pleasure is , that none be punished or troubled for not using it , until it be reviewed , and effectually reformed , as aforesaid . 8. lastly , concerning ceremonies , which have administred so much matter of difference and contention , and which have been introduced by the wisdom and authority of the church , for edification , and the improvement of piety : we shall say no more , but that we have the more esteem of all , and reverence for many of them , by having been present in many of those churches where they are most abolished , or discountenanced ; and it cannot be doubted , but that , as the universal church cannot introduce one ceremony in the worship of god , that is contrary to god's word expressed in the scripture ; so every national church , with the approbation and consent of the sovereign power , may , and hath always introduced such particular ceremonies , as in that conjuncture of time are thought most proper for edification and the necessary improvement of piety and devotion in the people , though the necessary practice thereof cannot be deduced from scripture ; and that which before was , and in it self is indifferent , ceases to be indifferent , after it is once established by law : and therefore our present consideration and work is , to gratifie the private consciences of those who are grieved with the use of some ceremonies , by indulging to , and dispensing with their omitting those ceremonies ; not utterly to abolish any which are established by law , ( if any are practised contrary to law , the same shall cease ) which would be unjust , and of ill example ; and to impose upon the conscience of some , for the satisfaction of the conscience of others , which is otherwise provided for . as it could not be reasonable that men should expect , that we should our self decline , or enjoyn others to do so , to receive the blessed sacrament upon our knees , which in our conscience is the most humble , most devout , and most agreeable posture for that holy duty , because some other men , upon reasons best , if not only known to themselves , choose rather to do it fitting or standing : we shall leave all decisions and determinations of that kind , if they shall be thought necessary for a perfect and entire unity and uniformity throughout the nation , to the advice of a national synod , which shall be duly called , after a little time , and a mutual conversation between persons of different perswasions , hath mollified those distempers , abated those sharpnesses , and extinguished those jealousies which make men unfit for those consultations ; and upon such advice , we shall use our best endeavor that such laws may be established , as may best provide for the peace of the church and state. provided that none shall be denied the sacrament of the lord's supper , though they do not use the gesture of kneeling in the act of receiving . in the mean time , out of compassion and compliance towards those who would forbear the cross in baptism , we are content that no man shall be compelled to use the same , or suffer for not doing it : but if any parent desire to have his child christned according to the form used , and the minister will not use the sign , it shall be lawful for that parent to procure another minister to do it : and if the proper minister shall refuse to omit that ceremony of the cross , it shall be lawful for the parent , who would not have his child so baptised , to procure another minister to do it , who will do it according to his desire . no man shall be compelled to bow at the name of jesus , or suffer in any degree for not doing it , without reproaching those who out of their devotion continue that ancient ceremony of the church . for the use of the surplice , we are contented that all men be left to their liberty to do as they shall think fit , without suffering in the least degree for wearing , or not wearing it ; provided , that this liberty do not extend to our own chappel , cathedral , or collegiate churches , or to any colledge in either of our universities ; but that the several statutes and customs for the use thereof in the said places , be there observed as formerly . and because some men , otherwise pious and learned , say , they cannot conform unto the subscription required by the canon , nor take the oath of canonical obedience ; we are content , and it is our will and pleasure , ( so they take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy ) that they shall receive ordination , institution , and induction , and shall be permitted to exercise their function , and to enjoy the profits of their livings , without the said subscription or oath of canonical obedience : and moreover , that no persons in the universities shall for the want of such subscription be hindred in the taking of their degrees . lastly , that none be judged to forfeit his presentation or benefice , or be deprived of it , upon the statute of the thirteenth of queen elizabeth , chapter the twelth , so he read and declare his assent to all the articles of religion , which only concern the confession of the true christian faith , and the doctrine of the sacraments comprised in the book of articles in the said statute mentioned . in a word , we do again renew what we have formerly said in our declaration from breda , for the liberty of tender consciences , that no man shall be disquieted or called in question for differences of opinion in matters of religion , which do not disturb the peace of the kingdom ; and if any have been disturbed in that kind since our arrival here , it hath not proceeded from any direction of ours . to conclude , and in this place to explain what we mentioned before , and said in our letter to the house of commons from breda , that we hoped in due time , our self to propose somewhat for the propagation of the protestant religion , that will satisfie the world , that we have always made it both our care and our study , and have enough observed what is most like to bring disadvantage to it : we do conjure all our loving subjects to acquiesce in , and submit this our declaration concerning those differences which have so much disquieted the nation at home , and given such offence to the protestant churches abroad , and brought such reproach upon the protestant religion in general , from the enemies thereof ; as if upon obscure notions of faith and fancy , it did admit the practice of christian duties and obedience to be discountenanced and suspended , and introduce a licence in opinions and manners , to the prejudice of the christian faith. and let us all endeavour , and emulate each other in those endeavours , to countenance and advance the protestant religion abroad , which will be best done by supporting the dignity and reverence due to the best reformed protestant church at home ; and which being once freed from the calumnies and reproaches it hath undergone from these late ill times , will be the best shelter for those abroad , which will by that countenance both be the better protected against their enemies , and be the more easily induced to compose the differences amongst themselves , which give their enemies more advantage against them : and we hope and expect that all men will henceforward forbear to vent any such doctrine in the pulpit , or to endeavour to work in such manner upon the affections of the people , as may dispose them to an ill opinion of us and the government , and to disturb the peace of the kingdom . which if all men will in their several vocations endeavour to preserve with the same affection and zeal we our self will do ; all our good subjects will by gods blessing upon us enjoy as great a measure of felicity , as this nation hath ever done , and which we shall constantly labour to procure for them , as the greatest blessing god can bestow upon us in this world. given at our court at whitehall this twenty fifth day of october . 1660. the reverend dean of pauls his proposals or terms of vnion , betwixt the church of england and the dissenters : taken out of his preface to the vnreasonableness of separation , pag. 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94. is there nothing to be done for dissenting protestants , who agree with us in all doctrinal articles of our church , and only scruple the use of a few ceremonies , and some late impositions ? shall these differences still be continued , when they may be so easily removed ? and so many useful men be encouraged , and taken into the constitution ? do we value a few indifferent ceremonies , and some late declarations , and doubtful expressions , beyond the satisfaction of mens consciences , and the peace and stability of this church ? as to this material question , i shall crave leave to deliver my opinion freely and impartially ; and that , i. with respect to the case of the people ; the terms of whose union with us , is acknowledged by our brethren to be so much easier than their own . but these are of two sorts : 1. some allow the use of the liturgy , but say they cannot joyn in communion with us , because the participation of the sacraments hath such rites and ceremonies annexed to it , which they think unlawful ; and therefore till these be removed , or left indifferent , they dare not joyn with us in baptism or the lord's supper ; because in the one the cross is used , and in the other kneeling is required . as to these i answer , ( 1. ) upon the most diligent search i could make into these things , i find no good ground for any scruple of conscience , as to to the use of these ceremonies ; and as little as any as to the sign of the cross , as it is used in our church ; notwithstanding all the noise that hath been made about its being a new sacrament , and i knew not what ; but of this at large in the following treatise . ( 2. ) i see no ground for the peoples separation from other acts of communion , on the account of some rites they suspect to be unlawful : and especially when the use of such rites is none of their own act , as the cross in baptism is not ; and when such an explication is annexed concerning the intention of kneeling at the lord's supper , as is in the rubrick after the communion . ( 3. ) notwithstanding , because the use of sacraments in a christian church , ought to be the most free from all exceptions , and they ought to be so administred , as rather to invite than discourage scrupulous persons from joyning in them : i do think it would be a part of christian wisdom and condescention in the governors of our church , to remove those bars from a freedom in joyning in full communion with us . which may be done , either by wholly taking away the sign of the cross ; or if that may give offence to others , by confining the use of it to the publick administration of baptism ; or by leaving it indifferent , as the parents desire it . as to kneeling at the lord's supper , since some posture is necessary , and many devout people scruple any other , and the primitive church did in ancient times receive it in the posture of adoration , there is no reason to take this away , even in parochial churches ; provided that those who scruple kneelling , do receive it with the least offence to others , and rather standing than sitting , because the former is most agreeable to the practice of antiquity , and of our neighbour-reformed churches . as to the surplice in parochial churches , it is not of that consequ●nce as to bear a dispute one way or other ; and as to cathedr●l churches , there is no necessity of alteration . but there is another thing which seems to be of late much scrupled in baptism , viz. the use of god fathers and god-mothers exc●●●ing the parents . although i do not question , but the practice of our church may be justified , ( as i have done it towards the end of the following treatise , ) yet i see no necessity of adhering 〈◊〉 strictly to the canon herein , but that a little alteration may ●revent these scruples , either by permitting the parents to joyn with the sponsors ; or by the parents publickly desiring the sponsors to represent them in offering the child to baptism ; or which seems most agreeable to reason , that the parents offer the child to baptism , and then the sponsors perform the covenanting part ; representing the child ; and the charge after baptism be given in common to the parents and sponsors . these things being allowed , i see no obstruction remaining as to a full union of the body of such dissenters with us , in all acts of divine worship , and christian communion , as do not reject all communion with us as unlawful . 2. but because there are many of those , who are become zealous protestants , and plead much their communion with us in faith and doctrine , although they cannot joyn with us in worship , because they deny the lawfulness of liturgies , and the right constitution of our churches ; their case deserves some consideration , whether and how far they are capable of being made serviceable to the common interest , and to the support of the protestant religion among us . to their case i answer , first , that a general unlimited toleration to dissenting protestants , will soon bring confusion among us , and in the end popery , as i have shewed already ; and a suspension of all the penal laws that relate to dissenters is the same thing with a boundless toleration . secondly , if any present favours be granted to such , in consideration of our circumstances , and to prevent their conjunction with the papists , for a general toleration , ( for if ever the papists obtain it , it must be under their name : ) if , i say , such favour be thought fit to be shewed them , it ought to be with such restrictions and limitations as may prevent the mischief which may easily follow upon it : for all such meetings are a perpetual reproach to our churches , by their declaring , that our churches are no true churches ; that our manner of worship is unlawful ; and that our church-government is antichristian ; and that on these accounts they separate from us , and worship god by themselves . but if such an indulgence be thought fit to be granted , i humbly offer these things to consideration . 1. that none be permitted to enjoy the priviledge of it , who do not declare , that they do hold communion with our churches to be unlawful . for it seems unreasonable to allow it to others , and will give countenance to endless and causeless separations . 2. that all who enjoy it , besides taking the test against popery , do subscribe the thirty six articles of our faith , because the pretence of this liberty , is joyning with us in points of faith ; and this may more probably prevent papists getting in amongst them . 3. that all such as enjoy it , must declare the particular congregations they are of and enter their names before such commissioners as shall be authorized for that purpose ; that so this may be no pretence for idle , loose , and prophane persons , never going to any church at all . 4. that both preachers and congregations be liable to severe penalties , if they use any bitter or reproachful words , either in sermons or writings , against the established constitution of our churches ; because they desire only the freedom of their own consciences ; and the using this liberty , will discover it is not conscience , but a turbulent , factious humour , which makes them separate from our communion . 5. that all indulged persons be particularly obliged to pay all legal duties to the parochial churches , ( lest meer covetousness tempt men to run among them ) and no persons so indulged , be capable of any publick office. it not being reasonable that such should be trusted with government , who look upon the worship established by law as unlawful . 6. that no other penalty be laid on such indulged persons , but that of twelve pence a sunday for their absence from their parochial churches , which ought to be duly collected for the use of the poor , and cannot be complained of as any heavy burthen , considering the liberty they do enjoy by it . 7. that the bishops , as visitors appointed by law , have an exact account given to them , of the rule of their worship and discipline , and of all the persons belonging to the indulged congregations , with their qualities and places of abode ; and that none be admitted a member of any such congregation without acquainting their visitor with it , that so means may be used to prevent their leaving our communion , by giving satisfaction to their scruples . this power of the bishops cannot be scrupled by them , since herein they are considered as commissioners appointed by law. 8. that no indulged persons presume under severe penalties to breed up scholars , or to teach gentlemens sons university-learning ; because this may be justly looked on as a design to propagate schism to posterity , and to lay a foundation for the disturbance of future generations . ii. as to the case of the ejected ministers , i have these things to offer : 1. that bare subscription of the thirty six articles concerning doctrinal points , be not allowed as sufficient to qualifie any man for a living , or any church-preferment , for these reasons . first , any lay-man upon these terms may not only be capable of a living , but may take upon him to administer the sacraments ; which was never allowed in any well-constituted church in the christian world. and such an allowance among us , instead of setling and uniting us , will immediately bring things into great confusion , and give mighty advantage to the papists against our church . and we have reason to fear , a design of this nature , under a pretence of union of protestants , tends to the subversion of this church , and throwing all things into confusion , which at last will end in popery . secondly , this will bring a faction into the church , which will more endanger it than external opposition . for such men will come in triumphantly , having beaten down three of the thirty nine articles ; and being in legal possession of their places , will be ready to defie and contemn those who submitted to the rest , and to glory in their conquests , and draw followers after them , as the victorious confessors against prelacy and ceremonies . and can they imagine those of the church of england will see the reputation of the church , or their own , to suffer so much , and not appear in their own vindication ? things are not come to that pass , nor will they suddenly be , that the friends , of the church of england will be either afraid , or ashamed to own her cause , we do heartily and sincerely desire union with our brethren , if it may be had on just and reasonable terms ; but they must not think , that we will give up the cause of the church for it , so as to condemn its constitution , or make the ceremonies unlawful , which have been hitherto observed and practised in it . if any expedient can be found out for the ease of other mens consciences , without reflecting on our own ; if they can be taken in , without reproach or dishonour to the reformation of the church ; i hope no true son of the church of england will oppose it . but if the design be to bring them in as a faction to bridle and controll the episcopal power , by setting up forty bishops in a diocess against one ; if it be for them to trample upon the church of england , and not to submit to its order and government upon fair and moderate terms , let them not call this a design of union , but the giving law to a party to oppose the church of england . and what the success of this will be , let wise men judge . thirdly , if a subscription to thirty six articles were sufficient by the statute 13 eliz. c. 12. i do not understand how by virtue of that statute a man is bound publickly to read the thirty nine articles in the church , and the testimonial of his subscription , on pain of being deprived ipso facto , if he do not . for the l. ch. i. coke saith , that subscription to the 39 articles is required by force of the act of parliament , 13 eliz : c. 12. and he adds , that the delinquent is disabled and deprived ipso facto ; and that a conditional subscription to them was not sufficient , was resolved by all the judges in england . but how a man should be depriued ipso facto for not subscribing , and reading the 39 articles , as appears by the cases mentioned in coke , and yet be required only to subscribe to 36 , by the same statute , is a thing too hard for me to conceive . 2. but notwithstanding this , if any temper can be found out , as to the manner of subscription , that may give ease to the scruples of our brethren , and secure the peace of the church , the desired union may be attained without that apparent danger of increasing the factions among us . and this i suppose may be done , by an absolute subscription to all those articles which concern the doctrine of the true christian faith , and the use of the sacraments ; and a solemn promise under their hand , or subscription of peaceable submission , as to the rest , so as not to oppose or contradict them , either in preaching or writing ; upon the same penalty as if they had not subscribed to the 36. which may be a more probable means to keep the church in quiet , than forcing a more rigorous subscription upon them , or leaving them at their full liberty . 3. as to the other subscription required , 1 jac. to the 3 articles . the first is provided for by the oaths of allegiance and supremacy . the third is the same with the subscription to the 39 articles . and as to the second , about the book of common-prayer , &c. it ought to be considered , ( 1. ) whether , for the satisfaction of the scrupulous , some more doubtful and obscure passages may not yet be explained or amended ? whether the new translation of the psalms were not fitter to be used , at least in parochial churches ? whether portions of canonical scripture were not better put in stead of apocrypha lessons ? whether the rubrick about salvation of infants , might not be restored to its former place , in the office of confirmation , and so the present exceptions against it be removed ? whether those expressions which suppose the strict exercise of discipline , in burying the dead , were not better left at liberty in our present case ? such a review made by wise and peaceable men , not given to wrath and disputing , may be so far from being a dishonour to this church , that it may add to the glory of it . ( 2. ) upon such a review , whether it be not great reason that all persons who officiate in the church , be not only tied to a constant use of it in all publick offices , ( as often as they administer them ) which they ought in person frequently to do ; but to declare at their first entrance upon a parochial charge , their approbation of the use of it , after their own reading of it , that so the people may not suspect them to carry on a factious design , under an outward pretence of conformity to the rules of the church they live in . ( 3. ) whether , such a solemn using the liturgy , and approbation and promise of the use of it , may not be sufficient , in stead of the late form of declaring their assent and consent , which hath been so much scrupled by our brethren ? these are all the things which appear to me reasonable to be allowed in order to an union , and which i suppose may be granted without detriment or dishonour to our church . there are other things very desirable towards the happiness and flourishing of this church ; as the exercise of discipline in parochial churches , in a due subordination to the bishop ; the reforming the ecclesiastical courts as to excommunication , without prejudice to the excellent profession of the civil law ; the building of more churches in great parishes , especially about the city of london ; the retrenching pluralities ; the strictness and solemnity of ordinations ; the making a book of canons suitable to this age , for the better regulating the conversations of the clergy . such things as these , might facilitate our union , and make our church in spight of all its enemies become a praise in the whole earth . a specimen of a bill , for vniting protestants ; being a rough draught of such terms , as seem equal for the conformist to grant , and the non-conformist to yield to , for peace sake , provided a good while , and published on purpose only for the farther , better , and more easie consideration of the parliament . whereas , there are many jealousies risen about : popery , which makes it even necessary to the peace of the nation , that the protestant interest be united and strengthened by all good and lawful means : and to this end , there being this one proper expedient ; to wit ; the removing the occasion of divisions , which several persons do find to themselves in those late injunctions , which yet were intended to the same purpose of concord in the nation : be it enacted — that an explanation of these impositions , and such alleviations , be allowed to the tenderly considerate , and peaceably scrupulous , as follow . in the act of uniformity , by the declaration of assent and consent to all things , and every thing contained in , and prescribed by the two books of common prayer , and of ordering priests and deacons , we understand not , that these books are in every minute particular , infallible , or free from that defect , which is incident to all human composure : but that they are in the main contents , to be sincerely approved and used . and we do therefore allow this declaration to be sufficient , if it be made to the use of the book , in the ordinary constant lords-days-service , notwithstanding any exceptions some may have against some things in the by-offices , and occasional service , the rubrick , and otherwise . and for the ceremonies which are made , and have been always , and on all hands , held to be only indifferent things , we think fit that they be left to the consciences and prudence of ministers , and people , every where ( excepting the cathedrals ) to use them , or forbear them , as they judge it most meet for their own and others edification , provided that if any person will have his child baptized with the sign of the cross , or stands upon any thing else , hitherto required by the service-book , if the minister himself scruple the performance , he shall permit another to do it . in the same act , by those words in the subscription , that it is not lawful to take arms against the king , upon any pretence whatsoever ; we intend no new or strange thing , but the rightful maintenance only of the king's authority against rebellion , according to the common determination of learned writers , in the case of subjection to princes . by the words , i abhor the position of taking arms by the authority of the king , against any commissionated by him , we never thought of advancing the arbitrary commissions of the king above law ; but by those commissionated by him , we understand such as are legally commissionated , and in the legal pursuit of such commissions . by the clause which follows , that requires a renunciation of all endeavour of any alteration of government in the church or state , we never meant to deny any free-born subject his right , of choosing parliament-men , or acting in in his place for the common good any way , according to law ; but that he shall renounce all such endeavour , as is seditious , or not warranted by the constitution of the nation ; and particularly , such an endeavour as was assumed in the late times , without , and against the consent of the king : and for the rest of the subscription , which is enjoyned but to the year 1682. be it enacted , that it cease presently , and be no longer enjoyned . and forasmuch as there is an oath prescribed and required of all non-conformists preachers , that reside in any corporate town , by a certain act of the former parliament , made at oxford in the 17 th . year of his now majesties reign , entituled , an act for restraining non-conformists , from inhabiting corporations : we do further declare , that it shall suffice any man , for the enjoyment of his free born liberty , of inhabiting where he thinks best ; and serve him also instead of the fore-mentioned subscription ; to take that oath in this form of words following . i a. b. do swear , that i hold it unlawful upon any pretence , to take arms against the king , his government or laws : and that i disclaim that dangerous position , of taking arms by his authority , against his person , or any legally commissionated by him , in the legal pursuit of such commissions : and that i will not endeavour any alteration of government in the church or state , in any way or manner , not warrantted by the constitution of the kingdom , or any otherwise than by act of parliament : and as soon as any man has taken the oath thus , he shall be discharged of all penalty for his omission before . we do declare moreover , that whereas it is required also in the act of uniformity , that every minister who injoys any living or ecclesiastical preferment , shall be ordained by a bishop ; and there are several persons of late , who in case of necessity , for want of bishops took presbyterian-orders : our meaning is not in any wise to disgust the reformed churches beyond the seas , and make it necessary for such to be re-ordained to the office ; but that they receive this second imposition of hands to the exercise of their office in the new charge , unto which they are , or shall be called ; and that the bishop shall frame his words accordingly . and whereas there is a subscription also in the canons , and the canonical-oath of obedience , imposed on most ministers by the bishops , that have given some of the greatest occasion to non-conformity heretofore ; which yet never passed into law by any act of parliament : we do further declare , that nothing more of that kind shall be required of ministers hence forward , than was made and held necessary by the act of the thirteenth of elizabeth . and in regard there hath been great offence taken by conscientious ministers , at the bishops , ( or their courts ) commanding them to read the sentence of excommunication against some or other of their parish , for such faults as they think not at all worthy of so great a censure : we declare it but a just thing , that every minister be first satisfied in the cause , or else be exempted from the execution of that charge ; and that the bishop ( or his court ) provide some other person that is satisfied about it , to do it . and to the intent that a free search after truth may not be discouraged in the pursuit of concord , and many other scruples avoided upon that account : we declare , that though an authentick interpretation be required , as to the substance of all laws , yet in the articles of the church , ( which are theses for agreement , and not laws ) and the homilies , a doctrinal interpretation shall be held sufficient for an assent or subscription to them . and because the very superintendency of bishops , and that subjection to them which is required by the constitution of the realm , is , or may be an hindrance to many sober ministers , and other protestants , of coming into the church , who are ready to consent to the doctrine , but not to the discipline or government of it : we do declare , that so long as any person or party do acknowledge the king's supremacy , as head of the church in this nation , and obey their ordinary , or the bishops , in licitis & honestis , upon the account of his authority , ( committed to them for the exercise of that external regiment , circa sacra , which is granted by all our divines to the higher powers in every nation ) it is enough for the owning episcopal iurisdiction ( so far as they do own it , in the declaration of assent and consent , or in any other part of conformity ; ) and shall serve them to all intents and purposes in law , no lets than a professed belief and acknowledgment of the immediate divine right of it . be it therefore enacted by this present parliament , that if any person be willing to conform to the present establishment of the church of england , and her service appointed according to these explanations , alleviations , declarations , lenitives , or cautions , he shall be admitted to any ecclesiastical preferment , and enjoy the use of his ministry without any molestation : all statutes , canons , or laws to the contrary notwithstanding . and for the making this act of better signification to the concerned , and the prevention of that scandal which is raised on the clergy , through the covetousness of some , in heaping up to themselves all the preferments they can get , when others have scarce subsistence for their families , and the souls of many people are thereby neglected : be it farther enacted , that no clergy-men for the three next years ensuing , be suffered to enjoy any more than one living or cure of souls , and one dignity , ( or other ecclesiastical preferment ) at one time ; and that every man ( without exception ) that hath more than one of either , shall immediately give up the rest to be distributed among those who shall be brought off from their non-conformity , upon the terms of this act , into the established order . which that they may also be obtained , and possessed with a clean conscience , and that grievous curruption of simony may be extirpate out of the land : be it enacted moreover , that every patron that shall hence forward present his clerk to any living , shall have the oath , called the simonical oath , imposed on him , no less than on the incumbent : and if he refuses to take it , that then the bishop shall have immediate power ( taking only the same oath ) of presentation in his room . and forasmuch , as there are some ministers of a good life , that cannot ( according to their judgments ) allow of our parochial churches , nor a book of liturgy : but do choose to worship god , and jesus christ in the way of their gathered or separate congregations , and crave the protection and clemency of the king , upon their allegiance , as other subjects : be it finally enacted , for the happiness and quiet of the realm , and the reduction of these men by other means than those which have hitherto proved unsuccessful ; that every christian subject throughout the land , that profess the reformed religion , and be not convict of popery , be pardoned all faults and penalties , incurred upon the account of any fore-passed non-conformity ; and that they shall not , during these seven years next ensuing , be prosecuted upon any penal law , for their consciences , in the matter of religion ; they carrying themselves innocently and peaceably , with submission to the civil , and without disturbance to the ecclesiastical government , now settled in the nation : all statutes to the contrary notwithstanding . in short , a repeal of our laws about conformity unto the 13 th of elizabeth ; or , a new act of uniformity ; or , the king's declaration concerning ecclesiastical affairs , at his first coming in , turn'd into a law , were comprehension . his latter declaration to all his loving subjects , ( some few things in both , yet a little considered ) made so , were indulgence . a bill of comprehension with indulgence , both together , will do our business . an addition , or clause in it against pluralities , will do it with supererogation . deo gloria . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61586-e110 hooker's preface to his ecclesiastical polity , printed anno 1676. p. 44 , 45. hooker's preface to his ecclesiastical polity , p. 44. dr. stillingfleet's irenicu● p. 122.123 . preface to the common-prayer . dr. tillotson's sermon , preached at the yorkshire-feast . an. 1679. p. 28. dr. sherlock's sermon , preached before the lord mayor . nov. 1688. notes for div a61586-e1130 co. inst. 4. part. 323 , 324 a second letter to mr. g. in answer to two letters lately published concerning the conference at the d. of p. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1687 approx. 80 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 23 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a71074 wing s5635 estc r14280 13142401 ocm 13142401 97980 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a71074) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 97980) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 752:5 or 1643:15) a second letter to mr. g. in answer to two letters lately published concerning the conference at the d. of p. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. godden, thomas, 1624-1688. 44 p. printed for h. mortlocke ..., london : 1687. dated and signed: london, apr. 21, 1687. e.s. [i.e. edward stillingfleet]. reply to two letters by edward meredith; the first, "a letter desiring information of the conference at the dean of st. paul's, mentioned in the letter to mr. g. [i.e. thomas godden]", taking exception to stillingfleet's "letter to mr. g., giving a true account of the late conference"; the second, "a letter to dr. e.s. concerning his late letter to mr. g." cf. gillow, j. a literary and biographical history; bibl. dict. of the english catholics. advertisement: p. 44. item at reel 1643:15 identified as wing s911 (number cancelled in wing 2nd ed.). reproduction of original in duke university library and trinity college library, cambridge university. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng meredith, edward, 1648-1689? -letter to dr. e.s. concerning his late letter to mr. g. catholic church -infallibility. tradition (theology) 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-07 melanie sanders sampled and proofread 2004-07 melanie sanders text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a second letter to mr. g. in answer to two letters lately published concerning the conference at the d. of p. imprimatur , guil. needham . apr. 22. 1687. london , printed for h. mortlocke , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . 1687. a second letter to mr. g. sir , you may wonder that i continue my application to your self , when two gentlemen , have appeared in print so lately for you ; but the character they give of you is so extraordinary , that i have no mind to change my man ; and therefore hope you will at last generously undertake the defence of your own cause . the authour of the first letter , saith , those that know you better think there is not an honester man in the nation , and that if you have wronged me it is the first wrong you ever did in your life . i am afraid some will suspect your friend was not in earnest when he wrote this ; and that it rather looks like libelling the nation than commending you. but because it is so rare a thing to meet with a person set forth with such advantage ; you cannot blame me for desiring to hold a correspondence with you in the way of letters . for all mr. m's arguments for verbal conferences have not prevailed upon 〈◊〉 ; and therefore i proceed in writing another i 〈◊〉 to you , looking on this way as much freer 〈…〉 sudden heats and surprises , more cautious and 〈…〉 erate , and less liable to cavils and misrepresete 〈…〉 . and methi●ks the account mr. m. gives of our con●●rence , confutes all his arguments ; unless they ●e ●etter managed in ●●ffee-houses and other places , i. e. with more temper ●nd fairness than he represents ours to have been . the truth is , the experience i have had of the disingenuity both in and after them hath made me not very fond of them . but it may be verbal conferences are most agreeable to oral tradition ; but we who prefer a written rule as far more certain , rather chuse to publish in writing the sense of our minds , than leave it to the arbitrary representing of others words . which i had suffered so much by , that i was forced for my own vindication to betake my self to writing a former letter to you , wherein i complained of the injury done me by false and imperfect copies of our conference dispersed by you . if that were the first wrong you ever did in your life , i am very sorry you should begin with me . for after all that your friends have said for you i am still of the same opinion . and in this letter shall more fully give you my reasons . but i hope you are not now one hundred and fifty miles off , lest i be told again that i take advantage of your great distance , as though i durst not write to you at a less distance than between l. and ch. but in case you were there still , am i the less injured by your going so far ? or less obliged to vindicate my self among those who had been abused by false reports and copies of the conference ? i now apply my self to what mr. m. hath said for you in answer to my former letter . mr. m. saith p. 5. you were far from making great boasts of a victory after the conference . must i rely on mr. m.'s authority , against the infallibility of oral tradition ? the matter of fact was deliver'd to me from several persons who themselves heard you , and in several places . what must i now believe according to your infallible rule of oral tradition ? here are several witnesses of unquestionable credit , who had it ( not by a long series from father to son , but ) immediately from your own mouth ; who could not easily forget what they heard you say , and would not out of malice alter it , and yet your own advocate declares expresly contrary to them , and thinks i am bound to believe his testimony against them all . i pray , sir , consider what a reflexion this is upon your rule , and what little security we can have for our faith then , by oral tradition . if so many persons who were competent judges of what they heard themselves , and whose testimony i had no reason to suspect , could so strangely deceive me , at so little a distance , what infallibility can you pretend in bare tradition of matters of faith , when the things themselves are so much harder to conceive and deliver entire , and the distance so very much greater ? either therefore you must renounce your advocate if you hold to the infallibility of oral tradition ; or if you hold to mr. m. you must renounce your rule of faith. mr. m. seems to deny the charge of your giving out false and imperfect copies of the conference . but that which i charged you chiefly with , was from one that was received from your own hands ; and the rest i saw afterwards agreed with it . and yet mr. m. cannot deny that the copies given out contained lame and unfinished discourses p. 5. that the noise and wrangling might hinder the writers from being so exact , p. 15. that we parted in so great a hurry , that those things which were spoken were not written , nor some , perhaps , of what was written so nicely exact , &c. p. 19. that in the latter part of this dispute things were not set down so exactly as they ought to have been , ibid. that the disputations of the conference are lame and imperfect , p. 25. these being the words of your own advocane , had i not just cause to complain that such copies should be dispersed abroad , as a true account of the conference between us ; whereas himself confesses them to have been so lame and imperfect ? and yet these were given about with great industry and care , as though an entire account of what passed at the conference , were contained in them ; and few days passed , but i heard great boasts were made of this conference , and some said that they had it under my hand that i was baffled . i think therefore , i had reason to complain , of imperfect copies , since mr. m. confesses they were no better . but this is not all , for i had said the copies i had seen were false as well as imperfect . to make out this charge i must insist on some particulars , as they are in that copy , which was given by your self . when mr. t. declared himself satisfied as to the grounds of faith , without the roman churches infallibility , which was the true state of the question debated in the first part ( of which more by and by . ) he desired to know for his own satisfaction , how you would prove the church of rome to be infallible ? this in your copy is said to be put by me . and lest this might be thought a mere casual mistake , i am certainly informed that mr. m. told a gentleman to whom he gave a copy , that i proposed the question about the church of romes infallibility ( as though i did it on purpose to divert the discourse ) whereas mr. t. declaring himself satisfied with the answers given about the grounds of our certainty , desired that he might propose a question to you , how you could prove the church of rome to be infallible ? and in a copy sent from ch. where you dispersed it , the title of the second dispute is , stillingfleet's first question , how do you prove , &c. so that my name was here falsly put in ; and it is easie to guess with what design . but to proceed . when you said the infallibility of the church of rome consisted in following the universal testimony of all traditionary christians , your copy makes me ask a very wise question upon it , viz. how does if appear that the church of rome is infallible in traditiun ? whereas i put two questions to you . ( 1. ) how does it appear that the church of rome is infallible in the sense and meaning of tradition ? ( 2. ) is this tradition a rule of faith distinct from scripture ? the design of which questions was to shew , ( 1. ) that to receive a doctrine by mere tradition can afford no infallible ground of faith , unless persons be assured of the true sense and meaning of the doctrine so delivered . as for instance , suppose the doctrine delivered be that christ was the son of god ; if the infallibility of tradition goes no farther than the bare delivery from father to son , then faith can go no farther than the general words , though an heretical sense may lie under them . if the infallibility doth extend to the sense and meaning of these words , then either every traditionary christian is to give this sense which will make a very large infallibility in the whole body of traditionary christians , or else the explaining the sense and meaning of tradition must belong to a certain order of men by virtue of a divine promise . if so , then the infallibility of tradition cannot consist in holding the same doctrine to day that was delivered yesterday , and so up to the time of our blessed saviour , as you asserted . for , if the church may explain the sense and meaning of tradition , so as to oblige men to believe that by virtue of such explication which they were not obliged to before , then it is impossible the infallibility of tradition should be in a constant tradition from father to son. for they have no power to oblige to any more than they received : but according to the doctrine of the church of rome ( and some will tell you , it is heresie to deny it , and i appeal to f. warner if it be not ) the church hath power and authority to explain the sense and meaning of tradition , so as persons are obliged upon p●in of damnation to believe that sense and meaning of tradition which the present church delivers . as will appear by an undeniable instance . the tradition of a real presence in the eucharist is allowed on all hands ; but all the controversie is and hath been for some ages , what the sense and meaning of this tradition is ? whether it be a real presence by way of efficacy and influence , or by a mystical union , or by a substantial change of the very elements into the body and bloud of christ. the tradition of the real presence may be preserved under every one of these explications : the question now is whether it be sufficient to adhere to the general tradition of the church ; or it be not necessary to salvation to adhere to the churches explication of the sense and meaning of this tradition in the councils of lateran and trent ? if it be said that the sense and meaning of this tradition as there expressed ( viz. transubstantiation ) was always deliver'd from father to son : i answer , 1. this is more than is pretended by many of the greatest men in the roman church , as hath been lately abundantly shewed . and it is impossible to make it out that the manner of the presence , hath been constantly delivered from father to son from the time of christ and his apostles ; for the main testimonies alledged out of antiquity are onely for a real presence ; and there are as express testimonies against the change of the elements , as there are any for the other . 2. this takes off from the power and authority of the church of rome if it cannot make a necessary explication of the sense and meaning of tradition , and resolves all into a meer humane faith ; which is the unavoidable consequence of this doctrine of oral tradition . for no other account can be given of it than from meer natural reason , viz. that traditionary christians could not believe otherwise to day than they did yesterday . granting this to be true ( which is very far from being so , as shall be shewed , when your answer to the instance of the greek church comes abroad ) yet the utmost this can amount to is , that i resolve my faith into a logical demonstration . and is this the faith christians are to be saved by ? what grace of god , what assistence of the holy spirit are necessary to such a faith as this ? but for this , i refer you to the haeresis blackloäna , &c. 2. i intended by the second question to put a difference between the tradition allowed by us , and the tradition disputed . if no more were meant by tradition than the universal tradition of the christian church as to the books of scripture ; this i had before granted to be a sufficient ground for the certainty of our faith as to the canon of scripture , which is our rule of faith ; but if by tradition be understood , either some necessary articles of faith not contained in scripture , or a power in the church to make unnecessary to become necessary ; this i denyed and desire to see some better proof of it than you produce . all the answer which you give in your own paper to these two questions , is , that all traditionary christians , that is all bishops , all priests , all fathers and all people following this rule , and receiving faith because it was received the day before could not innovate in faith , unless they could all either forget what they received the day before , or out of malice change it , therefore because no cause can be assigned for such an effect , they cannot innovate ; if there can ? assign it . now to which of the questions that i put is this an answer ? doth this shew that the church of rome is infallible in giving the sense and meaning of tradition ? or that this tradition is a rule of faith distinct from scripture ? but it seems to be an answer to the question in your copy ; and therefore it is very suspicious , that the question was so framed , that the answer might seem pertinent to it . to shew the vanity of this demonstration , i produced the instance of the greek church which followed tradition from father to son , and yet you charge it with errour in matters of faith , so that a church following tradition may err in matters of faith. here again your copy notoriously fails , for it makes me put such another wise question as before . whether the greek church did follow from father to son the tradition in matters of faith or no ? as though i had desired information from you , whether it did , yea , or no ? and that had been all . but i urged plainly that it did , and notwithstanding you charge it with errour ( nay with heresie ; ) which overthrows all the force of your demonstration , that a church following tradition cannot err , when you charge a church following tradition with heresie . and is not this some thing like falsification , to leave out the whole force and strength of an argument ? and to leave it a very insipid toothless question ? no , saith mr. m. p. 18. it was onely to spare a little unnecessary pains ; for it cannot be imagined he should have any other design in leaving out those words . i do not charge the gentleman who wrote with a design to falsily , but i cannot excuse you from dispersing false copies , in that when you could not but see the notorious defects of this copy , you would disperse it as containing a true account of the conference . methinks you were very sparing in the necessary pains of correcting it , before you had read it in companies for the true copy and given it to others to transcribe . as to the conclusion mr. m. confesses that it was not distinctly set down ; but i say again , that copy is false in the conclusion . for these are the words , [ the greek church followed tradition from father to son ] till they left that rule and took up another and so fell into errour as the calvinists did . here is not one word concerning the arians , which you cannot but remember that you ran to and mentioned over and over , when i told you the greek church did still follow tradition as her rule ; you said the arians left the rule and interpreted scripture as the calvinists did . i told you again that i meant not the arians , but the present greek church ; and i do particularly remember that i desired the gentleman who wrote for you to put down in his paper that it was the present greek church i spake of . i grant as mr. m. saith p. 19. that it was not set down by your consent any where ; for the truth is , when you found your self pinched by this instance , you grew so very uneasie , that you did all you could to bring things into that confusion and disorder , which mr. m. mentions . you rose up in a great heat , and talked a great deal to no purpose about calvinists , &c. for , all the ways i could use could not bring you to set down any farther answer to the pressing instance of the greek church . you confessed , i had raised a vast difficulty about it ; but after all , you left no answer behind you to this difficulty , and i still desire you to give it . mr. m. p. 19. doth ingenuously confess that this point was not fully cleared . no , not in any measure . but he saith , i began with reproaches . i confess it is a terrible reproach to tell a man , he cannot answer an argument : but that he makes use of tricks to avoid it ; and that i never met with any that excelled you in that kind . farther than this , i remember not that i used any term of reproach to you . and the onely way to wipe off such a reproach is to give a fair and ingenuous answer ; and till that be done , this reproach will stick . as to mr. t 's slip in calling the greek church an universal church , methinks you might excuse him for the sake of the roman catholick church ; which in other words is the roman universal church . and why should not such a contradiction doe as well in greek as latin ; since the patriarch of constantinople had the title of oecumenical patriarch ? but this gentleman cannot escape so ; for although mr. m. cannot deny , that at the end of the first dispute he declared that he was fully satisfied with my answers ; ( p. 10 ) yet he desires leave to judge how far this satisfaction of mr. t. was rational and what grounds he had for it . if mr. t. had been unsatisfied with my answers , no doubt he had passed for a rational and ingenious man ; but his misfortune is , that he could not see reason in your demonstrations ; nor the want of it in what i offer'd to prove the certainty of our faith , without your pretence to infallibility . therefore to satisfie the world that mr. t. had sufficient grounds for what he then said , i shall now examine and weigh all the parts of that conference , and consider what mr. m. hath said about it . the occasion of it is thus set down by him ( p. 2. ) you had affirmed in some companies that no protestant could shew any ground of absolute certainty for their faith ; and that mr. t. had promised you that if i were not able to manifest the contrary he would forsake our communion . hitherto mr. t. was a very rational man , because he appeared to doubt of his religion ; and if a little thing had satisfied him ; i. e. if he had been converted by your demonstration , he had been more so than ever . but if a man cannot be convinced by your reason to change his religion , who can help it ? and yet i very much question whether f.w. would absolve any man who professed to embrace the catholick faith on your grounds ; which overthrow the churches authority in matters of faith , and proceed upon pelagian principles . the first thing which was proposed , saith mr. m. ( p. 3. ) and indeed the onely subject mr. g. had any purpose to discourse on was , whether protestants had a ground of absolute certainty for their faith , or not ? here the faith spoken of , is that faith whereby we are christians , and your pretence was that without your infallibility we can have no absolute certainty of the christian faith , i. e. of the grounds on which we believe the scripture to contain the word of god ; or all things necessary to be believ'd by us in order to salvation . therefore when the question was put by you : q. 1. whether you are absolutely certain that you hold now the same tenets in faith , and all that our saviour taught to his apostles ? a. 1. my answer was , that we are absolutely certain that we now hold all the same doctrine that was taught by christ and his apostles . wherein i plainly distinguish between that doctrine which christ by his own mouth taught his apostles , and that which the apostles did by the spirit of christ teach the whole church . the account i offered as to the christian faith , was not , as to what christ taught by an oral tradition ( as the iews affirm of moses delivering an unwritten law ) but i framed my answer on purpose , to shew that our faith is not to be resolved into what christ taught any otherwise than as it is conveyed to us by the writings of the apostles and evangelists . for the resolution of our faith , as to what christ himself taught , is not to be made into the words of christ teaching , conveyed by an oral tradition from his time downwards , but into the words of christ as recorded by the holy writers of the new testament . and so much i expressed in answer to the next question . q. 2. by what certain rule do you hold it ? a. 2. by the divine revelations contained in the writings of the new testament . here was no subtilty or learning requisite , but to give a plain answer , as to the rule of our faith. which we do assert to be the written word , and no oral tradition . q. 3. then follow'd , by what certain rule do you know that the new testament , which we now have does contain all the divine revelations of christ and his apostles ? a. 3. by the vniversal testimony of the christian church from the apostles time downwards . in which answer , i laid down the grounds of our different resolution of faith from that which you contend for ; and which i at large explained in the conference it self ; viz. that our certainty of faith is chiefly resolved into the testimony of the apostolical churches , which first received the books of the new testament from the divine writers of them ; and from these churches where the authentick writings themselves were preserved , copies were dispersed over other churches , which by comparing together the testimonies of the several churches , did by degrees fix upon the certain canon of the new testament . here a question was started , whether all the books of the new testament were alike received ? i answer'd , not at first , but after due examination those which were at first controverted , came to be universally received . and i particularly instanced in the church of rome ; which a long time did not receive the epistle to the hebrews , when it was received by other churches ; but at last did yield to the testimony of other churches therein . from whence i observed , that the church of rome was far from being believed then to have the authority of making the canon of scripture , or being infallible in faith , it being then taxed for disbelieving a part of scripture , and being at last over-ruled by the testimony of the other apostolical churches . i remember i asked you how it came about that the church of rome in st ierom's time did err about the epistle to the hebrews , if there were any infallibility in it ? and your answer was , that rome was at a great distance from judea : which i thought a strange answer , considering the communication the churches then had at greater distance , and the frequent recourse of iews to rome ; but especially if that church had any promise of infallibility made to it . which , to be just to you , i do not remember that you once asserted , in all that two hours discourse . and truly you were not inconsistent with your principles therein : for infallibility by promise and by oral tradition are as different as grace and nature , or the assent of faith from a dictate of reason . in faith a divine testimony is supposed ; in the infallibility of oral tradition nothing but a natural principle , that men must hold the same doctrine to day that they did yesterday , and so up to the time of our blessed saviour . where the different method of our resolving faith appears ; you begin at the present time , and so run upwards , but the force of all lies in the connexion of one link with another inseparably ; which , i say , will by no means hold ; but ours begins with the apostolical churches which first received the sacred books , and delivered them down ; their testimony is the authentick instrument of conveying down the canon of scripture , and the following tradition of the church is onely a conveying down that first testimony upon which we believe the canon of the new testament . there were many interlocutory passages about this subject ; but this is the substance of what i distinctly remember . q. 4. was that vniversal testimony an infallible rule to assure us certainly down to our time that the new testament contained all the divine revelations of christ and his apostles ? a. 4. the vniversal testimony of the christian church concerning the book of scripture , and the doctrine contained therein is a sufficient ground to make us certain of all matters necessary to our salvation . to make this answer clear , we are to consider that the scripture being our sole and entire rule of faith , all matters necessary to salvation must be supposed to be contained therein ; and therefore the same testimony which delivers the scripture to us , doth deliver all the necessary articles of faith as contained therein . which are there received as in the lump ; and if we receive the book which contains all , we must by the same authority receive all contained in it . as if a purse be left to a man by his father's will , full of gold and silver , and this by the executours be declared to contain all the gold and silver his father left him ; they who deliver this purse to him from the executours , do certainly deliver to him all the gold and silver left him by his father . but if he suspects there was both gold and silver left him by his father which was not in that purse , then he must call in question the integrity of the executours who declared that all was contained therein . this is now the case of the christian church as to all divine truths which respect mens salvation ; the primitive church , who answer to the executours in the other case , did unanimously declare that all such truths were undoubtedly contained in the written word . although therefore there may be a real difference in the nature of the doctrines therein contained , as there is between gold and silver , yet he that receives all must receive the one as well as the other ; and the matters of salvation being of greatest moment , they that receive the whole will of god upon grounds of certainty must be assured that therein they receive all matters necessary to our salvation . against my answer to this question mr. m. suggests several things ; ( p. 12. ) ( 1. ) as to difference of translations . doth mr. m. think our faith is to be resolved into the original texts ? what becomes then of the vulgar latin ? for although the council of trent declares it to be authentick , yet i take it to be but a translation . but there is a difference of translations , and there is no unanimous consent of the christian church for any one . and how is it possible there should be since the christian church consists of so many bodies of men of different countries and languages ? but we have the unanimous consent of all the ancient christian churches for the translation of the scripture into their own languages ; which shews that they thought the people ought to be acquainted with it as the word of god so translated ; and that they were to resolve their faith into it , as they were capable of understanding it . and it is very hard to conceive how faith can be resolved into an unknown tongue ; but we have the unanimous consent of the christian church that faith must rest upon the word of god which is contained in the books of scripture . and therefore we have the consent of the christian church against resolving faith into the infallibility of oral tradition . for if this were the christian method of resolving faith , there would have been very little use or necessity of scripture ; and the fathers were extremely mistaken in the mighty characters which on all occasions they give of it ; not onely of the excellency of the matter contained in it , but as a rule of faith for all christians ; as i might easily shew if there were occasion . but i desire to see any thing like the consent of the christian church from the apostles times downwards for resolving faith into mere oral tradition ; and certainly if the church had used this way , it must have understood it and expressed it . and it is a just prescription against a method of resolving faith , that the ancient christian church , which consisted ( i hope ) of true believers , never knew any thing concerning it ; and yet , i suppose , they had absolute certainty of their faith ; though they had different translations of the bible among them . ( 2. ) as to the number of books . i do not deny that there was in the first ages a difference in several churches about the number of canonical books ; but this doth not hinder that vniversal testimony i mentioned ; for ( 1. ) it adds weight to the churches testimony that where there was any controversie about any canonical book of the new testament , the matter was examined and debated , and at last after a through discussion the book was received , as happened about the epistle to the hebrews . which was not received by the authority of one church imposing upon another , but by a fair examination of evidence produced for its apostolical authority : which being allow'd , it hath been received by the unanimous consent of the christian church . ( 2. ) there hath been ever since an uncontradicted consent of the christian church as to the canonical books of the new testament . no one church disputing the authority of any of them . and even the council of trent agrees with us herein ; although it endeavours to obtrude some books for canonical in the old testament , which never had the universal consent of the jewish or christian church for them . ( 3. ) he desires to know , how i understand that all the divine revelations are contained in the new testament , viz. whether all necessary articles of faith are contained in the new testament virtually and implicitly , or clearly and explicitly ; the former will doe me little service , the latter is contradicted by the church of rome , and therefore i can plead no vniversal testimony of the christian church ; and so my plea for absolute certainty is groundless . to this i answer , ( 1. ) if it be agreed that all doctrines of faith necessary to salvation are contained in scripture either explicitly or implicitly ( which mr. m. denies not ) it is sufficient for my purpose . for the ground of my faith is absolutely certain , viz. that all necessary articles of faith are contained in scripture ; and if they be explicit , i am bound to give a distinct assent to them ; if they be not , then no more is required of me than to believe them , when they do appear to be there ; which is no more than a general preparation of mind to yield my assent to whatsoever doth appear to me to be the word of god. so that my faith rests on the word of god as its absolute ground of certainty ; but the particular certainty as to this or that doctrine depends upon the evidence that it is contained in scripture . and it is the general ground of faith we are now upon , and not the particular acts of it . ( 2. ) the church of romes assuming to it self the power of making implicit articles to become explicit by its declaring the sense of them , doth not overthrow the certainty of our faith. for as long as it is granted that all necessary articles of faith are there explicitely or implicitely by an universal consent of the christian church , it signifies nothing to the shaking of my faith that a particular part of the church doth assume such a power to it self . for this must come among the particular points of faith , and not the general grounds : it must be looked on as an article of faith , and so it must be contained in scripture either explicitely or implicitely . if explicitely , we desire to see it in express terms , which i suppose you will not pretend to ; if only implicitely , i pray tell me how i can be explicitely bound to believe such a power in the church of rome , which is only implicitely there ? and by what power this implicite article comes to be made explicite ? for the power of the church it self being the article in question , it is impossible that while it is only implicitely there , it should make it self explicit . if it be said , that it will become explicit to any sober enquirer ; then every such person may without the churches help find out all necessary points of faith ; which is a doctrine i am so far from being ashamed of , that i think it most agreeable to the goodness of god , the nature of the christi●n faith , and the unanimous consent of the christian church for many ages . but this is beyond our present business . ( 3. ) the church of rome hath no-where declared in council , that it hath any such power of making implicit articles of faith contained in scripture to become explicit by its explaining the sense of them . for the church of rome doth not pretend to make new articles of faith ; but to make an implicit doctrine to become explicit , is really to make a new article of faith. it doth not indeed make a new divine revelation ; but it makes that which was not necessary to be believed , to become necessary ; and what is not necessary to be believed , is no article of faith. what is only believed implicitely is not actually believed ; but there is only a preparation of mind to believe it , supposing it to be made appear to be a matter of faith. besides , the church of rome declares that it receives its doctrines by tradition ; and although i have often heard of an implicit faith , i know not what to make of an implicit tradition . i had thought whatever is delivered by way of tradition must be explicit ; or else the father and son might easily be mistaken : and so for all that i can see mr. m. and you must dispute it out ; for you say , that the infallibility of faith depends on oral tradition , and the infallibility of oral tradition on this , that the traditionary christians hold the same doctrine to day that was delivered yesterday in faith , and so up to the time of our b. saviour . but what think you now of mr. m.'s assertion , that the church hath power to interpret and make known implicit doctrines contained in scripture , so as to make it necessary to believe them explicitely ? for he saith , that all the churches in communion with rome do hold there are divine revelations in scripture , which are contained there virtually and implicitely , so as they need the churches interpretation and authority for being made known to us . let us now lay these two assertions together . if your doctrine hold good , all doctrines of faith must be explicitely delivered from father to son ; no , saith mr. m. the church hath power to make known doctrines implicitely and virtually contained in scripture . i pray could the father communicate to his son what was only implicitely and virtually contained in scripture ? if mr. m. say true , here is a very possible cause of innovation assigned without forgetfulness or malice ; viz. when the fathers of the church take upon them to draw forth implicit doctrines , and to make them explicit articles of faith. and thus undoubtedly many innovations have come into the church ; when some persons have taken up a particular opinion , and because nothing would prevail without scripture , they have attempted to bring it out of scripture ; but that being not plain or clear for it , they gave out it was virtually and implicitely contained in it ; and thus it passed from one to another , till it getting footing in the church , and prevailing over a great part of it ; then , lest the church should be charged with errour and innovation , the prevailing party takes upon it to declare this to be the sense and meaning of scripture , and to require all persons of their communion to believe it . and thus mr. m. hath answered your demonstration . but still , although the church of rome hath assumed such a power , yet it still disowned it , and even in the council of trent pretended to interpret scripture according to the unanimous sense of the fathers ; which is directly contrary to the power of making known such a sense and meaning of scripture in doctrines of faith , as may oblige men to believe that explicitely now , which they were not obliged to , by any precedent sense or explication . i come now to the fifth and last question . qu. 5. being the words christian church may be taken in several latitudes by persons of different religions , i desire to know what that christian church is , whose testimony concerning the books of scripture , and the doctrine contained therein , is a sufficient ground to make us certain of all matters that are necessary to our salvation ? ans. 5. by the universal testimony of the christian church concerning the books of scripture which are our rule of faith as to matters of salvation , i mean , the universal consent of all christian churches from the apostles times downwards . this mr. m. calls trifling ( p. 13. ) and in this you agree , though you differ in the resolution of faith. but i pray wherein does this trifling lie ? was it because i would not answer as you would have had me ? but i do not yet see how i could have answered more to the purpose . the question in short was , what the christian church was , whose universal testimony i relied upon as to the canon of scripture ? my answer was , that the christian church is that which is made up of all christian churches ; and their universal consent is that testimony we rely upon . is this trifling ? but , saith mr. m. ( p. 14. ) mr. g. 's intention was to know what churches i accounted christian churches . i told you over and over , since we were enquiring into the general grounds of faith , if we had the universal testimony of all christian churches , i had no reason to go any farther . for , if all churches of the christian world be agreed , as they are , about the canon of the new testament , this was sufficient for the certainty of our faith , without looking after any infallibility in the church of rome . and this , you know , was the main point in dispute between us ; as appears by the occasion of it , as it is set down by mr. m. you affirmed , that no protestant could shew any ground of absolute certainty for their faith : i undertook to shew we had ; for our faith is resolved into the scripture as the word of god ; and whatever is built on the word of god is absolutely certain : and that these books of the new testament contain our rule of faith as being the word of god , we have the universal testimony of all christian churches . and this makes our faith as to these books absolutely certain . and where now is the trifling ? doth the universal testimony of all christian churches afford sufficient ground of certainty as to the books of scripture or not ? if not , why do you not shew wherein it fails ? if it doth , what mean you to call this trifling ? when it is apparent i have gained the point i aimed at , viz. that we protestants have certain grounds for our faith , without any need of the roman churches infallibility . which was the thing to be shewed . but mr. m. tells me ( p. 14. ) that you asked me whether i included the arians , nestorians , eutychians and calvinists , and urged that this question might be written down , to which i did not consent : because mr. t. declared he was fully satisfied and desired to propose a new question to mr. g. i grant you did ask me the question several times , whether i included the arians , nestorians , &c. i told you i rejected the doctrines of all such as were condemned by the four general councils , as the arians , nestorians and eutychians were ; but it was not pertinent to our purpose to consider , how far any under those denominations might be parts of the catholick church . for since we had the consent of all christian churches in this matter , i had no reason to lessen the evidence they gave by a concurrent testimony . for the argument was so much stronger , since all churches , under all denominations did agree in it . but mr. m. still complains , that i would not permit your sixth question , viz. what churches i look'd on as members of the christian church ? it is strange he should forget for what reason i rejected it , viz. because it was not pertinent to our business . for , if the testimony of all christian churches be more considerable than only of some , why should i lessen the strength of the argument taken from the universal consent of all christian churches ? the other question must have led us into other disputes foreign to our business ; and my design was to keep close to the matter of certainty ; about which the conference began . and now i hope i have given an answer to the letter desiring information of the conference ; which i did forbear in my first letter to set down at large , foreseeing that either your self or your friend would offer me farther occasion , to give a suffer account of it . but because the substance of the whole conference depended on those two points , 1. whether the universal consent of all christian churches be not a sufficient ground for our certainty as to our rule of faith , viz. the scripture ? 2. whether tradition from father to son , be an infallible conveyance of matters of faith ? to shew , wherein the main force of the whole conference lay in few words , i desired you to make good these two things ; 1. that we have no absolute certainty as to the rule of our faith , viz. the scripture ; although we have a larger and firmer tradition for it , viz. the consent of all christian churches , than you can have for the points in difference between us . 2. that the tradition from father to son , is an infallible conveyance in matters of faith , notwithstanding the greek church is charged by you with errour , which adhered to tradition . now upon this , the authour of the first letter desires to be commended to me us a man who loves to spare his own pains . for 't is as much as to say , do you doe all the work , and i will sit by and tell you whether it be well done or no , must mr. g. prove that protestants have no absolute certainty ? i think you are bound to do it , upon mr. m's own account of the occasion of the conference , viz. that you affirmed that no protestants could shew any ground of certainty for their faith. and upon this the conference was desired ; and since therein , i undertake to shew what our ground of certainty was , you ought to make it evident wherein it fails ; and you have not so much as offer'd at any thing to disprove it , but would fairly have run into another dispute ; and because i would not yield to it , you and mr. m. call me a trifler . you see i have not been so sparing of my pains now ; but i would commend that gentleman to you , who get other men to do your work for you . but he goes on , i thought it had concerned them to be satisfied that they have . yes , so we are ; and are very well satisfied that we stand upon surer grounds , than those who go upon the baffled pretence of the infallibility of oral tradition ; for which no one church of the christian world hath declared . for the infallibility of tradition in the church of rome is another thing , depending upon a divine promise and not a kind of meer natural infallibility . but he saith , he takes no notice that the question is veered from certainty of protestant doctrine to certainty of scripture . how strangely mistaken is this gentleman in the whole matter ! for the question was wholly about the certainty of faith in general ; as fully appears by what is said already . when the grounds of faith are made clear , we shall come easier to particular points of difference between us . if we may have sufficient certainty without your pretence of infallibility , then we may have a true and sound faith without coming into your church ; and where there is such a faith there is a possibility of salvation , and consequently there can be no necessity of forsaking the communion of a church , where we have such certain grounds of faith. mr. m. in answer to the first particular speaks more home and close to the purpose , and therefore what he saith deserves to be more strictly examined . ( 1. ) it is not denied , saith he ( p. 28. ) that there is in faith an absolute certainty for that scripture wherein we agree . thus far mr. m. grants what you deny , that we protestants have absolute certainty for our faith. but he will not allow us to be able to shew any such certainty on our principles . now this is truly a hard case we are in ; there is an absolute certainty , and this certainty lies in universal tradition ; and we can shew this universal tradition , and yet we cannot shew the true ground of our certainty . if this be our case , we deserve to be either pitied or begg'd . but surely mr. m. hath some colour for such a strange assertion . this is all he pretends for it ; that in the time of the reformation , the protestants charged all christian churches with errours , not only in other articles of their belief , but even in the tradition or delivery of scripture . therefore we can have no certainty now from the universal tradition of christian churches . suppose some men were then to blame in charging some churches with more errours than they were guilty of ; must therefore no argument be taken from their consent when things are more cleared and better understood ? this is just as if it had been said of the blind man whom our saviour cured , you saw men walking like trees at first , and therefore you have no right to judge them to be otherwise now . or like one newly escaped out of a dark prison , who fears and suspects every one he meets and takes all for enemies , till he be better acquainted with them ; must this man therefore never have any certain knowledge afterwards of friends and enemies ? but why doth not mr. m. name the churches which the reformers charged with errours in delivering the canon of scripture ? i am sure they plead the consent of the eastern churches against the tridentine canon , as to the old testament ; and all christian churches are known to agree as to the new , and why such an universal consent should not afford a ground of certainty to us , is beyond my understanding . ( 2. ) he saith , our rule is scripture , not as interpreted ( or to be interpreted ) by the church , but as understood ( or to be understood , without a necessity of submitting to the interpretation of the church ) by every sober enquirer , tho' of the meanest capacity ; for which rule we are far from having the consent of all christian churches . the main question is , whether scripture be a rule of faith to us , or not ? and certainly all that believe it to be the word of god must take it for a rule of faith. for , since the reason of our believing is because god hath revealed , whatever god hath revealed must be believed ; and a book containing in it such revelations must be the rule of our faith ; i. e. by it we are to judge what we are bound to believe as divine revelations . the best of your divines do all agree , that our faith is not to be resolved into any other revelation than that which was made by christ and his apostles ; and that this revelation is contained in the books of the new testament . this being agreed on both sides , every christian , how mean soever his capacity be , must look on the scripture as his rule of faith ; for he that is bound to believe at all , must have some rule , or else he may believe any thing ; he finds all persons agreed that the scripture is the word of god ; and god's word is an infallible rule : therefore he is bound to search the scripture tor the matters of faith. and is it possible to imagine that god himself should direct the making of this rule for the benefit of all who are bound to believe , and not to make it useful to its end , viz. to be able to direct them in the necessary points of salvation ? the founders of monastie orders made rules for all those who were to live in them , and obliged them to observe them , under pain of expulsion : i desire to know , whether this doth not suppose that those rules are capable of being understood by all persons admitted into those orders , so far as they are concerned ; and whether the penalty would be reasonable , in case they could not understand their duty by them ? but in our case the matter is of far greater moment ; for mens eternal salvation or misery depends upon knowing and doing the will of god contained in scripture ; and therefore it is of so much greater consequence and necessity that all persons who are concerned for their salvation should be able to understand by diligent and carefull reading the scripture so much as is required of them in order to it . and this was the certain faith of the primitive church , that all things necessary to salvation were plain in scripture ; and if they were plain , they needed no interpreter . but we have not the consent of all christian churches that the scripture is a rule of faith without the churches interpretation . i answer , that we have the consent of all christian churches that the scripture is a rule of faith ; but , whether besides this rule , there be an infallible iudge of controversies , or interpreter of scripture , is another distinct controversie . we have the unanimous consent of all christian churches for the one ; but in the present state of christendom we do not pretend it for the other : for we are well enough acquainted with the pretence of infallibility in the church of rome ; but then we say that it is impossible for you to bring such an unanimous consent of all christian churches for your infallible iudge , as we do bring for our rule of faith ; and therefore we have much greater certainty of our rule , than you can have of your infallible iudge . we appeal to all the churches of the christian world for our rule ; you dare not appeal to any one church besides your own for your infallibility : for , it is utterly denied by all the eastern churches , though of very different denominations . and when you bring an universal consent of all christian churches for the roman churches infallibility , i may safely promise to become your convert . but yet they do not agree that every man is to interpret scripture for himself . what is the meaning of inter preting scripture for himfelf ? if it be , that a man is to rely on scripture as his rule of faith in order to salvation , then we have their universal consent , in as much as they deliver this as the rule of faith. if it be , that in doubtfull places he is to rely on his own judgment , without making life of the best helps , then we pretend to no such thing ; for we assert the contrary , and do think in all doubtfull cases that persons are bound to make use of the best and most reasonable means for their satisfaction ; among which we not only reckon prayer , meditation , comparing scripture and expositors upon it , but the help of spiritual guides , and the sense of the primitive church ; which our church doth especially recommend , and which we look on as the best arbitrator between us in all our controversies about the sense of doubtfull places of scripture . but after all , either there must be an infallible iudge , or every man must judge for himself in all matters that concern his salvation . and therefore , if we have the consent of all christian churches , against the only pretended infallible judge , we have their consent likewise , that every man is to judge for his own salvation . and this all mankind are really agreed in , whatever some may pretend ; or else it is to no purpose for you to go about to make converts ; for , in so doing , you make the person you intend to convert judge of the best way to salvation ; and not only so , but you make him judge of all the controversies between us and you , and especially of the true grounds of faith. and how ridiculous after this is it to pretend that a man is not to judge for himself in matters that concern his salvation ? ( 3. ) lastly , mr. m. ( p. 29. ) desires to know what those christian churches are , whose testimony is required towards the assuring us , what is scripture and what not , and by what mark i distinguished them from others ? i answer again , by no other mark than that they are christian churches ; and it is a great satisfaction to any mans mind , that however they differ about other matters , yet they are all agreed in the canon of the new testament . i am by no means bound to assign any rule in this case , as you desire , whereby to distinguish orthodox churches from heretical ; for , whatever they are in other points , they all agree in this , which is the foundation of our faith. as to the 2d . point i proposed in my letter to be made good , viz. that the tradition from father to son is an infallible conveyance of matters of faith , notwithstanding the greek church is charged by you with errours , which adhered to tradition ; the author of the first letter thinks you are concerned to answer it . but then he thinks i am as well bound to answer your argument . in good time ! but was not that very instance of the greek church produced on purpose to shew the weakness of the argument ? and is not making that plain , answering it as effectually , as the philosopher's argument against motion was , when the man moved before him ? for he proved that impossible , which he shewed was so far from it , that he saw him doe it . and sophistical arguments are best answered by clear and undeniable instances : and this of the greek church is of that nature . but he saith , objections may be raised against the most undeniable truth ; and he instanceth in two things mathematically demonstrable ; and yet objections may be made against them , which cannot easily be answered . but the difference of the case is very plain ; for those instances only shew , that there are some things above our comprehension about matter and motion ; but what is this to an infallible rule of faith ; which every one is bound to know , if ( according to you ) he would have any certainty of his faith ? and if it appears by a notorious instance that it fails , ( for a whole church and a very great and ancient church is accused by you of no less than heresie , and yet it adhered to tradition ) then the demonstration is quite gone . but mr. m. saith ( p. 29. ) that you never acknowledged that the greek church erred while it adhered to tradition ; and therefore my supposing it is to beg the question , and mis-represent the state of the argument . but whether you acknowledged it or not , the greek church did adhere to tradition , when the latin church charged it with heresie . and certainly i may be allowed to argue from an undeniable instance as i shall believe it to be , till i see the answer to it which mr. m. promises in his conclusion . before he comes to that , he lets me know ( p. 31. ) that himself and several others , upon comparing my two propositions together , had found a contradiction in them , and so they had once more dr. st. against dr. st. this is as witty an observation as the author of pax vobis had made upon me ; who , because i had proved from st. paul's words that iupiter was sometimes taken among the heathens for the true god , from thence wisely infers , that i am for introducing paganism , and hardly believe another life ; but this is so gross and ridiculous a calumny , that it hardly deserves to be taken notice of . but i pray let me see this controversie-juggle , as mr. m. phrases it ; and how dr. st. is set up against dr. st. thus it lies : in my first proposition i seem to affirm that the tradition of all christian churches is abound of absolute certainty for the admittance of scripture ; and in the second i would infer that tradition is no infallible conveyance of matters of faith ; but the belief of the scripture is a matter of faith. a rare discovery ! methinks , mr. g. appears very well qualified to set up for a controvertist , and much such a one as those who formerly set dr. st. against dr. st. but the author of the first letter obsrves , that i spare my own pains , and put the proof upon you ; & mr. m. confesses , that the occasion of the conference was , that you affirmed that protestants could not shew any ground of absolute certainty for their faith. therefore , since you own tradition to be an infallible way of conveying faith , i desired to know how you could deny that we had any ground for absolute certainty of our faith as to the word of god , when the tradition we go upon is so much larger and firmer than any you can bring for the points of faith in difference between us . but then as to your way of explaining tradition not with respect to the books of scripture , but to particular doctrines of faith , proposed the second particular to you to make good , viz. that the tradition from father to son is an infallible conveyance of matters of faith , notwithstanding the greek church is charged by you with errour which adhered to tradition . if therefore you do own the infallibility of tradition you have no reason to deny that we have any ground of certainty , who have a more unquestionable tradition for the scriptures , than you can have for your distinguishing doctrines , or the matters of controversie between us . yet , how can you esteem your way of tradition an infallible conveyance of matters of faith , when you charge the greek church with heresie , which adhered to tradition ? thus i leave any reader to judge , where the appearance of a contradiction lies . there remains nothing more in either of the letters which i can think requires an answer ; unless it be that i charge mr. m. with using arts to get mr. t. to sign your copy . i do confess that when he told me mr. m. had spoken to him that they might meet and compare and sign each others copies , without acquainting me with it , or desiring that copy which was taken for me , ( and was read aloud till the company rose ) and that he had said that i gave out false copies , i did look upon these as arts ; but if he doth not like this name ( nor mr. t. ) i can soon find out another . and the matter of fact is owned by mr. m. in these words : meeting accidentally with mr. t. in the street , i told him i heard you complained that mr. g.'s papers of the conference were false , and therefore i desired him to compare his copy with that which was written for mr. g. that we might see whether mr. g. or his amanuensis had dealt fairly or not . here is the very thing confessed which i complained of , viz. that , without acquainting me with it , he would have had mr. t. to have compared his copy with theirs , after he confess i had complained that the copy they gave out was false . and if mr. t. had complied with this proposition , and after comparing had signed your copy , what triumphs had then been made , that mr. t. himself had owned your copy against me ! and for this matter i need not make any insinuation , for the thing it self is clear . the only way for your justification had been , when you heard of my complaint , to have brought or sent your copy to me to have examined and compared it ; but i say still , it was very unjustisiable for you to give out a copy for the true account of the conference , which was never read nor compared , and i think i have now made appear to have been both false and imperfect . and now , having finished the main parts of my answer , i must make a review , that nothing which may be thought material may escape me . for that is the constant method of some men to cry up what is unanswered for unanswerable , although it were only passed over as not deserving it . i did say in my former letter , that you took great care in the conference it self , to keep me from expecting any great ingenuity after it . the author of the first letter ▪ desires information what that care was . i am very unwilling to expose your methods of managing conferences ; but i desire that gentleman to be present at any of them , and he will find satisfaction enough . but mr. m. as a proof of your fairness , insists ( p. 2. ) on your desire to put things into writing . will mr. m. say that you carried your self fairly and ingenuously as to the manner of the conference ? that you gave me no interruptions ? used no fleering behaviour ? that you never offered to put things down against my sense , nor hindered me in setting it down ? that you made no unhandsom reflections in the interlocutory part ? if charity be any part of ingenuity , you shewed it abundantly : for , when you spake of churches in communion with rome , mr. t. said , what! and all other churches must be in gehenna ? you replied with great charity and ingenuity , that many a true word was spoke in jest . if you are your self in earnest , i pray let us know for what reason you damn us all ? is it for want of certainty in our faith ? that is very far from being proved by you . and if you could prove it in your way , for all that i can see , you will damn almost all in the church of rome as well as all out of it . for , if this oral tradition be the only certain way of faith , and all are damn'd who want such certainty , what will become of all those in the church of rome , who believe as little of the infallibility of oral tradition as we do ? but , to return to your ingenuity in the conference , i observe , that mr. m. onely mentions this proposal of putting the conference in writing , to shew your ingenuity ; he saith not a word of it as to your manner of managing it . and truly , i then thought he was ashamed of it ; but whether he were or not , i am sure he had cause for it . he confesses there was noise , wrangling , confusions , interruptions , heat , passion , personal reflexions ( p. 3 , 9 , 15. ) and all this while you were very fair and ingenuous , very meek and candid , very soft and obliging ; not in the least boisterous , impertinent or provoking . which all , who have been present at your conferences , will set their hands to . alas , sir ! how much are you wronged by being charged with disingenuity in the conference ? you are onely forced sometimes to overcome your natural repugnance to it , as mr. m. saith he was in writing his letter to me . there is one thing mr. m. frequently insists upon , which i must give an answer to ; viz. that i was glad to put an end to the first dispute ; that the issue of it was such , that you could have no temptation for forgery in the account of it , which is not greatly for my credit , ( p. 9. ) that i was beholding to mr. t. for breaking it off , ( p. 20. ) that i was as little pleased with the true copies as with the false ones , ( p. 23. ) that the conference it self was as little to my satisfaction as the worst account of it , ( p. 25. ) these are very fine insinuations , i must not say artificial ; for mr. m. will no more like a word taken from arts , than the word it self . if he means , that i was very little pleased with the manner of your conference , i do freely confess it ; and none who have been present at your other conferences will blame me for it . but if he thinks that i was unsatisfied with the grounds of certainty which i gave , i utterly deny it . for i still assert the same thing , and abide by the answer i then gave ; and do still hold that the universal testimony of all christian churches is a sufficient ground of absolute certainty to us as to the rule of faith. and this is an answer , i am so fully satisfied in , that neither then nor now do i fear any objections against it . but i would not be drawn off from the main point to another debate ; and because i resolved to stick there , i thought it most reasonable that mr. t. should be yielded to , for breaking it off at the point in question ; which was not about the true parts of the catholick church , but about the true ground of certainty we had for our faith. and when mr. t. declared he had full satisfaction as to that , what reason had i to go any farther ? as to the truest copies of the conference , i was not forward to disperse them ; not out of any mistrust of the answers i gave ; but because they contained onely short heads and general answers ; for those who desire to see an account of a conference , expect to see a relation of all that passed , or at least of all material passages relating to it ; and therefore onely a general representation of it would seem dry and jejune , and not answer the expectation they had of the relation of a conference . but , as to the matter it self , so far as it is truly set down ( of which i have now given a fuller account ) i do abide by it . and , if my credit suffer by it , i do assure you , it is not by reason of any objection mr. m. hath made against it , or any that i foresee can be made . mr. m. chargeth me with disingenuous and unchristian proceeding toward you , ( p. 23. ) this is a home charge , and not much indeed for my credit , if he can in the least make it good . but if not , i leave him to judge where the disingenuous and unchristian proceeding lies ; and to remember his application of the mote and the beam , ( p. 15. ) whereon is the heavy charge grounded ? why , forsooth , when i heard of false and imperfect copies , i ought to have sent to you , to know whether they were given out by you . what! when they came to my hands from those very persons to whom you gave them ? but , i ought to have shewn you the errours of them and desired their amendment . it was , indeed , a very likely and hopefull way of vindicating my self . when i knew from the very persons to whom you spake , what boasts you had made of your victory ; and what publick places you had read the copies in , it was a very probable thing , that if i had shewed you the falsity of them , you would have gone to those very places and persons and told them , gentlemen , i must beg all your pardons , for i communicated false copies to you , and told you idle and lying stories about the conference ; for i have been since with dr. st. and he hath demonstrated to me , that my copy was not true , although it were my own copy , and that which i delivered to you for very true . do you think , sir , you could have overcome your natural repugnance so much as to have yielded to this method of satisfaction ? if not , when i was assured so many copies were dispersed in town and countrey , which you could not recall ( if you intended it ; ) when i was called upon time after time by my friends ; and it was told me , something must be done towards my vindication ; what could i doe more proper or effectual than to publish that letter ; which hath so much provoked mr. m. as to make him overcome his natural repugnance , and to appear in print ? but yet there are other circumstances which make my proceeding neither ingenuous nor christian. as that , the letter was published so long after . that shews how unwilling i was to be brought to it ; and nothing but mere necessity could have overcome my natural repugnance , in such a case . for , as the authour of the former letter well observes , i love to spare my own pains . but i took the opportunity of your absence . therein mr. m. did me injury . for , truly sir , it was perfectly the same thing to me , whether you were at lond. or west-chest . nay , the argument would hold the other way , if it were true . for i heard of your talking of going to ch. soon after the conference ; and that you told persons you were just going ; and i did believe you to be there , till i heard of some other conferences of yours . i do not think my self bound to enquire after your stays or removes ; but i know how you had done me wrong , and therefore mr. m. can have no reason to blame me for doing what was necessary for my own vindication . mr. m. charges me , ( p. 35. ) with having too mean an opinion of you . if i be to blame in this , i hope you will take care to rectifie it : but mr. m. hath not done much towards it . however , he takes a notable advantage , as he thinks , from hence : we , saith he , will be contented to pass for weak and ignorant ; and i shall be obliged to shew by whom you may be protected from errour . a very well compounded business ? but what if it be not in my power or any ones else to make you infallible ? did i ever promise or undertake any such thing ? or set up infallible bills ? when i doe so , then come to me for such directions . we never pretend to make any persons infallible , but to put them into a certain way to be saved ; which we think is much better . and if men be honest and sincere in their endeavours to know and doe the will of god , we have the word of god for it , that they are in the certain way to salvation ; but if they could be kept from all errour and yet not be sincerely good , can faith save him ? jam. 2.14 . what doth it profit , my brethren , though a man say he hath faith ( even infallible faith ) and have not works ? i have long wonder'd at this kind of missionary zeal , as mr. m. speaks , ( p. 34 . ) against errour , and the want of i know not what infallibility ; when so much less zeal is shewed against mens passions and vices ; whereas the vertues of the mind and of a good life are far more excellent and usefull to mankind than being kept from involuntary errours . but , saith mr. m. it is a most uncomfortable thing to be shewn , that you ought not to trust your reason , and to be told y●u ought . in answer to this suggestion i will tell you a very comfortable thing , and that is , the allowance god makes for ignorance and weakness . for , if god will not charge involuntary errours upon us , we may think our selves as safe , as if we were infallible . what reason we have , we ought to make use of for the best purposes ; but if our reason fail us , the goodness of god will not if we be sincere . yet mr. m. cannot get it out of his head , but , that it is my task to give some distinguishing mark for the finding out those christians on whose tradition we may safely rely for the reception of the holy scriptures . how often must i repeat it , that it is none of my task ? and that , if the testimony of all christian churches be a sufficient ground of certainty , i have no reason to examine farther ? as for instance , suppose upon a lord mayor's day , i ask of all the several liveries and companies , and other people , whether my lord mayor be gone by ; and they all unanimously agree , that he is ; have not i reason to be satisfied by this universal consent ? ay but , sir , saith mr. m. you are to consider , that there was a great diversity in the companies you met with ; there was my lord mayor's own company , and many besides , some whereof had no charters confirmed to them , i desire you to tell me , which of the companies had charters and which not ; for my part , i will believe none but the testimony of those companies which could produce their charters . but , say i , if our dispute was about legal companies , you say very well ; but since i aim at no more , than knowing , whether my lord mayor be gone by or not ; i think the testimony of them all is sufficient , whether incorporated or not ; whether they were of the orange or blew regiment , or any other people in the street ; when i find them all to agree in the same thing , i have no reason to question the certainty of it . i will not think so poorly of your vnderstandings , as to think it needs application . but i must think so , if yet you think it my task to find out a distinguishing mark between churches , when the universal testimony of all christian churches is sufficient for the certainty of our faith ; which mr. m. so often grants was the occasion and subject of the conference . and now there is nothing remaining to be answered in mr. m's letter to me , but his learned discourses about verbal conferences and coffee-houses ; which will require no long answer from me . as to verbal conferences , they depend so much on the temper , ingenuity , presence of mind , and particular skill in controversie which persons have , that no certain rule can be given about them . they may doe good , or hurt , be usefull or mischievous , as the persons and circumstances are . and it is not the setting down some general heads can prevent the mischief of false reports , as i have had too large and fresh experience of it . which ought to make every one more carefull what sort of persons he meets with upon such occasions . i do not see , how any man can be secure as to his reputation after them , if they are such as run into companies , frequent coffee-houses , and are apt to boast and to talk much of themselves ; as that at such a time , saith one , i disputed with such a man and these were my arguments , and he gave such trifling answers to them , that i wonder he should have any reputation . and to convince you , look ye gentlemen , here are the notes of such a conference , do you mark what a pitifull answer this is ; and then , when he was required to go farther he refused , and pretended business and want of time ; so that upon the whole matter , i conclude him to be a mere trifler . all this while the person concerned is at a distance , and knows nothing of all this ; but he is abused , and reproached at the mercy of such persons who look on an officious lie as a venial sin ; especially when it is thought to serve a good cause . and when the injured person comes to understand how he hath been used , he hath no way left but to publish a vindication of himself ; and so verbal conferences , must end in writing controversies ; unless some effectual way could be found out to prevent mens partial and disingenuous representing them afterwards . there is too great reason to believe that those who are most impertinent in a dispute will be so after it ; and great talkers are commonly great boasters ; especially when they hope to recommend themselves by their pretended victories and their missionary zeal of disputing in coffee-houses . a thing which mr. m. observes ( p. 34. ) the children of the reformation are little acquainted with . and i do not like the mother of these children a jot the less for it . for religion is a grave and serious thing and ought to be treated with a respect due to the concernments of it . i am far from being a friend to any seditious , idle , or profane discourses in those places ; but yet methinks it looks very oddly to turn places of diversion into schools of disputing . and if such a missionary zeal prevails , i suppose the keepers of those houses will give little thanks to the promoters of it ; for men do not love to drink their warm liquour in mood and figure ; nor to lace their coffee with controversies . mr. m. represents me ( p. 33. ) as one that thought it a crime to go to coffee-houses . which is a notable device to make all the gentlemen who frequent them my enemies . whereas i onely mentioned your reading your paper in coffee-houses , and there boasting of your conference , wherein he might be sure i would not be present to contradict him . but this is a distinguishing mark of mr. m's ingenuity . i shall mention one more , and conclude this letter . mr. m. confesses many lies are told in coffee-houses , ( p. 33. ) and i have some reason to believe him . but if , saith he , all places are to be avoided , wherein lies are told i am afraid dr. st. would run the hazard of being silenced for want of a pulpit which might be ventured on . this is such an obliging complement to the london clergy to compare their pulpits to coffee-houses for lying , that it is beyond my skill to return it . but if there be so little truth in our pulpits as mr. m. suggests ( which i am sure he can never prove ) yet the constant loyalty which hath been preached there , might have made mr. m. a little more civil to them , than to compare them to coffee-houses ; wherein himself complains of seditious , idle and profane discourses . i am , sir , your humble servant , e. s. london , apr. 21 1687. there is in the press , and will speedily be published , an answer to the reasons of edward sclate● , minister of ●u●ney , for his conversion ●o the roman catholick faith and communion : sold by h. mortlock , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a71074-e110 v. her●s . blacklo●n . a sermon preached november v, 1673, at st. margarets westminst by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1674 approx. 81 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 27 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61606 wing s5645 estc r7707 12193847 ocm 12193847 55951 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61606) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 55951) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 880:7) a sermon preached november v, 1673, at st. margarets westminst by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. the second edition. [2], 50 p. printed by robert white, for henry mortlock ..., london : 1674. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -matthew vii, 15-16 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 rachel losh sampled and proofread 2004-05 rachel losh text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached november v. 1673. at s t. margarets vvestminst . by edward stillingfleet , d. d. chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . the second edition . london , printed , by robert white , for henry mortlock , and are to be sold at the white hart in westminster hall , and at the phoenix in st. pauls church-yard . 1674. s t. matth . vii . 15 , 16. beware of false prophets , which come to you in sheeps clothing , but inwardly they are ravening wolves . ye shall know them by their fruits . if we were to judge of the nature of christianity by the designs and practices of some , who would be thought the only true and catholick christians , we should have no great reason to esteem it our honour to be called by his name , who first brought this religion into the world . for if the christian religion did indeed justifie all the fraud and treachery , the mischief and cruelty which hath been either acted or designed by men under the glorious pretence of advancing the interest of the catholick church , we might better choose not to be christians , than to be such men : because whatever religion overthrows the common principles and duties of humane nature , such as those of civil obedience , integrity and humanity are , cannot be supposed a religion proper or intended by god for mankind ; whose great end in religion is to improve and rectifie , and not to debauch or corrupt the dispositions of men . men need no religion to instruct them in the arts of deceiving , the contrivances of malice , or the methods of revenge ; such fruits as these spring up too easily in our corrupt and degenerate natures , which need no great force or improvement to bring them forth : but when the warmth of the sun shall be joyned with the fruitfulness of the soil , when men are encouraged to pursue their own natural inclinations by the most powerful motives of religion , what bounds can be set to the growth and increase of these accursed fruits ? of all religions in the world , we might have thought the christian least lyable to be abused to such ill purposes ; for it was one of machiavel's quarrels against christianity , that by its precepts of meekness and patience , it rendred men unfit for such great undertakings , which could not be accomplished without something of cruelty and inhumanity , whereas the old religions by the multitude of sacrifices did inure men to blood and destruction , and so made them fitter for any enterprise . and machiavel was certainly in the right , if religion were intended only to make men butchers : or to instruct them in the use of swords and gun-powder . nay , the religion of mahomet is in this respect to be very much preferred before the christian , for that makes it not only lawful to destroy those of a different religion , but enrolls them for martyrs that dye in the field , and makes the blood of enemies as meritorious , as we do that of the cross. but that is reserved as the peculiar honour of the christian religion , that it commands the subduing all the bruitish and savage inclinations of men to acts of revenge and cruelty ; that it restores humane nature to it self by its precepts of meekness , mercy , peaceableness , and universal charity ; that it advances it to a divine nature by the imitation of god himself , in shewing kindness to enemies , and overcoming evil with good . this is the religion established by our lord and saviour in this excellent sermon on the mount , wherein the scope and design of christianity is delivered with the greatest plainness and perspicuity ; which ( if it be possible for us to judge of his meaning by the clearest expressions ) was far enough from being the setting up a monarchy in the church to which all the kings of the christian world are by their baptism bound to vail their crowns , and lay their scepters at its feet : or in case they do not , that then this spiritual monarch may excommunicate , depose , and deprive princes of their government , and dissolve all the obligations between their subjects and them ; and make it lawful for them to depose them : we find not the least footstep of any thing tending this way , where our saviour speaks most advantageously concerning the honour of his disciples ; which honour he represents by things which set forth their usefulness in common : ye are the salt of the earth , ye are the light of the world ; and not by setting up one above all the rest , far above all principalities and powers , to whom kings and princes , and all people are bound to be subject , if they regard their salvation . if any such thing as this had been so material a part of the christian doctrine , as some imagine , if it had been so necessary to salvation , it is somewhat strange , that when our blessed saviour gave so many directions in order to salvation he should give not so much as the least intimation concerning this . and yet he saith , at the end of this sermon , every one that heareth these sayings of mine , and doth them , is like unto a wise man that built his house upon a rock ; not super hanc petram , i e. according to the roman gloss , upon the popes authority ; but upon such a firm foundation as will never fail him . and what is it which our saviour endeavours to perswade men to , in order to so firm a settlement of their minds against all the assaults of persecutions ? viz. to humility , meekness , goodness , univeral holiness , to the love of god and mankind , to sincerity in devotion , dependence on providence , prayer , and doing as we would be done by : this is the substance of the christian law delivered by the son of god ; than which nothing can be imagined more contrary to the spirit of faction and disobedience , of cruelty and revenge , and that covered over with a pretence of zeal for religion . but he who gave these excellent precepts , did foresee , that there would arise men who should preach and prophesie in his name , and in his name cast out devils , and do wonderful works : that yet for all their fair shews and pretences to the world should be of a temper and disposition directly contrary to the gospel ; and therefore it was necessary for all christians , as they valued their own welfare , to have an eye to them , lest they should be deceived by them : which is the meaning of our saviour in these words ; beware of false prophets which come to you in sheeps clothing , but inwardly they are ravening wolves ; by their fruits ye shall know them . wherein we have these two things considerable . 1. the caution given , beware of false prophets , together with the ground of that caution , for they come to you in sheeps clothing , but inwardly are ravening wolves . 2. the rule laid down whereby we are to judge of them : by their fruits ye shall know them . 1. the caution given , beware of false prophets . there were two sorts of deceivers our saviour gives his disciples particular caution against , viz. false christs and false prophets ; the false christs were those who pretended that they were the persons who were foretold by the prophets that should come for the redemption of his people ; for many shall come in my name , saying , i am christ , and shall deceive many . not as though they pretended to be sent by christ , but that they would assume to themselves the dignity and authority of the true messias ; and of this sort , there were many that arose among the jews , such as theudas , jonathas , barchochebas , and many others . but besides these , there were false prophets , some of which did openly oppose christianity , such as that bar-jesus mentioned in the acts ; but there were others who pretended to own christianity , and to prophesie in the name of christ , whom s. peter calls false teachers ; and whom s. paul describes by the same character that our saviour here doth : but i know that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you , not sparing the flock : also of your own selves shall men arise , speaking perverse things , to draw disciples after them : whom he elsewhere sets forth by their sheeps clothing ; when he saith , that by good words and fair speeches they deceive the hearts of the simple , whom he calls false apostles , deceitful workers transforming themselves into the apostles of christ : which carryed so fair a shew and appearance among the people , that s. paul was very full of jealousie and apprehension concerning them , lest they should by degrees draw away his disciples from the simplicity of the gospel of christ. for i am jealous over you , saith he , with godly jealousie ; but i fear lest by any means as the serpent beguiled eve through his subtilty , so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in christ. it may seem strange , that after the apostles had with so much care and diligence planted the gospel of christ in several churches , they should express so much fear as they did , ( and especially s. paul ) of their being so soon corrupted by these false teachers ; as he doth , not only of the corinthians , but of the galatians too . i marvel , saith he , that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of christ. and o foolish galatians , who hath bewitched you , that you should not obey the truth ? and of the ephesians , that we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro , and carryed about with every wind of doctrine , by the sleight of men , and cunning craftiness , whereby they lye in wait to deceive : and of the colossians , beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit , after the tradition of men , after the rudiments of the world , and not after christ. and let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels : and of the hebrews , be not carried about with diverse and strange doctrines . but we shall see this great caution , delivered here first by our saviour , and afterwards by his apostles , was no more than necessary , if we consider under what pretences they came , and what arts and methods these false teachers used to delude and seduce the people . 1. they pretended to the same infallible spirit which the apostles had . and this may be the reason , why our saviour doth not here call them false teachers , but false prophets . for prophecy in its proper notion doth not relate to future events , but to divine inspiration . so s. chrysostom saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a prophet , saith he , is the same with gods interpreter : so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in greek authors , as in the author of the book de mundo , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendered by apuleius effari caeteris ; and festus saith , that the latines called those prophets , which were oraculorum interpretes ; and so the hebrew words are taken in the same sense without any relation to foretelling things to come . so moses is said to be a god to pharaoh , and aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet : i. e. thy interpreter . abraham is called a prophet , and the patriarchs are all called prophets , in regard that divine revelations were more common before the written law : but the reason why the name of prophecy came to be restrained to the prediction of things to come , was because future events lying most out of the reach of mens knowledge , the fore-telling of these was looked upon as the greatest evidence of divine inspiration . but in the new testament prophesying is often taken for the gift of interpreting the hard places of the old testament , as themistius calls one that interpreted the hard places in aristotle , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; thence prophesying is reckoned among the spiritual gifts ; and so these false prophets were not men who pretended to fore-tell future events , but to the assistance of an infallible spirit , in giving the sense of scripture ; and by this pretence they transformed themselves into the apostles of christ , giving out that they enjoyed equal priviledges with them : whereby three things may be observed which deserve our consideration . 1. that nothing is more easie , than for false teachers to pretend to an infallible spirit ; such whom our saviour and his apostles did warn men especially against , pretended to be prophets and apostles , and to know the mind of christ better than they who truly had the assistance of the holy ghost . some think the bare pretence to infallibility ought in such a divided state of the christian world to be entertained as the best expedient to end controversies , and that church which doth alone challenge it , ought on that account to be submitted to ; as though the most confident pretenders were to be soonest believed : so they will be , do what we can , by the weakest sort of mankind , but by none who have and use their judgements . if bare pretences were sufficient , simon magus did bid the fairest to be head of the church , for he pretended to be gods vicar upon earth , or the divine power sent down from heaven , which none of the apostles pretended to . why then did not the christian church submit to montanus his paraclete , when no other christians pretended to such an immediate inspiration as he did ? and certainly prisca and maximilla were better oracles , than a crucifix was to a late pope . if there be any thing beyond a bare pretence to an infallible spirit , we desire to see better arguments for it , than the false apostles could produce for theirs ; if there be nothing but a bare pretence , we must leave the pope and quakers to dispute it out . 2. that the pretence to divine inspiration is very dangerous to the christian church . for we see what mischief it did in the apostolical times , when there was a true infallible spirit in the apostles of christ to discover and confute it ; yet notwithstanding all the care and diligence of the apostles many were seduced by it . for those who have the least ground , do commonly use the greatest confidence , and denounce hell and damnation the soonest to those who despise and reject them . which being expressed with a grim countenance and a terrible accent , startles and shakes more persons of weak judgements and timorous dispositions , than all the reasons and arguments they could ever produce . this hath alwayes been the method of deceivers , to pretend to the highest , and then make the sin of those who do not believe them as great , as if the thing were real . thus the rejecting mens fanatick pretences to revelations and extasies is cryed out upon , as blaspheming the holy ghost ; and refusing to believe upon the roman churches pretended infallibility , is called no less , than denying gods veracity . we profess to believe the true inspiration of the holy ghost , and every tittle of what god hath revealed : but we will not swallow pretences for evidences , nor enthusiasms for revelations . for as the true religion was at first founded upon divine inspiration ; so we know that the greatest corruptions of it have sprung from the pretence to it . maimonides saith , that the first beginning of pagan idolatry , was owing to the pretence of inspiration , and immediate revelations for the worship of the stars . however that be , we are certain the devil made use of oracles and enthusiasms , as the most effectual means to bring men to the practice of it , both in aegypt , in greece and many other places ; and they who have taken the pains to collect them , have reckoned one hundred and sixty several oracles that were in request in the times of paganism . after christianity began to be setled in the world , the greatest corrupters of it were the pretenders to dinive inspiration , as the false apostles , the gnosticks , the montanists , and many others . and the pretence to this , is so much the more dangerous , because it bids high , and is easily taken up , and requires no learning or wit , but only confidence to manage it , and may carry men by impulses and motions to the most unwarrantable actions , and where it meets with an enthusiastical temper , is very hardly removed . 3. we may observe , that a truly infallible spirit is not sufficient to put an end to controversies . for when was that ever more evident than in the holy apostles after the miraculous descent of the holy ghost upon them ? many are apt to say now , that there will never be an end of these wranglings , and schisms , and disputes in religion , till there be an infallible judge to put an issue to them ; but were there not infallible judges in the apostles time , that gave infinitely greater evidence of an infallible spirit , than any ever since have done ? but were controversies put to an end by it ? no certainly , when the apostles complain so much of the schisms , and divisions , and errors , and heresies , and disputes , and quarrellings that were among them . and if so great an evidence of a divine spirit manifested by their miracles , had no greater effect then , what can we imagine the shadow of s. peter , or the dream of infallibility can do in the roman church ? and give me leave to say , it is the inquisition and not infallibility , which keep things quiet among them . but god deliver us from such an end of controversies . 2. the false prophets and apostles pretended to greater mortification and self-denyal than the true apostles did s hierom understands their coming in sheeps clothing , of this pretence to greater severity , and rigour of life than others used . those that go about to deceive , must appear to have something extraordinary this way , to raise an admiration of them among those who judge of saints more by their looks , than by their actions . whereas the greatest hypocrites have been alwayes the greatest pretenders this way . our blessed saviour was so far from making any shew of this rigour and severity , that he was reproached by the scribes and pharisees , those mortified saints , to be a wine-bibber , a friend to publicans and sinners . alas ! what heavenly looks , and devout gestures , and long prayers , and frequent fastings had they more than christ or his disciples ? the poor widows were so ravished with their long prayers , that they thought they could not do better with their houses or estates , than to put them into the hands of such mortified men to the world : till they found , notwithstanding their sheeps clothing , that by their devouring they were ravening wolves . those that seem so much to fly from the world , do but as souldiers in a battel sometimes do , that seem to fly from their enemies , but only with a design to make them follow , that they may have the more advantage upon them . one would think no men were so afraid of the world , as they that seem to run so fast from it , but they lay their ambuscado's to entrap it ; and if once it gets into their hand , no men know better how to be revenged upon it . what pleasant incongruities are these ? to see men grow rich by vows of poverty , retired from the world , and yet the most unquiet and busie in it ? mortified to the pleasures of life , and yet delighting most in following the courts of princes ? such kind of men were the pharisees of old : and who would have thought , that under the name of that jesus , who so much detested and abhorred their hypocrisie , there should others arise , who have outdone them in their own way ? as though christ had said , except your righteousness be like the righteousness of the scribes and pharisees , ye shall not enter in the kingdom of heaven . but we need not wonder that in these latter ages such pretences should be made use of , since in the very beginning of the christian church , these were the common arts of deceivers . they found fault with the apotles , as giving too much liberty to men in the use of marriage and meats ; but they thought the state of the one was not agreeable to their sanctity , nor the free use of the other consistent with their severe and mortified life . for they did forbid to marry , and commanded to abstain from meats . they would not make use of the liberty which god had allowed , but they were ready to take that which he had forbidden : therefore the apostle gives the true character of them when he saith , they spake lyes in hypocrisie . there was an outward shew of sanctity and severity in their doctrine ; but no men are observed by ecclesiastical historians to have been more eager of what god had forbidden , than they who were so scrupulous about what god had allowed . we do not say , the case is altogether the same , where men are forbidden absolutely , as though marriage were unlawful in it self ; which was the case of the antient hereticks ; and where it is forbidden only to a particular order of men , as it is in the church of rome : but this we say , that where it is forbidden to a particular order of men , as though it did not become the sanctity of that order ; this is reviving that hypocrisie which s. paul condemns : especially when it is forbidden on such an account as pope siricius did it , because they that are in the flesh cannot please god ; which is in effect sending all married persons to hell. this was one part of the pretended mortification of false teachers about marriage , the other was about meats . s. paul knew no such holiness in one sort of meat above another , as though men could fast their bellies full of one , but the least taste of the other destroyed it . what a pleasant thing it is to account that fasting , which the unmortified epicures of old accounted their most delicious feasting , viz. fish and wine ! this is not doing so much as the pharisees did , for they appeared unto men to fast : but in the church of rome they cannot be said to do that , unless fasting and eating be the same thing . but may not the church call not eating prohibited meat fasting ? no doubt it may ; as well as call that no bread , which we see , and taste , and handle to be bread . however i cannot understand , but if their church had so pleased , the eating flesh and abstaining from fish might have been called fasting ; and so they might have made one entire fast of a whole years eating : and notwithstanding all the pretence of fasting and mortification in that church , i cannot see that any man is bound by the laws of it , to keep one true fast all the dayes of his life . but if all the mortification required , lyes only in a distinction of meats , the false apostles went beyond them in it ; for they utterly forbid some sorts , saying , touch not , taste not , handle not ; and not meerly to shew their obedience to the commands of the church , but that they might not gratifie the desires of the flesh , and therefore the apostle saith , these things had on that account a shew of wisdom in them ; being in all probability taken from the severe precepts of the pythagorean philosophy , which makes him bid them , beware lest they were spoiled through philosophy and vain deceit , after the tradition of men , and the principles of the world , and not after christ. for if this sort of mortification were a thing so pleasing to god , the heathen principles were more agreeable to his nature , than the doctrine of christianity . this only requires the subduing our inward lusts , and in order to that , to keep the body in subjection ; but in the mysteries of the heaten religion far greater severities were to be undergone , in order to their participation of them . and the hardships were so great in some of their initiations , especially those of mithras , that some dyed before they could pass through them : and yet for any to be admitted without them , was present death to them . they were to make confession of their sins , shave their heads , change their habits , lye upon the bare ground , fast for several dayes , and when they eat , it was to be only of some certain meats ; these and many other severities they were to go through in order to the purifying their souls , as they thought , and bringing them to the state they were in before they came into the body . some part of these hardships the pythagoreans took into their philosophy ; and from them the colossians began to be infected with them : but s. paul calls them only vain deceits , the commandments and doctrines of men , things that made a fair shew , but he looks upon them as corruptions of the doctrine of christ. yet afterwards the montanists and encratitae and others were much stricter and more frequent in these fasts and abstinence , than the catholick christians ; but the church thought fit to condemn them , as corrupters of christianity . by all which we see , how apt men are to be deceived by false teachers , when they pretend to so much mortification above what christianity requires from them . 3. they pretended to know the mind of christ better than the apostles did : they pretended , that they had conversed familiarly with christ upon earth , and understood his meaning better than the apostles did . and therefore their disciples in the church of corinth , were neither for paul , nor apollos , nor cephas , but they were only for christ : and gave out that from him they understood , that what he had said concerning the resurrection , was only to be understood of the state of regeneration : which doctrine it seems had gotten great footing in the church of corinth by their means . they reported , that the apostles understood only some common and ordinary things , but the deeper and more hidden mysteries were only made known to them : which makes s. paul in his epistles to those churches which they had corrupted , speak so often of his understanding the mysteries of god : but we speak the wisdom of god in a mysterie , even the hidden wisdom which god ordained before the world to our glory : having made known unto us the mysterie of his will : whereby ye may understand my knowledge in the mysterie of christ. the true apostles declared , that they kept back nothing of the counsel of god , but delivered it openly and plainly , to make all men see and understand what that mysterie was : the false apostles pretended , that the doctrine and writings of the apostles did not contain all the great mysteries of the gospel , but they were received from christs own mouth , and conveyed to others by a secret and oral tradition . the things written by the evangelists they could not deny to be true , but they were dark and obscure , and could not be understood but by the help of their oral tradition : and upon this principle , cerinthus , basilides , valentinus , and marcion went , as appears by irenaeus . for when they saw , they could never make good their doctrines by the writings of the new testament they sought to blast the reputation of these , and set up the authority of an oral tradition above them . men do not use to pick quarrels with their friends ; and therefore when we find any charging the scripture with obscurity and imperfection , we have reason to believe , they hope for no comfort from it . 4. they made use of the most subtle and crafty methods of deceiving . to this end they were very busie and active , watching every opportunity ; therefore s. paul charges them with sleight and cunning craftiness , lying in wait to deceive : i.e. with using all the arts and tricks of deceivers : as ( 1. ) by deep dissimulation and disguising themselves ; not appearing at first to be what they really are ; nor letting them understand , what their true doctrine and design is . if any of those they hope to gain , object any thing against them , how do they pity their ignorance , and revile their teachers , that did so foully misrepresent their doctrines to them ! alas for them poor men , they neither understand us nor our religion ! they have taken up things upon trust , & their prejudice will not suffer them to examine things as they are . have you not been told thus and thus concerning us , and not one word of it is true ? never trust such men more , come be perswaded by us , and then you shall be truly enlightned . ( 2. ) by raising prejudices against their teachers ; as they did in the church of corinth against s. paul , representing him as a man of a mean and contemptible presence , and rude in speech . come , say they , and hear our preachers , with what admirable eloquence and moving expressions they speak , how they dart beams of light into mens minds , and strike through the souls of men ! you would never care for this dull and obscure way of s. paul more . but this is a small thing to disparage only his gifts ; observe say they his doctrine , and see whither it tends , is not he against those that forbid to marry , and abstain from meats ? judge now whither these loose doctrines lead men . so s. paul tell us , that they had represented him as one that walked after the flesh ; and had prevailed so far upon the people by these sly insinuations , as though all he aimed at , was only for his own advantage , viz. that he might be popular , and get himself an interest among that rich people of corinth , so that he tells them , he was fain to live upon other churches to do them service : and he tells us afterwards the false apostles gave the occasion of it : & in the churches of galatia they had turned his greatest friends to be his enemies ; and he give this account of it , they would exclude us , that you might affect them . ( 3. ) by sowing schisms & divisions among them . this was their master-piece , to beget contentions where they could not prevail themselves . what joy was it to them to see in the church of corinth , such parties and factions made among them ? some for paul , some for apollos , some for cephas , from hence proceeded envying , and strife , and divisions among them ; and this gave them a fair opportunity of breaking them in pieces one against another . and therefore the apostle saw it necessary to use the utmost means to cure these divisions among them ; and elsewhere beseeches the christians to mark them that cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned , and avoid them ; for they that are such , serve not our lord jesus christ but their own belly ; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple : i.e. they carry on their own designs and interests , by these means ; and therefore study all the wayes to foment and increase them . why should the disciples of peter yield to those of paul , and why should not those of apollos be regarded as much as either ? and such was the unhappy success of these mens arts in this divided church of corinth , that notwithstanding all the care of s. paul to put an end to their factions , they brake out with greater fury afterwards , as appears by the epistle of clemens to them : and he takes notice of those who did cast the arrows of contention among them : and therefore he makes that the chief argument of his epistle , to defeat the design of the false teachers , by perswading them to peace and unity among themselves . ( 4. ) by the most plausible insinuations . by good words and fair speeches , saith s. paul , they deceive the hearts of the simple : they might find by their softness and gentleness that they were in sheeps clothing . how meek and humble , and insinuating are they where they have any hopes of a prey ! how do the bowels of these ravening wolves yearn towards the silly sheep , that look only on their outsides ! they would not hurt a limb of them for all the world ! nothing but meer zeal for their good , could make them run such hazards , and venture so much as they do ! what end could they have in following such stray sheep , but to reduce them to the true sheepfold ? thus , if the wolves may be believed , there is no danger to the sheep , but from their shepherds : let them but forsake them , and then see what admirable love , and peace , and unity they would live together in : but the apostle well adds to all this , deceiving the hearts of the simple , for none else are capable of being thus deceived , by all their fair pretences and plausible insinuations . 5. the false teachers were for a more pompous and easie way of religion , than the true apostles were : these were for the purity and simplicity of the gospel of christ , the other were for joyning the iewish ceremonies and the heathen customs : together with it ; and by this means they hoped with much more ease to gain proselytes to them ; especially when to this they added a greater liberty in mens lives ; so that by these offers , they hoped to gain the vain , the superstitious , and the profaner sort wholly to them see how s paul describes them , having a form of godliness , but denying the power of it ; for of this sort are they which creep into houses , and lead captive silly women laden with sins , led away with divers lusts . these were subjects rightly disposed to be deceived by them : their folly made them capable , and their lusts very tractable to such a formal , pompous , easie religion : it was by this indulgence of men in their sins , that vile sect of the gnosticks gained so much ground in the beginnings of christianity . s. chrysostom thinks these words of our saviour have a particular respect to the foregoing words , strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life , and few there be that find it . now these words coming immediately after seem to imply , that these false prophets were for making the gate wider , and the way to heaven larger than christ hath done , and such need not fear they shall have many followers , and especially of those who are farthest from the kingdom of heaven . all the blessedness our saviour promises , is to the humble and contrite , to the meek and righteous , to the merciful , pure and peaceable : but if others make easier conditions of blessedness , no wonder if their doctrine be entertained by those who are willing to be happy , but unwilling to leave their sins . as if false teachers should turn our saviours beatitudes into such as these : blessed are ye , if ye confess your sins to a priest , and receive the sacrament of penance , for your sins are forgiven . blessed are ye , if ye vow poverty , and leave the world ; for ye shall inherit the earth . blessed are ye , if ye go in pilgrimages , and visit the seven churches ( especially in a year of iubilee , and receive the popes benediction ) for ye shall be called the children of god. blessed are ye , if ye do or suffer evil for the catholick churches sake ; for great shall be your reward in heaven . blessed are they , that howsoever they live , dye in s. francis his habit , for theirs is the kingdom of heaven . for so gregory the ninth saith , that s. francis obtained this priviledge of god , that whosoever had that habit on , could not dye ill : and s. francis adds himself , that whosoever loved his order in his heart , how great a sinner soever he was , should obtain mercy of god. and are not these much easier terms of blessedness , than those our saviour layes down ? besides , that which makes the way to heaven more narrow , is that our saviour declares , he came not to destroy the law , but to fulfill it : and adds precepts of his own to it : but do not they make the way to heaven much opener , that teach men to dissolve both the law and the precepts of christ ? for this is the language of these false teachers , if we bring their doctrine to the manner of our saviours expressions . ye have heard , that it hath been said of old , thou shalt worship the lord thy god , and him only shalt thou serve ; but we say unto you , that ye are to give worship both to saints and angels . ye have heard , that it hath been said by them of old time ; thou shalt not make to thy self any graven image , nor the likeness of any thing , &c. but we say unto you , that this command may be left out among christians . you have heard that it hath been said of old , thou shalt not kill : but we say unto you , that to murder princes , blow up parliaments , destroy hereticks is lawful for the good of the catholick church . you have heard , that it hath been said of old , thou shalt not commit adultery : but we say unto you , that marriage in a priest is worse than fornication . thus far for the law ; now let us see the liberty they take as to the precepts of the gospel . ye have heard that it hath been said by christ , drink ye all of this : but we say unto you , that notwithstanding this precept of christ , the laity must not do it . you have heard , that it hath been said by the apostle , that men ought to pray with understanding : but we say unto you , that men need not understand what they pray for . ye have heard that ye have been commanded both by christ and his apostles , to read the scriptures : but we forbid the people to read the scriptures , and say , that more hurt than good comes by it . judge now , whether the character of false teachers do not belong to them , who have found another way , nay , a contrary way to heaven , to that which our saviour directed ? and so much for the caution here given , and the reason annexed to it ; beware of false prophets , for they come to you in sheeps clothing , but inwardly they are ravening wolves . i come now , 2. to the rule laid down by our saviour for the judging of them ; by their fruits ye shall know them . he doth not send men to an infallible judge to know the true and false teachers from each other , but layes down such a rule as he supposed might be sufficient to direct men in their judgement of them . if christ had ever intended to have left such a vicar upon earth , whose judgement all christians are bound to follow , he would never have put them to such a needless tryal of mens doctrines by their fruits : the short and plain way had been to have said thus , there will false teachers arise , but remember that you are to obey and follow the bishop of rome ; and if you will be saved , i command you to hold in communion with him . this had been the fullest and clearest direction in the world , and no doubt , if our blessed saviour had meant any such thing , such was his care of the souls of men , this would have been one of the first and plainest precepts of the gospel . but so dark and obscure , so remote and impertinent are the proofs brought from scripture for the popes supremacy , that i dare say , that aristotles politicks do prove it much better than any text in the bible : and those i suppose have been of my opinion , who slightly passing over the passages of scripture , have been large in proving , that monarchy is the best government , and therefore ought to be in the church . which argument if it have any force for an universal monarchy in the church , i should not at all wonder to see the same persons zealous to promote an universal monarchy in the world too . for if the argument in the canon law be good , that the pope is above the emperour , because god created two great lights , the sun and the moon : i hope the same reason , which will prove it necessary for the sun to rule the day , will equally hold , that the moon should rule the night . and i shall easily agree , that when it will be thought reasonable for all the kings and princes in the world to submit themselves to one universal monarch , it may be then expedient for all particular churches , to give up their rights to the pope . in the mean time we think it most convenient to follow our saviours rules , to judge of mens pretences , how great and haughty soever , by the fruits they produce . which rule is not to be understood concerning the particular actions of men which have no respect to their doctrines ; for as s. chrysostom observes , many hereticks have been men of excellent lives , and so on the contrary ; but we are to understand it of those fruits which their doctrines have a direct influence upon . and therefore this rule hath a particular respect to two things by which we are to examine the fairest pretences : viz. 1. the design they tend to . 2. the means made use of for the accomplishing this design . if therefore the design be quite of another nature from that of the gospel ; if the means be such as are directly contrary to it , we may from thence justly inferr , that how plausible soever the pretences are , how fine and soft soever the sheeps clothing be , yet inwardly they are ravening wolves . 1. i begin therefore , with the design of their doctrines . nothing is more easie , than for men to understand the design of christianity , viz. the exercise of all christian vertues to fit men for the kingdom of heaven : for our saviour declares , that his kingdom is not of this world ; that he came not to meddle with the rights of princes , or to dispose of crowns and dominions ; all that he aimed at , was to possess men with a firm belief of another world , and by the most powerful motives to perswade men to repentance , and a sober , righteous , and a godly life . and if they did these things , what ever troubles and difficulties they met with in this world , should be abundantly recompensed in that to come . this is the main scope and design of the christian religion ; and the great art of the false prophets lay in this , that they pretended still to own christianity , ( which was their sheeps clothing ) but withal by secret and pernicious mixtures of their own doctrines to undermine and pervert the whole design of it . so s. paul saith of them , not that they did oppose , but that they did pervert the gospel of christ. i marvel , saith he , that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of christ to another gospel : which yet is not another , but there be some that trouble you ; and would pervert the gospel of christ. now i desire , it may be considered , whether any thing doth more effectually pervert the design of the gospel , than the setting up a kingdom in this world under the pretence of it , that should be paramount to all princes and potentates , and to which they owe subjection and obedience ? and yet this hath been the open and avowed design of the prevailing faction in the church of rome for the last six hundred years . i do not deny but there were some tendencies to it before , and wise men might easily guess what it would come to , if the design came once to be managed by a man of spirit and courage , as it was by gregory the seventh , who in a council at rome published his famous dictates , viz. that there is but one name in the world , viz. that of the pope : that it was in his power to depose emperours , and absolve subjects from obedience to their princes . now the grand design breaking out , all other things were contrived and carried on which were thought necessary to accomplish it : and there being two things needful for the maintenance of such a pretended monarchy , viz. sufficient numbers of men , whose interest should lye in upholding it ; and great revenues to support the dignity of it : these two were taken care of with all the art and industry imaginable . for the first , it was necessary to disengage them from all civil interests , and yet to preserve their honour and reputation with the people . the former could not be done while the clergy gave hostages of their fidelity to the civil government by the interest of their families and children , therefore this pope did most severely forbid all clergy mens marrying ; that as the old roman souldiers were forbidden marriage while they received pay , lest their domestick interests should abate their courage ; so the celibate of the clergy was strictly enjoyned , to make them more useful and hearty for this design . but lest the number of these should not be thought sufficient , great swarms of monks and friers were encouraged and dispersed in all countreys , and to make them more faithful to this interest ( because princes might oblige particular bishops who might curb and restrain these spiritual ianizaries ) therefore they were exempt from their jurisdiction , and kept in immediate dependence on the pope . to give yet further encouragement to both orders , the doctrine of ecclesiastical liberty was set on foot ; not a liberty from the law of moses , or the power of sin , or the dominion of satan , which is all the liberty the gospel speaks of ; but an exemption from the power of the civil magistrate ; in so much , that the popish casuists determine , that rebellion in a clergy-man is no treason , because he is not subject to the civil power . and this doctrine of liberty is no invention of the iesuits ; but it is determined by the famous councils of constance , lateran , and trent , that lay persons have no iurisdiction over ecclesiastical . but besides this , the pope hath other tyes upon them ; every bishop is at this day sworn to obey the pope at his consecration ; all the regular clergy are under a vow of blind obedience to their superiours , who are more immediately influenced by the court of rome . now such an infinite number of persons being made thus sure to the papal interest , it must be so ordered , that these persons may preserve their reputation among the people ; to this end , they are told , that they must depend wholly upon the priesthood for matters of faith and salvation ; and it is of mighty concernment to them to have the good will of the priests , for that upon their good or bad intention depends the making or marring of their sacraments . but that no designs might be carried on , which they should not understand , never was there such an invention to that purpose , as auricular confession : and yet that the people may have greater reverence to their priests , they are told , that they can make their god at any time by pronouncing the five words of consecration . and what cannot they do , ( as one of them bravely said ) while they have their god in their hands , and their prince on his knees ? and both these doctrines of confession and transubstantiation were defined by the same pope innocent the third , a man of the same spirit and undertakings with gregory the seventh . and lastly , that no supplies should be wanting to support the grandeur of the papal see , besides the pretended donations and concessions of princes , all arts imaginable were used to drain money out of all countreys in subjection to the pope , and to empty it into the popes treasury . this very kingdom of ours was a remarkable instance of this , during its vassallage under the popes tyranny . for an account being taken in henry the eighths time , it was found , that in the compass of forty years foregoing , no less a sum than 160000 l. was carried to rome upon the sole account of investiture of bishops , besides the vast summs that were raised by peter-pence , dispensations and indulgences , which were a kind of contribution upon the sins of the people . thus we see , how the design was laid and managed for an universal monarchy in the church . but some will say , that the world is grown wiser now . i heartily wish it were so ; for nothing would be more prejudicial to the papal interest , than its being so . but let us not deceive our selves , the pretensions are as high and as great at rome to this monarchy as ever they were . and what ever some vainly distinguish of the court and church of rome in this matter , it is certain those of the court of rome not only assert , but prove it too , that this doctrine hath been the doctrine of the roman church for six hundred years ; and they produce for it besides a great number of authors no fewer than ten councils , whereof two are allowed by them to be general , viz. those of lyons and lateran . but this is not all , but they contend for it not as a probable opinion , but as a thing certain and of faith , and that not barely at rome , but even in france . for in the memory of many yet alive , after a hot debate in a general assembly of the three estates at paris , the popes power of deposing princes was assented to by all the nobility and clergy of that kingdom . some particular persons among them , may and do oppose it of late ; but they are excommunicated at rome for doing it ; and thereby declared as much as they can be , not to be members of their church , for daring to oppose so orthodox and catholick a doctrine as the popes power of deposing princes . nay , cardinal perron saith in his eloquent oration to the third estate at paris , who opposed this doctrine , that unless it were approved , it followed that the church of rome for many ages hath been the kingdom of antichrist , and synagogue of satan : and king iames tells us , that the pope in his letter of thanks to the nobility , for complying with this blessed doctrine , called the commons or deputies of the third estate , nebulones ex faece plebis , a pack of knaves of the very dregs of the people . very obliging language from the head of the church ! when all that the commons desired , was only to have this opinion condemned , that the pope hath power to depose princes , and that killing of kings is an act meritorious to the purchase of the crown of martyrdom : but this by all their instances and arguments , they could never obtain ; but the nobility and clergy over-ruled them in it . for the clergy king iames saith , he did not wonder so much , because they look on themselves as properly subjects to the pope , and therefore are bound to advance that monarchy to which they belong . but for the nobility , saith he , the kings right arm , to prostitute , and set as it were to sale , the dignity of their king , as if the arm should give a thrust unto the head ; i say , for the nobility to hold and maintain even in parliament their king is lyable to deposition by any forreign power or potentate , may it not pass for one of the strangest miracles , and rarest wonders of the world ? for that once granted , this consequence is good and necessary ; that in case the king once lawfully deposed , shall stand upon the defensive , and hold out for his right , he may then be lawfully murthered . which consequence is very well understood at rome , and allowed to be good by the roman casuists ; and yet the eloquent cardinal calls that doctrine which makes princes indeposable by the pope , a breeder of schisms , a gate that makes way for all heresie to enter ; and a doctrine to be held in such detestation , that rather than he and his fellow bishops will yield to the signing thereof , they will be contented like martyrs to burn at a stake . blessed martyrs the mean while ! and fit to be put in the same calendar with the gunpowder traitors , who suffered , as i shall shew presently , on the same principle ; methinks they might have chosen a better cause to have dyed martyrs for . but surely it must be an article of faith , and a main point of their religion , which makes men martyrs who suffer for it . and such no doubt , it is accounted among them ; when the same cardinal saith , that it leads men not only to unavoidable schism , but manifest heresie to deny it ; and that it obliges men to confess , that the catholick church hath for many ages perished from the earth ; for he confidently avows it , that all parties in the catholick churh have held it , and the whole french church till the time of calvin ; that if this doctrine be not true , the pope is so far from being head of the church and vicar of christ , that he is a heretick and antichrist , and all the parts of their church are the limbs of antichrist . and if they be so , we cannot help it : but think we have great reason to secure our selves against the infection of such pernicious principles both to christianity and the civil government . and what can be more opposite to the design of christianity , when that requires men to obey even infidel and heathen governours for conscience sake , this doctrine makes it lawful to depose , destroy , and murder christian princes for the pope and the churches sake ? this is the first thing we are to examine false teachers by ; viz. the design of their doctrines . 2. by the means made use of to accomplish this design : if things in themselves evil , repugnant to the principles of humane nature , and those of civil societies , as well as to the precepts of christianity , are made lawful only for the carrying on their design , we need not go farther to examine them ; for by these fruits we may know them . there are three things which mainly uphold civil societies , truth , obedience , and a care of the good of others ; but if men fall not through any sudden infirmity or surprize , but openly and avowedly justifie the lawfulness of falshood , treason and cruelty , when they are intended for the carrying on their design ; what could they invent more contrary to the laws both of god and man ? where in could they better discover themselves , notwithstanding their sheeps clothing , to be meer ravening wolves ? 1. falshood , and that both in their words and dealings . 1. in their words , by asserting the lawfulness of aequivocation and mental reservation in their most solemn answers : as father garnett , when the lords asked him , whether he had any conference with hall ? denyed it upon his soul , and reiterated it with such horrible execrations as wounded their hearts that heard him , and immediately upon hall 's confessing it , he excused himself by the benefit of aequivocation : which being objected against garnett after his execution , the roman jesuite eudaemon iohannes defends him in it , and saith it is lawful for a man to swear , and take the sacrament upon it , when he knows in his conscience , what he saith to be absolutely false , if he doth not help himself by a mental reservation . and tresham a little before his death in the tower subscribed it with his own hand , that he had not seen garnett in sixteen years before , when it was evidently proved , and garnett confessed they had been together but the summer before ; and all that garnett had to say for him was , that he supposed he meant to aequivocate . lord ! that men going into another world , should think thus grosly to impose upon god and men . what was speech intended for , if not that others might understand our meaning by it ? did ever any man tell a lye to himself ? truth in words consists in an entire proposition , and not of one half-spoken and half-concealed ? and if it be lawful thus to abuse mankind , it was to no purpose ever to forbid lying ; for any but meer fools may help themselves in their most solemn protestations , by some secret reserve in their own minds : and so this principle makes way for all the lyes or perjuries in the world , if a man thinks that he is not bound to betray himself , or if he judges his own damage will be greater by discovering the truth , than the others damage will be by concealing it . 2. falshood in dealings : and that notwithstanding the most solemn promises , nay , the safe-conducts of princes . for notwithstanding all their shifts and evasions in this matter , no man that regards his safety , will ever put his life into their hands for the sake of the council of constance . all that they have to say is , that the emperour did as much as lay in him to do ; but it belonged to the council to proceed upon hereticks , and the emperour could not hinder that . and what is this , but plainly to say , that princes are to keep their words with infidels and catholicks , but they have nothing to do to keep their words with hereticks ? and if this be their principle , we must have a care how far we trust them . 2. treason . it is the honour of our church of england , that it asserts the rights of princes so clearly and fully , without tricks and reservations ; and all that mean honestly , love to speak plainly . but how many cases have they in the church of rome , wherein men are acquitted from their duty from their princes ? if a toy comes into the popes head , or upon some pique or jealousie , he falls to the censures of the church , & excommunicates a prince : what a case is this poor prince in as to all those subjects that think themselves bound to obey the pope ? they may lawfully in their own opinion rise against him , fight with him , assassinate and murder him . and which is very observable , all this while they are not bound to believe the pope infallible in these censures ; so that right or wrong , if a prince chance to fall under the popes censures , we see what a liberty is left to all his creatures to ruine and destroy their soveraign ? the frequent attempts upon q. elizabeth , the murder of henry the third of france after their excommunications by pius the fifth , and sixtus the fifth , are sufficient evidences of the danger of princes in these cases . by which last instance , we see it is not only the case of heresie , which renders them obnoxious to the popes censures ; but particular piques and quarrells ; or if the pope chance to think a man unfit to govern , as in the case of chilperic of france ; or if they detain church-land , belonging to monasteries , in which case becanus saith expresly , kings and princes are to be excommunicated and deprived : and pope paul the fourth was perfectly of his opinion ; and declared , they were in a state of damnation that held them but so far some of them , are kind to princes to say , that they ought not to be deposed , till they are excommunicated ; and yet gregory the seventh before excommunication deprived the emperour henry the fourth for the damnable heresie , of defending his own rights . but since they are lyable to these horrible censures upon so many causes , we may see how very ticklish and uncertain the doctrine of obedience must be among them , and that mens being guilty of treason depends upon the popes pleasure . and methinks , herein the case of princes deserves hugely to be pittyed , that when no man thinks it lawful to cut another mans throat , or put him out of his house and estate , because he is excommunicated ; yet if a prince falls under excommunication , he loses presently his right to the crown , and his subjects may take away crown , liberty , and life from him . 3. cruelty . and by this they fully discover themselves to be ravening wolves : when they have lost all the tenderness , and love , and good nature of men or christians : when no design can be so horrible or bloody , so mischievous and treacherous , so base and cruel , but persons will be found to undertake it , and that under a pretence of conscience and religion . i need not here tell the long & dreadful stories of the roman inquisition , the numbers of those in other countreys who have been butchered on the account of religion , but the fact , i mean the conspiracy , ( for god be thanked it went not farther ) which we bless god for the discovery and defeating of this day , doth abundantly manifest the fruits of those doctrines , which they had sucked in from the roman church . if only a few desperate persons upon personal provocations had been engaged in so villainous a design , we should have had never the less reason to thank god for our deliverance ; but since it doth appear , that those persons who undertook it , pretended nothing in it but conscience and religion , we have not only reason to abhorr the undertaking , but the principles which animated them to it . i know very well what sheeps clothing hath been of late cast over the most barbarous cruelty of these ravening wolves ; and men by their impudence would endeavour to bear us down , that it was only a project of some few male-contents , drawn in by the subtilty of a crafty statesman in those dayes ; and that it ought not in justice or honour to be imputed to the principles of their religion . therefore to lay open before you the just and true circumstances of this horrible conspiracy , i shall proceed upon these three particulars . 1. that the persons engaged in it had no personal provocations to move them to it . 2. that all the motives they had to it were from the principles of their religion . 3. that the church of rome hath never since detested the principles upon which they acted ; or set any mark of infamy on the actors in it . 1. that the persons engaged in it had no personal provocations . what injury had catesby , or percy , or tresham , or digby received from the king or parliament , to stir them up above thousands of others to be the great managers of so hellish a plot ? did not they enjoy their estates and places , and one of them at court too ? why should these men venture lives , estates , honours , families , and all that was dear to them ? were their estates confiscated before ; and themselves every hour in danger of having their throats cut ? this might make men of high spirits grow desperate . but not the least tittle of all this was pretended , by the most enraged of them : nothing but zeal for religion and the catholick cause , was ever pleaded by them . to which purpose these are remarkable words of king iames in his speech in parliament upon the discovery . for if these conspirators , saith he , had only been bankrupt persons , or discontented upon occasion of any disgraces done them , this might have seemed to have been but a work of revenge . but for my own part , as i scarcely ever knew any of them , so cannot they alledge so much as a pretended cause of grief , and the wretch himself in hands doth confess , that there was no cause moving him or them , but meerly and only religion . and the king himself again avowed it to the whole christian world , that the papists had not before this horrible design , the least colour of any discontent from him : that he had so far suspended penalties , and abated the rigorous execution of laws against them , to such a degree , as gave great suspicion to his best subjects , who told him what would be the fruit of all his kindness to them . nay , he saith , they grew to that height of pride in confidence of his mildness , as they did directly expect , and assuredly promise to themselves liberty of conscience , and equality with his other subjects in all things : that he had shewn particular favours to many of them , gave them free access to him , eased them of their payments , set their priests at liberty , granted a general pardon to them after conviction . now after all this , what colour or pretence in the world can there be to say , that only discontent and despair brought these men to it ? o , but it might however be the cunning of a great minister of state , to draw a few gentlemen and others into such a plot. this i know is suggested and believed by some , who think it a fine thing to talk out of the common road , and to be thought more skilful in mysteries of state than other men . but i would fain understand from whence they derive this profound intelligence at such a distance of years . if king iames may be believed , if the popish historians and apologists at that time may be credited , there was not the least intimation given , either by the actors or sufferers , from abroad or at home of any such thing . was not the world sufficiently alarm'd at the news of this dangerous and unparallel'd conspiracy ? were not men very inquisitive into all the particulars ? and those of the church of rome , especially the iesuits concerned in point of honour to wipe off the stain from themselves , and to cast the odium of it on a great minister of state ? were not two of the iesuits who were conscious of the plot , preferred afterwards at rome ? and how many writings came from thence about it ? and yet not one man discovered the least suspicion of any such thing . if they go on in this way without the least shadow of proof to lay the contrivance of this plot on a professed protestant : for all that i know , by the next age , they may hope to perswade men , that it was a plot of protestants to blow up a popish king and parliament . 2. that they had all their motives and encouragements from the principles of their religion to undertake such a design . ( and philostratus contends , that the murder of domitian ought rather to be attributed to the doctrines of apollonius , than to the hands of stephanus and parthenius . ) for which we are to consider , that they were fully possessed with this as a principle of their religion , that it was absolutely in the popes power to deprive heretical princes of their dominions : which had been rooted in them , especially after that pius the fifth had fully declared it in his bull against queen elizabeth . in her case they made no scruple to destroy her if they could , and thought they should do it with a good conscience . and there are no villains in the world like those who are villains out of conscience . but as to the queens successor , the pope had declared nothing ; till such time as garnett being provincial of the iesuits , had received two briev's from rome , wherein he declared , that in case they should suspect the queens successor would not be true to their religion , it was lawful for them to use their endeavours to keep him from the crown . these briev's garnett shews to catesby , who took the rise of his design from hence . and when afterwards in conference garnett desired him to know the popes opinion in it , he replyed , that he needed not ask that , for if it were lawful to exclude him before he came to the crown , it was lawful to take him away when he was in possession of it . which argument was so strong , that garnett either had no mind , or was not able to answer it . all the scruple catesby had after this was , whether it were lawful to destroy the innocent and guilty together : which garnett fully resolved him in , so it were for the greater good of the church . upon these two grounds as widdrington , a roman catholick well observes , catesby laid the foundation of his whole conspiracy . after this , it 's evident by manifest proofs , and garnetts own confession under his hand , that he and other iesuits did understand the particulars of the plot ; and tesmond another iesuit and he discoursed the circumstances walking together in moor-fields ; and that not in confession , as is pretended , for the iesuit did not confess it as a fault , but advised with him about particulars , and asked him , who should be protector of the kingdom after the plot took effect ? as garnett himself confessed . but suppose it had been in confession ; why might not treason be discovered as well as heresie ? and their casuists acknowledge , that heresie may be revealed . there is only this difference , that treason is only against secular princes , but heresie against the interest of their church ; which is dearer to them than all the princes lives in the world. yea , so busie were the iesuits in encouraging this plot , that they not only debated it among themselves ; but one of them gave them the sacrament upon the oath of secrecy , and then absolved them after the discovery ; another prayed for good success , another comforted them after it was discovered by the examples of good designs that had wanted success . and must we after all this believe , that only a few discontented laicks were engaged in it , and that it was nothing at all to their church ? when the iesuits gave all the encouragement to them in it , in point of conscience : so that it was truly , as well as wittily said of one , that the iesuits double garment might well be called charity , because it covered a multitude of sins . 3. but if the church of rome give no encouragement to such actions ; why hath it not detested the principles upon which it was grounded ? why hath it not removed all suspicion in the minds of princes and people of giving any countenance to such treasonable designs ? but on the contrary , the same doctrines are still avowed , and the persons of the conspirators honoured . widdrington saith , that garnetts name was inserted into the english martyrology , though he gave it under his hand , that he dyed for treason , that his bones were kept for reliques , and his image set over altars , as of a holy martyr ? is this the honour of regicides and traytors in the roman church ? when in the late prosperous rebellion , the prevailing faction had proceeded to such a height of wickedness , as to take away the life of our gracious soveraign , how did the church and nation groan and grow impatient till they could vindicate the honour of our religion and countrey ! not only by an execution of justice on the persons of the regicides , but by declaring in parliament against the principles that led to it . what hath there been done like this in the court or church of rome , against the principles or actors of this gunpowder-treason ? if it had succeeded , by all that we can see , paul the fifth might have admired the providence of god in it , as much as sixtus the fifth did in the murder of henry the third of france : and we may guess his mind shrewdly by the bulls he published against the oath of allegiance , which the king was forced for his own security to impose on the papists after this conspiracy . with what scorn and contempt doth bellarmine treat the king in his writings against him , and tells him in plain terms , if he would be secure , he must give liberty to their religion ? it seems then , their principles are dangerous to princes where they have it not . what mark of dishonour was there set by their own part on any one of the conspirators ? two of the iesuits upon their arrival at rome , met with such hard usage , that one was made the popes poenitentiary , the other a confessor in s. peters at rome . and is not this the way to let the world see , how detestable such persons and practices are to their church ? to conclude all , i challenge those of the roman church to produce any one solemn declaration of that church , ( i do not say of secular powers or some particular persons , or councils rejected at rome ) whereby they make it unlawful for the pope to depose princes , or to absolve subjects from their oaths of allegiance to them . but instead of that , even in this present age of ours , that opinion which makes it unlawful , hath been condemned at rome by three several popes , paul the fifth , innocent the tenth , and alexander the seventh : and which is more considerable , all three have condemned it with a particular respect to the case of his majesties subjects ; and not meerly condemned it as a false opinion , but as wicked and contrary to faith . and is not the world grown wiser now , as to these matters ? but if they be not , i hope we may be . and after their frequent treasons and horrible conspiracies , and principles , never disowned by their church , have we not reason to entertain in suspicion of them , as to their principles of civil government , till they give sufficient security , that these pernicious principles have no influence upon them ▪ but blessed be that god , that hath hitherto defeated the malicious purposes of the inveterate enemies of our church and religion : that hath brought to light these works of darkness ; and yet continued us in the enjoyment of the benefits of this mighty deliverance to this day . may the same gracious god go on still to protect our established religion , against all forreign usurpations and domestick factions . may our love to it still increase , and our zeal for its preservation make us study the best means to preserve it ; that neither divisions among our selves , nor assaults of our common enemies may be ever able to ruine and destroy it ; that we may still say with the psalmist , blessed be the lord , who hath not given us over as a prey unto their teeth . our soul is escaped as a bird out of the snare of the fowlers ; the smare is broken and we are escaped . our help is in the name of the lord who made heaven and earth . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61606-e120 matth. 5.13 , 14. mat. 7.24 . mat. 24.24 mat. 24.5 . acts 13.6 . mat. 7.21 . 2 pet. 2.1 . act. 20.29 , 30. rom. 16.18 . 2 cor. 11.13 . v. 2 , 3. gal. 1.6 . 3.1 . eph. 4.14 . coloss. 2.8 . 18. heb. 13.9 . s. chrys. in 1. ad cor. hom . 36. auct . de mundo , c. 1. plut. de def . orac. lucian . in vit. phil. exod. 7.1 . gen. 20.7 . psalm 105.15 . themist . or. 1. 1 cor. 12.10 . epiph. haer . 20. maim . de idol . c. 1. sect . 3. hier. in loc . 1 tim. 4.3 . siric . ep. 1. c. 7. ep. 4. c. 9. mat. 6.17 . col. 2.24 . v. 23. $ v. 8. 1 cor. 1.12 . 1 cor. 2.7 . eph. 1.9 . 3 , 4. v. 9. iren. l. 3. c. 2. eph. 4.14 . 2 cor. 10.1.11.6 . 2 cor. 10.2 . 2 cor. 11.8 . 12. gal. 4.15 , 16 , 17. 1 cor. 1.12 3.3 . rom. 16.17 , 18. clem. ep. p. 2.19 . 2 tim. 3.4 , 5. mat. 7.14 . sacrar . privileg . s. francis. p. 6. gregor . de majorit . & obed. joh. 18.36 . gal. 16.7 . baron . an. 1076. sect. 31. sa aphor. v. clericus . ed. colon. conc. const. sess. 19. concil . lat. 5. sess. 10. conc. trid. sess. 25. c. 20. v. pontific . rom. in consecr . ep. antiq. brit. a.d. 1532. a.d. 1615. harangue faite de la part de la chambre ecclesiastique en celle du tiers estat . sur l'article du serment . par monsig . l'eminentiss . cardinal du perron l'an. 1615. k. iames defence of the right of kings , in the preface . rom. 13.5 . proceed . against the trait . eudaem . ioh. resp. ad ep. is. casaub. c. 8. p. 171. proceed . against the trait . becan . cont . angl. p. 127. history of the council of trent , l. 5. n. 392. apology for papists . reply to the answer , p. 203. advocate for liberty of conscience , p. 218. k. iames's works , p. 501. k. iames's works , p. 253. l. 7. vit. apol. widdringt . append . ad supplicat . p. 133. proceeding against the traitors . garnett's tryal . widdrington . appen . p. 150. psal. 124.6 , 7 , 8. the mischief of separation a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel, may 11. mdclxxx. being the first sunday in easter-term, before the lord mayor, &c. / by edw. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1680 approx. 100 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 34 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2007-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61568 wing s5604_variant estc r35206 13566898 ocm 13566898 100317 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61568) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100317) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 751:46, 1579:30, 1050:2) the mischief of separation a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel, may 11. mdclxxx. being the first sunday in easter-term, before the lord mayor, &c. / by edw. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [7], 59 p. printed for henry mortlock, at the phoenix in st. pauls church-yard, and at the white hart in westminster hall, london : 1680. reproductions of originals in:duke university library (reel 751:46), henry e. huntington library and art gallery (reel 1050:2), and university of illinois (urbana-champaign campus. library (reel 1579:30). copies are incorrectly identified on film at reel 751:46 (as s5606a) and reel 1050:2 (as s5604 variant). created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -philippians iii, 16 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2005-12 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2006-10 ali jakobson sampled and proofread 2006-10 ali jakobson text and markup reviewed and edited 2007-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion clayton mayor . martis quarto die maij 1680. annoque regis caroli secundi , angliae , &c. xxxii . this court doth earnestly desire the reverend d r. stillingfleet , dean of s t. pauls to print his sermon preached at the guild-hall chappel on sunday morning last , with what further he had prepared to deliver at that time . wagstaff . the mischief of separation . a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel , may ii. mdclxxx . being the first sunday in easter-term , before the lord mayor , &c. by edw. stillingfleet , d. d. dean of s t. paul's , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . london , printed for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in st. pauls church-yard , and at the white hart in westminster hall. 1680. to the right honourable s r. robert clayton lord mayor of the city of london . my lord , in obedience to your lordships order i now present to your hands , not only the sermon you lately heard , but those additions , which the straits of time would not then permit me to deliver . in all which , i was so far from intending to stir up the magistrates and judges to a persecution of dissenters , as some ill men have reported , that my only design was to prevent any occasion of it , by finding out a certain foundation for a lasting union among our selves . which is impossible to be attained , till men are convinced of the evil and danger of the present separation ; it being carried on by such principles as not only overthrow the present constitution of our church , but any other whatsoever . for , if it be lawful to separate on a pretence of greater purity , where there is an agreement in doctrine , and the substantial parts of worship , as is acknowledged in our case ; then a bare difference of opinion as to some circumstances of worship and the best constitution of churches will be sufficient ground to break communion and to set up new churches : which considering the great variety of mens fancies about these matters , is to make an infinite divisibility in churches , without any possible stop to farther separation . but , if after themselves are pleased with condescensions to their own minds , any think it fit that others should be tied up , notwithstanding their dissatisfaction ; the world will judge it too great partiality in them to think that none ought to separate but themselves , and that the same reason will hold against themselves in the judgement of others ; it thereby appearing , that it is not uniformity they dislike , but that they do not prescribe the terms of it . but , my lord , i intend not to argue the case of separation here , ( which is at large done in the following discourse ) but only to shew , how necessary it was in order to the laying a foundation for peace and unity , to have this matter throughly discussed . and if once the people be brought to understand and practise their duty as to communion with our churches , other difficulties which obstruct our union will be more easily removed . i have endeavoured to pursue my design in a way suitable to the nature of it , without sharp and provoking reflections on the persons of any ; which often set friends at distance , but never reconciled or convinced adversaries . however , i must expect the censures of such who either make our divisions , or make use of them for their own ends : but i am contented to be made a sacrifice , if thereby i might close up the breaches among us . god almighty bless this great city and your lordships care in the government of it ; and grant that in this our day , we may yet know the things that belong to our peace , and to the preservation of the true protestant religion among us . i am , my lord , your lordships most faithful and obedient servant , edward stillingfleet . phil. iii. 16. nevertheless , whereto we have already attained , let us walk by the same rule , let us mind the same things . although the christian religion doth lay the greatest obligations on mankind to peace and unity , by the strictest commands , the highest examples , and the most prevailing arguments ; yet so much have the passions and interests of men overswai'd the sense of their duty , that as nothing ought to be more in our wishes , so nothing seems more remote from our hopes , than the universal peace of the christian world. not that there is any impossibility in the thing , or any considerable difficulty , if all men were such christians as they ought to be ; but as long as men pursue their several factions and designs under the colour and pretence of zeal for religion ; if they did not find names and parties ready framed , that were suitable to their ends , the difference of their designs would make them . so that till mens corruptions are mortified , and their passions subdued to a greater degree than the world hath yet found them , it is in vain to expect a state of peace and tranquillity in the church . we need not go far from home for a sufficient evidence of this ; for although our differences are such as the wiser protestants abroad not only condemn but wonder at them ; yet it hath hitherto puzzled the wisest persons among us to find out wayes to compose them ; not so much from the distance of mens opinions and practices , as the strength of their prejudices and inclinations . what those divisions of reuben of old were , which caused such thoughts and searching of heart , we neither well understand , nor doth it much concern us : but the continuance , if not the widening , of these unhappy breaches among our selves do give just cause for many sad reflections . when neither the miseries we have felt , nor the calamities we fear ; neither the terrible judgements of god upon us , nor the unexpected deliverances vouchsafed to us , nor the common danger we are yet in , have abated mens heats , or allayed their passions , or made them more willing to unite with our established church and religion . but instead of that , some rather stand at a greater distance if not defiance , and seem to entertain themselves with hopes of new revolutions ; others raise fresh calumnies and reproaches , as well as revive and spread abroad old ones ; as though their business were to make our breaches wider , and to exasperate mens spirits against each other ; at such a time , when reason and common security , and above all our religion obligeth us to follow after the things that make for peace , and things wherewith one may edifie another ; and not such as tend to our mutual destruction ; as most certainly our divisions and animosities do . yet all parties pretend to a zeal for peace , so they may have it in their own way ; by which it appears that it is not peace they aim at but victory ; nor unity so much as having their own wills . those of the roman church make great boasts of their unity and the effectual means they have to preserve it ; but god deliver us from such cruel wayes of peace , and such destructive means of unity as treachery and assassinations , and an inquisition . their feet are swift to shed blood ; destruction and misery are in their wayes ; and the way of peace they have not known . but it were happy for us , if all those who agree in renouncing the errors and corruptions of the roman church , could as easily join together in the great duties of our common religion , that is , in our prayers , and praises , and sacraments , and all solemn acts of divine worship . for this would not only take off the reproach of our adversaries , who continually upbraid us with our schisms and separations , but it would mightily tend to abate mens passions , and to remove their prejudices , and to dispose their inclinations , and thereby lay a foundation for a blessed union among our selves . which would frustrate the great design of our enemies upon us , who expect to see that religion destroyed by our own folly , which they could not otherwise hope to accomplish by their utmost care and endeavour . and we may justly hope for a greater blessing of god upon us , when we offer up our joint prayers and devotions to him , lifting up , as st. paul speaks , holy hands without wrath and disputing . this is therefore a thing of so great consequence to our peace and union , that tends so much to the honour of god , and our common safety and preservation ; that no person who hath any real concernment for these things , can deny it to be not only just and fitting , but in our circumstances necessary to be done , if it can be made appear to be lawful , or that they can do it with a good conscience . and this is the subject i design to speak to at this time ; and for that purpose have made choise of these words of the apostle , nevertheless , whereto we have already attained , let us walk by the same rule , let us mind the same things . for our better understanding the full scope and meaning of the apostle in these words , we are to consider , that an unhappy schism , or wilful breach of the churches unity , had begun in the apostles times , upon the difference that arose concerning the necessity of keeping the law of moses . and that which made the schism the more dangerous , was that the first beginners of it pretended a commission from the apostles themselves at ierusalem , and were extreamly busie and industrious to gain and keep up a party to themselves in the most flourishing churches planted by the apostles . at antioch they bore so great a sway , that st. peter himself complied with them , and not only other iews , but barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation . insomuch that had it not been for the courage and resolution of st. paul , all the gentile christians had been either forced to a compliance with the jews , or to a perpetual schism , ( of which st. peter had been in probability the head , and not of the churches unity if st. paul had not vigorously opposed so dangerous a compliance ) but finding so good success in his endeavours at antioch , he pursues those false apostles , who made it their business to divide and separate the christians from each others communion through all the churches , where they had , or were like to make any great impression . he writes his epistle to the galatians purposely against them ; he warns the christians at rome of them . now i beseech you brethren mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned , and avoid them . and because he had understood they had been busie at philippi to make a party there too , therefore the apostle to prevent their designs , makes use of this following method . 1. he exhorts the philippians to an unanimous and constant resolution , in holding fast to the faith of the gospel , in spight of all the threats and malice of their enemies : that ye stand fast in one spirit , with one mind , striving together for the faith of the gospel ; and in nothing terrified by your adversaries . if once the fears of troubles and persecutions make men afraid to own and maintain their religion ; it will be an easie matter for their enemies first to divide , and then to subdue them . but their courage and unanimity in a good cause baffles the attempts of the most daring adversaries , and makes them willing to retreat when they see they can neither disunite them nor make them afraid . 2. he beseeches them in the most vehement and affectionate manner , not to give way to any differences or divisions among them , if there be therefore any consolation in christ , if any comfort of love , if any fellowship of the spirit , if any bowels and mercies ; fulfil ye my joy , that ye be like minded , having the same love ; being of one accord , of one mind . as though he had said unto them , i have seen the miserable effects of divisions in other churches already ; how our religion hath been reproached , the gospel hindred , and the cross of christ rendred of little or no effect by reason of them ; let me therefore intreat you , if you have any regard to the peace and welfare of your own souls ; if you have any sense of your duty you owe to one another as members of the same body ; if you have any tenderness or pity towards me , avoid the first tendencies to any breaches among you ; entertain no unjust suspicions or jealousies of each other , shew all the kindness you are able to your fellow members ; live as those that are acted by the same soul ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) carry on the same design ; and as much as possible prevent any differences in opinions amongst you . 3. he warns them and gives cautious against some persons from whom their greatest danger was , viz. such as pretended a mighty zeal for the law : and very well understanding the mischief of their designs under their specious pretences , he bestows very severe characters upon them , vers . 2. beware of dogs , beware of evil workers , beware of the concision . all which characters relate to the breaches and divisions which they made in the christian churches ; which like dogs they did tear in pieces , and thereby did unspeakable mischief , and so were evil workers ; and by the concision st. chrysostom understands such a cutting in pieces as tends to the destruction of a thing ; and therefore , saith he , the apostle called them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : because they endeavoured to cut in pieces , and thereby to destroy the church of god. but lest they should give out that st. paul spoke this out of a particular pique he had taken up against the law of moses , he declares that as to the spiritual intention and design of the law it was accomplished in christians , vers . 3. for we are the circumcision which worship god in the spirit , and rejoyce in christ iesus , and have no confidence in the flesh . and for his own part , he had as much reason to glory in legal priviledges as any of them all , vers . 4 , 5 , 6. but the excellency of the gospel of christ had so prevailed upon his mind , that he now despised the things he valued before , and made it his whole business to attain to the glorious reward which this religion promiseth . this he pursues from vers . 7 , to vers . 15. 4. having done this , he perswades all good christians to do as he did , vers . 15. let us therefore , as many as be perfect , be thus minded . but because many disputes and differences as to opinion and practice might happen among them , he therefore lays down two rules for them to govern themselves by . 1. if any happen'd to differ from the body of christians they lived with , they should do it with great modesty and humility , not breaking out into factions and divisions , but waiting for farther information , which they may expect that god will give upon a diligent and sober use of the best means ; and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded , god shall reveal even this unto you . by leaving them to gods immediate care for farther illumination , he doth not bid them depend upon extraordinary revelation ; but requires them to wait upon god in his own way , without proceeding with the false apostles to the wayes of faction and separation , and in the mean time to go as far as they could . 2. for those who were come to a firmness and settlement of judgement upon the christian principles , he charges them by all means to preserve unity and peace among themselves . whereto we have already attained , let us walk by the same rule , let us mind the same things . wherein the apostle supposes two things . i. the necessity of one fixed and certain rule , notwithstanding the different attainments among christians . nevertheless , whereto we have already attained , let us walk by the same rule . ii. the duty and obligation which lies upon the best christians to observe it . he doth not speak to the ignorant and unthinking multitude ; not to the licentious rabble , nor to the carnal and worldly church ; which some think are only desirous of uniformity ; but to the very best christians ; to those who had got the start of others ( as the words here signifie ) that they would be an example of peace and unity to their brethren . i. the necessity of one fixed and certain rule , notwithstanding the different attainments , of christians . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which phrase seems to be a continuation of the former allusion to a race . for as eustathius observes , the first thing the greeks were wont to do as to their exercises , was to circumscribe the bounds within which they were to be performed . that which fixed and determined these limits was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the greeks , and regula and lineae by the latins : thence transilire lineas in cicero is to commit a fault , to break the bounds within which we are confined . all the question is , what the apostle means by this rule , whether only a rule of charity and mutual forbearance , with a liberty of different practice ; or such a rule which limits and dermines the manner of practice . it cannot be the former , because that is the case , the apostle had spoken to just before . if in any thing ye be otherwise minded ; therefore now subjoining this with respect to those who had gone beyond them , he doth imply such an agreement and uniformity of practice as doth lie in observing the same standing rule . for which we must consider , that they understood already what orders and directions he had given them when a church was first formed among them ; and therefore when the apostle mentions a rule without declaring what it was , we have reason to believe , it was such a rule which they very well knew , which he had given to them before . so we find elsewhere the apostle refers to such rules of government and order , which he had given to other churches , and were already received and practised among them . for the apostles did not write their epistles for the founding of churches , but they were already in being ; only they took notice of any disorders among them , and reformed abuses , and left some things to their own directions , when they should come among them . and the rest will i set in order when i come . as the lord hath called every one , so let him walk ; and so ordain i in all the churches . which shews that the apostles did not leave all persons to act as they judged fit , but did make rules determining their practice , and obliging them to uniformity therein . for might not men pretend that these were not things in themselves necessary , and might be scrupled by some persons , and therefore were not fit to be imposed upon any ? but i do not find that the apostles on this account did forbear giving rules in such cases , and to oblige christians to observe them ; and that not on the meer authority of apostles , but as governours of churches , whose business it is to take care of the welfare and preservation of them . there are many things which seem very little and inconsiderable in themselves , whose consequence and tendency is very great ; and the wisdom of governours lies in preventing the danger of little things , and keeping the zeal of well-meaning persons within its due bounds . for , those who are engaged below in the valley , fighting in small parties , and pursuing their advantages , do run into their enemies camp before they are aware of it , may receive an unexpected check from their commanders in chief , who from the higher ground espie the hazard they are in by their over-forwardness , and the arts which their enemies use in drawing them into little companies to fight separately , and the danger they may thereby bring upon the whole army ; and therefore send them a peremptory order to give over fighting by themselves and make good their retreat into the body of the army : they wonder , they complain , they think themselves hardly used ; but no understanding man blames their generals who regard their safety more than they do themselves , and know the allowing them the liberty they desire , would endanger the destruction of them all . the wisdom and conduct of governours , is quite another thing from the zeal and courage of inferiour persons ; who knowing their own resolution and integrity , think much to be controlled ; but those who stand upon higher ground and see further than they can do , must be allowed a better capacity of judging what makes for the safety of the whole , than they can have : and such things which they look on in themselves , and therefore think them mean and trifling , the other look upon them in their consequence , and the influence they may have upon the publick safety . it were extreamly desirable that all good and useful men should enjoy as much satisfaction as might be , but if it cannot be attained without running great hazards of unsettling all , it is then to be considered , whether the general safety or some mens particular satisfaction be the more desirable . and this is that , which the example of the apostles themselves gives us reason to consider , for although there were many doubts and scruples in their times about several rites and customes , yet the apostles did give rules in such cases , and bind christians to observe them ; as we find in that famous decree made upon great deliberation , in a council of the apostles at ierusalem ; wherein they determined those things which they knew were then scrupled , and continued so to be afterwards , whereever the judaizing christians prevailed . but notwithstanding all their dissatisfaction , the apostles continued the same rule ; and s. paul here requires the most forward christians to mind their rule , and to preserve peace and unity among themselves . but doth not s. paul in the 14th chapter of his epistle to the romans lay down quite another rule , viz. only of mutual forbearance in such cases , where men are unsatisfied in conscience ? i answer , that the apostle did act like a prudent governour , and in such a manner , as he thought , did most tend to the propagation of the gospel , and the good of particular churches . in some churches that consisted most of iews , as the church of rome at this time did , and where they did not impose the necessity of keeping the law on the gentile christians ( as we do not find they did at rome ) the apostle was willing to have the law buried as decently , and with as little noise as might be ; and therefore in this case , he perswades both parties to forbearance and charity , in avoiding the judging and censuring one another , since they had an equal regard to the honour of god in what they did . but in those churches , where the false apostles made use of this pretence , of the levitical law being still in force , to divide the churches , and to separate the communion of christians ; there the apostle bids them beware of them , and their practices ; as being of a dangerous and pernicious consequence . so that the preserving the peace of the church , and preventing separation was the great measure , according to which , the apostle gave his directions ; and that makes him so much insist on this advice to the philippians , that whatever their attainments in christianity were , they should walk by the same rule , and mind the same things . ii. we take notice of the duty and obligation that lies upon the best christians , to walk by the same rule , to mind the same things . from whence arise two very considerable enquiries . 1. how far the obligation doth extend to comply with an established rule , and to preserve the peace of the church we live in ? 2. what is to be done , if men cannot come up to that rule ? for the apostle speaks only of such as have attained so far ; whereto we have already attained , let us walk by the same rule . 1. how far the obligation doth extend to comply with an established rule , and to preserve the peace of the church we live in ? this i think the more necessary to be spoken to , because i cannot perswade my self that so many scrupulous and conscientious men as are at this day among us would live so many years in a known sin ; i. e. in a state of separation from the communion of a church , which in conscience they thought themselves obliged to communicate with . it must be certainly some great mistake in their judgements must lead them to this ; ( for i am by no means willing to impute it to passion and evil designs ) and out of the hearty desire i have , if possible , to give satisfaction in this matter , i shall endeavour to search to the bottom of this dangerous mistake , to which we owe so much of our present distractions and fears . but for the better preventing all mis-understanding the design of my discourse , i desire it may be considered 1. that i speak not of the separation or distinct communion of whole churches from each other ; which according to the scripture , antiquity and reason , have a just right and power to govern and reform themselves . by whole churches , i mean , the churches of such nations , which upon the decay of the roman empire , resumed their just right of government to themselves , and upon their owning christianity , incorporated into one christian society , under the same common ties and rules of order and government . such as the church of macedonia would have been , if from being a roman province it had become a christian kingdom , and the churches of thessalonica , philippi and the rest had united together . and so the several churches of the lydian or proconsular asia , if they had been united in one kingdom , and governed by the same authority , under the same rules , might have been truly called the lydian church . just as several families uniting make one kingdom , which at first had a distinct and independent power , but it would make strange confusion in the world to reduce kingdoms back again to families , because at first they were made up of them . thus national churches are national societies of christians , under the same laws of government and rules of worship . for the true notion of a church is no more than of a society of men united together for their order and government according to the rules of the christian religion . and it is a great mistake , to make the notion of a church barely to relate to acts of worship ; and consequently that the adequate notion of a church , is an assembly for divine worship ; by which means they appropriate the name of churches to particular congregations . whereas , if this held true , the church must be dissolved assoon as the congregation is broken up ; but if they retain the nature of a church , when they do not meet together for worship , then there is some other bond that unites them ; and whatever that is , it constitutes the church . and if there be one catholick church consisting of multitudes of particular churches consenting in one faith ; then why may there not be one national church from the consent in the same articles of religion , and the same rules of government and order of worship ? nay , if it be mutual consent and agreement which makes a church , then why may not national societies agreeing together in the same faith , and under the same government and discipline , be as truly and properly a church , as any particular congregation ? for , is not the kingdom of france as truly a kingdom consisting of so many provinces ; as the kingdom of ivetot once was in normandy , which consisted of a very small territory ? among the athenians , from whom the use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came into the christian church , it was taken for such an assembly , which had the power of governing and determining matters of religion as well as the affairs of state. for the senate of 500 being distributed into fifties according to the number of the tribes , which succeeded by course through the year ; and was then called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; every one of these had 4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 regular assemblies ; in the last of which , an account of the sacrifices was taken and of other matters which concerned religion ; as in the comitia calata at rome . from whence we may observe , that it was not the meeting of one of the single tribes , was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but the general meeting of the magistrates of the whole city and the people together . and in this sense i shall shew afterwards , the word was used in the first ages of the christian church , as it comprehended the ecclesiastical governours and the people of whole cities ; and why many of these cities being united under one civil government , and the same rules of religion should not be called one national church , i cannot understand . which makes me wonder at those who say they cannot tell what we mean by the church of england ; in short we mean , that society of christian people which in this nation are united under the same profession of faith , the same laws of government , and rules of divine worship . and every church thus constituted , we do assert to have a just right of governing it self , and of reforming errors in doctrine and corruptions in worship . on which ground , we are acquitted from the imputation of schism in the separation from the roman church , for we only resume our just rights , as the brittish nation did , as to civil government , upon the ruine of the roman empire . 2. i do not intend to speak of the terms upon which persons are to be admitted among us to the exercise of the function of the ministry ; but of the terms of lay-communion ; i. e. those which are necessary for all persons to joyn in our prayers and sacraments and other offices of divine worship . i will not say , there hath been a great deal of art used to confound these two , ( and it is easie to discern to what purpose it is ; ) but i dare say , the peoples not understanding the difference of these two cases hath been a great occasion of the present separation . for in the judgement of some of the most impartial men of the dissenters at this day , although they think the case of the ministers very hard on the account of subscriptions and declarations required of them ; yet they confess very little is to be said on the behalf of the people , from whom none of those things are required . so that the people are condemned in their separation , by their own teachers ; but how they can preach lawfully to a people who commit a fault in hearing them , i do not understand . 3. i do not confound bare suspending communion in some particular rites , which persons do modestly scruple , and using it in what they judge to be lawful ; with either total , or at least ordinary forbearance of communion in what they judge to be lawful ; and proceeding to the forming of separate congregations , i. e. under other teachers , and by other rules than what the established religion allows . and this is the present case of separation which i intend to consider , and to make the sinfulness and mischief of it appear . but that i may do it more convincingly , i will not make the difference wider than it is ; but lay down impartially the state of the present controversie between us and our dissenting brethren , about communion with our churches . 1. they unanimously confess they find no fault with the doctrine of our church , and can freely subscribe to all the doctrinal articles ; nay they profess greater zeal for many of them , than , say they , some of our own preachers do . well then ! the case is vastly different as to their separation from us , and our separation from the church of rome ; for we declare , if there were nothing else amiss among them , their doctrines are such , as we can never give our assent to . 2. * they generally yield , that our parochial churches are true churches ; and it is with these their communion is required . they do not deny that we have all the essentials of true churches , true doctrine , true sacraments , and an implicite covenant between pastors and people . and some of the most eminent of the congregational way have declared ; that they look upon it as an unjust calumny cast upon them , that they look on our churches as no true churches . 3. many of them declare , that they hold communion with our churches to be lawful . yea we are told in print , by one then present , that a. d. 1663. divers of their preachers in london met to consider , how far it was lawful , or their duty to communicate with the parish-churches where they lived , in the liturgy and sacraments ; and that the relator brought in twenty reasons to prove that it is a duty to some to join with some parish-churches three times a year in the lords supper ; after he had not only proved it lawful to use a form of prayer , and to join in the use of our liturgy , but in the participation of the sacrament with us ; and no one of the brethren , he adds , seemed to dissent , but to take the reasons to be valid . such another meeting , we are told , they had after the plague and fire , at which they agreed that communion with our churches was in it self lawful and good . who could have imagined otherwise , than that after the weight of so many reasons , and such a general consent among them , they should have all joyned with us in what themselves judged to be lawful , and in many cases a duty ? but instead of this , we have rather since that time found them more inclinable to courses of separation , filling the people with greater prejudices against our communion , and gathering them into fixed and separate congregations ; which have proceeded to the choice of new pastors upon the death of old ones ; and except some very few , scarce any , either of their preachers or people here , come ordinarily to the publick congregations . and this is that which at present we lament as a thing which unavoidably tends to our common ruine , if not in time prevented ; for by this means the hearts of the people are alienated from each other , who apprehend the differences to be much greater than their teachers will allow , when they are put to declare their minds ; and our common enemies take as much advantage from our differences , as if they were really far greater than they are . but you may ask , what then are the grounds of the present separation ? for that there is such a thing is discernible by all , but what the reasons of it are is hard to understand after these concessions ; yet it is not conceivable that conscientious men can in such a juncture of affairs persist in so obstinate and destructive a course of separation , unless they had something at last fit to answer the twenty reasons of their own brethren against it ? i have endeavoured to give my self satisfaction in a matter of so great moment to the peace and preservation of this church , and consequently of the protestant religion among us ; which i never expect to see survive the destruction of the church of england . and the utmost i can find in the best writers of the several parties , amounts to these two things . 1. that although they are in a state of separation from our church , yet this separation is no sin . 2. that a state of separation would be a sin , but notwithstanding their meeting in different places , yet they are not in a state of separation . and herein lies the whole strength of the several pleas at this day made use of to justifie the separate congregations : both which i shall now examine . 1. some plead , that it is true they have distinct and separate communions from us , but it is no sin , or culpable separation so to have . for , say they , our lord christ instituted only congregational churches , or particular assemblies for divine worship , which having the sole church power in themselves , they are under no obligation of communion with other churches , but only to preserve peace and charity with them . and to this doctrine , others of late approach so near , that they tell us , that to devise new species of churches ( beyond parochial or congregational ) without gods authority , and to impose them on the world ( yea in his name ) and call all dissenters schismaticks , is a far worse usurpation , than to make or impose new ceremonies or liturgies . which must suppose congregational churches to be so much the institution of christ , that any other constitution above these is both unlawful and insupportable . which is more than the independent brethren themselves do assert . but to clear the practice of separation from being a sin on this account , two things are necessary to be done . 1. to prove that a christian hath no obligation to external communion beyond a congregational church . 2. that it is lawful to break off communion with other churches , to set up a particular independent church . 1. that a christian hath no obligation to external communion beyond a particular congregational church . they do not deny , that men by baptism are admitted into the catholick visible church as members of it ; and that there ought to be a sort of communion by mutual love among all that belong to this body : and to do them right , they declare that they look upon the church of england , or the generality of the nation professing christianity , to be as sound and healthful a part of the catholick church , as any in the world. but then they say , communion in ordinances must be only in such churches as christ himself instituted by unalterable rules , which were only particular and congregational churches . granting this to be true , how doth it hence appear not to be a sin to separate from our parochial churches ; which according to their own concessions have all the essentials of true churches ? and what ground can they have to separate and divide those churches , which for all that we can see , are of the same nature with the churches planted by the apostles at corinth , philippi or thessalonica ? but i must needs say further , i have never yet seen any tolerable proof , that the churches planted by the apostles were limited to congregations . it is possible , at first , there might be no more christians in one city than could meet in one assembly for worship ; but where doth it appear , that when they multiplied into more congregations , they did make new and distinct churches , under new officers with a separate power of government ? of this , i am well assured , there is no mark or footstep in the new testament , or the whole history of the primitive church . i do not think it will appear credible to any considerate man , that the 5000 christians in the church of ierusalem made one stated and fixed congregation for divine worship ; not if we make all the allowances for strangers which can be desired : but if this were granted , where are the unalterable rules that assoon as the company became too great for one particular assembly , they must become a new church under peculiar officers and an independent authority ? it is very strange , that those who contend so much for the scriptures being a perfect rule of all things pertaining to worship and discipline , should be able to produce nothing in so necessary a point . if that of which we read the clearest instances in scripture , must be the standard of all future ages , much more might be said for limiting churches to private families , than to particular congregations . for , do we not read of the church that was in the house of priscilla and aquila at rome ; of the church that was in the house of nymphas at colosse ; and in the house of philemon at laodicea ? why then should not churches be reduced to particular families , when by that means they may fully enjoy the liberty of their consciences , and avoid the scandal of breaking the laws ? but if , notwithstanding such plain examples , men will extend churches to congregations of many families ; why may not others extend churches to those societies which consist of many congregations ? especially considering , that the apostles when they instituted churches , did appoint such officers in them , as had not barely a respect to those already converted , but to as many as by their means should be added to the church ; as clemens affirms in his epistle ; the apostles , saith he , went about in cities and countries preaching the gospel ; and appointed their first-fruits , having made a spiritual trial of them , for bishops and deacons , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of those who were to believe . from hence the number of converts were looked on as an accession to the original church , and were under the care and government of the bishop and presbyters , who were first settled there . for although when the churches increased , the occasional meetings were frequent in several places ; yet still there was but one church , and one altar , and one baptistry , and one bishop , with many presbyters assisting him . and this is so very plain in antiquity , as to the churches planted by the apostles themselves in several parts , that none but a great stranger to the history of the church can ever call it in question . i am sure calvin , a person of great and deserved reputation among our brethren , looks upon this as a matter out of dispute among learned men , that a church did not only take in the christians of a whole city , but of the adjacent country too : and the contrary opinion is a very novel and late fancy of some among us , and hath not age enough to plead a prescription . it is true , after some time in the greater cities , they had distinct places allotted , and presbyters fixed among them ; and such allotments were called titles at rome , and laurae at alexandria , and parishes in other places ; but these were never thought then to be new churches , or to have any independent government in themselves ; but were all in subjection to the bishop and his college of presbyters , of which multitudes of examples might be brought from most authentick testimonies of antiquity ; if a thing so evident needed any proof at all . and yet this distribution even in cities was so uncommon in those elder times , that epiphanius takes notice of it as an extraordinary thing at alexandria ; and therefore it is probably supposed there was no such thing in all the cities of creet in his time . and if we look over the antient canons of the church , we shall find two things very plain in them , ( 1. ) that the notion of a church was the same with that of a diocese ; or such a number of christians as were under the inspection of a bishop . ( 2. ) that those presbyters who rejected the authority of their bishop , or affected separate meetings , where no fault could be found with the doctrine of a church , were condemned of schism . so the followers of eustathius sebastenus , who withdrew from the publick congregations on pretence of greater sanctity and purity , in paphlagonia , were condemned by the council at gangrae ; so were those who separated from their bishops , though otherwise never so orthodox , by the council at constantinople , and the council at carthage ; wherein before st. cyprian had so justly complained of the schism of felicissimus and his brethren , who on pretence of some disorders in the church of carthage had withdrawn to the mountains ; and there laid the foundation of the novatian schism . but when false doctrine was imposed on churches , as by the arian bishops at antioch , then the people were excused in their separation ; so at rome when felix was made bishop ; and at sirmium when photinus published his heresie ; but i do not remember one instance in antiquity , wherein separation from orthodox bishops and setting up meetings without their authority and against their consent , was acquitted from the sin of schism . indeed some bishops have sometimes refused communion with others upon great misdemeanors ; as theognostus and st. martin with the ithacian party on the account of the death of priscillian ; but this doth not at all reach to the case of presbyters separating from bishops , with whom they agree in the same faith. the followers of st. chrysostom , did , i confess , continue their separate meetings after his banishment , and the coming in of arsacius : but although they withdrew in his time , being unsatisfied in the manner of his choice ; yet when atticus restored the name of st. chrysostom to the diptychs of the church , they returned to communion with their bishop , as st. chrysostom himself advised them ( as appears by palladius ) which is far from justifying the wilfull separation of presbyters and people from the communion of their bishops , when they do agree in the same faith. 2. but suppose the first churches were barely congregational , by reason of the small number of believers at that time , yet what obligation lies upon us to disturb the peace of the church we live in to reduce churches to their infant-state ? they do not think it necessary to reduce the first community of goods , which was far more certainly practised , than congregational churches ; they do not think it necessary to wash one anothers feet , although christ did it , and bad his disciples do as he did : they believe that the first civil government was appointed by god himself over families ; do they therefore think themselves bound to overthrow kingdoms to bring things back to their first institution ? if not , why shall the peace of the church be in so much worse a condition than that of the civil-state ? it is very uncertain whether the primitive form were such as they fancy ; if it were , it is more uncertain whether it were not so from the circumstances of the times , than from any institution of christ ; but it is most certainly our duty to preserve peace and unity among christians ; and it is impossible so to do if men break all orders in pieces for the fancy they have taken up of a primitive platform . it is a great fault among some who pretend to great niceness in some positive duties , that they have so little regard to comparative duties : for that which may be a duty in one case , when it comes to thwart a greater duty , may be none . this doctrine we learn from our blessed saviour in the case of the obligation of the sabbath ; which he makes to yield to duties of mercy . and can we think that a duty lying upon us , which in our circumstances makes a far greater duty impracticable ? is there any thing christ and his apostles have charged more upon the consciences of all christians , than studying to preserve peace and unity among christians ? this is that we must follow after , even when it seems to fly from us ; this is that , we must apply our minds to , and think it our honour to promote ; this is that which the most perfect christians are the most zealous for ; this is that , for the sake of which we are commanded to practise meekness , humility , patience , self-denial and submission to governours . and after all this , can we imagine the attaining of such an end should depend upon mens conjectures , whether five thousand christians in times of persecution could make one assembly for worship ? or whether all the christians in ephesus or corinth made but one congregation ? on what terms can we ever hope for peace in the church , if such notions as these be ground enough to disturb it ? what stop can be put to schisms and separations , if such pretences as these be sufficient to justifie them ? men may please themselves in talking of preserving peace and love under separate communions ; but our own sad experience shews the contrary ; for as nothing tends more to unite mens hearts than joyning together in the same prayers and sacraments ; so nothing doth more alienate mens affections , than withdrawing from each other into separate congregations . which tempts some to spiritual pride and scorn and contempt of others , as of a more carnal and worldly church than themselves ; and provokes others to lay open the follies , and indiscretions and immoralities of those who pretend to so much purity and spirituality above their brethren . 2. others confess , that to live in a state of separation from such churches , as many at least of ours are , were a sin ; for they say , that causeless renouncing communion with true churches is schism , especially if it be joyned with setting up anti-churches unwarrantably against them ; but this they deny that they do , although they preach when and where it is forbidden by law ; and worship god , and administer sacraments by other rules and after a different manner than what our church requires . this is not dealing with us with that fairness and ingenuity which our former brethren used ; for they avow the fact of separation , but deny it to be sinful ; these owning it to be sinful , have no other refuge left but to deny the fact , which is evident to all persons . for do they not do the very same things and in the same manner , that the others do ; how comes it then to be separation in some and not in others ? they are very unwilling to confess a separation , because they have formerly condemned it with great severity ; and yet they do the same things for which they charged others as guilty of a sinful separation . for , the assembly of divines urged their dissenting brethren to comply with their rules of church-government , and charged them with schism if they did it not ; whereas they only desired to enjoy such liberty as to their separate congregations , as is now pleaded for by our dissenting brethren . this , say they , would give countenance to a perpetual schism and division in the church , still drawing away some from the churches under the rule , which also would breed irritations between the parties ; and would introduce all manner of confusion . and they thougt it a very unreasonable thing for them to desire distinct and separated congregations , as to those parts of worship where they could joyn in communion with them : and they thought no person was to be indulged as to any error or scruple of conscience ; but with this proviso , that in all other parts of worship they joyn with the congregation wherein they live ; and be under the government to be established . to this the dissenting brethren answered , that such a variation , or forbearance could neither be a schism , nor endanger it ; and that the great cause of schism hath been a strict obligation of all to uniformity ; that as long as in their separate congregations they did practise most of the same things , and the most substantial in their rule , it could not be called a total separation , especially considering , that they professed their churches to be true churches ; and that they had occasional communion with them , which is the very same plea made use of at this day among us . to which the assemblies party smartly replied , that since they acknowledged their churches to be so true , that they could occasionally join in all acts of worship , they conceived they were bound to act with them in joint communion by one common rule , and not by different rules and in separated congregations . and they add , that to leave all ordinary communion in any church with dislike , when opposition or offence offers it self , is to separate from such a church in the scripture sense ; such separation was not in being in the apostles times , unless it were used by false teachers ; all who professed christianity held communion together , as in one church , notwithstanding differences of iudgement , or corruptions in practice ; and that , if they can hold occasional communion without sin , they know no reason why it may not be ordinary without sin too , and then separation would be needless . to which they subjoin these remarkable words , which i heartily wish our brethren at this day would think seriously upon , to separate from those churches ordinarily and visibly with whom occasionally you may joyn without sin , seemth to be a most unjust separation . so that whatever false colours and pretences some men make use of to justifie their present practice , if the judgement of their own brethren may be taken upon the most weighty debate , and most serious deliberation , it is no better than plain and downright separation . and i must needs say , i never saw any cause more weakly defended , no , not that of polygamy and anabaptism , than that of those , who allow it to be lawful to join in communion with us , and yet go about to vindicate the separate meetings among us , from the guilt of a sinful separation . for although they allow our churches to be true , and that it is lawful to communicate with them , which is the most plausible plea they have , this is so far from extenuating , that it doth aggravate the fault ; for as the brethren of the assembly said , though they do not pronounce an affirmative iudgement against us ; yet the very separating is a tacit and practical condemning of our churches , if not as false , yet as impure . but whatever may be said as to other pleas for their present practices , my text seems to afford the strongest of all , viz. that men are to be pressed to go no farther than they have already attained , and not to be strained up to an uniformity beyond the dictates of their consciences , but to be let alone , as the apostle directs in the foregoing verse , if any one be otherwise minded , he must be left to god , and that manifestation of his will , which he will be pleased to give him . the clearing of this will give a full answer to the second enquiry , viz. 2. what is to be done , if men cannot come up to the rule prescribed . to this therefore i answer in these particulars . 1. this can never justifie men in not doing what they lawfully may do . for this rule of the apostle makes communion necessary , as far as it is lawful ; and that upon the account of the general obligation lying upon all christians to do what in them lies for preservation of the peace of the church . therefore as far as ye have attained walk by the same rule , do the same things ; which words , saith cajetan , the apostle subjoyns to the former , left the persons he there speaks to should think themselves excused from going as far as they can as to the same rule . which plainly shews that men are bound in conscience to go as far as they can ; and i cannot see how it is consistent with that tenderness of conscience which our brethren pretend to , for so many of them to live so many years in a neglect of that communion with our church , which themselves judge to be lawful . i dare say , if most of the preachers at this day in the separate meetings were soberly asked their judgements , whether it were lawful for the people to joyn with us in the publick assemblies , they would not deny it ; and yet the people that frequent them , generally judge otherwise . for it is not to be supposed , that faction among them should so commonly prevail beyond interest ; and therefore if they thought it were lawful for them to comply with the laws , they would do it . but why then is this kept up as such a mighty secret in the breasts of their teachers ? why do they not preach it to them in their congregations ? is it for fear , they should have none left to preach to ? that is not to be imagined of mortified and conscientious men . is it lest they should seem to condemn themselves , while they preach against separation in a separate congregation ? this , i confess , looks oddly , and the tenderness of a mans mind in such a case , may out of meer shamefacedness keep him from declaring a truth which flies in his face , while he speaks it . is it that they fear the reproaches of the people ? which some few of the most eminent persons among them , have found they must undergo if they touch upon this subject ( for i know not how it comes to pass , that the most godly people among them , can the least endure to be told of their faults . ) but is it not as plainly written by s. paul , if i yet please men i should not be the servant of christ ; as woe be unto me if i preach not the gospel ? if they therefore would acquit themselves like honest and conscientious men , let them tell the people plainly that they look on our churches as true churches , and that they may lawfully communicate with us in prayers and sacraments ; and i do not question but in time , if they find it lawful , they will judge it to be their duty . for it is the apostles command here , whereto we have already attained let us walk by the same rule , let us mind the same things . 2. if the bare dissatisfaction of mens consciences do justifie the lawfulness of separation , and breaking an established rule , it were to little purpose to make any rule at all . because it is impossible to make any , which ignorant and injudicious men shall not apprehend to be in some thing or other against the dictates of their consciences . but because what we say may not weigh so much with them in this matter , as what was said on this occasion by their own brethren in the assembly , i shall give an account of their iudgement in this matter . the dissenting brethren were not so much wantting to their cause , as not to plead tenderness of conscience with as much advantage and earnestness as any men now can do it . to which they answer , 1. that though tenderness of conscience may justifie non-communion in the thing scrupled , yet it can never justifie separation . we much doubt , say they , whether such tenderness of conscience , as ariseth out of an opinion , cui potest subesse falsum , ( which may be false ) when the conscience is so tender , that it may be withal an erring conscience , can be a sufficient ground to justifie such a material separation , as our brethren plead for ; for though it may bind , to forbear or suspend the act of communion in that particular wherein men conceive they cannot hold communion without sin ( nothing being to be done contrary unto conscience ) yet it doth not bind to follow such a positive prescript as possibly may be divers from the will and counsel of god , of which kind we conceive this of gathering separated churches out of other true churches to be one . 2. that it is endless to hope to give satisfation to erring consciences . the grounds , say they , upon which this separation is desired , are such upon which all other possible scruples which erring consciences may in any other cases be subject unto , may claim the priviledge of a like indulgence . and so this toleration being the first , shall indeed but lay the foundation and open the gap , whereat as many divisions in the church , as there may be scruples in the minds of men , shall upon the self same equity be let in . and again , that this will make way for infinite divisions and sub-divisions ; and give countenance to a perpetual schism , and division in the church . 3. that scruple of conscience is no protection against schism ; no cause of separating ; nor doth it take off causeless separation from being schism , which may arise from errors of conscience as well as carnal and corrupt reasons ; and therefore they conceive the causes of separation must be shewn to be such as ex natura rei will bear it out . 4. that the apostles notwithstanding the differences of mens iudgements did prescribe rules of uniformity . for , say they , they suppressed the contentions of men by the custome of the churches of god , 1 cor. 11. 16. and ordain the same practice in all the churches , notwithstanding our brethrens distinction of difference of light . 1. cor. 7. 17. and did not the apostles bind the burden of some necessary things on the churches , albeit there were in those churches gradual differences of light ? 5. that the apostle by this rule in the text , did not intend to allow brethren who agree in all substantials of faith and worship , to separate from one another , in those very substantials wherein they agree . is this , say they , to walk by the same rule , and to mind the same things , to separate from churches in those very things wherein we agree with them ? we desire no more of them than we are confident was practised by the saints at philippi , namely to hold practical communion in things wherein they doctrinally agree . 6. that there is a great deal of difference between tyranny over mens consciences , and rules of uniformity . for the dissenting brethren charged the assembly , with setting up an uniformity for uniformities sake , i. e. affecting uniformity so much , as not to regard mens consciences ; and without respect had to the varieties of light ▪ in matters of a lesser nature ; which , say they , will prove a perfect tyranny , and it is in effect to stretch a low man to the same length with a taller , or to cut a tall man to the stature of one that is low , for uniformities sake . to which the others answer , that they do not desire uniformity for the sake of tyranny , but only for order , and order for edification . but for ought they could perceive , any thing that is one must be judged the foundation of tyranny ( which are their own words . ) as to variety of light , they desired their brethren to answer them in this one thing , whether some must be denied liberty of their conscience in matter of practice , or none ? if none , then , say they , we must renounce our covenant and let in prelacy again ; and all others ways ; if a denial of liberty unto some may be just , then uniformity may be settled notwithstanding variety of lights , without any tyranny at all . as to their similitude , they grant it to be pretty and plausible ; but such arguments are popular and inartificial , having more of flourish than substance in them . for did not they endeavour to raise lower churches to a greater height ? would they permit other church-governments if it were in their power , because men must not for uniformities sake be pared or stretched to the measure of other men ? would they endure the lower suckers at the root of their tree to grow till they had killed the tree it self ? ad populum phaleras . from whence we see the church of england's endeavour after uniformity is acquitted from tyranny over the consciences of men by the judgement of the most learned of the assembly of divines ; for such we do not question they chose to manage this debate , upon which the turn of their whole affairs depended . 3. a wilful error or mistake of conscience doth by no means excuse from sin . thus if a man think himself bound to divide the church by a sinful separation ; that separation is nevertheless a sin for his thinking himself bound to do it . for s. paul thought himself bound to do many things against the name of jesus of nazareth , yet he calls himself a blasphemer and the greatest of sinners , for what he did under that obligation of conscience . the iews thought themselves bound in conscience to do god service , but it was a horrible mistake , when they took killing the apostles to be any part of it . from whence it appears , that men may do very bad things , and yet think themselves bound in conscience to do them . i do not hence infer that the pretence of conscience is not to be regarded , because it may be abused to so ill purposes ; for no man that hath any conscience will speak against the power of it , and he that declares against it , hath no reason to be regarded in what he saith . but that which ought to be inferred from hence , is , that men ought not to rest satisfied with the present dictates of their consciences , for notwithstanding them , they may commit very great sins . i am afraid , the common mistating the case of an erroneous conscience hath done a great deal of mischief to conscientious men , and betray'd them into great security , while they are assured they do act according to their consciences . for the question is generally put , how far an erroneous conscience doth oblige ? and when men hear that they must not act against their consciences though they be mistaken , they think themselves safe enough , and enquire no further . but if they would consider , that no mans conscience alters the nature of good and evil in things ; that what god hath made a duty or a sin remains so , whatever a mans conscience doth judge concerning them ; that no mans conscience can strictly oblige him either to omit a duty , or to commit a sin ; the utmost resolution of the case comes to this , that a man may be so perplexed and entangled by an erroneous conscience that he may be under a necessity of sinning , if he acts either with or against it . not that god ever puts a man under the necessity of sinning , ( for then it would be no sin to him , if it were unavoidable ) but that by their own neglect and carelesness , without looking after due information , and running on with violent prejudices , which was the case of s. paul and the iews ( and i wish it were not of many christians ) they may make false and rash judgements of things , and so sin either in doing or not doing what their consciences tell them they are bound to do . the most material question then , in the case of an erroneous conscience , is , what error of conscience doth excuse a man from sin in following the dictates of it ? for , if the error be wholly involuntary ; i. e. if it be caused by invincible ignorance , or after using the best means for due information of his conscience , though the act may be a fault in it self , yet it shall not be imputed to him as a sin ; because it wanted the consent of the mind , by which the will is determined ; but if men fall into wilful errors of conscience ; i. e. if they form their iudgements rather by prejudice and passion and interest than from the laws of god or just rules of conscience ; if they do not examine things fairly on both sides , praying for divine direction ; if they have not patience to hear any thing against their opinion , but run on blindly and furiously , they may in so doing act according to their consciences , and yet they may be in as great danger of committing heinous sins as s. paul and the iews were . thus if men through the power of an erroneous conscience may think themselves bound to make schisms and divisions in the church , to disobey laws and to break in pieces the communion of that church , which they are , or ought to be members of , they may satisfie themselves that they pursue their consciences , and yet for want of due care of informing themselves and judging aright , those very actions may be wilful and damnable sins . nothing now remains but to make application of what hath been said to our own case . and that shall be to two sorts of persons , 1. to those who continue in the communion of our church , 2. to those who dissent from it . i. to those who continue in the communion of our church . let us walk by the same rule , and mind the same things . let us study the unity and peace , and thereby the honour and safety of it . while we keep to one rule , all people know what it is to be of our church ; if men set up their own fancies above the rule , they charge it with imperfection ; if they do not obey the rule , they make themselves wiser than those that made it . it hath not been either the doctrine or rules of our church which have ever given advantage to the enemies of it ; but the indiscretion of some in going beyond them ; and the inconstancy of others in not holding to them . such is the purity of its doctrine , such the loyalty of its principles , such the wisdom , and order , and piety of its devotions , that none who are true friends to any of these , can be enemies to it . let us take heed we do not give too much occasion to our enemies to think the worse of our church for our sakes . it is easie to observe , that most quarrels relating to constitutions and frames of government are more against person than things ; when they are unsatisfied with their management , then they blame the government ; but if themselves were in place , or those they love and esteem , then the government is a good thing , if it be in good mens hands . thus do mens judgements vary as their interests do . and so as to churches , we find uniformity and order condemned as tyrannical , till men come into power themselves , and then the very same things and arguments are used and thought very good and substantial , which before were weak and sophistical . those who speak now most against the magistrates power in matters of religion had ten substantial reasons for it , when they thought the magistrate on their own side . those who now plead for toleration , did once think it the mother of confusion , the nurse of atheism , the inlet of popery , the common sink of all errors and heresies . but , if there be not much to be said against the churches constitution , then they are ready to lay load upon the persons of the governours and members of it ; and thence pretend to a necessity of separation for a purer communion . let us endeavour to remove this objection , not by recrimination ( which is too easie in such cases ) but by living suitably to our holy religion , by reforming our own lives , and redressing ( what in us lies ) the scandals and disorders of others . let us by the innocency and unblameableness of our lives , the life and constancy of our devotions , the meekness and gentleness of our behaviour in our own cause , our zeal and courage in gods , add a lustre to our religion and bring others to a love of our church . ii. to those who dissent from our communion . whether they hear , or whether they will forbear , i cannot dismiss this subject , without offering some things to them , 1. by way of consideration . 2. by way of advice . ( 1. ) i shall offer these things to their consideration . 1. let them consider how many things must be born with in the constitution of a church ; which cannot be expected in this world to be without spot or wrinkle . and if men will set themselves only to find faults , it is impossible , in this state of things , they should ever be pleased . and if they separate where they see any thing amiss , they must follow his example who pursued this principle so far , till he withdrew from all society , lest he should communicate with them in their sin ; in which condition he continued till his children lay dead in the house , and he became utterly unable to help himself ; and because no humane inventions were to be allowed about the worship of god , he had cut out of his bible the contents of the chapters , and titles of the leaves , and so left the bare text , without binding or covers . this is the case the rigid and impracticable principles of some would bring our churches to , by cutting off all rules of order and decency , as encroachments on the institutions of christ. 2. i desire them to consider how impossible it is to give satisfaction to all , and how many things must be allowed a favourable interpretation in publick constitutions and general laws ; which it is hardly possible so to frame , but there will be room left for cavils and exceptions . yea when the wisest and best men have done their utmost , some of themselves confess , there may be dissatisfaction still ; and if christian humility , charity and discretion , will then advise persons to acquiesce in their private security and freedom , and not to unsettle the publick order for their private satisfaction . why should not men practise the same vertues themselves ; which they do confess , will be necessary for some at last ? wise and good men will consider the difficulties that always attend publick establishments ; and have that esteem for peace and order , that they will bear with anything tolerable for the sake of it . it is a very hard case with a church when men shall set their wits to strain every thing to the worst sense , to stretch laws beyond the intention and design of them , to gather together all the doubtful and obscure passages in calendars , translations , &c. and will not distinguish between their approbation of the use and of the choice of things , for upon such terms as these men think to justifie the present divisions . i much question , whether if they proceed in such a manner , they can hold communion with any church in the christian world . if men be disposed to find faults , no church can be pure enough ; for something will be amiss either in doctrine , or discipline , or ceremonies , or manners ; but if they be disposed to peace and union , then charity will cover a multitude of failing ; and then according to s. paul's advice , with all lowliness and meekness , with long-suffering , forbearing one another in love , they will be endeavouring to preserve the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace . and without the practice of the former vertues , no metaphysical discourses of unity , will signifie any thing to the churches peace . 3. they would do well to consider , how separation of the people from our churches comes to be more lawful now , than in the days of our fathers . it hath been often and evidently proved , that the most sober and learned non-conformists of former times , notwithstanding their scruples in some points , yet utterly condemned separation from our churches as unlawful . and they looked upon this , not as a meer common sin of humane infirmity , but as a wilful and dangerous sin ; in that it is so far from tending to the overthrow of antichrist , that it upholds and maintains him ; calling it a renting the church , the disgrace of religion , the advancement of pride , schism and contention , the offence of the weak , the grief of the godly , who be better settled , the hardening of the wicked , and the recovery or rising again of antichristianism ; nay , even persecuting the lord iesus in his hoast , which they revile in his ordinances , which they dishonour ; and in his servants whose footsteps they slander , whose graces they despise , whose office they trample upon with disdain . these are the very words of one of the most learned and judicious nonconformists before the wars . and surely the mischiefs that followed after , could not make separation to appear less odious . was it a sin ? was it such a sin then ? and is it none now ? either our brethren at this day , do believe it to be a sin for the people to separate , or they do not : if not , it must either be , that there are new and harder terms of communion , which were not then ; which is so far from being true , that they confess them to be rather easier for the people : or it must be , that they are gone off from the peaceable principles of their predecessors , which they are unwilling to own . if they do believe it to be a sin , why do they suffer the people to live in a known sin ? why do they encourage them by preaching in separate congregations ? for their predecessor did not think it lawful much less a duty , to preach when forbidden by a law : neither did they understand what warrant any ordinary minister hath in such a case by gods word , so to draw any church or people to his private ministery in opposition to the laws and government he lived under . they understood the difference between the apostles cases and theirs ; and never thought the apostles woe be unto me if i preach not the gospel , did extend to them ; but thought that silenced ministers ought to live as private members of the church till they were restored , and the people bound to learn. of which there can be far less ground to dispute , when themselves acknowledge the doctrine by law established to be true and found . 4. lastly , let me beseech them to consider the common danger that threatens us all by means of our divisions . we have adversaries subtile and industrious enough to make use of all advantages to serve their own ends ; and there is scarce any other they promise themselves more from , than the continuance of these breaches among our selves : this some of our brethren themselves have been aware of ; and on that account have told the people of the danger of the principles of separation , as to the interest of religion in general , and the protestant religion in particular among us . certainly , nothing would tend more to our common security than for all true and sincere protestants to lay aside their prejudices , and mistakes , and to joyn heartily in communion with us : which many of their teachers at this day allow to be lawful . and how can they satisfie themselves in hazarding our religion by not doing that , which themselves confess lawful to be done ? ( 2. ) but if we are not yet ripe for so great a mercy as a perfect union , yet i would intreat our brethren to make way for it by hearkning to these following advices . 1. not to give encouragement to rash and intemperate zeal ; which rends all in pieces , and makes reconciliation impossible . those who see least into things , are usually the fiercest condenders about them : and such eager disputants are fitter to make quarrels than to end them ; for they can be contentious for peace-sake , and make new differences about the ways of unity . wisdom and sobriety , a good judgement , a prudent temper , and freedom from prejudice will tend more to end our differences , than warm debates , and long disputations ; which as greg. nazianzen said once of councils , seldom have had any good end . but there is a more fiery sort of zeal , and more dangerous than this ; which may lie smothering for a time , till it meets with suitable matter and a freer vent , and then it breaks out into a dreadful flame . this we have already seen such dismal effects of in this age , that we should think there were less need to give men caution against it again , were it not to be feared , that where reason connot prevail , experience will not . all that we can say to such persons that may be like to move them , is , that if their blind zeal transport them , as it did sampson , to pull down the house over their heads , they will be sure to perish themselves in the fall of it ; but here will lie the great difference of the case , while they and their friends perish together , the philistims without will rejoyce to make others the instruments to execute their designs . 2. not to be always complaining of their hardships and persecutions ; as though no people had suffered so much since the days of dioclesian ; whereas the severity of laws hath been tempered with so much gentleness in the execution of them , that others have as much complained of indulgence , as they of persecution . it doth not look like the patience , and humility , and meekness of the primitive christians , to make such noise and outcries of their suffering so much , when they would have been rather thankful that they suffered no more . is this the way to peace , to represent their case still to the world in an exasperating and provoking manner ? is this the way to incline their governours to more condescension , to represent them to the people as an ithacian persecuting party ? where are the priscillians that have been put to death by their instigation ? what do such insinuations mean , but that our bishops are the followers of ithacius and idacius in their cruelty ; and they of the good and meek bishop s. martin , who refused communion with them on that account ? if men do entertain such kind thoughts of themselves , and such hard thoughts of their superiors , whatever they plead for , they have no inclination to peace . 3. not to condemn others for that which themselves have practised , and think to be lawful in their own cases . what outcries have some made against the church of england , as cruel and tyrannical , for expecting and requiring uniformity ? and yet do not such men , even at this day , contend for the obligation of a covenant , which binds men to endeavour after uniformity in doctrine , discipline and worship ? but they want the ingenuity of adonibezek , to reflect on the thumbs and the toes , which they have cut off from others ; and think themselves bound to do it again , if it were in their power . who could have been thought more moderate in this way , than those who went upon the principles of the dissenting brethren ? and yet we are assured , that even in new england , when their own church-way was by law established among them , they made it no less than banishment for the anabaptists to set up other churches among them , or for any secretly to seduce others from the approbation and use of infant-baptism . and how they have since proceeded with the quakers , is very well known . nay , even these , notwithstanding the single independency of every mans light within him , have found it necessary to make rules and orders among themselves to govern their societies , to which they expect an uniform obedience ; and allow no liberty out of the power and the truth ; as they love to speak . from all which it appears , the true controversie is not about the reasonableness of uniformity ; but who shall have the power of prescribing the rules of it . is it not now a very hard case , that the church of england must be loaded with bitter reproaches , and exposed to the common hatred of all parties for the sake of that , which every one of them would practise if it were in their power ; and think it very justifiable so to do ? 4. not to inflame the peoples heats , by making their differences with the church of england to appear to be greater than they are . let them deal honestly and faithfully with them , by letting them understand that they look on our churches as true churches , and occasional communion at least with them to be lawful : ( and it is hard to understand , if occasional communion be lawful , that constant communion should not be a duty . ) this were the way to abate mens great prejudices , and to soften their spirits , and to prepare them for a closer union . but if instead of this , they endeavour to darken and confound things , and cast mists before their eyes , that they cannot see their way clear before them ; all understanding men will conclude , they prefer some little interests of their own , before the honour of christ and the peace of his church . 5. not to harb●● or foment unreasonable jealousies and suspicions in peoples minds concerning us . this hath been one of the most successful arts of keeping up the distance and prejudices that have been so great among us , viz. by private whispers , by false suggestions , by idle stories , by unreasonable interpretation of words beyond the intention and design of those who spake them . by such devices as these , great mischief hath been done among us , and i am much afraid , is doing still . for nothing sets men at a greater distance from our church , than the apprehending that we are not hearty and sincere in the protestant cause : which although it be a most groundless and malicious calumny , yet there have been some , who have had so little regard to conscience , or common ingenuity , as not only to charge particular persons , but our church it self with marching towards popery . what injustice , what uncharitableness , what impudence is it , to fasten such an imputation upon a church that hath hitherto continued ( and long may it do so ) the chief bulwark of the protestant cause ? little do such persons consider , how much they serve the design of our enemies , who cannot but be mightily pleased to find their most formidable adversaries represented to the people as their secret friends . 6. not to run the hazard of all for a shew of greater liberty to themselves . for under this pretence our adversaries endeavour to make them their instruments to bring upon our necks 〈◊〉 yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear . an universal toleration is that trojan horse , which brings in our enemies without being seen , and which after a long siege they hope to bring in at last under the pretence of setting our gates wide enough open , to let in all our friends . and then think with your selves what advantages they will have above others ; considering some mens coldness and indifferency in religion ; others uncertainty and running from one extreme to another ; others easiness in being drawn away by the hopes and fears of this world ; which have a wonderful influence upon changing mens opinions , even when they do not think it themselves . so that those seem very little to understand mankind , who do not apprehend the dangerous consequences of a general toleration . those who pretend there is no danger , because by this means the folly of their religion will be exposed , do not consider what a catching disease folly is ; and how natural it is for men that are fanciful in religion to exchange one folly for another . if all men were wise and sober in religion , there would need no toleration ; if they are not , we must suppose , if they had what they wished , they would do as might be expected from men wanting wisdom and sobriety , i. e. all the several parties would be striving and contending with each other , which should be uppermost , and gain the greatest interest . and what would the fruit of all such contentions be , but endless disputes , and exposing the follies of one another , till at last religion it self be sunk into the greatest contempt ; or men , through meer weariness of contending , be willing even to submit to papal tyranny , because it pretends to some kind of unity ? so that , upon the whole matter , if we would consult the honour of god and religion , the peace and tranquillity of the church we live in ; if we would prevent the great designs of our enemies , and leave the protestant religion here established to posterity , we ought to follow the apostles advice , in walking by the same rule , and in minding the same things . the end. published by the same author , several conferences between a romish priest , a fanatick chaplain , and a divine of the church of england , concerning the idolatry of the church of rome : being a full answer to the late dialogues of t. g. notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61568-e860 judges 5. 15 , 16. rom. 14. 19. rom. 3. 15 , 16 , 17. 1 tim. 2. 8. act. 15. 2● ▪ gal. 2. 12 ▪ 13 ▪ ●om . 16. 17. ●hil . 1. 27 , 28. ●hil . 2. 1 , 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , iliad . 3. 1 cor. 11. 34. 1 cor. 7. 17. act. 15. 28 rom. 14. ● , 6 , 10. rob. coenalis hist. gallic . l. 2. p. 126. iul. pollux . onomast . l. 8. c. 9. schol. in arist . acharn . act. 1. s. 1. sacrilegious desertion , p. 35. separation yet no schism , p. 59. peace-offering in the name of the congregational party , a. d. 1667. p. 10 , 11. baxters defence of his cure , p. 64. separation yet no schism , p. 60. * discourse concerning evangelical love , church-peace and unity , 1672. p. 84 , 85 , 86. see corbet of schism , p. 41. baxters defence of his cure , p. 38. ●●●a for ●●ace , p. 〈◊〉 . discourse concerning-evangelical love , church-peace and unity , p. 68. baxters true and only way of concord , a. d. 1680. p. 111. evangelical love , &c. p. 49. 52. p. 54. p. 59. rom. 16. 3. 5. colos. 4. 15 philem. v. 2. clem. ep. ad corinth , p. 55. vnicuique civitati erat attri●uta certa regio , quae presby●eros inde sumeret , & velut corpori ecclesiae illius accense●etur , calvin . instit. l. 4. c. 4. ● . 2. petav. not . in epiphan . haer . 69. n. 1. canon . nicaen . 6. 15 , 16. constan. c. 6. chalced. 17. 20 , 26. antioc . c. 2. codex eccl. afric . c. 53. c. 55. concil . gangr . c. 6. concil . const. c. 6. concil . carthag . c. 10 , 11. cyprian . ep. 40 , 42. theod. eccl. hist. l. 1. c. 22. l. 2. c. 24. c. 17. vincent . c. 16. baron . a. d. 404. n. 41. 412. n. 47. joh. 13. 14. mat. 12. 7. rom. 14. 19. 1 thess. 4. 11. phil. 3. 15. 2. 3. eph. 4. 2 , 3. heb. 13. 17. true way of concord , part 3. ch . 1. sect. 40. papers for accommodation , printed 1648. p. 16. p. 20 , 21. p. 22. p. 25. p. 28 , 29 , 30. p. 47. p. 55. p. 56. p. 71. gal. 1. 10. papers for accommodation , p. 51. v. p. 61. p. 66. p. 68. p. 73. p. 68. p. 73. p. 111. p. 113 , 114. p. 115. ibid. p. 116. p. 117. act. 26. 9. 1 tim. 1. 13 , 15. s. joh. 16. 2. ●nsw . to 2 questions . 6 , 9. they that are ruled must consider , that the best policy or constitution , so far as it is of mans regul●ting , hath defects and inconveniences , and affairs will be complicated ; an● therefore they must not be too unyielding , but bear with what is tolerable , a●● not easily remediable . corbett of the sound state of religion , p. 75. 1679. ball against can. p. 13. a discourse of the religion of england in its due latitude . sect. 19. such is the complicated condition of humane affairs , that it is exceeding difficult to devise a rule or model that shall provide for all whom equity will plead for . therefore the prudent and sober will acquiesce in any constitution that is in some good sort proportionable to the ends of government . a discourse of the religion of england , &c. sect. 14. printed 1667. see baxters cure of divisions . p. 264. eph. 4. 2 , 3. papers of accommodation . p. 52. ball against can. pref. p. 2. bradshaw against iohnson . s. 40. 91. gouges whole armour of god. p. 570. nothing that i know of in the world , doth so strongly tempt some sober conscientious men to think popery necessary for the concord of churches , and a violent church government necessary to our peace , as the woful experience of the errors and schisms , the mad and manifold sects that arise among those that are most against them . baxters last answ. to bagshaw . p. 30. you little know what a pernicious design the devil hath upon you , in perswading you to desire and endeavour to pull down the interest of christ and religion , which is upheld in the parish-churches of this land : and to think that it is best to bring them as low in reality , or reputation as you can , and to contract the religious interest all into private meetings . id. p. 31. n. 25. judg. 1. 7 see clarks narrative of new-englands persecution , a. d. 1651. see spirit of the hat. ● . 12 , &c. and verily you will keep up the papists hope , that by an universal toleration , they may at last come in on equal terms with you , or by connivence , be endured as much as you . and if they be equal in england with you , their transmarine advantages will make them more than equal , notwithstanding their disadvantages in their cause , and their contrariety to kingly interest . baxters last answ. to bagshaw . p. 31. a discourse concerning bonds of resignation of benefices in point of law and conscience by ... edward lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1695 approx. 120 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 67 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-05 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61536 wing s5572 estc r7708 12193854 ocm 12193854 55952 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61536) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 55952) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 899:21) a discourse concerning bonds of resignation of benefices in point of law and conscience by ... edward lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], xi, [1], 116, [2] p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1695. reproduction of original in huntington library. advertisement: p. [1]-[2] at end. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng benefices, ecclesiastical -great britain. patronage, ecclesiastical -great britain. great britain -church history -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-03 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2004-03 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a discourse concerning bonds of resignation of benefices , in point of law and conscience . by the right reverend father in god edward lord bishop of worcester . london , printed by i. h. for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . 1695. the preface . the intention of writing and publishing the following discourse , was to give a stop , if possible , to a dangerous and prevailing practise ; and so much the more dangerous , because it is managed with so much secrecy , and persons are often drawn into it , before they are aware of the mischief of it . they are told , that there is no law against it ; and that there are adjudged cases and precedents in law for it ; and that there is nothing amiss in the bond of resignation it self : but if there be any corrupt or evil practice after it , that makes it fit to be condemned in equity , but not in law. but a general bond of resignation of a benefice upon notice , in order to the obtaining a presentation to that benefice , hath such a simoniacal appearance ; that any person who pretends to conscience cannot but think it necessary to examine , how far such a practice can be consistent , not only with the law , but with the oath which he is to take against all simoniacal contracts and promises , directly or indirectly &c. for or concerning the procuring or obtaining the rectory or vicarage of &c. how can any man that enters into these bonds , say that he doth it not in order to the obtaining a presentation ? and doth not such a bond amount to a contract ? how then can they satisfy themselves in taking this oath after such a bond ? all they can pretend is , that although it be a contract for such an end , yet it is no simoniacal contract . but which way are we to be satisfied in point of conscience , what is a simoniacal contract , and what not ? is it only from the statute 31 eliz. c. 6. so that what is there forbidden is simoniacal and nothing else ? but where hath that law determin'd what simony is , when it is never mentioned in it ? it severely prohibits some corrupt practises as to benefices ; but it never goes about to restrain the notion of simony to them ( as will appear in the following discourse ) and the ecclesiastical laws , as to this matter , are left as they were before . if therefore there be such a true notion of a simoniacal contract , as is allowed by our laws , which is not confined to that statute ; then it must follow , that there may be a simoniacal contract , which is not condemned by that law : and therefore all persons who understand the nature and extent of our laws , will have a care of restraining the nature of a simoniacal contract to the letter of that statute . it may be said , that a simoniacal contract is an ill name put upon we know not what , if we go beyond the law of the land : and that there must be some certain bounds set to such hard words ; or else the snare may be greater another way : and that here is no such thing as real simony in the case ; but the word is applied to some indirect practises in obtaining benefices , but what those are the law must determine . to which i answer , that i am very far from going beyond the law of the land for determining this matter . for i do acknowledge that since the notion of simony is extended beyond the first occasion of the name , there must be a certain rule to determin it ; and that i do freely grant is the law of the land. but by it , i do not mean a particular statute made with respect to some more notorious acts , which are punishable in the courts of common law ; but i understand by the law of england that comprehensive body of laws , which have been here receiv'd , as the measure of our iudgment and actions in those things which are to be determin'd by them . if a question be made whether a contract made at sea be a good contract ; it will be no good answer , to say it must be a good contract , because there is nothing in it contrary to the rules of the common law. for , if our common law should happen to allow such contracts , which the civil law doth not ; will it be ground enough to affirm , that it is a good contract because our common law doth not condemn it ? no certainly . but it must be determin'd by that law which is proper for it , and being here receiv'd for such , is in such cases the law of the land. so i say here ; the ecclesiastical law , so far as it is receiv'd and allow'd by the common law , is the rule and measure , whereby the nature of simony is to be determin'd ; and that is allow'd by our most learned and judicious interpreters of our common law , to be of ecclesiastical cognisance : only such acts as come under statutes belong to the courts of common law. and there was a general presumption in law before , that no patron was to make any advantage to himself of a right of presentation . and therefore my lord coke saith , that a guardian in socage of a manor whereunto an advowson is appendant shall not present to the church , because he can take nothing for the presentation for the which he may account to the heir : from whence he infers , that simony is odious in the eye of the common law. and it is very well if it so continues ; which i can hardly imagine , if these bonds of resignation prevail . but if by the ecclesiastical law , as received here , such bonds are simoniacal , being a contract in order to the obtaining a presentation ; then it can give little satisfaction to any man's conscience to be told , that they are not against law , i.e. against the statute 31 eliz . c. 6. my business is not here to give a full account of the matters contained in the following discourse ; but only to remove some general prejudices against the design of it . which is truly no other , than to bring this secret practice into open view , and to have it fairly examin'd and discussed . for , while it is managed in this manner , there is not only mischief done to the church , but to the consciences of men ; who are very apt to suspect a snare in all such bonds , and are very uneasie at the thoughts of them afterwards . if there be any better reasons to be given for them , than i have yet seen ; i should be glad to be convinced of the lawfulness of such indirect practises and private contracts : but at present i think ( if they be not timely prevented ) they will end in unspeakable mischief to the parochial clergy , who are the main ecclesiastical body of the church of england ; and in whose welfare we ought to be all concerned . and truly i cannot but be very tender in what relates to their rights ; for their work and duty is great and laborious , if it be performed as it ought to be ; and they ought not to have any new burdens imposed upon them , under a pretence of law , which neither they nor their successors will be able to bear . i am very sensible , how much in this age depends upon the faithfulness and diligence and good reputation of the parochial clergy of england . for i am not much afraid of any designs of our open enemies ( or which may be worse , of our pretended friends ) if we be true to our selves ; i. e. if we seriously and conscientiously do our duties with respect to god , the people , and our own souls . if we do not give way to unreasonable suspicions and causeless iealousies of one another ; if we mind the interest of religion more than our own , and serve god and not our own lusts ; if we sincerely promote the best ends in the world , the saving souls and doing good to mankind ; god will not be wanting to us : but he that hath saved us from the lion and the bear , will likewise save us from the fox and the viper ; i mean such who under fair and plausible pretences eat through the bowels of their mother ; and by secret and indirect practises go about to ruine the church they profess themselves to be of : although by their works they deny it . if i had not some more than ordinary reason to believe such things to be not only practised but incouraged by such who pretend , not only to understand our law , but to direct the nation in it ; i should hardly have undertaken a task of this nature . but having so just an occasion to search into this matter , as well as i could , and finding so much cause of dissatisfaction as to these bonds ; i thought it my duty to doe what lay in me to prevent that mischief which is hastning upon our church by them . if i am mistaken in any part of the following discourse , i shall be glad to be better informed : and if i am not , i hope that our church may receive no disadvantage by it . and as i honour the profession of the law , and the many worthy persons , who are and have been of it : so i cannot but be concerned to find some pretenses of law made use of to such ill purposes and designs ; that if the number of patrons that are against our established religion should happen to exceed those that are for it ; by the help of these bonds of resignation , the title to most of our parochial cures would in a little time fall into the hands of popish priests : which would much facilitate the introducing their religion ; when so many protestant incumbents would so easily be turned out , by no other means , but by these bonds of resignation . and therefore it is not meerly the interest of our parochial clergy , but of our religion , which lies at stake . and this i suppose will be sufficient to justify this undertaking . westminster , iuly 10. 1695. e. w. a discourse concerning bonds of resignation &c. the design of this discourse , is to enquire into a case , too commonly practised among us , and too little examin'd ; which is concerning bonds of resignation given by clergymen to patrons in order to the obtaining a presentation to a benefice with cure of souls . this is a case which respects both law and conscience : and it is not so easy a matter , as some seem to take it for granted , to resolve it as to either of them . for if such a practice be within the reason and intention of the law , which forbids all corrupt presentations and resignations , 31 eliz. c. 6. then it cannot be justified by law ; and if it be against the scope and design of the oath against simoniacal contracts , then it can much less be justified in point of conscience . and whether it be or not , is the subject of this present discourse ; which i am sorry there is so much occasion for ; but since there are too many that practise it , and others too ready to defend it ; and since it is of so mischievous consequence to the interest of the church of england , if it prevails ▪ i think it highly necessary to enquire more strictly into this matter , than hath been hitherto done . which i shall do in such a manner , as to make it appear that no considerations whatsoever have swayed me , but those of law and conscience ; and i hope those who have been drawn into such snares will see cause to repent , ( if they do it not already ) and others take care how they run themselves into such perplexities , which no precedents in point of law , and no authority in point of conscience can give them satisfaction in . but i intend no reflections on particular persons ; and i cannot believe that any who have impartially weighed these things can maintain the lawfulness of them so , as to wish them generally practised . for , however there may be some cases wherein such bonds may be thought far more reasonable than in others : yet it cannot be denied that there are far more cases , wherein such a practice must be destructive to the legal rights of the church . suppose some patrons to be persons of great piety and integrity , who do require these bonds only to bind the clergy the more strictly to do their duty : suppose others have no regard to their own interest , but only take care of minors , bred up with a prospect of such benefices which they are not yet capable of : ( which are the most reasonable considerations insisted upon in the adjudged cases : ) but what are these to the multitude of most unjust and unreasonable considerations , which may be made the conditions of these bonds ? for the bonds are supposed to be general ; and so the patrons left at liberty to impose their own conditions . and , are there no such kind of patrons among us who may be too justly suspected to mind their own interest above the churches good ? and therefore will take all ways to lessen the profits of benefices in their disposal , as far as they are told that the law permits them ? such i mean , who have no restraint but what the law lays upon them , having no sense of honour or conscience in these matters . and if it once pass for an allowed doctrine in law , that bonds of resignation are lawfull ; what shall stop such men from putting very unreasonable conditions upon their incumbents , or else they may presently call them to an account for the forfeiture of their bonds ? if then there be no effectual course so much as offer'd , against very hard and unreasonable terms ; how can such bonds be thought just and reasonable ? it may be said , that if the conditions be such as are allowed by law , then the bonds are lawfull , otherwise not . but this by no means clears the difficulty . for the main question is , whether such bonds be lawfull , where the conditions are not expressed ; but meer notice of three or six months ? and these are the general bonds of resignation : and such i think i may with reason affirm to be against both law and conscience . but suppose there may be conditions of both kinds required , but it is not expressed in the bonds what they are : what a miserable slavery must the clergy be under , who give general bonds , and know not what conditions will be required ? and then they must go to law , and be at greater charge and trouble than they can well bear , to know whether the conditions required of them be such as the law allows or not ? so that the general allowance of bonds of resignation upon notice , although the law be left to determine the particular conditions , is that which we have reason to look upon as very hard and unjust , and inconsistent with the nature and design of that relation which the law supposes between patrons and incumbents , as will appear more afterwards . there are two things chiefly insisted on by those who plead for these bonds of resignation : i. that there is no law against them ; ii. that there have been cases adjudged for them : and both these i shall carefully examine . i. that there is no law against them . there are two laws to be consider'd in this matter : 1. the law against simoniacal contracts 31 eliz ; 2. the law which requires every incumbent to take an oath against simony . 1. as to the law against simoniacal contracts : the statute is expresly against presenting to a benefice for a summ of money , reward , gift , profit or benefit , directly or indirectly , or entring into bond or covenant for that purpose ; 31 eliz. c. 6. n. 5. wherein these things are observable : ( 1. ) that it is not a meer summ of money which is here forbidden , but any benefit whatsoever , directly or indirectly . ( 2. ) that not meer doing the thing , but entring into bond or covenant to do it is within the reach of this law. ( 3. ) that the penalty is against such who do present for or by reason of any promise or agreement for any benefit whatsoever : or those who do accept such presentations on those terms : i. e. so as it becomes the motive of such presentation or acceptance . ( 4. ) that the same law declares n. 8. against corrupt resigning or exchanging the benefice he enjoys , for any summ of money or benefit whatsoever . ( 5. ) that the ecclesiastical censures still remain in force against these offences : which supposes that this law doth not supersede the ecclesiastical laws here in being . n. 9. so that here are two material questions to be resolved upon this statute . [ 1. ] whether since the making this statute , there be any simoniacal contract , but what is against the purport of it ? [ 2. ] whether a bond of resignation , upon which a benefice is given and accepted , be within the design of it ? [ 1. ] as to the former ; it is observable that the words simony or simoniacal contract are never mentioned in this statute . for , if they had , the judges would have had sufficient reason to have declared what was simony and what not . we are told indeed by the reverend and learned judges in the case of mackaller and todderick , that the consideration to have money to procure one to be rector of a church is a simoniacal contract , and an unlawfull act condemned by all laws : and that the common law before the statute 31 eliz. took notice of it . but they do not declare how far the common law could take notice of it , before that statute ; any farther than that it was not a thing allowed by it . for certainly it was then of spiritual cognisance : and the persons guilty of it were to be proceeded against by the ecclesiastical laws . and consequently , the notion of simony is to be taken from thence , and not meerly from this statute : so that if accepting a benefice upon giving a bond of resignation were simoniacal before , it doth not cease to be so by this statute . indeed corrupt resignation of a benefice hath not the same penalty by this statute with corrupt acceptance of it at first : for that is a disability , and the other double the value . but hereby we see that the one is against the law , as much as the other . so far then it is clear by this statute , that any corrupt resignation is against law : and if the enquiry be after the penalty , the statute must determine that . but if the question be , whether resignation upon a bond given before-hand in order to a presentation be a simoniacal act or not , as done in pursuance of a simoniacal contract ? in that the statute gives no rule ; but only declares the penalties of some particular acts , which are there expressed . those who would have nothing now to be simony , but what is there forbidden , must first prove that the intention of the law was to limit and determine the nature of simony ; which ( as is already observed ) is not so much as mention'd in it . the reason of the law as to penalties is one thing , and the nature of a simoniacal contract another . if a question be put , whether a simoniacal contract be void in law or not ? my lord coke saith , that the statute doth not make the bond , covenant , promise , or other assurance void , but the presentment &c. and so it was adjudged 40 eliz. this is somewhat strange doctrine : that a presentment should be void by reason of a simoniacal bond , and yet that bond not be void in law. for that which makes another thing void , one would think should be void in it self : especially since he saith in the same chapter , that simony is odious in the eye of the common law. but not so very odious : if a simoniacal contract be a good contract according to the common law. but he distinguisheth between malum in se against the common law , and malum prohibitum by statute law. how doth this clear the point ? the presentation is void , being prohibited by the statute : but is not a simoniacal contract malum in se against the common law ? how then comes this not to be void ? especially since it is contractus ex turpi causâ : and for that reason my lord hobart held it void in law ; and so the court held in mackaller's case . but suppose my lord coke in the right as to a simoniacal contract ; that it is not void at common law : it follows from thence , that the consideration of law and conscience is different in this matter . for i suppose none will deny that a simoniacal contract is unlawfull in point of conscience : and yet he asserts it , not to be void in law. why then may not bonds of resignation , although not within the compass of this statute , yet be unlawful in point of conscience : as well as a simoniacal contract be unlawful in point of conscience , and yet be good by the common law ? either therefore simony , as odious as it is in the eye of the law , must not be malum in se against common law , as my lord coke speaks : or if it be , there must be another rule of conscience in this matter from this statute . i would fain know , what was simony at common law before this statute : and whether that which was so before doth not continue so still , if it be not taken away by it ? for , if there be no simony now , but what is expressed in that statute : then it must declare ; what is simony and what not . simony , saith my lord coke , is described by this act , 31 eliz. and he saith in his margin , injustum est illa vendere , quae gratis distribui debent : which is a very good illustration of it . but the question is , what is meant by selling ? whether it be meerly for a summ of money , paid down , or secured by bond or covenant ? or whether it doth not take in any kind of benefit or emolument accruing to the person who bestows it , which hinders it from being a free gift ? the casuists say , nomine emptionis & venditionis intelligitur omnis contractus non gratuitus . but can that be called a free gift , where there is a bond of resignation of such a thing , whereof the possession and reversion bear a price , and have a real value ? we need not run to simon magus to understand what turpe commercium is . there were many laws among the old romans against purchasing any publick offices ; and they thought it a great reproach to them for any price to be set upon them : as the great roman master said , pretium quod habet , hoc ipso vilescit . by the laws acilia , and calpurnia , all that were convict of giving money for offices , were under a disability , or incapacity of any for the future ; and the mercatores potestatum were infamous by their laws . aristotle thought it a matter of very ill consequence to any government to have any thing of money given for offices : because it taught men to set a greater value on money than vertue . these considerations , setting aside the story of simon magus , were great enough to induce the christian church to be extremely nice and tender in this matter of benefices : and not only to forbid the direct sale of them for money ; but any indirect trafficking which might take of the entire freedom of the presentation of persons to them . i know to how little purpose it would be , to reckon up all the canons which have been made in the christian church from the apostles times downwards against simony : because some will say , that the ecclesiasticks were always true to their own interest . but let us set aside all prejudice in this matter , and consider it impartially . if any offices in the world ought to be free from the suspicion of sordid trafficking : certainly those of the church ought , from the nature and design of their imployments . the question then will come to this , whether giving a bond of resignation in order to the procuring a benefice , be such a trafficking or not ? and we have three rules to judge by : 1. the nature and reason of the thing : whether such actings be not inconsistent with that freedom , which ought to be used , both in giving and taking ecclesiastical benefices ? so that , if there were no laws either ecclesiastical or civil in the case ; whether there be not something in these transactions unbecoming the design and dignity of the employment ? 2. the ecclesiastical law of england ; which hath been from time to time receiv'd here and allow'd by a general consent ; and still continues in force , where it is not repugnant to any laws of the realm : which cannot be pretended in this case . 3. the statute law ; which doth not abrogate the ecclesiastical law as to simony : it only enacts some particular penalties on some more remarkable simoniacal acts , as to benefices and orders ; but never once goes about to repeal any ecclesiastical laws about simony , or to determin the nature and bounds of it . [ 2. ] but let us come more closely to the statute it self ; to see whether these bonds of resignation be not against the design of it . the words are , if any person for any summ of money , reward , gift , profit or benefit , directly or indirectly ; or for or by reason of any promise , agreement , grant , bond , covenant , or other assurance of or for any summ of money , gift or profit whatsoever , directly or indirectly ; shall present &c. now we suppose a patron to present one to a benefice , without any money , or bond for money ; but he declares before his presenting him , that he must enter into a bond to resign his benefice upon six months notice under a severe penalty : to which he submits , on the condition of obtaining his benefice . after this , the patron demands such a portion of tythes ; or a consent for him to inclose , to the apparent benefit of the patron , and diminution of the profits of the living . the question is , whether such a bond be within the design of this statute ? all that can be said is , that no such consideration is expressed in the bond , which is in general terms : which implies , that if the consideration had been expressed in the bond , it had been plainly against the law. but suppose it be left out of the bond : is not the penal summ of the forfeiture of the bond sufficient to make the poor incumbent comply with the terms proposed afterwards ? if none but just and reasonable things had been intended ; why were they not clearly expressed in the bond it self , so as to prevent any fear or jealousy of worse designs ? have no such things ever been practised , or heard of among us ? if there had not ; doth it not look like a contrivance to deceive the law , and to hamper the consciences of those who take benefices ? and whatever is done in fraudem legis , is against law : for it frustrates the main intention and design of a law without breaking the letter of it ; which is the worst way of defeating a law. but we are told , that our courts of law are to judge according to the law ; and not according to an equitable construction of the intention and design of it . if it be really so ; it doth only shew that such courts are under a strange limitation , which are tied up to the letter of a law , against the main scope and principal end of it . but by the judges oath 18 e. 3. n. 2. 20 e. 3. n. l. they are bound to do equal law and execution of right to all the king's subjects &c. what is here meant by equal law ? is it to pursue the letter of the law against the reason and design of it ? there are two sorts of equity to be consider'd among us ; 1. an equity founded upon a reasonable construction of law , according to the intention of it : 2. an equity for which the common law hath made no provision ; as in cases of fraud , accident and trust : which is the true foundation of the court of equity in chancery ; viz. to supply the defects of our law in those cases . the question now is , whether the judges at common law are so tied up to the bare letter of it , that they cannot take-in such cases , which are according to the reason of a law , but not within the words of it ? and my lord coke allows this sort of equity . for , saith he , equity is a construction made by the iudges , that cases out of the letter of a statute , yet being within the same mischief or cause of making of the same , shall be within the same remedy that that statute provideth . these are remarkable words of this great oracle of the law , and ought to be well weighed and considered in all such cases as this . and he afterwards saith , that equity is the reason of the law , which weighs cases according to their due measures ; and so gives in paribus rationibus paria iura & iudicia . if then these bonds of resignation are within the reason of this law , and tend to the same mischief ; they ought to have the same remedy : and it cannot be made any just plea for them , that they are not within the letter of the law. ii. i now come to consider the oath against simony , which every incumbent is bound to take ; which runs in these words : i , a. b. do swear that i have made no simoniacal payment contract or promise , directly or indirectly , by my self or by any other , to my knowledge or with my consent , to any person or persons whatsoever , for or concerning the procuring or obtaining of the rectory or vicarage ; nor will at any time hereafter perform or satisfy any such kind of payment , contract or promise , made by any other without my knowledge or consent . simony , saith my lord coke , is the more odious , because it is ever accompanied with perjury ; for the presentee is sworn to commit no simony . here are two things fit to be considered : 1. that the oath is not meerly against direct simony ; but against any simoniacal contract for obtaining a benefice . 2. that this oath is not limited to the statute 31 eliz. nor made in pursuance of it ; but was in being long before : and therefore must have its interpretation from the ecclesiastical law , as it was here receiv'd ; and not from the words of the statute , which do not mention a simoniacal contract . we must then enquire what was a simoniacal contract by our ecclesiastical law. in our provincial constitutions , which were receiv'd as part of our law relating to ecclesiastical matters , there is one about an oath to be taken by every one presented before the bishop : that for the obtaining the presentation he had neither promised nor given any thing to him that presented him ; nec aliquam propter hoc inierit pactionem ; nor enter'd into any bond or covenant for that end : not a covenant , to pay a summ of money , but to obtain the presentation . propter hoc , saith lyndwood , sc. ut praesentetur : and he declares it before , that whatever is done with an intention to induce the patron to present , is simoniacal ; and whatever compact any enter into for that purpose , is a simoniacal contract . nay he goes so far as to say , the doing any thing with that design to obtain a benefice makes it a mental simony : ( which reaches not to the oath , and requires no more but repentance ) but if there be a bargain between the patron and the party to be presented , he declares it to be a simoniacal contract . he puts the question , if a person offers to serve a patron for a year or two , with that intention to obtain the presentation to such a benefice by it , whether such a one can with a safe conscience take the oath ? he answers negatively , if this were his principal design , and there were a bond or covenant between them to that purpose : for this were simony . from whence it follows ; that any bond or covenant enter'd into for that end , to obtain a presentation , was simoniacal according to the sense of our law ecclesiastical . in the time of archbishop courtney , the form of the oath was more full and express , as it is extant in the archbishop's register called morton , and in spelman's councils : for there is this clause added , that neither themselves nor any friends of theirs are under any bonds about the resignation or exchange of their benefices . here the oath is express against any bonds of resignation . but why is this clause left out since ? because it was supposed to be sufficiently implied in the other words : since this was at least an indirect simoniacal contract . it may be said , that men are not now tied up to the canonists opinions about mental and conventional simony : for out law owns nothing but real simony ; i. e. either actual payment , or a bond to pay such a summ of money to obtain a presentation : and if there be no contract for that end , it is no simoniacal contract according to our law. this is all that can be said in this case : but i think it can give no considering man satisfaction . for the intention of the law , in being so strict and severe against all simoniacal contracts , was twofold : 1. to preserve the dignity of the sacred function ; which could never be upheld , if mean and sordid trafficking were allowed as to benefices . for the people can never have any due respect or veneration for a person , whom they suspect to have come into his place among them by indirect practises ; although it be not the payment of so much money . for they have so much sense as to know , that what is valuable by money is as good as money according to its proportion : and if a man gives a bond to resign his living upon notice ; they know how much this abates of the value of it to him , when he holds it on such a precarious title : and that he gives so much to obtain the living , as it is of less value to him , than if he had it without any such bond. he that is forced by a bond to resign his benefice , must part with what was really valuable to him ; as much as the possession of it for so many years , as he might otherwise enjoy it , would come to : and he that gives a bond to that purpose to obtain a presentation , doth oblige himself to give to the patron so much as that interest can be valued at . is not a free unconditional interest in a benefice really more valuable , than that which depends on the pleasure of another ? if it be ; then he that gives a bond of resignation , doth give something really valuable in money , to obtain the presentation . and how can this be excused from simony ? yes ; some may say , simony is only a frightfull word used by ecclesiasticks to deter people from making the best of their own : whereas the true notion of simony is only buying the gifts of the holy ghost : but what relation is there between the gifts of the holy ghost and a benefice ? i do not think there are any so weak , as to imagine the gifts of the holy ghost can be purchased with money given to patrons : and if they could , the dealers in such bargains would not think them worth their money ; which they could lay out upon things of greater value to them . but here lies the true state of the case . it hath been the wisdom and charity of princes and other persons of estates , to make endowments of parochial churches for the support and incouragement of those in holy orders to attend upon the service of god in them : and the law of the land hath so annexed the spiritual duty with the temporal advantage , that no one can be capable of the latter , that is not obliged to the other . so that the right of discharging a spiritual trust and the right of enjoying the profits go together . but to prevent the unspeakable mischief of purchasing the profits which are devoted to such a spiritual use , this hath been called by the detestable name of simony : and very severe laws have been made , not only against the giving of money , but the using of any indirect means to obtain a presentation . because such things do lessen the esteem of those who use them ; and not only thereby make them more uncapable of doing service , but expose the sacred function it self to contempt . 2. another great end of these laws , is to keep the clergy from oppression and slavery . i am far from going about to lessen the just and legal rights of patrons ; who by our laws enjoy some privileges , which are not allowed them in other countries , where the ecclesiastical law is stricter than here in england : as in the liberty of selling the rights of advowsons ; their trial at common law ; the six months for patrons &c. but for our right understanding the present matter , it must be consider'd , as to the rights of patrons , that it was not an original and absolute right to dispose of benefices as they pleased ; but a limited trust reposed in them , to put-in fit persons to discharge the duties of their places . it is very well known to all persons who have looked into these matters , that in the first settlement of this church of england , the bishops of the several dioceses had them under their own immediate care ; and that they had the clergy living in a community with them , whom they sent abroad to several parts of their dioceses , as they saw occasion to imploy them : but that by degrees , they saw a necessity of fixing presbyters within such a compass , to attend upon the service of god among the people that were the inhabitants : that these precincts which are since called parishes , were at first much larger , and cast into such divisions in each diocese , as probably make up the several deaneries since : that when lords of manors were inclined to build churches for their own conveniencies , they found it necessary to make some endowments , to oblige those who officiated in their churches to a diligent attendance : that upon this , the several bishops were very well content to let those patrons have the nomination of persons to those churches ; provided they were satisfied of the fitness of those persons , and that it were not deferred beyond such a limited time . so that the right of patronage is really but a limited trust ; and the bishops are still in law the judges of the fitness of the persons to be imployed in the several parts of their dioceses . but the patrons never had the absolute disposal of their benefices upon their own terms ; but if they did not present fit persons within the limited time , the care of the places did return to the bishop , who was then bound to provide for them . some pretend , that before the lateran council , there was no time of lapse to the bishop , if the patron did not present : but that the bishop was to provide one to serve the cure in the mean time , and the patron might present when he would . but this is certainly a mistake : however it be asserted by persons of great authority . my lord coke cites bracton and fleta for it : but i can find nothing like it in either of them . bracton indeed speaks of the time of lapse by the council of lateran , which was to be after six months , if a dispute happen'd about the title ; and this constitution is extant in the decretals : and the same words are used by fleta : but not a word in either of them of any unlimited power which patrons had before , as far as i can find . which made me wonder at such a maxim , as i find by several father'd on bracton , ante concilium lateranense nullum currebat tempus contra praesentantes . but rolls very fairly reports it just as it is in bracton ; yet afterwards he recites mr. selden's words . before this lateran council , alex. had sent a constitution hither , which allow'd the bishops , in case any difference happened about the patronage , to sequester the profits , without fixing the time : which is all the foundation i can meet with for this famous maxim. but before this we may observe several canons of councils , which limited the patrons to three months . these canons were never receiv'd in england ; which , if i mistake not , had always the privilege of six months for patrons . this i ground upon the register , a book of great authority , and considerable antiquity ; where it is said expresly , that the bishops have not the right of lapse till six months are passed ; which is said to be secundum legem & consuetudinem regni angliae ; according to the ancient custom and law of england . and the like was observed in the old customs of normandy . but by the ancient law of england , notwithstanding the right of patronage , the bishop of the diocese had these rights reserved to him : 1. the right of admission of the person presented : 2. the right of lapse , or bestowing the benefice , if the patron failed his six months : 3. the right of making an avoidance , by deprivation or resignation . 1. the bishop hath by the law the right of admission of the person presented by the patron . for here from the time of christianity being receiv'd among the saxons , at least as far as we can trace any footsteps of the settlement of a parochial clergy , it was expresly provided for ; that no presbyters should be fixed in any places , without the consent of the bishop . for this we have a canon of theodore archbishop of canterbury , preserved by egbert archbishop of york ( each the seventh in their sees , but at some distance of time ) in his collection of canons : the words are , statutum est ut sine authoritate & consensu episcoporum , presbyteri in quibuslibet ▪ ecclesiis non constituantur , nec inde expellantur ; & siquis hoc facere tentaverit , synodali sententiâ feriatur . so that by the original constitution of this church the bishops had the power of fixing presbyters in churches , and of removing them if there were occasion ; and no other persons could do it without them . this doth by no means infringe the right of nomination or presentation of fit persons to the bishop : but it implies that no such presentation was sufficient , unless the bishop did first approve and consent to the person . wherein the ancient right of patronage here in england did consist , we cannot have a better account ; than from the words of all the nobility of england in their remonstrance to gregory ix . when he attempted to incroach upon them by papal provisions : cum igitur à primâ christianitatis fundatione in angliâ , tali fuerint hactenus progenitores nostri gavisi libertate , quod decedentibus ecclesiarum rectoribus , ecclesiarum patroni personas idoneas eligentes ad easdem , diocesanis praesentaverunt ab eisdem ecclesiarum regimini praeficiendas . these are words of great weight ; and do plainly shew , that the right of patronage consisted in the nomination of fit persons to the bishop of the diocese for any vacant places : but that the bishops were , if they approved them , to put them into the possession of them . in the time of innocent iii. the king wrote to the pope ; that the nobility and bishops of england did insist upon it , as their right by the ancient custom , to build churches on their own lands : and the pope yielded it to the laity , provided that they had the consent of the bishop of the diocese ; and that the rights of former churches were not prejudiced thereby . but saith mr. selden , they challenged it without licence . what to do ? to build churches on their own lands : but not a word of putting-in any incumbents by their own power without the bishop's consent and approbation . nay , it appears that they could not build churches on their own lands without the bishops allowance . mr. selden would fain have it believed , that the right of presentation to the bishop of the diocese came in by the canon law about a. d. 1200. but the insinuations of that kind , as they are frequent in his book of tythes , so they do shew his want of skill or ingenuity at that time , as much as any one part of it . but i need go no farther , than this letter of the nobility to the pope ; who were extremely jealous of their rights of patronage , and yet they challenged nothing thereby , but a right of nomination of a fit person to the bishop of the diocese : not a word of investiture or collation by the patron ; which mr. selden talks of . he doth not deny , that after a. d. 1200 , it was the undoubted law of england for the patrons to present to the bishops . but i say , it was the law of england , before ever the decretals were made : it was the original and fundamental law of the english church ; and as ancient as the right of patronage . in the same epistle , they desire the pope to leave them to their ancient liberty , which was personas idoneas praesentare . but who is to be judge of the fitness of the persons ? for that , we have a full declaration of the ancient law and custom of england , in artic. cleri , c. 13. de idoneitate personae praesentatae ad beneficium ecclesiasticum , pertinet examinatio ad iudicem ecclesiasticum , & ita est hactenus usitatum , & fiat in posterum . upon which my lord coke saith , that the examination of the ability and sufficiency of the person belongs to the bishop , who is the ecclesiastical iudge ; and in this examination he is a iudge and not a minister ; and may and ought to refuse the person presented , if he be not persona idonea . and that this was no new law , appears by the words , that it had been hitherto so used , and should be so for the time to come . and so coke truly saith , that this act was but a declaration of the common law and custom of the realm . so that the bishops power of examining and iudging the fitness of the person presented is a part of the common law of england . 15 h. 7. 8. it is declared by all the judges , that the bishop in the examination of a clerk , is a iudge and not a minister . and if he misbehaves himself , he is to be punished as a iudge . 18 h. 7. keilway saith , that the bishop may refuse for insufficiency ; and is to give notice to the patron . it was resolved by the court in specot ' s case , that the court is to give credit to the bishop acting iudicially : but then it is said , that the plea must be special and certain . and so coke saith , that in a quare impedit brought against the bishop for refusal of his clerk , he must shew the cause of his refusal specially and directly . but it was the opinion of lord chief justice anderson , that in things not triable at common law a general plea was sufficient . but when the case came to the king's bench 32 eliz. it was there said , that the articuli cleri mention a reasonable cause ; which , say they , must be special : for causa vaga & incerta non est rationabilis . but the main point is , who is to judge what is a reasonable cause ? and i cannot but think that anderson's opinion is the truest and most reasonable . if it be for a matter triable at common law , that court is to judge : but if not , i do not see how it can be avoided , but the bishop must judge : and his judgment of insufficiency must be taken ; as well as in any certificate whatsoever . for , if the law trust him with the judgment of a matter proper for him to judge of ; other courts , which have no cognizance of it , must give credit to such a certificate : or else they must take upon them to judge in matters that are not of their cognisance ; which is to confound the jurisdiction of courts . i grant , the judgment of the bishop is not conclusive : but the appeal then lies to the supreme ecclesiastical court ; and the metropolitan is to be judge of the sufficiency of the person . but is not this a great prejudice to the right of patrons , if the bishops are to judge of the fitness of persons presented ; and so the patrons presentation may signify nothing , if the bishop pleases ? this is a trust which the law reposes in the bishop , and it lies upon his conscience to act sincerely in this matter : and in case of examination of fit persons , a trust must be placed somewhere : and in whom more properly than in the bishop of the diocese ? to whom the care of it doth especially belong ; and that by as plain law as any we have . are not all judges trusted in matters that come before them ? but this is no decisive judgment : for an appeal lies according to the nature of the matter . and this is no other trust than hath been allow'd in all other christian nations , where the rights of patronage are owned . iustinian owns it several times in his novels ; not only that the bishops are to examine and approve those who are nominated by founders of churches ; but if they find them unworthy , they may put others in their room . by the capitulars , or old ecclesiastical laws of france , the lay patrons are not only to present to the bishop such as were probabilis vitae & doctrinae ; but if upon examination they found them otherwise , it was in their power to reject them . as to the canon law , there can be no dispute in this point : but if the bishop refused , an appeal did lie to the pope ; and if he were unjustly refused , the bishop was bound to provide for him : but during the appeal , the patron might present another ; whom if the bishop approved , the appeal did fall . rebuffus a noted lawyer saith , that it is a damning sin in a bishop , not to examine the fitness of those who are presented by patrons . and a late learned french canonist saith , those are to blame who lay the fault of so many unworthy men being in places on the lay patrons : for , saith he , the bishops are to blame , who are bound to examine , and if they see cause , to reject them . so that we have not only our own law , but the general consent of the christian world , where the right of patronage is allow'd ; as to the bishops right of examining and iudging the fitness of persons presented to benefices . 2. the right of collation upon lapse belongs to the bishop , notwithstanding the right of patronage . it is said by lord hobart , that a lapse is not an interest naturally , but a meer trust in law ; and afterwards ; that the ordinary , or he that is to present by lapse , is as a kind of attourney made by law , to do that for the patron ; which it is supposed he would do himself , if there were not some lett : and therefore the collation by lapse is in the right of the patron and for his turn . this seems to me to be a mistaken notion of a lapse : for the true question is , whether upon a lapse the ordinary doth collate iure pleno , or iure devoluto ? some french lawyers held the latter ; but car. molinaeus and others utterly reject that opinion , for this reason ; because churches and dioceses were iure communi under the care of the bishops ; but it was by particular indulgence , that the patrons had the right of presentation : which being neglected , things do return to common right : and therefore the bishop hath a true interest , and acts not in the right of the patron , but his own. it 's true , there is a devolution afterwards by our law : for as the author of the doctor and student saith , the law of the realm is , that if a benefice falls void , then the patron shall present within six months ; and if he do not , that then the ordinary shall present : but yet the law is farther in this case , that if the patron present before the ordinary put-in his clerk , that then the patron shall enjoy his presentment : and so it is , though the time should fall to the metropolitan . for , as he saith , by our law , if the bishop doth not collate within six months , then the metropolitan presents . but this is by a right of devolution , and then why not the other ? the answer is , that the bishop is ordinary of the diocese , and therefore it comes to him of common right : but it falls to the archbishop , not as ordinary , but as superiour ; to whom the right of devolution falls upon the inferiour's neglect . for , although in some respects , and in the excepted cases , the archbishop may be said to be ordinary of the whole province : yet that is not so much in respect of immediate iurisdiction ; which hobart and others say , was by virtue of the legatine power which was annexed to his see. but the archbishop hath a power as metropolitan , to supply the defects of the suffragans of his province ; and so this right of collating upon defect of the ordinary comes to him by right of devolution . but how then comes the king to his right after the metropolitan's neglect ? that is , say our lawyers , because the king is patron paramount of all the benefices within the realm . the meaning is , that the king by right of his crown is to see that all places be duely supplied with persons fit for them : and if all others whom the law hath entrusted , do neglect their duties ; then by the natural order and course of government , it falls to the supreme power , which is to supply defects , and to reform abuses . 3. the bishop hath the right of making an avoidance by deprivation or resignation . for , as he hath the power of putting-in ; so the law hath lodged in him the judicial power of proceeding against offenders , and hath not left that to the judgment of the patron . if we enquire , who by our law is made the proper judge of a beneficed person , whether he behaves himself so as to deserve to lose his benefice ? will any one say , that the law hath put this into the patron 's hands ? yet all those who justify these bonds of resignation must in effect say , that the patrons are the proper judges : for they have the real power of deprivation in their hands , and may execute it when they please . which is such an arbitrary jurisdiction , as would be thought intolerable in other hands . in all causes of deprivation of a person actually possessed of a benefice , these things must concur : 1. a monition or citation of the party to appear : 2. a charge given him , to which he is to answer , called the libel : 3. a competent time assigned for the proofs and answers : 4. a liberty for counsel to defend his cause ; and to except against the proofs and witnesses : 5. a solemn sentence after hearing all the proofs and answers . these are the fundamentals of all judicial proceedings in the ecclesiastical courts , in order to a deprivation : and if these things be not observed , the party hath just cause of appeal , and may have remedy by a superiour court. and these proceedings are agreeable to the common justice and reason of mankind : because the party accused hath the liberty of defence , and the right of appeal . but there is nothing of all this , in bonds of resignation : for the patron takes the advantage of the forfeiture of the bond ; and so without any trial , or proof , or sentence , deprives him of his benefice . some who are no friends to the ecclesiastical courts , would have no deprivation of a benefice , but by proceedings at common law : because it is a freehold . suppose that it were so ( which seems contrary to the course of the law : for the bishop in a plea to a quare impedit , saith , nihil clamat praeter institutionem & destitutionem clericorum ; and ecclesiastical deprivations have been still allow'd at common law , if they have been according to the ecclesiastical laws ) but taking it for granted , that a deprivation of a freehold ought to be at common law : what then ? what , without an indictment , and without a trial by a jury ? no hearing of the cause , no witnesses examin'd , no counsel to be heard , no judgment by his peers ? and can this be agreeable to the fundamental laws of england ; to have men forced out of their freeholds in such an arbitrary manner ? what would they think ; if other freehold estates , which hold of a superiour lord , were made so arbitrary , as to depend upon the will of the lord so , as to be turned out upon six months notice ? let us see bonds of resignation practised upon such estates : and then we shall soon find , what clamours will be made against them , as overthrowing the fundamental rights and liberties of the people . is there not the same reason in this case ? is there not greater ? because these benefices are not freeholds , which are held of the patrons ; but they have only a right to present fit persons to them . but it may be , that the defenders of these bonds will deny benefices to be freeholds by the law of england . it is easy to guess , what some men would have them to be , by these bonds : i am sure far enough from freeholds . but such private transactions cannot alter the nature of things : and we are now enquiring , what benefices are , by the law of england ? it is disputed at common law , in whom the freehold of the glebeland of a benefice is , during the voidance ? and it is agreed , that it is neither in the patron nor ordinary : because it was given to the incumbents and their successors . and therefore they tell us , it is then in abeyance ; which is a pretty way of expressing , that the law takes care that it shall come to the next incumbent , notwithstanding the discontinuance by death of his predecessor : and i think it had been as well said , that it was in the law , although not in any person . but it is not disputed , but that as soon as another incumbent is in possession , the freehold is in him : for those are littleton's words , sect. 647. and my lord coke saith , that the incumbent cannot be look'd on , as a meer tenant for life : because he may have such writs , which none can have but a tenant in fee-simple or fee-tail ; and he may receive homage , which tenant for life cannot do . and for this he goes as far back as the time of e. 1. but long before that , in glanvil's time , which was of h. 2. it is said , that he that is possessed of a benefice by institution from the bishop , and judged fit by him , shall enjoy it for his life ; although the right of advowson be disputed . which is several times affirmed by my lord coke upon good reason . in one place he saith , that at the common law , if a church be once full , the incumbent could not be removed : ( excepting just cause of deprivation ) and plenarty generally was a good plea in a quare impedit , or assise of darein presentment : and the reason of this was , to the intent the incumbent might apply himself to his spiritual charge . 2. the law intended , that the bishop that had cure of souls within his diocese would admit and institute an able man for the discharge of his duty and his own ; and that the bishop would do right to every patron in his diocese . in another place he saith , that by the order of common law , if one had presented unto a church whereto he had no right , and the bishop had admitted and instituted his clerk , this incumbent could not be removed for divers reasons : 1. for that he came into the church by a iudicial act of the bishop . 2. that by the common law , in every town and parish there ought to be persona idonea : and when the bishop had admitted him able , which implied that he was idonea persona , then the law had his final intention , viz. that the church should be sufficiently provided for . 3. that the incumbent having curam animarum might the more effectually and peaceably intend so great charge ; the common law provided , that after institution he should not be subject to any action , to be removed at the suit of any common person ; without all respect of age , coverture , imprisonment , or non-sane-memory ; and without regard of title , either by descent or purchase , or of any estate . are these things consistent with bonds of resignation ? but it may be said , that here is no deprivation supposed , but a voluntary resignation : and what hurt is there , if it be a man 's own act ? i answer , that we are not only to consider the act of the person , but the interest and general concernment of the church in it . for in all matters of such a publick nature , we are not to regard so much the consent of the party , as the nature and consequence of the act it self . if it be an illegal thing , and tend to subvert the rights of the church ; it cannot make it legal to say , that it was his own act. now as to this kind of resignation , we are to consider these two things : 1. that if the resignation be not into the hands of the bishop , it is an illegal act , and void of it self : 2. that if it be into the bishop's hands , he hath the power in law to accept it or not . 1. that the resignation must be into the hands of the bishop . for a resignation into the hands of the patron , is by the canon law declared to be null and void of it self . so innocent iv. ad c. 6. de rerum per. and this is grounded on the text of the canon law. c. 17. q. 2. c. gonsaldus : and on the appendix to the lateran council under alex. iii. de renunt . tit . 15. c. pen. where it is declared to be an unworthy thing , and contrary to the canons , to resign into the hands of patrons . and alex. iii. forbids it absolutely under an anathema , de renunt . c. 4. which is confirmed by innocent iii. c. 8. in the decretals . but we are to consider especially , how far this part of the canon law was here receiv'd ; and we can have no better a judge in this case than lyndwood , who saith positively , that renuntiatio facta in manus laici etiam sponte non tenet ; i. e. a resignation made into the hands of a lay-patron , if it be never so free , doth not hold : and therefore he saith , it must be made into the hands of him who hath the ordinary iurisdiction , and therefore hath power to admit . he observes two things very material as to the point of resignation : 1. that a voluntary resignation , though not to the ordinary , deprives the party of the possession ; so as he cannot recover , although he be not wholly devested of the property , or right to the thing : quia sine consensu superioris non tenet resignatio : and this is founded on that fundamental reason , that the care of the diocese belongs to him , who hath the ordinary jurisdiction ; who was the bishop : but as lyndwood observes , by custom and composition , this is put into other hands ; as in places of exempt jurisdiction . and so , where the power of granting institution is lodged by the bishop's consent , and a prescription upon it ; there is a power likewise of receiving a resignation : but not in any , who have only a delegated power from the bishop . for there is a difference in law and reason between an ordinary power depending on an ancient prescription and composition ( as it is in several places in the deans and chapters within certain precincts ) and an ordinary power in a substitute , as a chancellor or vicar-general . for although such an officer hath the same court with the bishop , so that the legal acts of the court are the bishop's acts , by whose authority he sits there ; so that no appeal lies from the bishop's officer to himself , but to the superiour : and although a commissary be allow'd to have the power of the ordinary in testamentary causes , which were not originally of spiritual iurisdiction , as it is said in henslow's case , with which lindwood agrees : yet in acts of spiritual and voluntary iurisdiction the case is otherwise . for the bishop by appointing a chancellor , doth not devest himself of his own ordinary power : but he may delegate some parts of it by commission to others , which goes no farther than is expressed in it . for it is a very great mistake in any to think , that such who act by a delegated power , can have any more power than is given to them ; where a special commission is required for the exercise of it . for by the general commission no other authority passes , but that of hearing causes : but all acts of voluntary jurisdiction require a special commission , which the bishop may restrain as he sees cause . for as lyndwood saith , nothing passes , virtute officii , but the hearing of causes : so that other acts depend upon the bishop's particular grant for that purpose . and the law no-where determins the bounds of a chancellor's power as to such acts ; nor can it be supposed so to do , since it is but a delegated power : and it is in the right of him that deputes , to circumscribe and limit it . neither can use or custom inlarge such a power , which depends upon another's will. and however , by modern practise , the patents for such places have passed for the life of the person , to whom they were first granted ; yet it was not so , by the ancient ecclesiastical law of england . for lyndwood affirms , that a grant of jurisdiction ceases by the death of him who gave it : per mortem deputantis cessat potestas officialium : ( or else it could never pass into the dean and chapter sede vacante ; or to the guardian of the spiritualties . ) and he gives a good reason for it ; nè invitus habeat officialem sibi fortassis odiosum . it 's true , that by the statute 37 h. 8. c. 17. meer doctors of law are made capable of exercising all manner of ecclesiastical iurisdiction . but it doth not assign the extent of their jurisdiction ; but leaves it to the bishops themselves , from whom their authority is derived . and the law still distinguishes between potestas ordinaria and delegata : for the former supposes a person to act in his own right and not by deputation ; which , i suppose , no chancellors or officials will pretend to . but how far now , a commission to exercise jurisdiction doth hold , when the person who gave it is dead , is not my present business to enquire : but in sutton's case , it seems to be taken for granted by the counsel , that a chancellor's patent , confirmed by dean and chapter , doth give a man a freehold for life , if he be capable of doing his duty ; otherwise he may be deprived for insufficiency , as doctor sutton was . but noy saith , that the court was in doubt , how far the act of the predecessor could bind the successor as to the profits . and in the prebend of hatcherlies case , dodderidge declared , that ecclesiastical iurisdiction in iudicial acts may be executed by substitute : but a grant of it is not good , but during the bishop's life ; and shall not bind the successor . and coke thought it a very hard thing , that the successor should not remove him ; but be bound to answer for the acts and offences of a commissary , which he never put-in . but these things belong not to our present business , any farther than to shew , that however in some cases the bishops may substitute others ; yet as to resignations of benefices , for all that i can find , the law only takes notice of the bishop himself . lyndwood observes , that there is a difference to be made between the resignation of a simple benefice , i. e. where there is no cure of souls ; and of such a one that hath such a cure going along with it . in the former case he saith , that a resignation may be to the prejudice of the party , without the bishop's consent : but in the latter , where it may be to the prejudice of others as well as of himself , it hath no force without the bishop's ratification : in hoc casu necessaria est ratihabitio episcopi . so that no resignation of a cure of souls can be of any validity without the bishop's acceptance . in the case of smith against foanes , it was resolved and agreed by all upon evidence at bar , that a resignation to a proctor , does not make the church void , until it be accepted by the bishop , and acknowledged before him . 2. but suppose the resignation be made into the hands of the bishop , is he bound to accept it ? by what law ? for what reason ? must he not enquire into the reason and inducements of the resignation , whether it be corrupt or not ? no bishop can be bound to accept a corrupt resignation ; and whether it be so or not , he is bound to enquire : and if he be not satisfied ; by what law can he be required to do that , which he cannot do with a good conscience ? if the law hath trusted him with accepting a resignation ; it hath likewise trusted him with judging , whether it be fit to be accepted or not . in gayton's case it is plain , that the bishop may refuse a resignation before a publick notary , when there was a condition annexed to it , which the law doth not annex . for in this case , the condition was , that if such or such a person were not presented within six months , the resignation should be null : which coke then said , made it void , because resignations ought to be free : and this is a judicial act , to which a condition cannot be annexed , no more than an ordinary may admit upon condition . but it may be objected , that in case of donatives the resignation must be into the patrons hands , as in gays and fairchild's case : why then may not a resignation be good to a patron in other benefices , since those are as really benefices as the other ? the difference is , that there is no presentation to the bishop in donatives . for , it is agreed by the judges in that case , that if there were a presentation once made to the bishop , it ceases to be a donative , and becomes always presentable . so that the case of donatives is very different ; for we say , that wherever the bishop hath a right to admit , it is his right to accept of a resignation . but in this case , the bishop is supposed to have nothing to do in the admission or institution of the person . if it be asked , how the bishops came to lose their right of receiving the presentation to these benefices ? i answer , that they seem to me to have come one of these two ways : 1. by royal licence : so my lord coke saith , that the king may not only found a church , or free chapel donative himself ; but may license any subject to do the same . but the register supposes a royal foundation , and not a meer royal licence ; and that it must be proved to be ancient too : and therefore a new licence will not come up to the register . 2. by peculiar privilege . as when a lord of a manor in a great parish , having his tenants about him at a remote distance from the parish-church , offers to build and endow a church there ; provided that it should belong entirely to him and his family , to put in such persons as they should think fit , if they were in holy orders . it 's very possible , that the bishops at that time , to encourage such a work , might permit them to enjoy this liberty ; which being continued time out of mind , is turned into a prescription . if these donatives had been common , the mischief would have been more visible : but being so few in comparison , they have been less taken notice of . and they are to be distinguished from those called sine-cures and exempt iurisdictions . for sine-cures in truth , are benefices presentable ; but by means of vicarages endowed in the same places , the persons who enjoy them , have by long custom been excused from residence ; which is the most can be said for them . and such sine-cures , if they be resigned , it must be into the bishop's hands . exempt iurisdictions are not so called , because under no ordinary ; but because they are not under the ordinary of the diocese , but have one of their own . these are therefore called peculiars ; and they are of several sorts : 1. royal peculiars : which are the king 's free chapels , and are exempt from any jurisdiction but the king 's ; and therefore such may be resigned into the king's hands as their proper ordinary ; either by ancient privilege , or inherent right . but how far resignations may be made to the king as supreme ordinary , as in goodman's case , it is not here a place to examine . 2. archbishops peculiars : which are not only in the neighbour . dioceses , but dispersed up and down in remoter places : for it appears by eadmerus , that wherever the archbishop had an estate belonging to him , he had the sole iurisdiction as ordinary . 3. deans and chapters peculiars : which are places wherein by ancient compositions the bishops have parted with their iurisdiction as ordinaries , to those societies ; whose right was not original , but derived from the bishop ; and where the compositions are lost , it depends upon prescription ; as in the deans and chapters of st. pauls , and litchfield , which are mentioned in the books , 11 h. 4. 9. 4. peculiars belonging to monasteries . for , the richer monasteries were very uneasy , until they had obtained either from the bishops , or from the popes ( which proved the most effectual , but more chargeable way ) an exemption from ordinary jurisdiction . those churches , which the monasteries had gotten to be annexed to themselves , were called appropriations : but how far these were exempt from the ordinaries jurisdiction , is not fully understood ; and therefore i shall endeavour to explain it . 1. appropriations did not at first imply any exemption from the ordinary . for it was expresly provided in the canon law , that no persons should be put into such churches without institution from the bishop : to whom the incumbents were to be answerable in all spiritual matters ; as in all temporal , to the abbots . and in the oldest appropriations , which i have seen , there is a salvo per omnia iure episcopali : which words are inconsistent with an exemption . 2. the forms of appropriation were different afterwards . for although none could be made without the bishop's consent , yet that consent was expressed in different ways , and had different effects . if the bishop only confirmed the lay-patron's gift , then nothing but the right of patronage passed , and his jurisdiction remained . if the bishop joyned in the donation in these words , concedimus vobis talem ecclesiam ; then he passed away his temporal rights , as to that church . if the bishop granted the church pleno jure ; then the canonists say , he passed his diocesan right : which consisted in rights which the bishop had distinct from his episcopal iurisdiction : which it was thought he could not part with by any act of his ; for that were to devest himself of his order . 3. appropriations , confirmed by the papal authority , were allow'd to carry with them exemptions from the ordinary . and therefore the monasteries which could bear the charge , did not think themselves free from their ordinaries , till they had obtained bulls for that purpose : and then they took themselves to be free in their conventual churches , as well as their chapels , or oratories on their own lands . 4. all papal exemptions are taken away by act of parliament , 31 h. 8. c. 13. and the churches so exempted are put under the iurisdiction of the ordinary of the diocese ; or such commissioners as the king shall appoint . so that no papal exemption can now be pleaded , as to appropriated churches ; how clear and full soever the charters of exemption were . this is a thing so little taken notice of , that i shall set down the words , sect. 23. be it further enacted , that such of the said monasteries &c. and all churches and chapels , to them , or any of them belonging ; which before the dissolution &c. were exempted from the visitation or visitations , and all other iurisdiction of the ordinary or ordinaries , within whose diocese they were situate or set , shall from thenceforth be within the iurisdiction and visitation of the ordinary or ordinaries , within whose diocese they or any of them be situate and set ; or within the visitation and iurisdiction of such person or persons , as by the king's highness shall be limited or appointed ; this act , or any other exemption , liberty or iurisdiction , to the contrary notwithstanding . therefore no persons who enjoy the estates belonging to monasteries , can now plead an exemption by virtue thereof from the ordinaries iurisdiction ; nor that they have a power to put-in and put-out as they please , without any regard to the bishop's authority . but suppose there were no endowment , and that the churches were built on the site of the monasteries , and so were supplied by their own body ; then such persons are wholly at their will , and they may turn them out as they please . i answer ; i confess the condition of such stipendiaries , is as bad as of those who hold their benefices under bonds of resignation . for tenures at the will of the lord are the worst of any . but it is to be hoped , that such persons who enjoy such estates as were originally designed for the support of the parochial clergy , ( however at first fraudulently perverted by the combination of the monks and popes ) will at the least take care that the cure of souls be duely provided for in such places . for that burthen goes along with the churches revenue in whose hands soever it be : and so they are both in law and conscience to see the places well supplied . and by the statutes of dissolution , as they do enjoy the rights , so they are bound to provide for the churches : and where they were parochial , to see that there were a fixed incumbent with a competent maintenance ; which the law always took a particular care of . ii. it is time now to consider the precedents , which have been produced to shew , that these bonds of resignation are not against law. the first is of iones and laurence , 8 iac. a bond was given to resign the benefice he was presented to , within three months upon request : and it was alledged in court , that it was a simoniacal contract , and against law. on the other side it was said , that there doth not appear any simony upon the condition : and therefore iudgment was given for the bond. but a writ of error was brought in the exchequer chamber : and the principal error insisted on was , that this condition was against law. but the judges of the common bench and barons of the exchequer held , that the obligation and condition are good enough . for a man may bind himself to resign upon good and valuable reasons , without any colour of simony : as to be obliged to resign , in case of plurality or non-residence ; or if his son be at age. but if it had been for a lease of the glebe , or tythes , or a summ of money ; that had been simony &c. and so the judgment was affirmed . to this precedent , i answer , that the reason of the judges is insufficient . for it comes to this : the bond is good because there may be good reason for it . may it not be said on the other side , the bond is naught , because there may be a very bad reason for it ? and a bond that may be turned to so very ill uses , it cannot but seem strange to me , that the judges should affirm it to be a good bond. if the particular reasons had been made the conditions of the bond , they might have judged upon them : but the bond was general , and no condition in it but notice . therefore their judgment must be , that a bond is reasonable , if no bad condition appears in it : which makes the incumbent a slave to the patron , and overthrows the just rights and liberties of the clergy ; and lays them open to perjury , when they give such a bond meerly to obtain a presentation . and they very well knew that none could be possessed of a benefice without an oath against all simoniacal contracts , either directly or indirectly . why did not the judges declare , that it was simony within their oath ? but they were onely to judge of the law. and how could they judge this not to be a simoniacal bargain ? because there was no simoniacal condition in it . but what is a simoniacal condition ? where hath the common law determin'd it ? and by what rule ? yes , say they , a lease for tythes , or a bargain for money , had been simony . but how come they to determine that no other contracts are simoniacal ; when they own , that simony is not under their cognisance ? did they ever offer to advise with the civilians , what was a simoniacal contract , according to the ecclesiastical law ? not the least mention of this : and therefore i cannot but think this a judgment without sufficient reason to support it . the same cause came on again the next year : and there it is declared , that it was not simony , but good policy to tie him to resign ; and if it were , it is not material . here are two good points declared : 1. that bonds of resignation are good policy . to what end ? to insnare mens consciences ; to make the church a prey to corrupt patrons ; to keep men from doing their duties , lest they should displease their patrons . if this be good policy , let it rather pass for that , than for good law. 2. that it is not material as to the goodness of the bond , whether it be simony or not . then it seems a simoniacal contract holds good in law : which i think was no good policy for judges to declare . but we are told , that 15 iac. in the case of paschal and clerk , it was said by the court upon evidence , that if the patron takes a bond of resignation at three months warning , it was simony within the statute . and for this we are referr'd to the roll , 2051. i wonder this judgment is not hitherto disproved , if the roll be falsified : and if not , here is judgment against judgment . but again , in the case of babington and wood , it was resolved on the same grounds with that of iones and laurence , and so deserves no new consideration : and several other judgments are said to have been given since on the same grounds . but let us compare this case with such as have been adjudged to be simony in the courts of common law. in the case of byrte and manning , the court held , that if a man entred into a contract to procure a presentation in consideration of the marriage of his son , that had been a simoniacal contract . why is not a bond of resignation , as much simony , as a consideration of marriage ; when both are made equally the conditions of obtaining a presentation ? if a simoniacal contract be made , and the person presented not at all privy to it , he is to incurr the penalty of it : but if a man be privy to a bond of resignation in order to a presentation , he shall not be guilty . and yet in the one case , a man swears with a good conscience : which i think he cannot in the other . in the case of winchcomb and pulleston , it was declared to be simony , to purchase the next presentation , when the incumbent was still alive , but in a fit of the strangury . and yet this was not within the letter of the law : for the living was not actually void . therefore such acts , as are against the design and reason of the law , are forbidden by it . and the like was affirmed by iustice hutton in the case of sheldon and bret. in a late judgment in chancery , bonds of resignation at pleasure to patrons by their clerks , are damned in equity , when any ill use is made of them . but why should any such bonds be allowed in law , which are liable to such ill uses ? i conclude with the words of my lord coke , that the common law doth detest simony , and all corrupt bargains for presentation to any benefice : and its design is , that a fit person for the discharge of the cure should be presented freely without expectation of any thing . how then can bonds of resignation be agreeable to law ? having thus dispatched the main point against all general bonds , which are made the conditions of obtaining a presentation ; there remain only some quaere's to be resolved . ( 1. ) suppose a bond be required onely to tie men up to do their duties , and to keep them from non-residence . i answer , ( 1. ) that the patron is to blame to pitch upon a person to discharge such a cure , of whom at the same time he discovers such a mistrust , as to need a bond to make him do his duty . and if a man makes no conscience of his duty without a bond , i doubt he will make very little with it . if he could make him a good man by his bond , it were of great use ; but if he be not , he may do the more mischief by continuing in his place by the force of a bond. so that i look on such bonds , as apt to raise scruples in good mens minds ; and to do no good upon bad ones . 2. that all wise and good patrons will consider the general mischief , more than a particular inconvenience . and what greater mischief can come to our church , than to have bonds of resignation brought into request ? for , besides corrupt patrons as to bargains ; what advantage will corrupt patrons as to religion make of it ? who by that means will be able to turn out the incumbents upon notice given , when opportunity serves them : as is before observ'd in the preface . ( 2. ) suppose it be a very equitable case , as for a minor ; is a bond of resignation unlawfull ? i answer , that there may be a lawfull trust , in such a case i do not question : but whether the person who takes this trust , can enter into a bond , and take the oath , i very much question , upon the reasons already mention'd . for there may be a confidential simony , as the casuists call it : and the way to prevent it , is , say they , that the trust be sine pretii , pacti , modi , vel conditionis interventu . for the taking of a bond argues a mistrust ; and is therefore contrary to the nature of a trust. ( 3. ) suppose the bishop himself requires a bond of resignation , as to a prebend of his church , if the prebendary quit the diocese ; is such a bond justifiable , or not ? the bishop , is no doubt , bound to take all possible care of the good of his diocese , and to make his preferments serviceable to that end. but if a man knows before-hand , that without this condition he cannot obtain it , and with it he may , he runs into a snare by giving a bond for that end ; and after , taking the oath against any simoniacal contract , directly or indirectly . i do think these bonds of so bad a nature and tendency , that i do wish , that no countenance or incouragement be given to them : especially by such , whose example may encourage others , to do that for bad designs , which they do for good. and wise and good men will always shew the greatest regard to that , which serves the most publick interest , and prevents the most growing mischief . ( 4. ) suppose the incumbent of a living makes an agreement with another clergy man , that he shall have a lease of his benefice from three years to three years ; upon which he takes a summ of money , and gives a bond of resignation before harvest , and is to procure a presentation from the patron : is this simony or not , by our law ? here the patron is onely supposed barely to know and to consent , ( which is hardly to be supposed in such kind of cases ) and that the terms are onely between the two parties , ( for i will not suppose the bishop accessary to such bargains ) the question is , whether the incumbent can with a safe conscience part with his benefice on such terms ? and whether the other can give a valuable consideration for his interest in it , if the patron consents ? i answer , that the law is as express against corrupt resignations , as against corrupt bargains for a presentation ; onely the penalty is not so great . the words of the act are , that if any incumbent of any benefice with cure of souls , shall corruptly resign or exchange the same , or corruptly take for , or in respect of the resigning or exchanging of the same directly or indirectly , any pension or summ of money or benefit whatsoever ; that then as well the giver as the taker &c. shall lose double the value of the money so given , and double the value of one years profit . 31 eliz. c. 6. it may possibly be said , that this is a distinct clause from the other , and hath another kind of penalty ; and so cannot reach persons in point of conscience as the other doth . but this is a strange way of dealing with laws . for there is the same penalty in the former clause ; onely there is added a present avoidence , and a disability in law : supposing these two left out , the one stands upon the same foot with the other . and i would know , whether if these were gone , they could not as well make a bargain for a presentation , as for such a resignation ? and is there nothing of conscience , or honour , or a regard to the dignity of the sacred function in the case ? no reverence to laws made on purpose to deter men from such fordid practises ? is a benefice to be look'd on as a meer livelyhood , to be bought and sold as other estates are ? is there no sense of any spiritual imployment going along with it ? no regard to the charge and trust that attends it ? if nothing of a spiritual nature is to be consider'd in a benefice , then there can be no such thing as simony : and then their hearts are at ease , and they may publish papers for presentations , as well as for resignation of incumbents . but i will not suppose such hard things of persons , who pretend to be in holy orders : but this i must put them in mind of ; that there is an oath to be taken , and a very strict one , against all simoniacal contracts , either directly or indirectly . and is wilfull perjury a thing to be slighted by any ? especially by churchmen , and in order to a cure of souls ? i have already mention'd my lord coke's saying , that simony is the more odious , because it is ever accompanied with perjury ; for the presentee is sworn to commit no simony : and for this he referrs to lyndwood . and i have already shew'd , how simony is to be understood according to him . if a solemn oath comes to be slighted and made little or nothing of ; how can such men pretend to religion or conscience ? but it may be said , that simony is to be determined by the law ; and the law makes a bargain with the patron to be simony , and not with the incumbent . i have said enough already to shew , that the statute doth not determine what simony is , but only inflicts a severe penalty on some sorts of it : and therefore it may be simony , although not expresly against the words of the law. but the words of the law are express against corrupt resignations : and i would fain know , whether a resignation for money be not a corrupt resignation ? and supposing the patron innocent , can any man of common sense or honesty take the oath , who comes in upon such terms , that he hath made no simoniacal contract or promise , to any person or persons whatsoever , concerning the procuring or obtaining the rectory or vicarage &c. is not this bargain in order to the procuring or obtaining the presentation ? let it be with whom it will , if it be for this end , it is simoniacal ; or else it will be hard to determine what simony is . and as to such kind of bonds of resignation between parties , without the patron 's privity ; how can they signify any thing , if the bishop do not accept the resignation ? which i have shewed before must be into his hands . but these men seem to set the bishop quite aside ; or to suppose him very weak and inconsiderate . all they look at , is the point of law : and they may say , they have advised with council ; and they have told them , that there is nothing against law in this practise . how ? not against law ? did they ask them , whether this were not a corrupt resignation within the statute ? no ; but whether it were simony or not ? i hardly suppose any man that understands what simony is by our law , would go so far : but they might say , it doth not void the living , nor bring a disability on the person ; and so far they said as the statute doth . but is this all , which men of conscience , and who take the care of souls , are to enquire after ? what! nothing but whether the benefice will be void or not ? or , whether the king may present or not ? are these all the considerations , even of clergymen , in such cases ? such kind of practises , which savour only of this world , are those which give such advantages against our profession , in such an age of infidelity as ours . do not you see , say they , that they mind nothing but their bare interest as to this world , and have no regard to law or conscience , where they contradict it ? i am sensible , how unreasonable it is , to charge a profession with the faults of a few ; and those in comparison , i hope , not considerable in it . but we ought , if possible , to avoid any scandal of this kind ; for it strikes at the whole body of the clergy of our church , and at religion it self : which if we have any our selves , we shall be very tender of the honour of . some men have a mighty prejudice against any churchmen medling in secular affairs ; although they be matters of justice and mercy , which the law of the land calls them to : but my great prejudice is against such churchmen , who bring secular ways of trafficking into church-matters ; as though nothing were really minded , but buying , and selling , and getting gain . advancing of trade is a noble design in a nation ; and that which makes it considerable at home and abroad : but god forbid , that such a way of trading should ever be brought into the church , or be suffer'd to go unpunished in it : for it will certainly ruine the best church in the world ; by lessening the reputation of churchmen ; by taking off the good affections of the people ; and making them to run into factions and infidelity . there is certainly something more to be regarded in these things besides our own interest : there is that of religion , of our church , and of the laws of the land ; which ought to overrule it . suppose there were nothing but the bare law in the case , which expresly forbids all corrupt resignations ; is it not fit for those who are to preach obedience to laws , to observe them , in what relates to themselves ? ought they not to be examples to others , in every thing of good report ? and to abstain from whatever tends to take off from the influence of their doctrine upon the people ? and nothing doth it more , than when they are suspected to come among them by unlawful and indirect means . i have taken the liberty in this discourse , to speak my mind freely about matters , which touch upon law and conscience ; the duties of patrons and incumbents : but i have done it , without any other design , than of doing some good , or at least preventing some mischief to the church i live in , and which i have a true and a just value for . if i had not thought , that this kind of simoniacal contracts were a great and growing mischief ; and had not had too much reason to think so ; i should have spared my pains , as others have done : for i do not love to be uneasy to my self or others . i know very well , how ill such discourses are apt to be taken by all that are concerned in them ; viz. patrons , incumbents , and all such lawyers that go about to defend them . but before i conclude this discourse , i must request some things of all these : and then let them judge as they please ; so it be without prejudice and partiality . 1. that patrons would consider , that the right of patronage is a trust committed to them ; of which they must give an account to god : for there is an obligation in point of conscience , going along with it . it is hard to believe what is commonly reported , how slight many great patrons make of their bestowing of benefices , by letting servants make their best advantage of them ; who scandalously expose the livings , and themselves , and the honour of those they depend upon . if servants deserve to be gratified ; for god's sake , let it not be at the price of souls . if there were no such thing as religion ; but that the pretended care of souls is nothing but an artificial way of maintaining a sert of men , to keep the people in a little better order , by telling them of moral duties , and another world ; then there were some colour for such an affected negligence in these matters : but i do not believe that any of these persons can satisfy themselves in such absurd and unreasonable imaginations ; against the sense of all the wiser and more considerate part of mankind . but it cannot be denied , that the things which they are to teach the people in point of morality , are very good things , and necessary to be told them . this is all i desire at present . and is it of no consequence , what sort of men those are , who are entrusted with the teaching people their duties to god and man ? if religion were only to be regarded in point of policy ; those must be far from politicians , who have no regard to the qualifications of the persons they put into such places . for ignorant and illiterate men can never give them good instructions ; scandalous and debauched persons will certainly do abundance of mischief , making the people more loose and debauched than otherwise they would be . men of ill principles will instill them into the heads of the busy part of those they converse among , and take upon them to guide ; and make them far more ungovernable than otherwise they would be . i have no very great opinion of the world as it is ; but i cannot but think , that it would be yet much worse , if an ignorant , vicious , turbulent , seditious clergy were put into all such places as patrons dispose of : and they know not , but they may be all such whom they present , if they take no more care about them ; but suffer their servants to make what bargains they think fit ; who mind not the men , but the advantage they are to get by them . and there is a just presumption , that those are not very deserving , who are ready to drive such bargains for themselves : and such men are not to be valued , as cattle in a market , by the money they will yield . 2. that lawyers would not encourage their clients in indirect methods of obtaining presentations . for here lies a great part of our present mischief : the clergymen who want benefices , they say ; we are ignorant of the law ; but we go to those whose business it is to understand it : and they tell us , they have cases and precedents in their books , for such bonds ; and they have been many times adjudged in the courts of law to be good ; and therefore why are we to blame if we submit to them ? but here lies the great mistake : the point is really a point of conscience as to the oath ; but the question put to them can be only a point of law ; who are to give judgment upon the statute , and according to the rules of judgment allowed in their courts . but i cannot but observe , that there is no precedent offer'd before 8 iac. 1. and in the 15th . was a contrary judgment . in the beginning of charles i. the former judgment was affirmed ; and from hence it hath come to be such a prevailing opinion . i confess , that i am not satisfied , how far such precedents , or one or two judicial sentences make a thing to pass for law ; nor whether the authority of such a sentence , or the reason , is to give the force of law to it . i observe that my lord coke , when he speaks of the laws of england ; he reckons up common-law , statute-law , customs reasonable &c. but he never mentions the judgment of the courts , as any part of our law ; they being no more but a declaratory sentence of the majority of the judges , when it may be the other differ upon better reasons ; and when such reasons come to be thought better by one more at another time , then the contrary must pass for law on the same grounds . how often do we hear that the judges were divided in their opinions in point of law ? how often , that the greater number went one way , but law and reason on the other ? suppose a lord chief justice of great skill and knowledge in the law , to be unequally yoked with others of far less judgment ; how is it possible to prevent that judgment shall not be given on the wrong side , if the three happen to be of an opinion against him ; or one be absent , and two be against one ? in a late great cause , viz. of commendam ; although three judges concurred in opinion , and the general practise was allowed to be of that side ; yet because one judge differ'd from the rest , his authority was produced against the sentence of the court : and for what cause can this be , but the supposition , that it is not the sentence , but the reason which makes the law. my lord chief justice hales in a ms. discourse of the history and analysis of the laws of england , chap. 4. makes three constituents of the common law of england : 1. the common usage and custom : 2. the authority of parliament : 3. the iudicial decisions of courts of iustice : but how ? consonant to one another in the series and succession of time. this is spoken with great judgment : for , no doubt , a mighty regard ought to be shewed to a concurrent sense of so many persons of ability in the law , in the different times wherein such matters have been before them ; and this is the highest authority for expounding the law ; but it cannot amount to the making of a law. for , as the same excellent person adds ; it is true , the decisions of courts of iustice , although by the strength of the law of this kingdom , they do bind as a law between the parties to it in that particular case in question , till reversed by error or attaint ; yet they do not make a law : for that only the king , by the assent of parliament , can do . all that i aim at , is not in the least to take off from the authority and reverence due to judicial decisions , built upon a general agreement from time to time ; or upon evident reason in point of law : but only that things should not be so positively asserted to be law , which are built only on a few modern precedents , without any convincing evidence . which i take to be the present case . 3. that the clergy would mind their own honour and interest , and that of the church and religion so much , as not to accept of benefices upon such ensnaring terms , as those of bonds of resignation . if what i have said on this argument be true ; i am sure they have all the reason in the world to refuse them : when they know not what the consequence of them may be ; and they do know what kind of oath they are to take . and no man can honestly take an oath , that is not satisfied , that such bonds are no simoniacal contract in the sense of that law , by which he is required to take the oath . now the oath is not imposed by the courts of common law in pursuance of the statute ; for then it were to be understood according to the sense and meaning of it ; but that very statute leaves the ecclesiastical laws as they were ; by which simony is of a larger extent than it is understood at common law ; and by those laws this oath is required . therefore my request is to all such clergymen , as are in danger of having such put upon them ; that they would study the case , and satisfy their minds before they venture upon taking an oath ; which may afterwards rob them of that peace and tranquillity of mind , which every good man will esteem above any benefice in the world. finis . page 73. lin . 13. for gays read gayr . ibid. marg. for mar. read moor. a catalogue of books published by the right reverend father in god edward lord bishop of worcester , and sold by henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . a rational account of the grounds of protestant religion ; being a vindication of the lord archbishop of canterbury's relation of a conference , &c. from the pretended answer of t. c. wherein the true grounds of faith are cleared , and the false discovered ; the church of england vindicated from the imputation of schism , and the most important particular controversies between us and those of the church of rome throughly examined : the second edition . folio . sermons preached upon several occasions , with a discourse annexed concerning the true reasons of the sufferings of christ , wherein crellius his answer to grotius is considered . folio . origines britannicae , or the antiquities of the british churches , with a preface concerning some pretended antiquities relating to britain , in vindication of the bishop of st. asaph . folio . irenicum , a weapon salve for the churches wounds . quarto . origines sacrae , or a rational account of the grounds of christian faith , as to the truth and divine authority of the scriptures and the matters therein contained . quarto . the unreasonableness of separation , or an impartial account of the history , nature and pleas of the present separation from the communion of the church of england ; to which several late letters are annexed of eminent protestant divines abroad concerning the nature of our differences , and the way to compose them . quarto . a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it , in answer to some papers of a revolted protestant , wherein a particular account is given of the fanaticism and divisions of that church . octavo . an answer to several late treatises occasioned by a book entituled , a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it ; part i. octavo . a second discourse in vindication of the protestant grounds of faith , against the pretence of infallibility in the roman church , in answer to the guide in controversie , by r. h. protestancy without principles , and reason , and religion ; or the certain rule of faith , by e. w. with a particular enquiry into the miracles of the rom. church . octa. an answer to mr. cressy's epistle apologetical to a person of honour , touching his vindication of dr. stillingfleet . octavo . a defence of the discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , in answer to a book entituled catholicks no idolaters : octavo . several conferences between a romish priest , a fanatick chaplain , and a divine of the church of england ; being a full answer to the late dialogues of t. g. octavo . the grand question concerning the bishops right to vote in parliament in cases capital stated and argued , from the parliament rolls and the history of former times ; with an enquiry into their peerage , and the three estates in parliament . octavo . the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese , in his primary visitation begun at worcester , sept. 11. 1690. a discourse concerning the illegality of the ecclesiastical commission , in answer to the vindication and defence of it : wherein the true notion of the legal supremacy is cleared ; and an account is given of the nature , original and mischief of the dispensing power . the council of trent examin'd and disprov'd by catholick tradition , in the main points in controversie between us and the church of rome ; with a particular . account of the times and occasions of introducing them . twenty sermons preached upon several occasions , not yet collected into a volume . quarto . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61536-e140 3. inst. 156. notes for div a61536-e830 cr. car. 361. 3. inst. 153. marg. f. 156. hob. f. 167. cr. car. 361. sylvestr . v. simon . sigon . de judic . l. 2. c. 30. quintil. l. 12. v. ciceron . ●ro plancio . dion . l. 36. lamprid. in alex. sever. arist. pol. l. 2. c. 12. ● . inst. 24. b. 3. inst. 156. noy 25. c. de jurejur . present . stat . lyndw. f. 56. 2. inst. 361. bract. l. 4. 341. ext. de jure patron . c. 22. fleta l. 5. c. 14. selden of tythes , c. 12. 389. abridgment 2. 354. ext. de officio jud. ordin . c. 4. eugen. 2. in synod . rom. c. 24. leo 4. in synod . rom. c. 25. ed. holst . registr . f. 42. cust. norm . art. 69. pelm. conil . matt. paris . a. d. 1239. p. 513. innocent epist . l. 1. selden of tythes 361. ● . 387. 83. 86. 38● . 2. inst. 632. 5 r. 57. anders . 190. leon. 3. 200. novel . 53. ●it . 12. c. 2. 23. c. 18. cap. l. 1. c. 84. l. 5. 98. addit . 4. 95. ext. de jure patr. c. 29. rebuff . de nomin . n. 10. fra. de roye de jure patron . proleg . c. 25. hob. 154. de roye de jure patr. p. 95. 145. dr. & stud. c. 36. 125. hob. 17. brownl . 21. 27. dr. & stud. 124. plowd . com. 498. b. 1. inst. 341. glanvil l. 13. c. 20. 1. inst. 343. b. 2. inst. 357. v. flamin . paris . de resignat . l. 7. c. 1. n. 9. lyndw. f. 55. c. ne lepra . 6. de appel . c. roman . lyndw. f. 54. 9 r. 41. de testam . v. stat. v. approbat . 6. de ossicio vicarii c. 2. de sequestr . v. officiales . bracton l. 5. c. 2. fleta l. 6. c. 37. 1. inst. 96. cowel . v. ordin . cr. car. 65. noy 91. 152. noy 157. ●wen 12. yelvert . 60 mar. 765. cr. 2. 63. 1. inst. 344 1. inst. 344. registr . 40. 3. ●ynd . f. 64. 80 ●olls abrid . 356. ●oke 12. 41 , 〈◊〉 . eadm . hist. in anselm . p. 22. rolls abrid . 2. 357. c. 16. q. 2. c. ●ane . ext. de donat . c. pastor lyndw. f. 80 cr. 2. 248. cr. 2. 274. ●oy 2● . ● . car. 180. ●utton 110. ●nes 220. ●eble 2. 446. cr. car. 42● ▪ cr. eliz. 789 c. 12. 100. cr. 2. 385. noy 25. bulstrod . 3. 90. hob. 165. wynch 63. rep. chancery 2. 399. 1. inst. 17. b. navarr . man. c. 23. n. 109. 3. inst. 156. 1. inst. 11. 110. b. 115. b. scripture and tradition compared in a sermon preached at guild-hall chapel, novemb. 27, 1687 / by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1688 approx. 61 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 17 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-05 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61596 wing s5632 estc r14282 13142410 ocm 13142410 97983 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61596) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 97983) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 752:4) scripture and tradition compared in a sermon preached at guild-hall chapel, novemb. 27, 1687 / by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [4], 32 p. printed for henry mortlock ..., london : 1688. marginal notes. errata: p. 32. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -colossians ii, 6 -sermons. authority -religious aspects -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-03 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2004-03 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion scripture and tradition compared ; in a sermon preached at guild-hall chapel , novemb. 27. 1687. by edward stillingfleet , d. d. and dean of st. paul's . london , printed for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . 1688. imprimatur , guil. needham rmo in christo ac d. d. wilhelmo archiep. cant. a sacris domest . nov. 28. 1687. the preface . i intend , god willing , to publish in a little time , a full answer to j.s. his catholick letters , so far as i am concerned in them . in the mean while , i thought it not unfit to print this sermon i lately preached , that i might give a general view of scripture and tradition , as to the way of conveying matters of faith , before i come to the particular debate with j.s. wherein i do not doubt , but i shall be able to shew that we have ry good grounds for the certainty of our faith , and that they have none either as to faith or tradition , as to the main points in controversie between us . nestly as he doth to them ? must we think , as some do , that he uses these expressions as gentle methods of insinuation , and commends them for that , which he would perswade them to ? but this doth not seem agreeable to the apostles simplicity and godly sincerity , which he elsewhere sets such a value upon . but it is far more probable that hitherto they had been very orderly and stedfast : but epaphras going to st. paul had informed him throughly of their condition , viz. that they were like a garrison closely besieged on all sides ; and although hitherto they had held out with great courage , yet he did not know what earnest sollicitations , and fair promises , and tempting motives might do with them , and therefore the apostle writes this epistle to encourage them in their stedfastness , and to warn them against temptations . which he doth in such a manner , as shews , 2. that he had a more than ordinary apprehension of the danger they were in . and this i say , saith he , lest any man should beguile you with enticing words , v. 4. and beware lest any man spoil you with philosophy and vain deceit , after the traditions of men , after the rudiments of the world , and not after christ , v. 8. let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels , &c. v. 18. all which expressions do imply , that he had just reason to fear and to give them caution in time , that while they did yet think that they stood , they should take heed lest they fall . and this is that which the apostle aims at in the words of the text ; as ye have therefore received christ iesus the lord , so walk ye in him . receiving christ iesus the lord , doth not here relate to his person , but to his authority , and to his doctrine ; so the apostle himself explains it in the next verse , rooted and built up in him , and established in the faith , as ye have been taught . walking in him is an eastern way of speaking and supposes both an adhering to that faith they had then received , and living according to it , looking on christ and his doctrine , as their only way to heaven . and as ye had received him , so walk ye in him , implies that the manner of their receiving christ and his doctrine at first was different from that which the false apostles endeavoured to bring in among them , and that they were bound to keep close to that pure and primitive doctrine which they at first received . from hence we may consider a double obligation lying upon them . 1. to keep stedfast to that faith which they first received , without being seduced from it by the arts of deceivers , who were then busie among them . 2. to live according to it , ; by making that faith the principle of a christian life ; and so walking in him , as they have received him . 1. as to the former , the reasonableness of it cannot but appear from the supposition here made , viz. that they had received christ iesus the lord. for , thereby they declared , that they received him as the christ , i. e. as him who was anointed of the father to teach and instruct his church ; and therefore they were bound to adhere to his doctrine ; there being no other , whom the father hath sealed and appointed to declare his will ; and in him were hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge . they received him as christ iesus , that is , they hoped for redemption through his blood , even the forgiveness of sins . and if their hopes of heaven depended upon his mediation , they had the greatest reason to adhere only to him . they received him as christ iesus the lord , and therefore they ought to submit to his authority , to obey his commands , and to observe his institutions , and in all circumstances of life to keep stedfast to the doctrine which he delivered . but here arises the great difficulty , how they should know by any certain rule , what was the true and genuine doctrine of christ , which himself delivered ? for , 1. the false teachers among them pretended to deliver the true doctrine of christ as well as the apostles . 2. that which they at first received was no certain rule . for the false teachers might have been before them . and first possession gives no title in religion . 3. the apostle doth not put the whole tryal meerly upon their judgments or memories , or capacities ; viz. what they thought , or remembred was at first taught them for the doctrine of christ. for , it was very possible for them to have mistaken , or to have mis-remembred , what was at first delivered . nothing can be more weak than to imagine that the judgments of people in matters of faith , must be formed according to the skill and excellency of their teachers . for the hearers of christ himself ; although he spake as never man spake , yet did very often mistake his meaning . aud at one time so remarkably , that although he took care to rectify their misapprehension , yet it is said , from that time many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him . so that the highest infallibility in the teachers , doth not prevent the possibility , or the danger of mistaking in the hearers . and whatsoever any vainly pretend , nothing can do it , but transfusing the spirit of infallibility into all . if we look over the apostolical churches while they were under the care and conduct of an infallible spirit ; yet this did not prevent their running into great errours and mistakes , as appears by the account we have of them , given by that spirit which cannot deceive in the apostolical writings . in the church of rome it self , even at that time , when its faith was spoken of throughout the world , yet there were dissensions and differences there , and such as were contrary to the doctrine which was delivered . and st. paul bids them to mark such which caused them ; he doth not say , it was impossible for them to introduce any thing contrary to the doctrine which they had learned by tradition from the apostles ; but he not only supposes it very possible , but he bids them have a particular eye to them , lest they should be deceived by them . the church of corinth was planted by paul , and watered by apollos ; and there were disciples of cephas and of christ himself . and yet in the midst of so many infallible teachers , they had like to have lost all their faith ; as one of them tells them . how say some among you there is no resurrection of the dead ? and if christ be not risen , then is our preaching vain , and your faith is also vain . could not they remember to day what was taught them yesterday , and so what the apostles at first preached to them ? the churches of galatia had such an opinion of st. paul , upon his first preaching the gospel among them , that they received him as an angel of god , even as christ iesus ; yet presently after he saith , am i therefore become your enemy beause i tell you the truth ? what! of an angel of god , or of one received as christ iesus , to become their enemy , and that upon the most unjustifiable account , because he told them the truth ! but , where truth can make enemies , errours may easily gain friends . and so we find it was in the apostolical churches , even under the conduct and teaching of the apostles . the colossians were not yet so far gone ; but they were in such danger , that the apostle writes this epistle with great concernment for them . he tells them v. 1. he had a sharp conflict in his own mind about them . they had not yet seen his face in the flesh , being converted by some sent by him , of whom epaphras is most taken notice of ; but he was present with them in spirit , v. 5. i. e. he was deeply affected with their condition ; for he understood the designs and artifices of the seducers among them . he knew what fair and plausible pretences they had ; viz. that they went about not to undermine christianity , but to advance it , by taking in some jewish customs , and some gentile observances , and modes of worship which might easily be accommodated to the christian doctrine ; and so a great deal of the ammosities both of the iews and heathens would be removed ; and christianity would thereby gain more friends , and meet with fewer enemies . the apostle finding how necessary it was at this time , if possible , to keep them stedfast in the faith , 1. he assures them , that the christian doctrine was of it self so sufficient for the good of mankind , that it needed no additions , either from the law of moses , or the philosophy of the gentiles , which might introduce several things , with a specious appearance of wisdom , humility and mortification ; but they ought to be assured , that from christ they had all that was necessary or useful for salvation ; for in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge . 2. that this doctrine was at first truly delivered to them , and they ought to be stedfast in it ; which is the design of the text. but they might object , that epaphras was no apostle of christ himself ; and if he were , yet there were many apostles , and the false apostles pretended to be true ones ; and although st. paul interposed his authority ; yet he was but one , and the iudaizers would not yield to it , but were ready to suggest , that the other apostles were more favourable to the jewish customs than he ; and therefore it was necessary some more general and common rule be found out , whereby to distinguish the original and genuine doctrine of christ from that of pretenders and seducers . the clearing of this is in it self a matter of great consequence ; and not only was to those of that age , but is so in every age of the christian church , where the same question may be put : what was the true primitive doctrine of christ ; and by what means may we come to it ? which concerns us this day as well as them . and the answer lay in two particulars , which i shall endeavour to clear . 1. 〈…〉 the apostles did in common deliver to 〈…〉 by them , was the genuine doctrine 〈…〉 . 2. that which they have left in their writings , after it came to be contested which was the true doctrine of christ. 3. that which the apostles did in common deliver to the churches planted by them . for , we have all the reason in the world to believe , that the apostles delivered one and the same faith to all the churches ; having the same infallible spirit to direct them . there was no need for them to meet together before their dispersion , and to agree upon some common articles of faith , as russinus imagins , lest they should differ from each other ; for how could they differ , who had the same spirit of truth to lead them into all truth ? and we find nothing like a combination among the apostles , as to matters of doctrine : and if there had been , it would have rendred the faith they delivered more suspitious , in that they durst not trust particular persons with delivery of it , without an antecedent confederacy among themselves , which would have cerning him ; and the disciples when they first heard him were amazed ; after this , he took a course by himself , and did not go up to ierusalem to the college of apostles there resident , but went into arabia ; so that , if any one might be thought to set up another doctrine , it was he ; but he was so far from it , that he established and confirmed the truth of what they delivered , and was very successful in his apostleship in all places . and when there had been some whispers concerning him , as though he proceeded not in the same way with the rest , he went up to ierusalem , and there upon full examination , james and cephas , and john , who were the leading apostles , gave him the right hand of fellowship ; in token of their full consent in the same faith. 2. the truth of the gospel was the more plainly discovered . all this while , the apostles only preached and delivered their doctrine to the several churches by verbal instructions ; but after these had been received in the hearts of such multitudes , that there could be no suspition that a false representation of christs doctrine or actions could be received by those churches , then the wise providence of god took care for posterity , and imploy'd several persons in distant places and times to write the history of our saviour . and there was this advantage to the church that the gospels were written no sooner . for all the churches planted by the apostles , were then made judges whether the gospels written were agreeable to the doctrine which the apostles had taught ; and if not , there would have been just reason to have question'd either the truth of what had been taught them , or what was delivered in the gospels . but when they found the main to be fully consonant to what they had been taught , the testimony of every one of these churches did shew the concurrence of all the apostles , as to the doctrine contained in the several gospels . and that which adds to the strength of this proof is , that when the true gospels were written , there were several false and counterfeit gospels dispersed abroad , under the names of the apostles themselves . as of st. peter st. thomas , st. matthias , and others ; as eusebius informs us ; and as we have the genuine acts of the apostles , so there were the pretended acts of paul , of andrew and john , and the other apostles . how came these to be rejected , and the other to be carefully received ? here lies the true advantage of original tradition before the written gospels , that by it the several churches were enabled to pass a true judgment concerning them when they came to be dispersed among them . for they could presently tell , whether what they read were agreeable to what they had heard and received from the apostles . as suppose the gospel of st. matthew being published in iudea , were carried into mesopotamia or persia , where many christian churches were very early planted ; these being throughly instructed by the apostles in all things relating to the life , death , resurrection and doctrine of christ , could presently judge whether st. matthews gospel agreed with what they had heard or not , and the like holds as to all the churches in the roman empire . so that the consent of the churches so soon , while the memory of the apostles doctrine was so fresh in their minds , is in effect the consent of all the apostles who taught them . and this is very different from the case of particular persons in some churches , who might mistake or forget what was taught ; for this is a concurrent testimony of all the apostolical churches , who could not agree to approve an error in the gospels contrary to the faith delivered to them . and that while some of the apostles were still living . for the other gospels were received and approved , before st. iohn wrote his . the case had been far otherwise , if no gospels had been written in that age ; for then it might have been suspected , that either the impressions of the first teachers were worn out , or they had been by degrees alter'd from their first apprehensions by the cunning craftiness of those who lay in wait to deceive them . after the decease of the apostles , the common tradition of the apostolical churches was useful in these cases ; 1. to convey down the authentick writings of the apostles or evangelists , which were delivered to any of them . 2. to bear testimony against any pretended writings , which were not first received by the apostolical churches to which they were said to be written . for there can be no negative testimony of more force than that ; it being improbable to the utmost degree that such a church should not know , or not make known any true apostolical writings . 3. to overthrow any pretence to a secret tradition from the apostles different from what was seen in the apostolical writings . and to this purpose irenaeus and tertullian make very good use of the tradition of the apostolical churches against the pretenders to such a tradition , which those churches were not acquainted with . but they agree that the apostles committed the same doctrine to writing which they preached , and that it might be a foundation and pillar of faith ; that this doctrine was contained in the four gospels ; and that the apostolical churches did receive them from those who first wrote them , and that within the compass of the apostolical age. it was therefore most agreeable to the infinite wisdom of god in providing for a constant establishment of the faith of his church in all ages , neither to permit the gospels to be written till the churches were planted , nor to be put off to another generation . for , then it would have been plausibly objected ; if these things are true , why were they not recorded , when there were persons living who were best able to have either proved , or confuted them ? then we might have been satisfyed one way or other ; but now the iews are dead , and the apostles are dead ; and although there are many left who believe their doctrine , yet this can never reach to the testimony of those who saw and heard the things themselves , or whose doctrine was attested by those who did so . and this is now the mighty advantage of the church ever since that the things concerning christ were written by such persons . with what another kind of authority do those words command our assent , that which was from the beginning , which we have heard , which we have seen with our eyes , which we have looked upon , and our hands have handled of the word of life ; for the life was manifested , and we have seen it , and bear witness , and shew unto you that eternal life , which was with the father , and was manifest unto us , that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you ; then if all the testimony concerning christ were to be resolved into those who heard some say , that others told them , they had it from such , who saw those who conversed with them who saw christ in the flesh ? at such a distance the authority of a testimony is extremely lessen'd ; which is not like a river which grows greater by running ; but like a mineral water which loses its strength by being carried too far . we find in the time of papias who lived but in the second century , the authority of bare tradition was mightily sunk ; for , eusebius saith , he conversed with the disciples of our lord and his apostles , he saith of himself , that he went up and down to them to get what he could from them , having a greater esteem of what he could learn from them than of what was written . and what advantage did this bring to the church ? it brought some idle opinions into reputation , saith eusebius ; for afterwards they thought it enough to fix them upon papias . but how was it possible for him to mistake ? eusebius saith , that being a man of mean capacity , he might easily misunderstand the meaning of what was spoken . but if tradition might fail after such a manner so near the apostles times ; then we must be assured of the capacity as well as integrity of those of every age through whom a tradition passed , or else they might deceive , or be deceived about it . but god was pleased to provide better for the security of our faith , by causing the gospels to be written either by the apostles themselves , as st. matthew and st. iohn , or by the disciples of the chief apostles , while the others were surviving , as st. mark and st. luke ; and the latter gives this account of his undertaking to write it , viz. that thou mighest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed . his instruction was by an oral tradition ; but that it seems wanted something to strengthen and confirm it ; and that was by st. lukes writing his gospel . how could they add any assurance to him , if all the ground of his certainty were to be taken from tradition ? st. luke thought it necessary then , that those things which concerned the life and doctrine of christ should be put into writing , that they might be more certainly convey'd ; and that while they had the testimony of those , who were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word . 2. and so i come to the second rule of discerning the primitive doctrine of christ ; viz. the writings of the apostles , when matters of doctrine came to be contested , were the infallible rule , whereby they were to judge , which was the true and genuine doctrine of christ. there are some who pretend , that the apostles writings were meerly accidental and occasional things , but that the main design was to lodge the great assurance of the doctrine of christ in tradition from one to another ; and what they wrote was not to make any rule of faith , but only to give some good advice to those churches they wrote to . but i shall now prove that the writings of the apostles were intended by the holy ghost to be a standing rule , whereby the church was to judge which was the true and genuine doctrine of christ. 1. from the reasons and occasions of writing the books of the new testament . 1. as to the gospels , we must distinguish the general reason of writing them , from the particular occasions as to the several gospels . the general reason is to be drawn from the divine wisdom which inspired and guided them ; the particular occasions relate to the circumstances of writing them . the general reason is that which irenaeus gives , viz. that the gospel which they had first preached , was by the will of god put into writing , that it might be a foundation and pillar of our faith. not meerly to keep up the remembrance of it , which fevardentius yields , and thereby overthrows the infallibility of oral tradition ; but that so it may be a certain rule of faith to all ages . the evangelists saith st. augustin , were but christs hands , which himself as the head , directed in writing the gospels , and therefore we are to look on the gospels as his own hand-writing . the holy ghost , saith he , directed the minds of the evangelists , as to the order and manner of their writing . which varied according to the particular occasions , but yet were all subservient to the general reason . st. matthew wrote the first gospel , saith eusebius , to the jews to whom he had preached , because going into other parts he would supply the want of his presence among them by his writing . what need this , if tradition were a certain and infallible way of conveying the doctrine of christ ? st. chrysostom saith , the jewish christians desired him to put into writing what they had heard him preach . did not they understand the force of tradition better ? or why should st. matthew put them out of an infallible way ? the authority of the imperfect work on st. matthew saith , they desired him to write his gospel , that where ever they went they might carry an account of their faith with them . clemens alexandrinus , saith , the occasion of writing st. marks gospel was , that the people were not satisfied with an unwritten delivery of the holy doctrine , and therefore importuned mark , who was the disciple of st. peter , that he would leave a monument of his doctrine in writing ; which st. peter understanding by revelation , approved and confirmed his gospel for the use of the churches . origen saith , he wrote it according to st. peters directions . epiphanius saith , by his authority , athanasius saith , it was dictated by him at rome . it seems that peter himself did not think fit to leave the doctrine of christ to an oral tradition , even at rome , but irenaeus thinks it was written after st. peters decease , who therein differs from the rest , and shews how uncertain meer tradition is . tertullian saith , st. marks gospel was attributed to st. peter , and st. lukes to st. paul. st. ierom mentions the opinion of some , that when st. paul saith according to my gospel , he means that of st. luke . but st. luke himself plainly gives an account of the occasion of his writing . st. ambrose thinks by those who had taken in hand to write of those things which were firmly believed among us , he means the authors of the counterfeit gospels , as that of the twelve apostles and st. matthias . but we have no evidence that these were older than st. luke ; his meaning is , that in those parts where he was , there were some who did undertake to give an account of the life and actions of christ , who wanted the advantages which he had ; having had great opportunities of knowing circumstances from the eye-witnesses ; and therefore he set himself to give an exact relation of them , that not only theophilus , but every one that answers his name might know the certainty of those things wherein they had been instructed . but , did not they know the certainty of these things by the apostles preaching ? yes , but the things they heard might slip out of their memories ; and to prevent this , saith theophylact , st. luke wrote his gospel , that they might retain these things with greater certainty . and words that are only spoken are more easily misunderstood ; which maldonat assigns , as one great reason of the evangelists writing their several gospels . st. iohn likewise gives an account himself of the reason of his writing ; and that the greatest imaginable . but these are written that ye might believe that iesus is the christ , the son of god , and that believing ye might have life through his name . why written that ye might believe ? did the apostle in his old age mistrust the understandings or the memories of christians ? was not the apostles teaching sufficient to keep up the principles of the christian faith in the hearts of the people ; no , not while st. iohn himself was yet living ? he had certainly a very mean opinion of tradition , that thought it necessary for him to write that they might believe that iesus is the son of god. for there was no point of faith more necessary than this , which was required of all persons to be owned before baptism . yet for all this , and whatever else can be said , st. iohn thought it necessary that these things be written that they might believe . he lived the longest of any of the apostles , and therefore saw how little tradition was to be trusted ; for it was already corrupted in so weighty a point as the divinity of christ. cerinthus and his followers allow'd the general tradition of the church , that iesus was the son of god ; but then they gave their own sense of it , by extraordinary favour and adoption . and from hence the fathers agree that st. iohn took occasion to write his divine gospel , to clear this fundamental point of the christian faith. and withal observing that the other evangelists insisted chiefly on the actions of christ for one year , viz. after johns imprisonment he resumes the whole matter , and adds those things which were omitted by the rest ; that so the church might be furnished with a full relation of all that was necessary to compleat and establish the faith of christians . 2. as to the epistles . the first epistle we read of in the christian church , ( and in probability the first writing in the new testament ) was the decretal epistle of the council of ierusalem . what should make the apostles put these decrees into writing ? they were very short , and concerned the practices of men , and withal were sent by barnabas and paul , and iudas , and silas . were not these sufficient to deliver the apostles sense to the churches , without letters from them ? what a pitiful thing did they take oral tradition to be , if they thought such men could not by it give full satisfaction to the churches of syria and cilicia , unless they sent it under their hands ? the epistle to the romans was written by st. paul on purpose to clear some main points of the christian doctrine , which were then warmly disputed between the jews and the christians , and between the judaizing christians and others , as about iustification , rejection of the iews , the difference of meats , &c. and st. paul took very needless pains in writing that excellent epistle , if he knew of christs appointing a iudge of controversies there ; or if he thought writing were not a certain way to make a rule of faith , whereby they were to judge in those matters . the first epistle to the corinthians was written not meerly to reprove their factions and disorders ; but to direct them , and to establish and prove the faith of the resurrection , which was then contested among them . the epistle was sent by stephanus and fortunatus , who could have carried the apostles sense without his writing ; but there are many weighty things , besides the particular occasions which are of lasting concernment to the church in all ages ; as there are likewise in his second epistle to them . the epistle to the galatians was written on occasion of one of the greatest points of controversy at that time , viz. the use and obligation of the law of moses . and st. paul sound by sad experience among them , that it was very possible for those who had the best instructions , either to forget them , or to grow out of love with them , and to be fond of a change ; else he would never have said , o foolish galatians , who hath bewitched you that ye should not obey the truth ? and i marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of christ into another gospel , how was it indeed possible for them to be removed , and to be soon removed , who had received the faith by the delivery of st. paul himself ? then , for all that i can see , human nature taken with all its advantages and motives , and evidences , is a very sallible thing ; and if then it might be deceived , and that so easily and grosly ; then much more in any following age of the church ; unless human nature be mightily changed for the better , since the apostles times ; or any teachers since be more effectual , than the apostles , and especially than st. paul , who laboured more abundantly than they all . the epistle to the ephesians , though written upon a general argument , yet doth suppose that they were in continual danger of being deceived ; and tossed up and down , and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men , and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive . and therefore he advises them to be upon their guard , and to have their armour about them , and one choice part of it , is the sword of the spirit , which is the word of god. the philippians were assaulted by a rude , violent , head-strong faction of judaizers ; which the apostle bids them to beware of ; and writes his epistle to them for that purpose , and he exhorts them to stand fast in one spirit , with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel . in the second epistle to the thessalonians , and in both epistles to timothy , he gives notice of a great defection from the christian faith ; he describes the manner of it , that it shall be with signs and lying words , and with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness in them that perish , because they received not the love of the truth ; that they shall speak lies in hypocrisie , and forbid to marry , and command to abstain from meats , being evil men , having a form of godliness , and denying the power of it . i meddle not now with the time when this apostacy began ; but from hence , it is evident that st. paul supposed , that those who at first received the christian faith by tradition from the apostles themselves , might notwithstanding through their own weakness and folly , and the artifices of deceivers be drawn from it ; and that to prevent such mischievous consequences , he knew no better means than a written rule , which he tells timothy was able to make him wise to salvation ; and to make the man of god perfect , throughly furnished to every good work. and to name no more , the colossians were set upon by some who thought to refine christianity ; or at least to make it more passable in the world , and therefore would have introduced into it some rites of the jews , some austerities of the gentiles , some ways of worship which would recommend them to their adversaries ; and upon this occasion he writes this epistle to them to convince them that christianity alone was far beyond any mixtures of the fancies or traditions of men , and therefore he could give them no better advice , than as they had first received the doctrine of christ to continue in it , or in the words of the text , as they had received christ iesus the lord so to walk in him . the design of what i have said is , that although the gospels and epistles were written upon particular occasions ; yet those occasions were so great and considerable ; and the assistance of the holy ghost did so direct the hands and pens of the evangelists and apostles in writing them , that what they have therein delivered contains a compleat rule of the true and genuine faith , as it was at first delivered to the church . but against this , it is objected , that st. paul himself charged the thessalonians to stand fast and hold the traditions which they have been taught either by word or by his epistles . from whence it appears , that there were other traditions to be held , that were not written . the force of all this will be taken away , if we consider when that epistle was written ; viz. one of the first which st. paul wrote , and soon after the former epistle to the thessalonians ; which was some time before st. lukes gospel , which was first received in the churches of greece planted by st. paul. therefore all the proper doctrine of christ himself , and all that relates to his life and actions were then but traditions among them ; and therefore st. paul had great reason then to require them to stand fast to the traditions they had been taught ; i. e. to the doctrine of christ they had received in that manner . but it is urged , that he mentions before , something he had said about antichrists coming when he was with them , v. 5. if this be allow'd , it will be more against than for tradition . for , what is become of that tradition ? if it be lost , then it follows that tradition is no infallible way of conveyence ; and therefore we have more reason to adhere to a written word . 2. which leads us to the second reason from which i designed to prove , that there ought to be a written rule for discerning true primitive christianity ; and that is from the notorious uncertainty of meer tradition . i say , notorious , because there never was any tryal made of it , but it failed , even when it had the greatest advantages . i might insist upon the tradition of the first ages of the world ; when mens lives were so long , and the principles of the natural religion so few ; and yet both before and after the flood , mankind was strangely degenerated from them . i might insist on many instances in the first ages of the christian church ; so many , that scarce one can be produced wherein they pleaded meer tradition , but they were mistaken in it ; as about the millennium , the age of christ , the time of easter ( on one side or other ) the communicating infants . for st. augustin quotes apostolical tradition for it . but i shall wave all these , and only mention a very necessary and important thing , which was a long time trusted to tradition , and yet they differ'd so much about it , as evidently proved , that meer tradition was no infallible means of conveyance . and that is about the apostles creed which was to be repeated by all that were to be baptized . we have many plain testimonies to prove , that this was not to be written ; but to be conveyed from one to another , by an oral tradition ; a st. hierom , b st. augustin , c ruffinus all affirm it . and the creed was commonly then called d the rule of faith ; which shewed that they looked on all the articles therein contained , as the standard of necessary points . and yet there is a plain and considerable difference in the antient creeds ; some articles being in some which were not in others ; although we have reason to believe the necessary points were at first the same in all . or else the several churches must have different rules of faith. the church of ierusalem was called c the mother of all churches by the general council of constantinople ; and in the creed there delivered to the catechumens . d st. cyril mentions the eternal generation of the son before all worlds ; and so doth e eusebius at caesarea in the creed , which he saith , he learnt at his baptism , which was long before the nicene creed . f cassian makes it a part of that creed which the apostles delivered to the church , and was particularly received in the church of antioch . but no such thing was delivered in the western creeds as far as now appears , by what st. augustin , ruffinus , and others say in their expositions of it . st. ierom writing against the bishop of ierusalem , urges him with the creed , g ( no doubt that which was received in his own church ) and he saith , it consisteth of three main points , the confession of the trinity , the unity of the church , and the resurrection of the flesh. and the creed of the church of aquileia went no farther , saith h ruffinus ; nor some old copies of the roman creed . but marcellus of ancyra had eternal life in his i creed , and so had k cyril of ierusalem ; so had the african church in st. l augustins time ; so had the church of ravena ; but not the church of turin ; nor the gallican churches ; if maimus taurinensis , and venantius fortunatus explained all the articles of their creeds . ruffinus confesses the article of descent into hell was not in the roman , nor in any of the eastern creeds . the creeds of ierusalem and aquileia had not the communion of saints ; nor those of marcellus and m epiphanius . the title of catholick was not added to the church in the creed in st. n augustins time ; for he makes it a periphrasis , utique catholicam , from whence probably it came to be added afterwards . ruffinus takes no notice of it , and it was not extant in the old copies of the roman creed ; nor in that of marcellus ancyranus . these things i mention , not in the least to shake the faith of the articles of the apostles creed ; which o st. augustin saith was gathered out of scriptures , and is agreeable to them ; but to shew what an uncertain way of conveyance meer oral tradition is , when a thing so easily remembred , so constantly used , of so much weight and consequence fell into such varieties in the greatest . churches , while they were so scrupulous about the writing of it . what cause have we then to be thankful to god , that hath taken so much care of his church , as to provide us an infallible written rule in the holy scriptures , whereby we certainly know , what the true primitive christianity was , which was delivered by christ and his apostles ? but here is a great difficulty to be removed , as to the written word . how can we be certain , we have it , if not by tradition ? and if tradition be so uncertain , how can we be made certain by it , that we have that written word which the apostles delivered ? for might not that fail in this , as well as the creed ? and then what security can we have for our faith ? in answer to this , i shall shew , 1. what advantage things that are written have , as to the certainty of conveyance above things meerly committed to memory and tradition . 2. what advantage the scriptures have , above any other things committed to writing as to the certainty of their conveyence . 1. as to the advantage things written have above those committed to memory and tradition only . which will appear by these things , 1. it was the way god himself made choice of , where the reason for tradition was stronger ; i mean as to the ten commandments , which were short and plain , and easy to be remembred , and very agreeable to the sense and general interest of mankind ; yet the wise god who perfectly understood the nature of man , would not leave the ten commandments to an oral tradition , but god delivered to moses two tables of stone written with the finger of god ; and on them he wrote the ten commandments . what a vain and superstuous thing were this , if oral and practical tradition were infallible ? but gods own pitching upon this way , after so long a tryal of mankind in the other ; is a demonstration of the greater certainty of it , if we suppose that god aimed at the benefit of mankind by it . 2. when religion was corrupted among the jews , the only way of restoring it was by a written book of the law. as we find in the case of iosiahs reformation , which was made by the book of the law , which was found in the house of the lord. this was the rule by which hilkiah the high priest , thought it necessary for iosiah to go by ; and not by any tradition left among them concerning the law which god had given by moses . 3. this was that which our saviour appealed to in all his disputes ; search the scriptures , saith he to the iews ; not run to your traditions , for those were then very corrupt , especially about the messias , as that he was to be a temporal prince , &c. which was then a dangerous and fundamental mistake ; and therefore christ appeals from them to the scriptures ; and they are they which testifie of me . had ye believed moses , ye would have believed me , for he wrote of me ; but if ye believe not his writings , how shall ye believe my words ? and our saviour severely checks the pharisees for regarding their own traditions more than the written law. and yet they pretended to an oral tradition down from moses ; as the jews do to this day ; and none are more grosly deceived than they . 4. the general sense and experience of mankind agrees herein , that all matters of consequence are more certainly preserved by writings than by meer words . there is no invention hath been more valued by the wiser part of mankind than that of letters ; because it is of such excellent use for conveying the sense of our minds at a distance to others . all men have so great a mistrust , either of the capacity or memory , or fidelity of others ; that what they would have done with security they commit to writing . and whatever we truly understand of the ages before us , we are beholden to writing for it ; all those memorable actions , and institutions , either of philosophy or religion which were not written , are long since buried in oblivion , without possibility of a resurrection . but where they have been committed to writing they are preserved after so many ages ; and by it we certainly know the history of the patriarchs , and the strange revolutions that happened from the beginning of the world. by it , we converse with the wisest persons of former times ; and were able to justifie the scriptures by the concurrent testimonies of other writers . by it , we are enabled to interpret prophecies , and to make plain their accomplishments , which without it , we could never make out . yea by it , the wisdom of those is preserved for the benefit of mankind , who thought fit to write nothing themselves , as socrates and pythagoras , but their disciples took care in time to write their doctrines . so that we have the general consent of the wisest part of mankind , that writing is a far more certain way of conveyance than meer tradition . 2. and especially in our case where there are so many particular advantages , as to the holy scriptures , above any other writings . 1. from the special providence of god , with respect to them ; for since it is agreed by all christians , that these were written by divine inspiration , it is most reasonable to believe , that a more than ordinary care would be taken to preserve them . and therefore to suppose any books of scripture to be lost , which contained any necessary points of faith is a great reflexion on divine providence . for , if god watches over his church , he cannot be supposed to let such books be lost which were designed for the universal and lasting benefit of his church . 2. from the mighty esteem which the church of god had always for them ; for , they built their hopes of heaven upon the promises contained in them . the book of scripture was their evidence for their future inheritance ; the foundation of their hope , and rule of their faith ; their defence against assaults and temptations ; their counseller in cases of difficulty ; their support , under troubles ; and their surest guide to a happy eternity ; and therefore the primitive christians chose rather to endure any torments than basely to betray it , and give it up to their enemies . 3. from the early disputes that were about them . which shews that they were no invention of after times ; nor were brought into the world by stealth and art ; for , they endured the greatest shock of opposition at first , while the matters of fact concerning them were the most easily proved . and having passed the severe scrutiny of the first ages , when so many counterfeit writings were sent abroad , the following ages could have no reason to call their authority in question . 4. from the general consent of divided churches about them . it might have pleased god to have kept his church from those unhappy breaches which have been in all parts of the christian world ; but the east , and the west , the north and the south can all bear testimony to the sad divisions of christendom ; and those of many ages standing . but yet , we have this considerable advantage by them ; that we can have no reason to mistrust a conspiracy where the several bodies are so much divided . 5. from the great internal satisfaction which the minds of good men have concerning them ; and which no other writing can pretend to give . for here we read of the promise of divine assistance to sincere and humble minds . and that assistance carries a lumen fidei into the mind ; as aquinas calls it 2. 2. a 3 ad 2. and by that he saith , the mind is united to truth , that its assent is only fixed upon it ; and therefore there is no danger of damnation to those who are in christ iesus , and are thus illuminated by faith in him . not that this is an argument to convince others , who have not that inward sense which they have ; but the same holy spirit which did at first indite them , may give such an inward and effectual testimony as to the truth of the matter contained in them ; that from thence they may firmly conclude these books to contain the word of god. and that assurance which the minds of good men have from the influence of divine grace , may be more effectual and powerful in them , than all the pretended infallibility or demonstration in the world. it is certain those cannot be deceived whom the holy spirit teacheth ; and the best and wisest of the antient schoolmen did make the great firmness and certainty of faith not to depend on outward motives , but on inward grace ; which so inlightned the mind , and fixed the inclinations of the soul , that nothing is able to remove it . this sort of faith is no blind assent ; but after all the evidence which it hath to make its assent reasonable ; it takes so fast a hold of divine truths by discerning the excellency and value of them , that he that hath it is willing to let go any thing rather than that ; and although the apprehension of faith be not so clear as that of science ; yet the hypostasis , as the apostle calls it , may be so firm , that no temptations may be able to shake it . and he that can die for his religion hath a stronger and better faith , than he that thinks himself never so infallible in the grounds of it . that is a true divine faith which purifies the heart , and thereby enlightens the mind ; which works by love , and not by cavilling and wrangling about the grounds of it ; which overcomes the world , and not that which overcomes the temptations of it . and such a faith , and only such a one will carry us to heaven ; when , if it were possible for us to have the utmost infallibility in the act of believing ; yet if it did not work effectually on our hearts and lives , we might go infallibly to hell. and so i shall conclude this discourse with the second sense of the obligation which lies on those who have received christ iesus the lord so to walk in him : i. e. to improve their sound faith into the practice of a good life . for alas ! what advantage will it be to us , to have the most primitive and apostolical faith , if our works be not answerable to it ? why call ye me lord , lord , saith christ , and do not the thing which i say ? why do we pretend to receive christ iesus the lord , if we do not observe his commands ? it is good , saith s. paul , to be zealously affected always in a good thing . and no doubt our faith is such ; but then let us be zealous of good works too , that we may shew our selves to be that peculiar people who are redeemed by iesus christ. so that our obligation arises every way from christ iesus the lord , to walk in him ; if we consider him as our lord , so we are to obey him ; if as christ iesus , so he died for us to redeem us from all iniquity . we can have no pretence to live in our sins , if we have received him who commands us to forsake them ; for then we receive and reject him at the same time . let every one that names the name of christ , depart from iniquity , saith st. paul , what should those then do that profess to receive him as their lord , who are thereby bound to yield obedience to his laws ? one of the great causes of the degeneracy of the heathen world was the separating religion and morality ; when this was left to the schools of philosophers to instruct men in , whereas their religion consisted only of some solemn rites and sacrifices . let us have a care of as dangerous a separation between faith and works , or which is all one , between receiving christ , and doing his will. for those are the proper works of the gospel , wherein we own christ as our lord , and do them because he commands us . and the apostle hath summ'd up the whole duty of christians in those comprehensive words , teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts , we should live soberly , righteously , and godly in this present world ; looking for that blessed hope , and the glorious appearance of the great god , and our saviour iesus christ. to whom , &c. finis . errata . page 8. line 18. for days read places . p. 25. l. 15. r. matim●● . p. 28. l. 18. for were ● . are . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61596-e330 2 cor. 1. 12. col. 2. 3. col. 1. 14. john 6. 66. rom. 1. 8. 16. 17. 1 cor. 15. 12. 14. gal. 4. 14. 16. ch. 1. v. 7. ●● 12. v. 3. russia . in symbol . joh , 16. 13. acts 9. 13 21. gal. 1. 17. 2. 9. euseb. hist. l. 3. c. 25. iren. l. 3. c. 3. 4. tertul. de praescript . haer. 1 john 1 , 2 , 3. euseb. hist l. 3. c. 39. luk. 1. 4. i●●n . l. 3. c. 1. aug. de con. ●ers . evang. l. 1. c. 54. l. 2. c. 53. euseb hist. l. 3. c. 2. 〈…〉 〈…〉 . in mat. in pr●●ogo . euseb. l. 2. c. 15. euseb. l. 6. c. 25. epiphan . haer. 51. athanas. in synopsi . p. 155. t●t●l . c. marc. l. 4. c. 5. hieron . de script . eccles . ambros. in luc. luke 1. 1. epiph. haer. 51. theophyl . in luc. maldonat . com. in evang . prol . joh. 20. 31. hierom. proem . in matth. de script . eccles. epiph. h● . 51. chrys. hom . 1. in matth. euseb. l. 3. c. 24. act. 15. 23. 1 cor. 15. 2. gal. 3. 1. 1. 6. 1 cor. 15. 10. eph. 4. 14. 6. 17. phil. 3. 2. 1. 27. 2 thess. 2. 3. 10. 1 tim. 4. 2 , 3. 2 tim. 3. 1. 5. 2 tim. 3. 16 , 17. 2 thess. 2. 15. bell. de verbo . l. 4. c. 5. aug. de peccat meritis . l. 1. c. 4. a in symbolo fidei & sp●i nostrae , quod ad apostolis traditum , non scribitur in charta & atramento , sid in tabulis cordis carnalibus . hieron . ad pammaclu : advers . errores joh. hierosol . b nec ut eadem verba symboli teneatis , ullo modo debetis scribere , sed audiendo perdisctre ; nec cum didic●ritis scribere , sed memoria semper tenere & recolere . august . de diversis serm. 75. c iacirco denique haec non scribi chartulis & membronis , sid requiri credentium cordibus tradiderunt , ut certum esset haec neminem ex lectione , quae interdum 〈…〉 ad infideles solet , sed ex . apostolorum traditione didicisse . ruffinus in symbol . d tetul de prascrip . c. 12 , 13 , 14 , 21. de virgin. v●l. c. 1. adv●s . pra●●am . c. 2. august . som. 59. 186. 213. 215. retract . l. 2. c. 3. en●i●i● . de fide , n. 15. de symbol . ad ca●●c● . r●ffin . in ●●oem . c theod. l. 5. c. 9. d cyrill . 〈◊〉 . 11. e theodo . l. 1. c. 12. f cassian de 〈◊〉 . l. 6. c. 3 , 4. g hi●●on ad pammach h ruffin in symbol . p. 191. v. vsser . de symb. p. 8 , 9. i epiph. 〈◊〉 haeres . 72. k cyrill . catech. 18. l august . de symb. l. 1. petr. chrysol , serm. 57 , &c. m epiph ancor at n augustin● de fide & symbolo . et de symbolo serm. 243. o de symbolo ad catech. c. 1. deut. 9. 10. 10. 4. 2 kings 22. 8. 23. 2 , 3. john 5. 39. 46. 47. matt. 15. 3. 9. heb. 11. 1. act. 15. 9. gal. 5. 6. 1 joh. 5. 4. luk. 6. 46. gal. 4. 18. tit. 2. 14. 2 tim. 2. 19. tit. 2. 12. 13. a letter to a deist, in answer to several objections against the truth and authority of the scriptures stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1677 approx. 129 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 76 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61565 wing s5600 estc r21879 12260997 ocm 12260997 57894 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61565) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 57894) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 880:4) a letter to a deist, in answer to several objections against the truth and authority of the scriptures stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [6], 135, [10] p. printed by w.g. : and are to be sold by m. pitt ..., london : 1677. reproduction of original in huntington library. attributed to edward stillingfleet. cf. bm. advertisement: p. [2]-[9] at end. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible -evidences, authority, etc. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-04 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion imprimatur hic liber ( cui titulus , a letter to a deist . ) feb. 8. 1676. guil. jane , r. p. d. henr. episc. lond. a sacris domest . a letter to a deist , in answer to several objections against the truth and authority of the scriptures , london , printed by w. g. and are to be sold by m. pitt , at the angel in st. paul's church-yard , 1677. the preface . this following discourse was written for the satisfaction of a particular person , who owned the being and providence of god , but expressed a mean esteem of the scriptures , and the christian religion . which is become so common a theme among the scepticks of this age , that the author of this discourse thought it worth his time and care , to consider the force of the objections that were made against them . especially , being written in a grave and serious manner , and not with that raillery and buffonry , which the rude persons of this age commonly bestow upon religion . it might be justly expected from such who pretend to breeding and civility , that they would at least shew more respect to a thing , which hath prevailed so much among men of the best understanding and education , and who have had no interest to carry on by it . for it is against the ordinary rules of conversation , to affront that which others think they have great reason to esteem and love ; and they would not endure that scorn and contempt of their meanest servant , which they too often shew towards religion , and the things belonging to it . if they are not in earnest when they scoff and mock at sacred things , their own consciences will tell them it is a horrible impiety ; if they are in earnest , let them debate these things calmly and seriously , and let the stronger reason prevail . men may speak sharply and wittily against the clearest things in the world , as the scepticks of old did against all certainty of sense and reason ; but we should think that man out of his senses , that would now dispute the being of the sun , or the colour of the snow . we do not say , the matters of religion are capable of the same evidence with that of sense ; but it is a great part of judgment and understanding , to know the proportion and fitness of evidence to the nature of the thing to be proved . they would not have the eye to judge of tasts , nor the nose of metaphysicks ; and yet these would be as proper as to have the senses judge of immaterial beings . if we do not give as good reason for the principles of our religion , as the nature of religion considered , can be given for it , let us then be blamed for our weakness in defending it ; but let not religion suffer , till they are sure nothing more can be said for it . there is a late author , i hear is mightily in vogue among many , who cry up any thing on the atheistical side , though never so weak and trifling . it were no difficult task to lay open the false reasonings , and inconsistent hypotheses of his book ; which hath been sufficiently done already in that language wherein it was written . but if for the advancement of irreligion among us , that book be , as it is talked , translated into our tongue , there will not , i hope , want those who will be as ready to defend religion and morality , as others are to decry and despise them . a letter of resolution to a person unsatisfied about the truth and authority of the scriptures . sir , although i do not pretend to any skill in the depths of theology , yet i am heartily concerned for the truth and honour of the christian religion ; which it is the design of your papers to undermine . when i first looked them over , i could not think them so considerable as to deserve a particular answer ; especially , from one in my circumstances , who have so much other business lying upon me , and so little leisure and health to perform it ; but i found at the conclusion of your papers , so earnest and vehement a desire expressed by you , that i would return an answer , in order to the settlement of your mind , that i could not refuse an office of so great charity , as you represent it to be . i confess , when i considered the nature of your objections , and the manner of managing them , i could hardly believe that they proceeded from a doubtful mind , that was desirous of any satisfaction ; but since you tell me so , i will first shew my charity in believing it , and then in endeavouring to give you my poor assistance , and impartial advice , in order to your satisfaction . and in truth , i think impartial advice will contribute more to that end , than spending time and paper in running through all the difficulties , which it is possible for a cavilling mind to raise against the plainest truths in the world. for there is nothing so clear and evident , but a sophistical wit will always find something to say against it , and if you be the person i take you for , you very well know , that there have been some , who wanted neither wit , nor eloquence , who have gone about to prove , that there was nothing in the world ; and that if there were any thing , it could not be understood by men ; that if it were understood by one man , it could not be expressed to another : and besides such extravagant undertakers as these , how many have there been , who with plausible and subtle arguments , have endeavoured to overthrow all manner of certainty , either by sense or reason ? must we therefore quit all pretences to certainty , because we cannot , it may be , answer all the subtilties of the scepticks ? and therefore i am by no means satisfied with your manner of proceeding , desiring all particular difficulties to be answer'd , before we consider the main evidences of the christian faith : for the only reasonable way of proceeding in this matter , is to consider , first , whether there be sufficient motives to perswade you to imbrace the christian faith ; and then to weigh the difficulties , and to compare them with the reasons and arguments for believing ; and if those do not appear great enough to overthrow the force of the other , you may rest satisfied in the christian faith , although you cannot answer every difficulty that may be raised against the books wherein our religion is contained . i pray sir , consider with your self ; do not you think it possible for any man to have faith enough to save him , unless he can solve all the difficulties in chr●●ologie that are in the bible , unless he can give an account of every particular law and custom among the jews , unless he can make out all the prophetick schemes , and can tell what the number of the beast in the apocalypse means ? if a man may believe and be saved , without these things , to what purpose are they objected for the overthrow of the christian faith ? do you think a man hath not reason enough to believe there is extended matter in the world , unless he can solve all the difficulties that arise from the extension or divisibility of matter ; or that he hath a soul , unless he can make it clear how an immaterial and material substance can be so united as our soul and body are ? or that the sun shines , unless he can demonstrate whether the sun or the earth moves ? or that we have any certainty of things , unless he can assign the undoubted criterion of truth and falshood in all things ? these things i mention on purpose , to let you see , that the most certain things , have difficulties about them , which no one thinks it necessary for him to answer , in order to his assurance of the truth of the things ; but as long as the evidence for them is much more considerable than the objections against them , we may safely acquiesce in our assent to them , and leave the unfolding these difficulties to the disputers of this world , or the knowledge of another . is it not far more reasonable for us to think , that in books of so great antiquity , as those of moses are , written in a language whose idiotisms are so different from ours , there may be some difficulty in the phrases , or computation of times or customs of the people , that we cannot well understand , than that all the miracles wrought by moses should have been impostures ; and that law , which was preserved so constantly , maintained with that resolution by the wisest of the people of the jews , who chose to dye rather than disown it , should be all a cheat ? is it not more reasonable for us to suspect our own understandings , as to the speeches and actions of some of the prophets , than to think that men who designed so much the advancing virtue , and discouraging vice , should be a pack of hypocrites and deceivers ? can any man of common sense suspect the christian religion to be a fourb , or an imposture , because he cannot understand the number of the beast , or interpret the apocalyptick visions ? i could hardly have believed any man pretending to reason , could object these things , unless i saw them , and were called upon to answer them . therefore , sir , my serious and impartial advice to you is , in the first place to consider and debate the main point , i. e. the proofs of the christian doctrin , and not to hunt up and down the scriptures for every thing that seems a difficulty to you , and then by heaping all these together to make the scriptures seem a confused heap of indigested stuff , which being taken in pieces and considered , with that modesty , diligence , and care , that doth become us , will appear to contain nothing unbecoming that sacred and venerable name which the scriptures do bear among us . if therefore , you design not cavilling but satisfaction , you will joyn issue with me upon the most material point , viz. whether the christian religion were from god , or from men ? for if this be proved to have been from god , all the other things will easily fall off of themselves , or be removed with a little industry . in the debate of this , i shall consider , first , what things are agreed upon between us , and then wherein the difference lies . 1. you grant an absolutely perfect and independent being , whom we call god. 2. that the world was at first created , and is still governed by him. 3. that he is so holy , as to be the author of no sin , although he doth not hinder men from sinning . 4. that this god is to receive from us all worship proper to him , of prayers , praises , &c. 5. that it is the will of this god , that we should lead holy , peaceable , and innocent lives . 6. that god will accept mens sincere repentance and hearty endeavours to do his will , although they do not perfectly obey it . 7. that there is a state of rewards and punishments in another world , according to the course of mens lives here . 8. that there are many excellent precepts in the writings of the new testament inducing to humility and selfdenyal , and to the honour of god , and civil duty and honesty of life ; and these in a more plentiful manner than is to be found in any other profession of religion publickly known . the questions then remaining , are , ( 1 ) whether the matters of fact are true , which are reported in the writings of the new testament ? ( 2 ) supposing them true , whether they do sufficiently prove the doctrin to have been from god ? 1. whether the matters of fact were true or no ? and as to this point , i wish you had set down the reasons of your doubting , more clearly and distinctly than you have done : what i can pick up , amounts to these things . 1. that there can be no certainty of a matter done at such a distance of time , there having been many fictitious histories in the world. 2. that it is probable , that these things might be written , when there was no one living to detect the falshood of them ; and thus you say , the grecians , romans , egyptians , and other nations were at first imposed upon by some men , who pretended to deliver to them the history of their gods and heroes , and the wonders wrought by them . 3. that these things might more easily be done , before printing was used ; and that there is reason to suspect the more , because of the pious frauds of the primitive christians , and the legends of the papists . 4. that there may have been many more deceptions and impostures in the way of propagating false revelations and miracles than we can now discover . 5. that we ought not to take the testimony of scripture , or the christian writers in this case , because they may be suspected of partiality ; and that the testimony of josephus is suspected by divers learned men to be fraudulently put in by christians . 6. that there are susficient grounds from the story it self , and the objections of enemies to suspect the truth of it ; because of the contradiction and inconsistency of the parts of it ; the want of accomplishment of the promises and prophecies of it ; the obscurity and unintelligibleness of other parts ; the defects of the persons mentioned therein , st. paul 's oftentation , the jarrs between peter and paul , and paul and barnabas . 7. that from these things you have just cause to doubt the apostles sincerity , and you think they might have indirect ends in divulging the miracles recorded in scripture ; and that men might be contented to suffer , to make themselves heads of a new sect of religion , and to rule over the consciences of men ; and that they had time enough to make a considerable interest before the persecutions began . this is the force of all i can find out , in the several parts of your papers towards the invalidating the testimony concerning the matters of fact reported in the writings of the new testament . in answer to all these things , i shall shew ; 1. that matters of fact done at such a distance of time may have sufficient evidence to oblige men to believe them . 2. that there is no reason to suspect the truth of those matters of fact which are contained in the history of the new testament . 3. that the apostles gave the greatest testimonies of their sincerity , that could be expected from them ; and that no matters of fact were ever better attested than those which are reported by them ; from whence it will follow , that it is not reason but unreasonable suspicion and scepticism , if not willfulness and obstinacy which makes men to continue to doubt after so great evidence . 1. that we may have such evidence of matters of fact done at such a distance of time as may oblige us to believe the truth of them . this we are first to make out , because several of your objections seem to imply , that we can have no certainty of such things ; because we cannot know what tricks may have been plaid in former times , when it was far more easie to deceive ; and that it is confessed , there have been several frauds of this kind , which have a long time prevailed in the world. but have not the very same arguments been used against all religion , by atheists ? and if the cheats that have been in religion , have no force against the being of god , why should they have any against the christian religion ? and if the common consent of mankind signifie any thing as to the acknowledgement of a deity , why should not the testimony of the christian church , so circumstantiated as it is , be of sufficient strength to receive the matters of fact delivered by it ? which is all i at present desire . do we question any of the stories delivered by the common consent of greek or latin historians , although we have only the bare testimony of those historians for them ? and yet your objections would lye against every one of them : how do we know the great prevalency of the roman empire ? was it not delivered by those who belonged to it , and were concerned to make the best of it ? what know we , but thousands of histories have been lost , that confuted all that we now have concerning the greatness of rome ? what know we , but that rome was destroyed by carthage , or that hanniba● quite overthrew the roman empire ; or that catiline was one o● the best men in the world , because all our present historie● were written by men of the other side ? how can we tell bu● that the persians destroyed th● macedonians , because all our accounts of alexanders expeditio● are originally from the greeks and why might not we suspec● greater partiality in all these cases , when the writers did not giv● a thousand part of that evidenc● for their fidelity , that the firs● christians did ? and yet , wha● should we think of such a perso● who should call in question th● best histories of all nations because they are written by thos● of the same countrey ? by whic● it seems , you will never allow any competent testimony at all ; for if such things be written by enemies and strangers , we have reason to suspect both their knowledge and integ●ity ; if written by friends , then though they might know the truth , yet they would write partially of their own side : so that upon this principle , no history at all , ancient or modern is to be believed ; for they are all reported either by friends or enemies : and so not only divine , but all humane faith will be destroyed . i am by no means a friend to unreasonable credulity ; but i am as little to unreasonable distrust and suspicion ; if the one be folly , the other is madness . no prudent man believes any thing , because it is possible to be true ; nor rejects any thing meerly because it is possible to be false : but it is the prudence of every man to weigh and consider all circumstances , and according to them , to assent , or dissent . we all know it is possible for men to deceive , or to be deceived , but we know there is no necessity of either ; and that there is such a thing as truth in the world ; and though men may deceive , yet they do not always so ; and that men may know they are not deceived . for else there could be no such thing as society among mankind ; no friendship , or trust , or confidence in the word of another person ; because it is possible that the best friend i have may deceive me , and the world is full of dissimulation , must i therefore believe no body ? this is the just consequence of this way of arguing , that we have reason to suspect the truth of these matters of fact , because there have been many frauds in the world , and might have been many more than we can now discover ; for if this principle be pursued , it will destroy all society among men ; which is built on the supposition of mutual trust and confidence that men have in each other : and although it be possible for all men to deceive , because we cannot know one anothers hearts , yet there are such characters of honesty and fidelity in some persons , that others dare venture their lives and fortunes upon their words . and is any man thought a fool for doing so ? nay , have not the most prudent and sagacious men reposed a mighty confidence in the integrity of others ? and without this , no great affairs can be carried on in the world ; for since the greatest persons need the help of others to manage their business , they must trust other men continually ; and every man puts his life into the hands of others , to whom he gives any freedome of access , and especially his servants : must a man therefore live in continual suspicion and jealousie , because it is possible he may be deceived ? but if this be thought unreasonable , then we gain thus much , that notwithstanding the possibility of deception , men may be trusted in some cases , and their fidelity safely relied upon : this being granted , we are to enquire what that assurance is which makes us trust any one ; and whereever we find a concurrence of the same circumstances , or equal evidence of fidelity , we may repose the same trust or confidence in them . and we may soon find that it is not any ones bare word that makes us trust him ; but either the reputation of his integrity among discerning men ; or our long experience and observation of him : this latter is only confined to our own tryal ; but the former is more general , and reaches beyond our own age , since we may have the testimony of discerning persons convey'd down to us in as certain a manner , as we can know the mind of a friend at a 100 miles distance , viz. by writing . and in this case , we desire no more than to be satisfied that those things were written by them ; and that they deserved to be believed in what they writ ; thus , if any one would be satisfied about the passages of the peloponnesian war , and hath heard that thucydides hath accurately written it , he hath no more to do , than to enquire whether this thucydides were capable of giving a good account of it , and for that , he hears that he was a great and inquisitive person , that lived in that age , and knew all the occurrences of it ; and when he is satisfied of that , his next enquiry is , whether he may be trusted or no ; and for this , he can expect no better satisfaction , than that his history hath been in great reputation for its integrity among the most knowing persons ; but how shall he be sure this was the history , written by thucydides , since there have been many counterfeit writings obtruded upon the world ? besides the consent of learned men in all ages since , we may compare the testimonies cited out of it with the history we have , and the style , with the character given of thucydides , and the narrations , with other credible histories of those times ; and if all these agree , what reason can there be not to rely upon the history of thucydides ? all learned men do acknowledge , that there have been multitudes of fictitious writings , but do they therefore question , whether there are any genuine ? or whether we have not the true herodotus , strabo , or pausanias , because there is a counterfeit berosus , manetho , and philo , set forth by annius of viterbo ? do any suspect whether we have any of the genuin works of cicero , because an italian counterfeited a book de consolatione in his name or whether caesars commentaries were his own , because it is uncertain who writ the alexandrian war that is joyned with them by which we see , that we may not only be certain of the fidelity of persons we converse with , but of all things necessary to ou● belief of what was done at a great distance of time from th● testimony of writers , notwithstanding the many supposititious writings that have been in the world. but it may be said , that all this only relates to meer matters of history , wherein a man is not mu●h concerned whether they be true or false ; but the things we are about are matters that mens salvation or damnation are ●id to depend upon , and therefore ●reater evidence should be given of these , to oblige men to believe them . to this i answer . 1. that ●●y design herein , was to prove , ●hat notwithstanding the possibility of deception , there may be sufficient ground for a prudent and firm assent to the truth of things done at as great a distance of time , and convey'd after the same manner , that the matters of fact reported in the new testament are ; and hereby those general prejudices are shewed to be unreasonable : and all that i desire from this discourse is , that you would give an assent of the same nature to the history of the gospel , that you do to caesar , or livy , or tacitus , or any other ancient historian . 2. as to the greater obligation to assent , ● say it depends upon the evidence of divine revelation , which i● given by the matters of fac● which are delivered to us . an● here give me leave to ask you ; 1. whether it be any ways repugnant to any conception you have of god , for him to make use of fallible men to make known his will to the world ? 2. whether those men , though supposed to be in themselves fallible , can either deceive , or be deceived , when god make● known his mind to them ? 3. whether on supposition , that god hath made use of such persons for this end , those are not obliged to believe them , who do not live in the same age with them ? if not , then god must either make no revelation at all , or he must make a new one every age : if they are , then the obligation lies as much on us now to believe , as if we had lived and conversed with those inspired persons . 2. that there is no reason to suspect the truth of those matters of fact which are reported in the new testament ; for since it is universally agreed among men , that humane testimony is a sufficient ground for assent , where there is no positive ground for suspicion ; because deceiving and being deceived , is not the common interest of mankind ; therefore we are to consider what the general grounds of suspicion are , and whether any of them do reach the apostles testimony , concerning the matters of fact reported by them . and the just grounds of suspicion are these 1. if the persons be otherwis● known to be men of artifice an● cunning , full of tricks and diss●mulation , and that make n● conscience of speaking truth so a lye tends to their greates● advantage ; which is too muc● the papists case in their legends and stories of miracles . 2. ● they temper and suit their stor● and doctrin to the humour an● genius of the people , they hop● to prevail upon , as mahomet did in encouraging war and lasciviousness . 3. if they lay the scene o● their story at a mighty distance from themselves , at such an age , wherein it is impossible either to prove , or disprove ; which is the case of the brachmans , as to their brahmà , and their veda ; and was of the heathens as to their fabulous deities . 4. if there be any thing contained in the story , which is repugnant to the most authentick histories of those times ; by which means the impostures of annius have been discovered . 5. if there be evident contradiction in the story it self ; or any thing repugnant to , or unbecoming the majesty , holiness , sincerity , and consistency of a divine revelation ; on which account we reject fanatick pretences to revelations . if there were any thing of this nature in the writings of the new testament , we might then allow there were some ground to suspect the truth of what is contained therein : but i shall undertake , by the grace of god , to defend that there is not any foundation for suspicion as to any one of these . 1. as to the persons , such wh● go about to deceive others , mus● be men that are versed in business and know how to deal with men ; and that have some interest already that they have gained by other means , before they can carry on such a design as to abuse mankind , by lyes and impostures in religion : therefore the atheists lay the deceiving the world by religion , to the charge of politicians and law-givers , to men versed in the practice of fraud , such as numa , or lycurgus , or xaca , or mahomet , such as understood the ways of cajoling the people ; or to subtle priests , that know how to suit the hopes and fears of the superstitious multitude ; whence came the multitude of frauds in the heathen temples and oracles . but would any man in the world have pitched upon a few fishermen , and illiterate persons , to carry on such an intrigue as this ? men that were rude and unexperienced in the world , and uncapable of dealing in the way of artifice with one of the common citizens of hierusalem . when was it ever heard that such men made such an alteration in the religion of the world , as the primitive christians did , against the most violent persecutions ? and when they prevailed so much , the common charge still against them was , that they were a company of rude , mean , obscure , illiterate , simple men : and yet in spight of all the cunning , and malice , and learning , and strength of their adversaries , they gained ground upon them , and prevailed over the obstinacy of the jews , an● wisdom of the greeks . if th● christian religion had been a mee● design of the apostles to mak● themselves heads of a new sect what had this been but to hav● set the cunning of twelve , o● thirteen men , of no interest or reputation , against the wisdom and power of the whol● world ? if they had any wisdom they would never have unde● taken such an impossible desig● as this must appear to them ● first view : and if they ha● none , how could they ever hop● to manage it ? if their aim wer● only at reputation , they migh● have thought of thousands ● ways more probable , and mor● advantageous than this : if w● suppose men should be willin● to hazard their lives for the● reputations , we may suppose withall such men to have so much cunning as not to do it till they cannot help it ; but if they can have reputation and ease together , they had rather have it . i will therefore put the case concerning the only person that had the advantage of a learned education among the apostles ; viz. st. paul , and whom you seem to strike at more than the rest : is it reasonable to believe , that when he was in favour with the sanhedrin , and was likely to advance himself by his opposition to christianity , and had a fair prospect of ease and honour together ; he should quit all this , to joyn with such an inconsiderable and hated company , as the christians were , only to be one of the heads of a very small number of men , and to purchase it at so dear a rate as th● loss of his friends and interest and running on continual troubles and persecutions , to the hazard of his life ? it is possibl● for men that are deceived an● mean honestly to do this ; bu● it is scarce supposable of a ma● in his senses that should kno● and believe all this to be a cheat and yet own and embrace it , to s● great disadvantage to himself when he could not make himsel● so considerable by it , as he migh● have been without it . me● must love cheating the world at strange rate , that will let go fai● hopes of preferment and ease and lead a life of perpetual trouble , and expose themselves to the utmost hazards , only for the sake of deluding others . if the apostles knew all they said to be false , and made it so necessary for all men to believe what they said to be true ; they were some of the greatest deceivers which the world had ever known : but men that take pleasure in deceiving , make use of many artifices on purpose to catch the silly multitude ; they have all the arts of insinuation and fawning speeches , fit to draw in the weakest , and such as love to be flatter'd ; but what is there tending this way in all the apostles writings ? how sharply do they speak to the jewish sanhedrin , upon the murther of christ ? with what plainness and simplicity do they go about to perswade men to be christians ? they barely tell the matters of fact concerning the resurrection of christ , and say they were eye-witnesses of it , and upon the credit of this testimony of theirs , they preach faith and repentance to jews , and gentiles : was ever any thing farther from the appearance of artifice than this was ? so that if they were deceivers , they were some of the subtilest that ever were in the world , because there seems to be so little ground for any suspicion of fraud ; and we cannot easily imagin persons of their education , capable of so profound dissimulation and so artificial a cheat. besides all this , we are to consider how far such persons do allow the liberty of dissimulation and artificial juglings , especially in religion ; we see the papists could not practice these things , without being forced to defend them , by shewing how convenient it is for the people to be told strange stories of saints , on purpose to nourish devotion in them : to which end , they say , it signifies not much , whether they were true or no : and withall they assert the lawfulness of equivocations , and mental reservations , and doing things , not otherwise justifiable , for the honour of their church and religion ; and i shall freely confess to you , if i found any countenance to such things as these , from the doctrin or practice of the apostles , it would give me too just a ground for suspicion as to what they deliver'd . for if they allowed equivocations , or mental reservations , how could i possibly know what they meant by any thing they said ? for that which was necessary to make the proposition true , lay without my reach in the mind of another ; and while they so firmly attested that christ was risen from the dead , they might understand it of a spiritual or mystical resurrection ; but if they should be found to allow lying or cheating for the cause of religion , their credit would be gone with me ; for how could i be any longer sure of the truth of one word they said ? i should be so far from thinking them infallible , that i could not but suspect them to have a design to deceive me . the first thing therefore we are to look at in persons who require our belief , is the strictest veracity ; if they falter in this , they expose themselves to the suspicion of all but credulous fools . but we no where find greater plainness and sincerity required , no where more strict and severe prohibitions of dissimulation in religion , nor more general precepts about speaking truth , than in the writings of the new testament . but might not all this be done with the greater artifice to prevent suspicion ? suspicion is a thing , which he that set bounds to the sea , can set no bounds to ; if men will give way to it , without reason , there can be no end of it . for the most effectual ways to prevent it , will still afford new matter and occasion for it . if men do use the utmost means that are possible , to assure others of their sincerity , and they will not believe them , but still suspect the design to be so much deeper laid ; there is no way left possible to satisfy such men ; their suspicion is a disease incurable by rational means , and such persons deserve to be given over as past all remedy . if men act like prudent men , they will judge according to the reason of things ; but if they entertain a jealousie of all mankind , and the most of those who give them the greatest assurance they have no intention to deceive them , it is to no purpose to go about to satisfie such persons , for that very undertaking makes them more suspicious . if the apostles therefore gave as much ground as ever any persons did , or could do , that they had no design to impose upon the world , but proceeding with all the fairness and openness , with the greatest evidence of their sincerity , there can be no reason to fasten upon them the imputation of cunning men who made it their business to deceive others . 2. this will more appear if we consider the matters deliver'd by them , and the nature of their doctrin . for if the christian religion were only a contrivance of the first preachers of it , it must by the event be supposed that they were very subtle men , who in so little time , and against so great opposition could prevail over both jews and gentiles ; but if we reflect on the nature of their doctrin , we can never imagin that these men did proceed by the same methods that men of subtilty do make use of . if it were there own contrivance , it was in their power to have framed it as they thought fit themselves ; and in all probability , they would have done it in a way most likely to be successful ; but the christian religion was so far from it , as though they had industriously designed to advance a religion against the genius and inclination of all mankind . for it neither gratifies the voluptuous in their pleasures , nor the ambitious in their desires of external pomp and greatness , nor the covetous in their thirst after riches ; but lays a severe restraint on all those common and prevailing passions of mankind ; which mahomet well understood , when he suited his religion to them . christianity was neither accommodated to the temper and genius either of jews or gentiles : the jews were in great expectation of a temporal prince at that time to deliver them from the roman slavery ; and every one that would have set up for such a messias , might have had followers enough among them , as we find afterwards by the attempts of barchocebas and others . but the messias of the christians was so directly contrary to their hopes and expectations , being a poor and suffering prince , that this set them the more against his followers , because they were hereby frustrated of their greatest hopes , and defeated in their most pleasing expectations : but besides , if they would have taken in the mosaick law , it might in probability have succeeded better ; but this st. paul would by no means hear of . but if they rejected the jews , methinks they should have been willing to have had some assistance from the gentiles . no , they charged them with idolatry where ever they came , and would not joyn in any parts of their worship with them ; nor so much as eat of the remainder of their sacrifices . but supposing they had a mind to set up wholly a new sect of their own ; yet we should think they should have framed it after the most plausible manner , and left out all things thar were most liable to reproach and infamy : but this they were so far from , that the most contemptible part of the christian religion , viz. a crucified saviour , they insist the most upon , and preach it on all occasions , and in comparison of it , strangely despise all the wisdom and philosophy of the greeks . what did these men mean , if christianity had been only a contrivance of theirs ? if they had but left out this one circumstance , in all human probability , the excellent moral precepts in christianity would have been highly magnified among all those who had been bred up under the instructions of philosophers . nay , they would not make use of the most commendable methods of humane wisdom ; nor do as the jesuits have done in china , make men have a better opinion of the religion they brought , for their skill in mathematicks and astronomy ; but as much as it was possible , to let the world see it was no contrivance of humane wisdom , they shunned all the ways of shewing it in the manner of its propagation . nay , when the people would have given the apostles divine worship , never were vain men more concerned to have it , than they to oppose it ; and do these things look like the actions of men that designed only to make themselves great , by being the heads of a new sect of religion ? 3. men that made it their design to deceive the world , if they had thought it necessary to bring in any matter of story concerning the author of their religion would have placed it at such a distance of time , that it was not capable of being disproved : as it is apparent in the heathen mythologie ; for the stories were such , as no person could ever pretend to confute them otherwise than by the inconsistency of them with the common principles of religion . but if we suppose christianity to have been a meer device , would the apostles have been so senseless to have laid the main proof of their religion on a thing which was but newly acted , and which they were very capable of enquiring into all the circumstances that related to it , viz. the resurrection of christ from the dead . we may see by the whole design of the new testament , the great stress of christianity was laid upon the truth of this ; to this , christ himself appealed before hand : to this all the apostles refer as the mighty confirmation of their religion ; and this they deliver as a thing which themselves had seen , and had conversed with him for 40 days together , with all the demonstrations imaginable of a true and real body : and that not to one or two credulous . persons , but so many of them who were hard to be satisfied , and one , not without the most sensible evidence , but besides these , they tell us of 500 at once who saw him , whereof many were then living when those things were written . now i pray tell me what religion in the world ever put it self upon so fair a tryal as this ? of a plain matter of fact as capable of being attested as any could be . why did not amida , or brahma or xaca , or any other of the authors of the present religions of the east indies ? why did not orpheus , or numa , or any other introducers of religious customa among the greeks or romans ? or mahomet among the arabians put the issue of the truth of their religion on such a plain and easie tryal as this ? if you say that christ appeared only to his friends , who were ready to believe such things , and not among his enemies : i answer , that though they were his friends , yet they were very hard to be perswaded of the truth of it at first ; and afterwards gave larger testimonies of their fidelity than the testimony of the greatest enemies would have been ; for we should have had only their bare words for it , ( if they would have given that , which is very questionable , considering their dealing with the other miracles of christ : ) but the apostles manifested their sincerity by all real proofs that could be thought sufficient to satisfie mankind ; appealing to the very persons who were concerned the most in it , having a hand in the death of christ , declaring their greatest readiness to suffer any thing rather than deny the truth of it , and laying down their lives at last for it . if all this had been a meer fiction , how unlikely is it , that among so many as were conscious of it , no one person by hopes or fears , by flatteries or threatnings , could ever be prevailed upon to deny the truth of it . if there had been any such thing , what triumphing had there been among the jews ; and no doubt his name had been recorded to posterity among the writers both of jew● and gentiles that were professed enemies of christianity . but they are all wonderfully silent in this matter ; and instead o● saying enough to overthrow the truth of christianity , as you seem to suggest , i do assure you , i am mightily confirmed in the belief of the truth of it , by carefully observing the slightness of the objections that were made against it , by its most professed enemies . but you seem to imply , that all this story concerning christ was invented long after the pretended time of his being in the world , why may not you as well suspect , that julius caesar lived before romulus ; or that augustus lived at the seige of troy ? for you might as well reject all history upon such grounds as those you assign ; and think mahomet as right in his chronology , as the bible . it is time for us to burn all our books , if we have lived in such a cheat all this while . methinks you might as well ask , whether lucretia were not pope joan ? or alexander the sixth , one of the roman emperours ? or whether luther were not the emperour of turky ? for there is no greater evidence of any history in the world , than there is , that all the things reported in the new testament were done at that time , when they are pretended to be . 4. therefore we offer this story of the new testament to be compared with all the circumstances of that age , delivered by any other historians , to try if any inconsistencies can be found therein : which is the most reasonable way can be taken to disprove any history . if it could be proved , that there could be no such taxation of the empire as is mention'd in the time of augustus , that herod did not live in that age , or that the jews were not under the roman government , or that there were no high priests at that time , nor the sects of pharisees and saducees , or that there were any other remarkable characters of time set down in the history of the new testament , which could be manifestly disproved ; there were some pretence to call in question the truth of the story ; but there is not the least foundation for any scruple on this account ; all things agreeing so well with the truest accounts we have of that age , both from josephus and the roman historie . i shall not insist on the particular testimony of josephus concerning christ , because we need it not ; and if those who question it , would proceed with the same severity against many other particular passages in good authors , they might as well call them in question as they do that ; since it is confessed , that all the ancient manuscripts have it in them , and supposing that it doth not come in well , must we suppose it impossible for josephus to write incoherently ? yet this is the main argument that ever i have seen urged against this testimony of josephus . but i say , we need it not ; all other things concurring in so high a degree to prove the truth of the history of christ. yet since you seem to express so much doubtfulness concerning it , as though it were framed when there was no one living capable of disproving it ; give me leave to shew you the great absurdity of such a supposition . 1. because we have the plain testimonies of the greatest enemies of christianity , that there was such a person as christ was , who suffered according to the scripture story . for tacitus not only mentions the christians as suffering at rome for their religion in the time of nero , ( annal. 15. ) but saith , that the author of this religion was one christ , who suffered under pontius pilate , procurator of judea , in the time of tiberius ; which is an irrefragable testimony of the truth of the story concerning christ , in an age , when if it had been false , nothing could have been more easily detected than such a fiction , by the number of jews which were continually at rome : and neither julian , nor celsus , nor porphyrie , nor lucian did ever question the truth of the story it self ; but only upbraided the christians for attributing too much to christ. 2. if there were really such a person as christ was , who suffered as tacitus saith , then the whole story could not be a fiction , but only some part of it ; and these additional parts must either be contrived by the apostles , or after their time : not after their time , for then they must be added after christianity was received in the world , for that , as appears by tacitus , was spread in the apostles times as far as rome ; and if these parts were not received with it ; the cheat would presently have been discover'd as soon as broached , by those who had embraced christianity before : and besides , tertullian in his time appeals to the authentick writings of the apostles themselves , which were then extant , wherein the same things were contained , that we now believe : if these things then were forged , it must be by the apostles themselves ; and i dare now appeal to you , whether ever any story was better capable of being disproved than this was , if it had not been true , since it was published in that very time and place , where the persons were living , who were most concerned to disprove it : as appears by the hatred of the jews to the christians , both then and ever since : which is a very observable circumstance for proving the truth of christian religion ; for the jews and christians agreed in the divine revelations of old , the christians believed moreover , that christ was the messias promised ; this christ lived and dyed among the jews his enemies ; his apostles preached , and wrought miracles among their most inveterate enemies , which men that go about to deceive never care to do : and to this day the jews do not deny the matters of fact , but look on them as insufficient to prove jesus of nazareth to have been the messias : nay , mahomet himself , who in all probability would have overthrown the whole story of the new testament , if he could have done it with any colour , yet speaks very honourably of christ and of the great things which were said and done by him . 5. that there is nothing in the christian religion , unbecoming the majesty , or holiness , or truth of a divine revelation . as to the precepts , you acknowledge their excellency ; and the promises chiefly refer either to divine grace , or future glory ; and what is there herein unbecoming god ? and as to what concerns the truth of it , we have as great characters of that throughout , as it is possible for us to expect ; there appearing so much simplicity , sincerity , candour , and agreement in all the parts of it . some men would have been better pleased , it may be , if it had been all written by one person , and digested into a more exact method , and set forth with all the lights and ornaments of speech . this would have better become an invention of men , but not a revelation of god : plainness and simplicity have a natural greatness above art and subtilty ; and therefore god made choice of many to write , and at several times , that by comparing them we may see how far they were from contriving together , and yet how exactly they agree in all things which men are concerned to believe . but you say , we have many infirmities of the apostles discovered therein , their heats and animosities one against another . but i pray consider ; 1. how came you to know these things ; is it not by their own writings ? and if they had been such , who minded only their applause , had it not been as easie to have concealed these things , and would they not certainly have done it , if that had been their aim ? if st. paul seems to boast , doth he not do it , with that constraint to himself , as a man that is forced to do it for his own vindication against malicious enemies ? and who ever denyed a man of a generous mind the liberty of speaking for himself ? 2. but suppose they had infirmities and heats among them ; doth this prove that god could not make use of them as his instruments to declare his truth to the world ? then it will follow , that god must never reveal his will by men , but by voices from heaven , or angels , or the assumption of the humane nature by the divine . but , if god be not denyed the liberty of imploying meer men , we cannot find so great evidences of piety and zeal , of humility and self-denyal , of patience and magnanimity , of innocency and universal charity in any men as were in the apostles ; and therefore did appear with the most proper characters of embassadors from heaven . and i dare venture the comparison of them with the best philosophers , as to the greatest and most excellent virtues , for which they were the most admired ; notwithstanding the mighty difference as to their education ; allowing but the same truth as to the story of the new testament , which we yield to xenophon , or diogenes laertius , or any other writers concerning them . but what is it then which you object against the writings of the new testament , to make them inconsistent with the wisdom of god ? i find but two things in the papers you sent me . 1. want of the continuance of the power of miracles , which you say is promised . mark 16. 17. 2. the number of the beast in the revelations . but , good sir , consider , what it is to call in question a divine revelation for such objections as these are ? must there be no revelation , unless you understand every prophecy , or the extent of every promise ? be not so injurious to your own soul , for the sake of such objections , to cast away the great assurance which the christian religion gives us , as to the pardon of sin upon repentance here , and eternal happiness in another world. would you reject all the writings of plato , because you do no more understand some part of his timaeus than the number of 666 ? you must have a very nice faith , that can bear with no difficulties at all , so that if there be but one or two hard things that you cannot digest , you must throw up all the best food you have taken ; at this rate you must starve your body , as well as ruin your soul. but of these places afterwards . 3. i have hitherto removed the grounds of suspicion , i now come to shew the positive testimonies of their sincerity which the apostles shewed , which were greater than were ever given to any other matter of fact in the world. i will then suppose the whole truth of the christian doctrine to be reduced to this one matter of fact , whether christ did rise from the dead or no ? for ( as i have said already ) it is plain , the apostles put the main force of all that they said upon the truth of this ; and often declared , that they were appointed to be the witnesses of this thing . now ●et us consider how it is possible ●or men to give the highest assurance of their sincerity to others ; and that must be either by giving the utmost testimony that men ●an give ; or by giving some testimony above that of men , which cannot deceive , which is the testimony of god. 1. they gave the utmost testimony that meer men could give of their fidelity . i know no bet●er way we have for a full assurance as to any humane testimony , than to consider what those circumstances are which are generally allowed to accompany truth , and if we have the concurrence of all these , we have as much as can be expected : for nothing● that depends on testi●ony can be proved by mathematical demonstration . but notwithstanding the want of this , eithe● we may have sufficient ground to assent to truth upon testimony , o● there can be no difference known between truth and falshood by humane testimony ; which overthrows all judicial proceeding● among men ; the justice whereof doth suppose not only the veracity of humane testimony ; bu● that it may be so discerned by others , that they may safely rely upon it . now the main thing to be regarded as to the truth o● humane testimony are these . 1. i● men testifie nothing but wha● they saw . 2. if they testifie i● at no long distance of time from the thing done . 3. if they testifie it plainly , and withou● doubtful expressions . 4. if a great number agree in the same testimony . 5. if they part with all that is valuable to mankind , rather than deny the truth of what they have testified : and where all these concur , it is hardly possible to suppose greater evidence to be given of the truth of a thing ; and now i shall shew that all these do exactly agree to the apostles testimony concerning the resurrection of christ. 1. they testified nothing but what they saw themselves . the laws of nations do suppose that greater credit is to be given to eye witnesses than to any others , thence the rule in the civil law testimonium de auditu regulariter non valet : because , say the civilians and canonists , witnesses are to testifie the truth , and not barely the possibility of things ; that which men see , they can testifie whether they are or not : that which men only hear , may be , or no● be ; and their testimony is no● of the fact , but is looked on as more uncertain , and ought to have greater allowances given it ; but the apostles testified only what they saw and handled ; and that after the most scrupulous enquiry into the truth of christ body , and after many doubts an● suspicions among themselves abou● it ; so that they did not seem hastily and rashly to believe what they afterwards declared to the world. now a body was a proper object of sense , and no tryal could be greater , or more accurate than theirs was ; nor an● satisfaction fuller than putting their fingers into the very wound of the pierced side . 2. they did not stay till the circumstances might have slipt out of their memories , before they testified these things ; but very soon after , while the impression of them was fresh upon them : if they had let these matters alone for any long time , the jews would have asked them presently , if these things were true , why did we not hear of them as soon as they were done ? therefore we see the apostles on the very day of pentecost , a little after christs ascension to heaven , openly and boldly declare the truth of these things , not in private corners among a few friends , but in the most solemn meeting of their nation from all parts ; which was the worst time could have been chosen , if they had any intention to deceive . 3. they testifie it in as plain a manner as is possible , on purpose to prevent all mistakes of their meaning , this jesus hath god raised up , whereof we all are witnesses ; therefore let all the house of israel know assuredly , that god hath made that same jesus , whom ye have crucified , both lord and christ. men that had a mind to deceive would have used some more general and doubtful words , than these were . 4. if this had been testified by one single witness , the world would have suspected the truth of his testimony ; for according to the rule in the civil law in the case of testimony , vox unius , vox nullius est : but this was testified by very many ; not meerly by the twelve apostles , but by 500 at once ; among whom some might be supposed to have so much honesty , or at least capable of being perswaded to have discovered the imposture , if they had in the least suspected any . 5. but that which adds the greatest weight to all this , is , that there was not one of all the apostles , and scarce any one of the rest , but exposed themselves to the utmost hazards and dangers , rather than deny or retract the truth of what they witnessed . if the people had been careless and indifferent about religion , it is possible men might have gone on in a lye so long till they had gotten interest enough to maintain it ; but no sooner did the apostles appear , witnessing these things , but they met with an early and vigorous opposition , and that from the chiefest men in power , who made it their business to suppress them . now in this case , they were put to this choice , if they would renounce or conceal the truth of what they testified , they might presently enjoy ease , and it may be , rewards too ; but if they went on , they must look for nothing but the sharpest persecution ; and this they met with almost in all places ; and is it conceivable , that men should be so fond of a lye , to forsake all and follow it , and at last to take up their cross for it ? if credit and interest in the hearts of people , might carry a man on a great way in the delusion , yet he would be loth to dye for it ; and yet there was never a one of the apostles , but ventured his life for the truth of this ; and all but one , they tell us , did suffer martyrdom for it . i pray , sir , consider , where you ever meet with any thing like this , that so many men should so resolutely dye , for what themselves at the same time knew to be a lye ; and that they must certainly do , if it were all a contrivance of their own heads . 2. but although in these things they went as high as it was possible for humane testimony to go , yet they had something beyond all this , which was a concurrence of a divine testimony , in the miraculous gifts and operations of the holy ghost . and this we assert to be the highest testimony can be given in the world , of a truth of any thing ; because god will not employ his power to deceive the world. and as all other truth hath a criterion proper to it ; so this seems to be the proper criterion of a divine testimony , that it hath the power of miracles going along with it . for if we do suppose god to make known his mind to the world , it is very reasonable to believe there should be some distinguishing note of what is immediately from god , and what comes only from the inventions of men ; and what can be more proper to distinguish what comes from god , and what from men , than to see those things done which none but god can do ? but against this you object several things , which i shall easily and briefly answer . 1. you cannot tell what it is that miracles do attest ; not all their doctrin , since paul said , some was not from the lord. answ. miracles do attest the veracity of the speaker , and by consequence the truth of the doctrin ; not that you should believe that to be from the lord , which he said was not ; but that which he said , was from the lord. but when he makes such a distinction himself , it is very unreasonable to urge that as an argument , that he had nothing from the lord ; it is much rather an argument of his candor and ingenuity , that he would not pretend to divine revelation , when he had it not . 2. you would have it signified , what doctrin it is which is attested by miracles , since the doctrins of scripture lye in heaps and confusion . answ. to what purpose should any doctrins be singled out to have the seal of miracles set to them , since it is their divine commission to teach and declare the will of god , which is sealed by it ? and what they did so teach and declare , is easily known by their writings . 3. but why do not miracles still continue ? answ. because there are no persons employ'd to teach any new doctrines ; and no promise of scripture doth imply any more : for the signs which were to follow them that believe , were such as tended to the first confirmation of the christian faith ; which being effected , their use ceased ; and so to ask why god doth not continue a gift of miracles to convince men that the former were true , is to the same purpose as to ask why god doth not make a new sun , to satisfie athiests that he made the old ? 4. but doth not the scripture say , that wonders are not always to be taken as confirmations of the truth of doctrin , since false prophets may work wonders , deuteron . 13. 1. answ. that signifies no more , than that wonders are not to be believed against the principles of natural religion ; or revealed religion already confirmed by greater miracles : and that those who would value such a particular sign above all the series of miracles their religion was first established by , may be justly left to their own delusions . you might as well object the lying wonders of the man of sin , against all the miracles of christ and his apostles . if god hath once done enough to convince men , he may afterwards justly leave them to the tryal of their ingenuity ; as a father that hath used great care to make his son understand true coyn , may afterwards suffer false to be laid before him , to try whether he will mind his being cheated or no ? 5. but you may yet farther demand , what the testimony of miracles doth signisie to the writings of the new testament ? answ. 1. the miracles do sufficiently prove the authority of that doctrin , which was delivered by those who wrought miracles ; as christ and his apostles . 2. if there had been the least ground to question the truth and authority of these writings , they had never been so universally received in those ages , when so many were concerned to enquire into the truth of these things ; for we see several of the books were a long time examined , and at last , when no sufficient reason could be brought against them , they were received by those churches , which at first scrupled the receiving them : and i am so far from thinking the doubts of the first ages any argument against the authority of a book , that by the objections of some against some of them , i am thereby assured , that they did not presently receive any book , because it went under the name of an apostolical writing : as i am the more confirmed in the belief of the resurrection of christ , because some of the disciples were at first very doubtful about it . 6. you may yet ask , what doth all this signifie to the writings of the old testament , which were written at a longer distance of time from us , and in a more ignorant age of of the world ? answ. there cannot be a more evident proof of the old testament , than by the new : for if the new be true , the old must be so , which was confirmed so plainly and evidently by it ; our saviour and his apostles appealing to moses and the prophets on all occasions . so that the same miracles which prove their testimony true , do at the same time prove the divine authority of the old testament , since it is so expresly said in the new , that holy men of god did speak as they were moved by the holy ghost . but after all this , you urge , that you have discover'd such things in these writings as could not come from god , as 1. contradictions in them . 2. something 's inconsistent with the wisdom of god. 3. promises made that were never fulfilled . 4. things so obscure as no one can tell the meaning of them . under these four heads i shall examin the particular allegations you bring against the scriptures . 1. under the head of contradictions , you insist on the prophecy gen. 15. 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. made to abraham concerning his posterity ; compared with the accomplishment mentioned , exod. 12. 40. 41. and the force of your argument lyes in this , that the prophecy in genesis doth imply that the servitude of the children of israel in egypt was to be 40 years ; or 430 saith exod. but both these are repugnant to other places of scripture , which make their abode in egypt not to exceed 215 years ; or at the highest , by the number of generations could not exceed 350 years , stretching them to the utmost advantage . to this which you lay so much weight upon , i answer distinctly , 1. by your own confession , supposing the 430 years to begin from the covenant made with abraham , the accomplishment mentioned , exod. 12. 40. doth fall out exactly in the time of the children of israels going out of egypt , for you have proved from scripture , that from the covenant with abraham to jacobs being in egypt , were 215 years ; to which you add , that coath being supposed 5 years old at the going into egypt ; and that at 70 years he begat amram , and that amram at at 70 begat moses , to which moses his 80 years being added , makes up the other 215 years , whereby we have the full 430 years , by your own computation . now , sir , i pray consider what reason you have to charge the scripture with contradiction in a matter your self acknowledges , so exactly accomplished in this way of computation ? 2. but you say , the words will not bear this ; because they speak of the 400 years to expire in their servitude in egypt . answ. for this we must consider the importance of the words both in genesis and exodus . there is not a word of egypt mentioned in genesis ; but only in general it is said , thy seed shall be a stranger in the land that is not theirs , and shall serve them , and they shall afflict them 400 years ; and it will conduce very much to the right understanding this prophecy to consider the main scope and design of it , which was not to tell abraham how long they should be in servitude to the egyptians , but how long it would be before his seed should come to the possession of the promised land ; and it seems abraham by the question , gen. 15. 7. 8. did expect to have the inheritance of this land in his own time : to this therefore god answers , by telling him , he meant no such thing , but it was intended for his seed , and that not suddenly neither , for they were to tarry till the iniquity of the amorites should be full , which would not be till the fourth generation ; and then his seed should after 400 years , come to the possession of the promised land ; but in the mean time they were to sojourn in a land that was not theirs , and to meet with many hardships and difficulties . this is plainly the scope of this prophecy , and by attending to it , the great objections presently appear without force ; for the land of canaan notwithstanding the promise , was by the patriarchs themselves looked on as a land wherein they were strangers . so abraham saith gen. 23. 4. i am a stranger and a sojourner with you ; and which is more remarkable in the blessing of jacob by isaac , to whom the promise was made , it is said ; and give thee the blessing of abraham to thee , and to thy seed , that thou mayest inherit the land wherein thou art a stranger , which god gave unto abraham , gen. 28. 4. where the very same word is used concerning jacob , that is expressed in the prophecy , gen. 15. 13. so that the patriarchs looked on themselves as strangers in the land of canaan , so long after the promise made , and after the increase of the seed of abraham ▪ and therefore the land of canaan was called terra peregrinationum , the land wherein they were strangers ; gen. 36. 7. — 37. 1. and when god was calling the people of israel together out of egypt , yet then the land of canaan was called by the very same title , the land of their pilgrimage , wherein they were strangers : exod. 6. 4. and ps. 105. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13. where we have a full account of the promise made to abraham , isaac , and jacob , concerning the inheritance of that land it is said , that they were few , and strangers in it , when they went from one nation to another , from one kingdom to another people . which doth fully explain the meaning of the prophecy in genesis , and that it is not to be restrained to the servitude of the people of israel in egypt , but to be understood of their state of pilgrimage for 400 years , wherein they were to suffer great hardships , before they should come to the inheritance of canaan . this is no forced or unnatural exposition of the words , as you seem to suggest ; but to my apprehension , very plain and easie , if we attend to the main scope and design of them which was to acquaint abraham how long it would be before the prophecy were accomplished , and what the condition of his seed should be the mean time , viz. that they should have no land which they should call their own by inheritance all that time , but they should be exposed to great hardships , yea even to servitude ; but that nation whom they should serve , should at last suffer for their ill usage of them , and they should come out of that captivity with great substance ; and all this to be done in the fourth generation of the amorites when their iniquities should be arrived at the full height . all which particulars , were so remarkably accomplished at such a distance of time , and under such improbable circumstances , that that this very prophecy were enough to convince an unprejudiced mind , that it came from divine inspiration . for where do we meet with any thing like this in the histories of other nations ? viz. a prophecy to be accomplished 400 years after , and the very manner foretold , which no humane conjecture could reach to , since the manner of deliverance of the people of israel out of their captivity in egypt , was to all humane appearance so impossible a thing , especially at such a time when the spirits of the people were sunk and broken by so long a slavery : and not only the manner foretold , but the accomplishment happened to a day , according to exodus 12. 41. and it came to pass at the end of the 430 years , even the selfe-same day it came to pass , that all the hosts of the lord went out from the land of egypt . but against this you object , that the sojourning is spoken of the children of israel in egypt for 430 years ; which cannot hold good any ways ; since , to make it up , the times of abraham , isaac , and jacob , must be taken in who could not be called the children of israel . answ. for the 430 years , i grant , that according to st. paul , they did commence from the covenant made to abraham gal. 3. 17. and that the 400 years began from isaac's being owned for the promised seed ; between which time the 30 years were passed ; and all appearance of difficulty is avoided , if we admit the reading of the best copies of the lxx . which is in these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , now the sojourning of the children of israel who dwelt in egypt and canaan , they and their fathers was 430 years . this is the reading of our alexandrian copy , and the complutensian , and that of aldus , and of eusebius in his chronicon , and of st. hierome in his translation of it ; and of the church in st. augustins time , and afterwards ; and lest any should reject this as a late interpolation , or gloss received into the text , besides these testimonies of the antiquity of it , we find the very same in the samaritan copy , which the enemies of it do allow to be as ancient as our saviours time . and that which very much confirms the truth of this reading is , that the jews themselves follow the sense of it , who are the most eager contenders for the authority of the hebrew copy ; who all agree , that the beginning of the computation of the 430 years is to be taken before the children of israels going into egypt : and menasseh ben israel contends with many others , that the 430 years did begin from the promise made to abraham , and the 400 from the time of isaac , to which their most ancient books of chronology do agree , and to the same purpose speak both philo judaeus , and josephus ; who although in one place he seems to make the israelites affliction in egypt to have been 400 years , yet when he speaks more particularly of it , he makes the time of their abode in egypt to have been only 215 , and the 430 to begin from abrahams entrance into canaan : the targum of jonathan begins the 430 from the vision of abraham , and the 400 from the birth of isaac ; all which i mention , to let you see that the jews themselves do in sense concur with the samaritan and greek copy ; and therefore we have more reason to suspect something left out in the present hebrew , than any thing added in those copies . but doth not this take off from the authority of the scripture ? not at all : for the only question is about the true reading : and having the consent of the samaritan , alexandrian , and other copies of the lxx . and of the ancient church ; and of the jews themselves as to the sense of it , we have reason to look on this as the truer reading : which is making no addition to the scripture either as to persons or places , but only producing the more authentick copy ; much less is this adding or changing as we please , for if we did this without so much authority as we have for it , you might as easily reject it as we produce it . 3. after all this , i do not see the mighty force of your reason to charge the scripture with contradiction , supposing the 400 years were to be spent in the servitude of the children of israel in egypt . i confess , when i found the scripture so boldly , so frequently charged with no less than contradiction , i expected something like demonstration in the case , especially in this place which you chose to put in the front of all ; but i do not find any thing like such a proof of a contradiction , supposing we should allow the 400 years to be spent in egypt . yes , say you , coath was 5 years old when he came down into egypt , and when he had lived there 65 years he begat amram , and amram being 70 years old begat moses , to which moses his 80 years being added , we have only 215 years . but since the scripture doth not assign , the particular age of any of these , when they begat their children , i see no impossibility or repugnancy in the supposition , that 400 years should pass from levi's going into egypt , to the eightieth of moses , any more than from salmons entrance into canaan to the time of david , for no more are reckoned in scripture than boaz the son of salmon , by raab , and obed , and jesse ; so that by the same way , this latter may be explained , the former may be so too . if it be said , that either they begat their children at a great age , or that the scripture in genealogies doth not set down all the intermediate parents , but only the most eminent , ( as caleb is called the son of esron . 1 chron. 2. 9 , 18. although there was at least one between them , ) the very same answer will serve to clear this part of the chronology of scripture from any appearance of contradiction . these things you might have found more largely deduced and fully handled by those learned persons , who have undertaken to clear the chronology of scripture : who were men of more judgment , than from any difficulty of this nature , to call in question the truth and authority of the sacred scriptures ; and although the opinions of chronologers , are like the city clocks , which seldom agree , yet some come nearer the time of the day than others do ; and therefore you ought to examine and compare them before you pronounce so peremptorily about contradictions in scripture , which you have no reason to do till you find that no one hypothesis among them will serve to free the scripture from contradiction : for otherwise , you do but blame the sun , because you cannot make the clocks agree . this is all i can find in your papers under the head of contradictions ; and i leave you now soberly to consider , whether this place did afford you sufficient ground for so heavy a charge ; but if you say , you have a great many more by you , but you sent me this only for a tryal of my skill ; before you send any more ; i beseech you , sir , to consider , 1. how easily things do appear to be contradictions to weak , or unstudied , or prejudiced minds , which after due consideration appear to be no such things . a deep prejudice finds a contradiction in every thing ; whereas in truth , nothing but ill will , and impatience of considering , made any thing , it may be , which they quarrel at , appear to be so . if i had been of such a quarrelsome humour , i would have undertaken to have found out more contradictions in your papers , than you imagin , and yet you might have been confident , you had been guilty of none at all . when i consider the great pains , and learning , and judgement , which hath been shewn by the christian writers in the explication of the scriptures ; and the raw , indigested objections which some love to make against them , if i were to judge of things barely by the fitness of persons to judge of them , the disproportion between these , would appear out of all comparison . a modest man would in any thing of this nature say with himself , methinks , if there were such contradictions in the bible , as now seem to me ; so many persons of incomparable abilities in the first , and latter ages of the christian church , who have made it their business to enquire into these things , would have discerned them before me : and yet they retained a mighty veneration for the scriptures , as coming from god himself ; and therefore it may be only weakness of judgement , want of learning , or some secret prejudice may make me suspect these things ; or else i must suspect the honesty of all those persons who have pretended such a devotion to the scriptures , and yet have believed them full of contradictions . 2. wherein the contradiction appears . is it in the main and weighty parts of the religion revealed herein ; or is it only in some smaller circumstances as to time and place ? the great thing you are to look after , are the matters those scriptures tell you your salvation depends upon ; and if there be a full consent , and agreement therein ; you find enough for you to believe and practice . and if some contradictions should still appear to you in smaller matters , what follows from thence , but only that the same care was not taken about little , as about great things ? and you ought to set that appearance of contradiction in small matters , together with the real consent in the things of the highest importance ; and from thence rather to infer , that this was no combination or design to deceive others ; for such persons take the greatest care to prevent suspicion , by their exactness in every minute circumstance ; and sometimes the over-much care to prevent suspicion doth raise it the more . 3. what ways have been used by men of judgement and learning , to clear those places from the charge of contradiction . for , not one of the objections you can start now , but hath been considered over and over ; and all the difficulties that belong to it examined ; if you will not take the pains to do this ; it is plain you do not desire satisfaction , but only seek for a pretence to cavil ; especially , if you only search the weakest or most injudicious writers on the scriptures , and endeavour to expose their opinions , without taking notice of what others have said with more clear and evident reason . this shews either want of judgment in choosing such expositors , or want of candor and fair dealing and a desire of taking any advantage against the scriptures . 4. how hard a matter it is for us at this distance to understand exactly the grounds of chronology , or the manner of computation of times used so long ago : and therefore in all difficulties of this nature , we ought to make the fairest allowances that may be , considering withall , that escapes and errours are no where more easily committed by transcribers , than in numbers : and that it is a very unreasonable thing , that a book otherwise deserving to be thought the best book in the world , should be scorned and rejected , because there appears some difference in the computation of times . we do not so exactly know the manner of the hebrew chronology , nor , the nature of their year , or intercalations , nor the customs of their genealogies ; nor the allowance to be made for interregnums , so as to be able to define peremptorily in these things ; but it is sufficient to shew , that there is no improbability in the accounts that are given ; and no sufficient reason can be drawn from thence to reject the authority of the scriptures . 2. i come to consider the places you object , as containing things inconsistent with the wisdom , or goodness of god , according to a rational perswasion ; and those are either , 1. from the laws of moses . 2. from the express story of the bible , or actions of the prophets . 1. from the laws of moses : your first objection is from exod. 21. 7. where a man is supposed to sell his daughter ; which you say , it is incredible to believe that god should permit ; because it implies unnatural affection and covetousness in the father . but , sir , 1. you do not consider , that this is barely a provisional law , and is not the permission of the thing , so much as the regulation of it , supposing it to be done , i. e. in case a man should part with his interest in his daughter to another person , upon an extraordinary case of necessity , as the jews understand it ; yet then , she was not to be in the condition of a servant , but to be either betrothed to the person who receiv'd her , or to his son ; which was intended for the restraint of promiscuous buying and selling daughters , meerly for the satisfaction of lust. the jews who certainly best understood their own judicial laws , do say , that this was never to be done , but where there was a presumption of such a betrothing ; for no man could sell his daughter to those to whom it was unlawful for her to marry by their law ; so that this was looked on as a kind of espousals of a young girle , taken into wardship by another ; but so , that if she were not betrothed , she was to remain her 6 years during her minority , as the jews understand it ; unless she were redeemed , or set free , or the jubile came , or the master dyed , or the time of her minority expired . 2. the case of necessity being supposed , it hath been thought lawful for parents to make advantage by their children , not only by the jews , but by other nations , who have been in the greatest esteem for wisdom . for by the law of the 12 tables , among the romans , the father had the liberty of selling his son three times , for his own advantage , as dionys. halicarnasseus relates ; and before that time , it was not only in use among the romans , but in such esteem among them , that upon the review of their laws the decemviri durst not leave it out ; but by one of the laws of numa pompilius , it was restrained to the times before marriage , for in case the son had the fathers consent to marry , he could not sell him afterwards , as the same author tells us . this law continued in force among them , till christianity prevailed in the roman empire , for although there were a prohibition of diocletian against it , yet that signified nothing , till constantine took care , that such indigent parents should be relieved out of the publick charge , cod. theodos. l. 11. tit . 27. 2. and yet after this , the custom did continue , when the parents were in great want , as appears by a law of theodosius , cod. 3. tit . 3. omnes quos parentum miseranda fortuna in servitium dum victum requirunt addixit , ingenuitati pristinae reformentur . and it further appears , that even in constantin's time , notwithstanding the law made by him , parents would still , when they thought themselves overcharged with children , part with their interest in them to others for advantage , but it was chiefly while they were sanguinolenti , as the law expresses it , i. e. new born. cod. theod. l. 5. tit . 8. by the laws of athens , before solons time , parents might sell their children , as appears by plutarch , in his life ; and the same philostratus reports of the phrygians , l. 3. vit . apollon . tyan . and the like custom doth obtain among the chineses to this day , if persons do think themselves unable to bring up their children themselves . and there are two things to be said for it . 1. the natural obligation lying on children to provide for their parents in necessity , by any way they are able . 2. the probability of better education under more able persons ; and therefore the thebans had a law , that parents in case of poverty , were to bring their children to the magistrate , as soon as they were born , who put them out to such as were judged fit to bring them up , and to have their service for their reward . but however , you say , this place implys a toleration of having many wives , because it is said , if he take him another wife , v. 10. i do not deny , that the mosaical law did suppose the practice of polygamy ; but as it doth no where expressly allow it , neither doth it expressly condemn it . and although we say , the christian law is far more excellent , which reduceth marriage to its first institution ; yet you will find it a hard matter to prove such a permission of polygamy as this was , to be so repugnant to the law and principles of nature , as from thence to infer , that this law of moses could not be from god : you might have said the same about the matter of divorce , which was permitted them ; christ saith , for the hardness of their hearts : which shews , that god doth not always require that from men which is best pleasing to himself ; and that as to his political government , he may not always punish that , which is not so pleasing to him . the next law you quarrel at is that , deut. 22. 13 , &c. about the tryal of virginity : which you object against , as immodest , and uncertain , and therefore unbecoming the wisdom of god. so , many customs of those elder times of the world , and of the eastern parts to this day seem very strange to us , that are not so well acquainted with the reasons of them . methinks , it better becomes our modesty in such cases , to question our understanding those customes , than presently to cast so much disparagement on the author of them . if you had been offended at the literal sense of those words , many of the jews themselves say , they are to be understood figuratively of the evidence that was to be brought and laid open before the judges , on behalf of the defamed person . and both josephus and philo omit the laying open the cloth. but supposing it to be taken in the plainest literal sense , i have two things to say in vindication of this law. 1. that however uncertain some physitians have thought that way of tryal to have been in these parts of the world ; yet it is generally agreed to have held for the eastern parts , by the most skilful physitians among the arabians : and a custom of the same nature is said by good authors to have been observed among the egyptians , and other africans , as well as the arabians ; so that this could not be thought so strange or immodest among the inhabitants of those parts : and it is very probable that some particulars , as to the practice of these laws are not set down , which might very much tend to the certainty of them , as the age of the married persons , which was most likely then , as it is to this day in the eastern parts , very early , the jews say , at 12 years old , which would make the tryal more certain . 2. as to the modesty of it , you are to consider , that the law was intended to keep persons from unjust defamations , and such a way of tryal was therefore pitched upon to deter persons from such defamations ; which men might otherwise have been more ready to , because of the liberty of divorce , and the advantage they had in saving the dower , if they could prove the party vitiated before marriage ; therefore all the proof of that nature was to be passed soon after the consummation of marriage , which being agreed then by all the friends , there was to be no liberty left for defamation afterwards ; but in case any man should be guilty of it , the producing those evidences , which before they were agreed upon , should be sufficient to clear the innocency of the party accused . and therefore i look on this law , as the jews do on that of the rebellious son , of which they say , that there is no instance of the practice of it ; the penalty threatned being so effectual to prevent the occasion of it . and such in a great measure , i suppose the other law mentioned by you to have been , viz. of the water of jealousy , which you make so strange a matter of ; and think it savours too much of a design to gratify the jealous humour of the jewish nation : but you might have put a fairer construction upon it , viz. that it was intended to prevent any occasion of suspicion being given to the husband , by too much familiarity with other persons ; since the law allowed so severe a trial , in case the wife after admonition did not forbear such suspected familiarity , but if you had looked on the law , as it is , num. 5. 12 , 13. &c. you would have found , that the design of it was to keep women from committing secret adultery , by so severe a penalty ; yet withall allowing so much to a reasonable suspicion , ( for so the jews understand it , with many cautions and limitations ) that rather then married persons should live under perpetual jealousies , he appointed this extraordinary way of tryal , whereby adultery was most severely punished , and the honour of innocency publickly vindicated ; which certainly are not ends at all unbecoming due conceptions of god. the last of the jewish laws , which you quarrel with is the prohibition of usury , in several places of moses his law and the psalms : and from hence you fall into a long discourse to prove the lawfulness of usury : but to what purpose i beseech you ? for you were to prove , that god could never forbid it ; you might have spared your pity for men , as you think , blinded with superstition , and cheated with new and aëry notions : for by all that i can see by these papers , some pretended enemies to superstition have no better eyes than their neighbours , and are as easily cheated with groundless fancies and aëry imaginations . the only thing to the business in that long discourse is this , that you cannot imagine that god should make a law so much to mans inconvenience , and forbid him so nice and indifferent a thing , as moderate increase of profit by letting out of money , when it is allowed upon lands , houses , and trade , &c. to this i answer , that the prohibition of usury , to the jewish nation , was upon political grounds peculiar to the constitution of that people ; as appears by the words of the law , deut. 23. 19 , 20. thou shalt not lend to usury unto thy brother — unto a stranger thou maist lend upon usury ; but none of the laws which are founded upon common and moral reasons have such limitations as this ; for god would never have said , thou shalt not commit adultery with thy brothers wife ; but with the wife of a stranger thou maist . but there was this particular reason , for the prohibition of usury to the jewish nation : it pleased god to fix their habitation , not upon the sea-side , as tyre and sidon stood ; but within land where they had no conveniencies of trading , but the riches of the nation lay in agriculture and pasturage : in which the returns of money are neither so quick nor so advantageous to make sufficient compensation for the interest of the money in the time they have it : for the main thing valuable in money is the advantage the borrower makes of it ; and where that is great , it seems reasonable that the person whose the money is , should have a proportionable share of the advantage made by it ; but where persons borrow only for present occasions to supply their necessities , there it is only an act of kindness to lend , and it would be unreasonable to press upon , or take advantage by anothers necessities . and this seems to have been the case among the jews ; they were only the poor that wanted money for present necessities ; the rich had no way to imploy it in trading , unless that they lent to the tyrian merchants , which it was lawful by their law to do ; now if they took usury of their own people , it must be of those whose urgent necessity , and not hopes of a mighty increase by it made them borrow , and therefore it was a very just and reasonable law to forbid usury among them : which i believe he would never have done , if he had placed the jews upon the coasts of phoenicia , where trading was so much in request . these are all the laws which you have picked out of the whole body of the jewish law , to represent it unbecoming the wisdom of god : and now i pray sir , look back again upon them , see how few , how small , how weak your objections are ; and compare them with the weight , and justice , and prudence , and piety , expressed in all the rest , and i hope you will find cause to be ashamed of speaking so harshly of those laws , so well accommodated to those ages of the world , and the condition of that people for whom they were appointed . 2. i now consider what you object against the story of the bible . 1. that passage of moses ; exod. 32. 32. blot me out of thy book which thou hast written : where your design is to shew that moses prayed to be damned , and that this was a very irrational thing : and savouring more of passion than of the spirit of god. but what if moses meant no such thing as damnation ? as there is not any word in the context relating that ways , but all the design of that chapter is about a temporal punishment , which was a present destruction of the people for their sins . and the book out of which he prayed god to blot him , seems to me to be no other , than the roll of gods chosen people , who were to possess the land of canaan : for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifies a roll or register . psalm 69. 28. we meet with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the roll of the living , or the book of the living we render it , because all ancient books were in the fashion of rolls . in that chapter , moses intercedes with god on behalf of the people , that he would make good his promise to them , of bringing them into the land of canaan . v. 13. and v. 30. he goes up to make an atonement for the people , i. e. as to the cutting them off in the wilderness , and therefore he desires rather than the people should be destroy'd , that god would strike him out of the roll , that he might dye in the wilderness rather than the people : and god gives that answer to this purpose , v. 33. whoever hath sinned against me , will i blot out of my book , the sense of which is the same with those words of the psalmist , he sware in his wrath that they should not enter into his rest. psal. 95 , 11. and according to this interpretation , which is most natural and easie , all your long discourse against praying to be damned comes to just nothing ; there being no pretence for it , either in the text or context . 2. the story of ruth doth not please you , as savouring in your opinion of a great deal of immodesty ; but you would have a better opinion of it , if you consider that the reason of her carriage towards boaz , in such a manner , was upon naomies telling her that he was one to whom the right of redemption did belong , and by consequence , by their law , was to marry her . ruth 2. 20. and this ruth pleaded to boaz , ruth 3. 9. by which it appears , that she verily believed that he was legally her husband ; and boaz we see speaks of her as one that was a vertuous woman , and known to be such in the whole city . v. 11. and he confesses he was her near kinsman , only he saith , there was one nearer . v. 12. by which it seems , if there had not , boaz had made no scruple of the matter : and the jews say , in such marriages very little ceremony was required , if the next of kin did not renounce his right , because the law had determined the marriage before hand . if you had but considered this one thing , you would have spared the many observations you make on this story . 3. you object against 2 sam. 12. 8. as too much countenancing either incest or adultery , because it is said , that god gave to david his masters wives into his bosom . but 1. it is very strange to bring this place as a countenance to adultery , which was purposely designed to upbraid david with the sin of adultery ; and you will find it no easie matter , by the constitution of the mosaical law , to prove polygamy to be adultery . 2. the jews give a fair interpretation of this place , for they say , that the wife of a king could never marry after her husbands decease , as the gemara on the title sanhedrim expresly saith , although some among them follow the opinion of r. jehuda , that she might marry the succeeding king ; but that is built chiefly on this place ; of which the rest give a better account , viz. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not imply sauls wives , but the maids of honour , or attendants , on the court of saul , which all fell into davids power , and out of whom he might choose wives , without danger of incest ; and even some of those who assert it lawful for one king to marry his predecessors wife , yet say in this case of david , that the word only implies , that they were of saul's family , as merab and michal were , but not saul's wives . so that all the difficulty here arises only from the interpretation of an unusual word , in which we have much more reason to trust the jews than other writers . 4. you are much offended at hosea's marrying an adulteress : but all the formidable difficulties of that place will presently vanish , if you allow the prophetical schemes , wherein those things are said to be done , which are intended only to represent in a more lively manner the things signified by them . and so you may see the chaldee paraphrase , fully explains this place of hosea and maimonides purposely discourseth on the prophetick parables , and brings this as one of the instances of them ; and with him the rest of the jewish interpreters agree . but you object against such a way of teaching , as tending to the encouragement of vice , which it is very far from , being designed to represent the odiousness of it : for the whole scope of the prophet is to let the people understand , that their idolatry was as hateful to god as the sin of adultery , and that the consequence of it would be their misery and ruine . and yet that god expressed as much tenderness to them , as a man that was very fond of a woman would do , in being unwilling to put her away , although he knew she were false to his bed : the former is intended in the first chapter , and the latter in the third . and what is there tending to immorality in all this ? may not god make use of one vice , whose evil is more notorious to represent another by , whose evil they are more hardly convinced of ? may not he set forth a degenerate people by the sons of an adulteress ? and by the names given to them express his detestation of their wickedness ? especially when the parabolical terms are so clearly explained , as they are in the second chapter . but you will say , these things are related as plain matters of fact : with the several circumstances belonging to them . it is true , they are so , but so parables use to be ; so was nathan's to david ; so is that of the rich man and lazarus in the new testament ; so is jeremies going to euphrates to hide his girdle ; ( for it is not very likely the prophet should be sent 18 or 20 days journey into an enemies country for no other end : ) so is ezekiels lying on one side for 390 days , and having his head and beard contrary to the law , as maimonides observes : and his digging in the walls of the temple at hierusalem , while he was in babylon : and many other things of a like nature , which are set forth with as punctual a narration of circumstances as this of hosea , and yet they were only figurative expressions . we that are accustomed to another way of learning , think these things strange ; but this was a very common way in the elder times , and it is to this day much used in the eastern countries , to represent duties to some , under the parables of things as really done by others : as may be seen in locman and perzoes , besides what clemens alexandrinus and others have said , concerning the antiquity and common use of this parabolical way of teaching . i now come to your objections against the new testament : but i find them so few , and those so slight and inconsiderable , as to the end for which you produce them , that i may easily pass them over . to that about the continuance of miracles , i have already answer'd : and i find not one word in the places mentioned by you , which implies the necessity of the continuance of them in all ages of the christian church . that place , mark 10. 29 , 30. speaks of no more but such a recompence in this life as is consistent with persecution ; and therefore must chiefly lie in inward contentment ; which all wise men have valued above external accommodations ; although withall , by the account st. paul gives of himself , and his brethren , god did abundantly provide for them one way or other . as having nothing , and yet enjoying all things : which amounts to a hundred-fold in this life . but certainly you are the first man , who have objected the obscurity of the book of revelations , againgst the authority of the scriptures : which is just as if one should object the quadrature of the circle against mathematical certainty . if we grant that there are some things in that mystical book , we do not yet well understand ; what then ! must neither that book , nor any other of the bible be of divine revelation ? i will not pursue the unreasonableness of this way of arguing so far as i might ; but i leave your self to consider of it ; and of all that i have written , in order to your satisfaction . if you think fit to return an answer , i pray do it clearly and shortly , and with that freedom from passion , which becomes so weighty a matter : and i beseech god to give you a right understanding in all things . i am sir , your faithful servant . june 11. 1675. finis . books sold by moses pitt , at the angel in st. paul's church-yard . folio . theses theologicae variis temporibus in academia sedanensi editae , & ad disputandum propositae . authore ludovico le blanc verbi divini ministro & theologiae professore . in qua exponitur sententia doctorum ecelesiae romanae , & protestantium . price 20 s. dr. henry hammond's sermons . 1675. a table of ten thousand square numbers , by john pell , d. d. stitcht , 1 s. 6 d. tuba stentoro-phonica , or the speaking-trumpet ; being an instrument of excellent use both at sea and land ; by sir samuel morland . price of the book 1 s. of the instrument 2 l. 5 s. articles and rules for the government of his majesties forces by land , during this present war , 1673. 1 s. 6 d. bailii opus hist. chronol . vet . & nov. test. 1663. becmanni exercitationes theol. contra socinianos . an history of the church , by alex. petrey . 1662. catalogus librorum in regionibus transmarinis nuper editorum . quarto . dr. pell's introduction to algebra . 7 s. nich. mercatoris logarithmo-technia , sive methodus construendi logarithmos , 1668. & jac. gregorii exercitationes geometricae , 1668. 2 s. love only for love sake , a dramatick romance , by sir richard fanshaw . 3 s. 6 d. mori enchiridion metaphysicum , 1671. 10 s. snellii typhis batavus , ludg. bat. 1624. 5 s. petrus paaw de ossibus , amst. 1633. 5 s. dr. thomas jacomb , on the eighth chapter of the romans . 8 s. a letter from a gentleman of the lord howard's retinue , to his friend in london , dated at fez , nov. 1. 1670. 6 d. dr. wallis opera mechanica , 22 s. hieronymi mercurialis de arte gymnastica libri sex cum figuris , 1672. pignorii mensa isaica , 1669. pharmacopeia hagiensis , 1659.   augustana , 1672. j. crellii ethica aristotelica & christiana , 16 s. joan. binchii mellificium theologicum , 16 s. theod. kerkringii d. m. spicilegium anatomicum , continens observationum anatomicarum rariorum centuriam unam nec non osteogeniam foetuum in qua quid cuique ossiculo ●ingulis accedat mensibus , quidve decedat & ●n eo per varia immutetur tempora , accuratissimè oculis subjiciuntur , 1670. there is newly published two recantation-sermons ( preached at the french-church in the savoy ) by two converted romanists , mr. dela motte , late preacher of the order of the carmelites ; and mr. de luzanzy , licentiate in divinity ; wherein the corrupt doctrines of the church of rome are laid open and confuted . both printed in french and english. also two other sermons , one preached before the king at white-hall , jan. 30. 1676. by henry bagshaw , d. d. the other before the lord mayor , dec. 19. 1675. by johncook . a modest survey of the most material things in a discourse , called the naked truth , 6 d. octavo . a discourse of local motion , undertaking to demonstrate the laws of motion , and withall to prove , that of the seven rules delivered by mr. des cartes on this subject , he hath mistaken six : englished out of french , 1671. 1 s. the history of the late revolution of the empire of the great mogol , with a description of the countrey , in two volumes . 7 s. the history of the conquest of the empire of china by the tartars . 1671. 4 s. mystery of iniquity unvailed in a discourse , wherein is held forth the opposition of the doctrine , worship , and practices of the roman church , to the nature , designs , and characters of the christian faith , by gilbert burnet . 1 s. a collection of popish miracles wrought by popish saints , both during their lives , and after their death , collected out of their own authors , 1 s. theod. turqueti , de mayerne , de arthritide , accesserunt ejusdem consilia aliquot medicinalia , 1 s. a new way of curing the gout , and observations and practices relating to women in travel , 3 s. a relation of a conference held about religion at london , apr. 3. 1676. by edward stilling fleet , d. d. and gilbert burnet , with some gentlemen of the church of rome . 2 s. 6 d. elenchi motuum nuperorum in anglia pars tertia , sive motus compositi . ubi g. monchii e scotia progressus , nec non aug. caroli secundi in angliam reditus ; ejusdemque regiae majest . per decennium gesta fideliter enarra●tur , 1676. gualteri needham disputatio anatomica de formato foetu . 1667. 3 s. 6 d. buxtorfius's epitome of his hebrew grammar englished , by john davis , 1658. 1 s. 6 d. the fortunate fool , or the life of dr. ce●nudo , a spanish romance , 1670. 2 s. the adventures of mr. t. s. an english merchant , taken prisoner by the turks of argiers , with a description of that kingdom , and the towns and places thereabouts , 1670. 1 s. 6 d. contemplations on mortality , 1670. 1 s. a discourse written to a learned frier , by mr. des fourneillis , shewing that the systeme of mr. des cartes , and particularly his opinion concerning brutes , does contain nothing dangerous ; and that all he hath written of both , seems to have been taken out of the first chapter of genesis : to which is annexed the systeme general of the cartesian philosophy , 1 s. the relation of a voyage into mauritania in africk , by roland frejus of marseilles , by the french kings order , 1666 , to muley arxid king of taffaletta , &c. with a letter in answer to divers questions concerning their religion , manners , &c. 1671. 1 s. 6 d. a genuine explication of the visions in the book of revelation , by a. b. peganius . 1671. 2 s. prodronius to a dissertation concerning solids naturally contained within solids , laying a foundation for the rendring a rational account , both of the frame and the several changes of the mass of the earth , as also the various productions of the same . by nich. steno , 1671. 1 s. 3 d. basilius valentinus , of natural and super-natural things , also of the first tincture , root , and spirits of metals and minerals , how the same are conceived , generated , brought forth , changed and augmented : whereunto is added frier bacon of the medicine or tincture of antimony , mr. john isaack holland his works of saturn , and alexander van suchten , of the secrets of antimony out of dutch , 1671. 2 s. the poetical histories , being a compleat collection of all the stories necessary for a perfect understanding of the greek and latin poets , and other ancient authors , written originally in french , by the learned jesuite p. galtruchius . now englished and enriched with observations concerning the gods worshiped by our ancestors in this island , by the phoenecians and syrians in asia ; with many useful notes and occasional proverbs , gathered out of the best authors : unto which are added two treatises ; one of the curiosities of old rome , and of the difficult names relating to the affairs of that city ; the other containing the most remarkable ●ieroglyphicks of egypt . the third edition , with additions . by marius d' assigny , b. d. 3 s. 6 d. an essay about the origine and virtues of gems , by the honourable robert boyle . 1 s. 6 d. idem lat. twelves , 1 s. sir samuel morland's arithmetick , with several useful tables , and a perpetual almanack , 1673. 3 s. a compleat treatise of chyrurgery , containing barbetts chirurgery . mindererus of diseases incident to camps and fleets : with a chyrurgeons chest of medicines and instruments . &c. 6 s. dr. lower de corde . amster . 1671. 3 s. dr. grews anatomy of vegetables , 1672. 2 s. crowei elenchi script . in scripturam . 3 s. 6 d. eugelenus de scorbuto . fred. deckeri exercitationes medicae . grotii via ad pacem . alb. gentilis de armis romanis . de imperio . de legationibus . de nuptiis . hammond de confirmatione . hugenii momenta desultoria . paraei chronologia sacra . thruston de respiratione . twelves . a paradise of delights , or an elixir of comforts offered to believers , in two discourses , the first on heb. 6. 17 , 18. the second on rom. 8. 32. by robert wyne . 1 s. grotii sophompaneas . gronovius in livium . primrose ars pharmaceutica . schook de pace . suetonius . swalve alcali . severini synopsis chyrurgiae . terentii flores . trelcatii loci communes . balduinus de calceo & nigronius de caliga veterum . accesserunt ex q. sept. fl. tertulliani , cl. salmasii & alb. rubenii scriptis plurima ejusdem argumenti , 1667. pauli barbetti opera chirurgica anatomica , 1672. praxis barbettiana cum notis fred. deckeri , ottonis tachenii hippocrates chymicus , q. horatii poemata cum commentariis jo. menellii , 1676. hugo grotius de veritate religionis christianae , 1674 ? theodori kerckringii d. m. commentarius in currum triumphalem antimonii basilii valentini a se latinitate donatum , 1671. jo. pincieri m. d. aenigmatum libri tres cum solutionibus , 1655. francisci redi experimenta circa res diversas naturales , speciatim illas quae ex indiis adferuntur , 1675. aulus gellius . besterfeldus redivivus . herls wisdoms tripos . wilkins beauty of providence . quarto . a new dictionary , french and english , by guy miege . 1677. marshal turenne's funeral sermon . 1677. jer. horroccii . angl. opusc. astron. 1673. an historical vindication of the church of england in point of schism , by sir ro. twisden . the last siege of mastricht . sept. 5. 1676. dr. tillotson's sermon before the king , apr. 18. 1675. dr. wilkins's two sermons before the king , march 7. 1669. and feb. 7. 1670. dr. jo. tillotson's rule of faith. 1676. rhetores selecti : demetrius phalerius , tiberius rhetor , anonymus sophista , severus alexandrinus grecè et lat. per tho. gale. soc. coll. m. 1676. a scriptural catechism , according to the method observed by the author of the whole duty of man , 1676. how , of delighting in god ; of the blessedness of the righteous . two vol. art of speaking , by m. du port-royal , 1676 : notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61565-e220 tractat. theol. politic . notes for div a61565-e530 acts 2. 32. 36. aelian . v. hist. l. 2. c. 7. selden . vxor ebra . l. 1. c. 10. schick . de jure reg. c. 16. theor. 19. maim . moro nevoch . l. 2. c. 46. jer. 13. 4. 5. ezek. 4. 5. 6. ezek. 5. 1. ezek. 8. 8. 2 cor. 6. 10. a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall, march the 13th, 1691/2 by the right reverend father in god, edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1692 approx. 51 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 21 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61624 wing s5664 estc r8160 13729570 ocm 13729570 101599 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61624) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101599) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 852:9) a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall, march the 13th, 1691/2 by the right reverend father in god, edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 40 p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1692. "published by her majesty's special command." reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -romans viii, 6 -sermons. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-06 amanda watson sampled and proofread 2004-06 amanda watson text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , march the 13 th . 1691 / 2. by the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester . published by her majesty's special command . london , printed by j. h. for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , 1692. romans viii . 6. for , to be carnally minded is death ; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace . in these words is imply'd a distribution of mankind into those who are carnally and spiritually minded ; which distinction is so large and comprehensive , as to take in all sorts and conditions of men , and of so great moment and importance , that their life or death , happiness or misery depend upon it . but , considering the mixture of good and evil in mankind , it is not an easie matter to set the bounds of the carnal and spiritual mind ; and considering the frequent impunity and security of bad men , and the fears and troubles , which the best are not exempted from , it seems next to impossible to make out ( at least as to this life ) that to be carnally minded is death , but to be spiritually minded is life and peace . yet , our apostle doth not seem to confine the consequences here mention'd to another world , ( although the full accomplishment of them be only there to be expected ; ) but if we attend to his scope and design in the end of the foregoing chapter , and the beginning of this , we shall find that even in this life the result of a carnal mind is a sort of spiritual death ; and of a spiritual mind is life and peace : for , when s. paul in the 7th chapter had represented himself as carnal and sold under sin , although there were great strugglings between the convictions of his conscience , and the strength of carnal inclinations ; yet , as long as the latter prevailed so that he could not do the things that his mind and reason told him he ought to do ; but did those things which he was convinced he ought not to have done : the more he reflected upon himself , the more sad and miserable he found his condition to be , as appears by that emphatical expression which follow'd upon it , o wretched man that i am , who shall deliver me from the body of this death ? but he no sooner finds hopes of delivery and escape out of that estate , but he breaks forth into a transport of joy and inward satisfaction . thanks be to god who hath given us the victory through jesus christ our lord. not meerly a victory over death , but over sin too : and so he begins this chapter after a triumphant manner ; there is therefore no condemnation to them which are in christ jesus ; who walk not after the flesh , but after the spirit . for the lord of the spirit of life which was in christ jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death : he that groaned under his captivity before to the law of sin , doth now rejoyce in his deliverance from it by the grace of the gospel . for , what could not be done by natural freedom , by the power of the law and the force of reason , is brought to pass by the assistance of divine grace given to the souls of men by jesus christ. for what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh : what was that which the law could not do ? it could awaken , convince , terrifie and confound the consciences of sinners under the sense and apprehension of their sins ; but it could neither satisfie the justice of god , nor the minds of men ; it could not remove the guilt , nor take away the force and power of sin. but god sending his own son in the likeness of sinfull flesh , and for sin condemned sin in the flesh ; i. e. jesus christ becoming an expiatory sacrifice for sin , took off the damning power of sin ; and by the prevailing efficacy of his grace subdued the strength and force of it to such a degree , that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us , who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit . how could this be , if s. paul still considered himself in the same condition he did in the foregoing chapter ? for if he were still in captivity to the law of sin in his members , how was it possible that the righteousness of the law should be fulfilled in him ? how could he walk not after the flesh but after the spirit , if the good which he would he did not , and the evil which he would not that he did ? for these things are so repugnant to each other , that when they are spoken of the same person , it must be under different considerations ; the one of him , as meerly under the power of the law ; the other , as under the grace and influence of the gospel . the one was like rough and a churlish sort of physick , which searches into every part , and puts all the ill humours of the body into motion , and makes a general disturbance and uneasiness within , but yet lets them remain where they were ; the other is like a gentle but more effectual remedy , which carries off the strength and power of inward corruptions , and alters the habit and temper , and puts quite another disposition into us , which produces very different effects upon us . for , instead of horrour and despair , and inward anguish and confusion , there will follow a new life of joy and peace here , and eternal happiness hereafter . and this is what the apostle means in the words of the text ; to be carnally minded , &c. wherein are two things , which very much deserve our consideration . i. the different tempers of mens minds ; some are carnally and others spiritually minded . ii. the different consequences which follow them : to be carnally minded is death ; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace . i. the different tempers of mens minds . the different denominations are taken from the flesh and the spirit ; which are here represented as two principles so different from each other , that the same person cannot be supposed to be acted by both of them . for , as the apostle saith in the foregoing words , they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh ; but they that are after the spirit the things of the spirit . where the flesh , in a moral sense , takes in all our sensual inclinations which are sinfull either in their nature or degree . the spirit is that divine principle , which possesses the mind with the love and esteem of spiritual things , and keeps our natural inclinations within the compass of god's law. to be carnally minded , is to be under the influence of carnal things , so as to make the pursuit of them our chief design : to be spiritually minded is to have so deep and just a sense of god and his law upon our minds , as to make it our business to please him , and therefore to subdue all such inclinations which are repugnant to his will. but here lies the main difficulty ; how to judge concerning this matter so , as to be able to determine whether we our selves be carnally or spiritually minded . which is a thing of so great consequence for us to know , that the peace of our minds , the true comfort of our lives , our due preparation for death , and a happy eternity , do all depend upon it . and yet that this is a real difficulty will appear from these considerations . ( 1. ) it requires a greater knowledge of our selves ( as to our spiritual condition ) than most persons in the world can pretend to . for it is not a slight and superficial view of our selves , not a transient , sudden reflection , nor a partial inquiry into our inward passions , and the course of our actions , which can make us capable of passing a true judgment upon the temper of our minds ; but there must be a true light , a serious and diligent search , frequent recollection , free and deliberate thoughts , long observation and due comparison of our selves with our selves and with the law of god , before we can form a just opinion as to the prevailing temper and disposition of our minds . it 's true , this is not necessary in all persons ; for some ( and i am afraid too many ) are so carnally minded , that the least reflection or consideration would make them see how bad their condition is . for , they have no true sense of god or religion at all ; they have no serious thoughts or apprehensions of divine and spiritual things ; this world they pretend to know something of , and have too great an esteem of the vanities and pleasures of it ; for these wholly take up their hearts and time ; and they have a savour and relish for any thing that tends to their greatness or honour or entertainment of their appetites or fancies here ; but if we speak to them of another world , of god and heaven and a spiritual disposition of soul ; either they look on us with amazement , as if they were insensible of such things ; or else with scorn and contempt , as if we went about to deceive them . alas ! they are too wise to be imposed upon by us ; and they have other things to mind ( i am sure not greater or weightier ) which take up all their time ; and so what through the business and the impertinencies of this world , their time passeth away as a tale that is told ; and as though it were a very pleasant tale , they are troubled only to think it will be so soon at an end. but these are not the persons , who require any such care to pass a right judgment upon them ; for they can pretend to nothing that is spiritual , as to the tempers and dispositions of their minds ; and therefore such as these must be set aside , for it is too apparent that they are only sensual and carnally minded . but as the papists distinguish of the body of christ , so may we of the carnal mind ; there is a gross and capernaitical sense ; and there is a more refined and ( if i may use the expression ) a more spiritual sense of it . for although it be a great absurdity in them to suppose that a meer body can be after the manner of a spirit ; yet it is not so to suppose a carnal mind to have a mixture of some spiritual qualities and dispositions in it . and this makes the difference so much harder to be perceived between the carnally and spiritually minded ; since there are the same faculties of perception , reasoning , and application in both ; and the same common principles of religion may be owned by both ; which may in reason be supposed to make some impression on the minds of the more ingenuous part of mankind , who are not given over to such a reprobate sense as the former were . now , how to distinguish between frequent good impressions on the mind , and an habitual temper and disposition , is not to easie to all who are concerned to distinguish them . and yet a person may be throughly convinced of his sins , and tremble at the apprehension of the justice and severity of god against them , he may have many checks and reluctancies of conscience while he goes on to commit them ; he may sigh and groan and lament under the wretchedness of his condition by his love of sin ; and yet may love his sins all the while more than god or heaven , or any thing in competition with them . the difference doth not lie in the nature or number of the impressions from without , but in the inward principle of action . a cistern may be full of water falling down from heaven , which may run as long as that holds which fell into it ; but a spring hath it rising up within , and so continues running when the other is spent . a carnal mind may have many spiritual convictions , and good motions and inclinations , but after a time they wear off and leave no lasting effect behind them ; but where there is a spring in the soul , there is a fresh and continual supply of such inclinations , as keep up a constant course of a spiritual life ; which our saviour calls rivers of living water . i confess it is hard to determine what a habit or principle abiding in our minds is ; yet the scripture doth evidently suppose such a thing , when it speaks of the new birth , and the new life , and the new creature , and the children of god ; all which are very insignificant terms , if there be not under them something answerable to the first principles of life ; and if there be not a divine spirit dwelling and acting in the souls of good men , and raising them up above carnal and sensual objects to things divine and spiritual , and carrying them through the passage of this world so as to prepare them for a better . but yet there may be many things which carry some resemblance to this principle within , which come not up to it . there may be such principles of education and good manners , such awakenings of conscience , such a strength of natural reason and common ingenuity , as may carry one on to do some very good things , and yet he may fall short of having a true principle of spiritual life in him . but then , there must be another principle within , which contradicts this , and prevails over it , and carries him on to the love of sin , which proves too strong for the love of god and the due regard to spiritual things . the result of this discourse is , since the carnal mind is not to be taken meerly for such a one which stands out in opposition to the gospel , nor for such a one which is insensible of spiritual things ; but such as may consist with a common profession of religion , and have the same convictions and good impressions which others have ; it doth require a more than ordinary acquaintance with our selves to be able to judge aright , whether the temper of our minds be carnal or spiritual . 2. but this is not all ; for , since there is so great a mixture of good and evil in the better sort of mankind , there is required not barely knowledge of our selves , but a good judgment too to adjust the proportions of good and evil in particular persons , so as to be able to judge whether we are carnally or spiritually minded . for , as those who are carnal , while they follow their carnal inclinations , may have many inward strugglings by spiritual convictions ; so those who are spiritually minded may meet with many combats from the flesh , which may be troublesome , where it cannot prevail . but there is a great difference between the spirit struggling against the flesh in the carnally minded , and the flesh struggling against the spirit in those who are spiritually minded . for , where there is no perfect victory , there will be some opposition ; and the best have so many failings to complain of in this world ; so many infirmities and defects in their good actions ; so many passions not brought into their due order ; so many omissions of personal and relative duties ; such variety of tempers and weakness of resolution ; such coldness in devotion and unreasonable dejections of mind ; so many unaccountable fears and such dreadfull apprehensions of death and the consequences of it ; that these things must make great abatements as to such as are truly spiritually minded . but by all these things the difficulty still increaseth , and therefore it is time to come to the resolution of it ; and that will be by shewing that the difference between the carnal and spiritual mind lies in these three things : 1. in the deliberate judgment and choice . 2. in the prevailing interest . 3. in the constant rule and measure of actions . 1. in the deliberate judgment and choice . for the main difference as to the carnal and spiritual mind , lies in the different end which is aimed at by them . where the chief end is the pleasing our selves , and the enjoying of any thing as our happiness under the supream good , whatever thoughts and intentions we may at some times have , to repent of our sins , and turn our souls from the love of sin to the love of god , as long as we continue pursuing a wrong end , we have too great reason to conclude our minds to be yet carnal and sold under sin . for while the apostle represents himself so , he tells us he had his conscience throughly awakened with the sense of his sins , even of those which the world is least apt to be sensible of , inward and secret sins ; he was not only convinced of the excellency and purity of the law , but had some pleasure and satisfaction in it ; he had some hearty desires to be rid of his beloved sins ; but yet they were too hard for him , he sighed and lamented under his deplorable condition ; but 'till the grace of god came to set him free , he was in a miserable and hopeless state. but how is it , that the grace of god thus refines and purifies the minds of men , so as of carnal to make them spiritual , when the same passions and inclinations remain ? a change there must be , and that real and spiritual , and therefore in our best faculties , viz. our understandings and our wills ; not by a revelation of new objects to the mind , nor by offering any force upon the will ; but by fixing the judgment of the mind and the choice of the will upon the best and most desirable object , which is god himself , as the supreme good. the turn of the soul which makes one spiritually minded , must not be only from gross and sensual inclinations , but from every other kind of good , which stands in competition with the supreme . a truly spiritual mind is one that is possessed with the love of god above all , and that values other things , as they tend to the enjoyment of him. god must be the only center of his hopes and designs ; for in him alone his true happiness consists : as the psalmist expresses it ; whom have i in heaven but thee ? and there is none upon earth i desire besides thee . whatever falls short of this , may agree to a carnal mind ; but a carnal mind can never love god as he ought to be loved ; not with a supreme transcendent degree of love , which is alone proper and suitable to him . all other kind of love is beneath his infinite goodness and perfections ; and to love him as we do his creatures , is to do him the greatest dishonour , for it levels their perfections , and supposes them to deserve the same degree of affection from us . but there may be many spiritual notions in mens minds about god and religion ; about mystical unions , and the participations of divine love ; man seeming spiritual raptures and ecstasies , and yet there may not be this spiritual mind . for the heats of enthusiasm may seem to be very spiritual , but are of another kind ; they are spiritual , as they are the effects of a great heating of the spirits by the force of a vehement imagination ; which hath been often accompanied with as vehement an inclination to sensual pleasures ; which shews the plain difference between an exalted fancy and a spiritual mind . a spiritual mind is such a one as is not only throughly convinced of the reality of spiritual things ; but of their excellency and desirableness , above any others that can be offer'd to our choice . it sees through all the glittering vanities of this world ; and soars above the most tempting and bewitching follies of mankind here : it frequently retires from the noise and confusion , the hurry and vexation of worldly affairs , that it may converse more freely with invisible objects ; not meerly by way of contemplation , but by raising the affections of the soul towards them , as the things which it hath chosen for its happiness . and this makes a ●onderfull alteration in the thoughts that these different tempers have concerning the same things . i do not deny but those who have carnal minds may have some raised and spiritual thoughts , but they are too cold and speculative ; they may have noble and refined speculations about the invisible world ; may be fully convinced that the things which are seen , could not be what they are , were it not for the things which are not seen ; and that the things which are not seen , are of incomparably greater value than those which are so much more admired , because they are seen . but we must not conclude , that because men do really believe spiritual things , therefore they are spiritually minded , ( for that were to suppose all to be saints who are not atheists ; ) but there must be such a due preference in our minds , of that invisible and eternal state , above all that is accounted great and desirable here , as gives a just denomination to one that he is spiritually minded ; i. e. that his mind and soul is fixed upon another world as his proper happiness , and other things are regarded and valued in subserviency to it . 2. a spiritual mind is discerned by the prevailing interest . for , as long as we are made up of flesh and spirit , there will and must be a combat between them : for the flesh lusteth against the spirit , and the spirit against the flesh ; and these are contrary the one to the other ; so that ye cannot do the things that ye would : and yet the same apostle soon after adds , they that are christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts ; the meaning is , that , in some particular instances and less remarkable cases , the flesh may sometimes be too hard for the spirit ; but in all notorious instances of the lusts of the flesh , which he reckons up ; and in the main issue of all lesser combats the spirit will be too hard for the flesh in those who are spiritually minded ; as the flesh will be too hard for the spirit at last in those who are carnally minded . if we look on them in the time of the combat , it will be hard to judge which is most likely to prevail ; but those may have the better in some particular skirmishes , who may lose very much in the state of the war ; a good man may be foiled by surprise or under some disadvantage , but he will recover himself , and , it may be , gain ground by his falls ; and a bad man may in some fits of devotion seem so spiritually minded , that one might be apt to think he were quite changed , 'till he returns to his former practices . if we had been to judge of ahab in the time of his humiliation ; and of david in the time of his impenitency after his sins of adultery and murther , we should have thought in common justice and charity , the latter had been the carnal , and the former the spiritual-minded man. but it was quite otherwise ; which shews that we are not to judge of mens spiritual condition by sudden and violent motions whether good or bad ; but by that interest which prevails with them in the whole course of their lives . to give a general character of a man from some violent passion against the tenour of his life , would be like drawing the picture of a man in a fit of an epilepsy , or a convulsive motion of his face . and to believe a man to be a good man , because he hath some good moods and passionate fits of devotion , is , as if we should take a piece of rotten wood for a true phosphorus , because it shines sometimes ; or suppose judas to be a saint , because he was so much in our saviour's company . the inward habits and dispositions of mens minds may be cover'd over and disguised a great while ; but a tempting occasion lays them open ; as no doubt judas did not get his habit of covetousness of a sudden , but it was still growing and ripening under a fair appearance ; and when the proper season came , the secret malignity brake forth ; and the temptation of thirty pieces of silver discover'd the baseness and hypocrisy of his heart . sometimes the vein of hypocrisy lies deep , and is cover'd over with such a fair outside , that no one can have reason to mistrust it , 'till it discovers it self , and then the corruption is found to loathsome , as to render ordinary sincerity suspicious . but this is a common fault , either to be too easily deceived , or too unreasonably mistrustfull ; there is no certainty in a deduction from particulars , but where the causes are equal and necessary . it is as absurd an inference that there is no such thing as a spiritual mind , because some who have pretended to it have been found carnal ; as that there is no such thing as common honesty among men , because some who have long born the name of honest men have been found great cheats and impostors . but when a predominant habit doth discover it self , the person must bear that title and denomination which it gives him . 3. a spiritual mind is known by the general conformity of actions to a divine and spiritual rule ; and so a carnal mind by following the bent and inclinations of the flesh. and there lies a great part of the difference ; for such who lay no restraint upon their natural inclinations must needs be carnally minded ; because the flesh , as s. chrysostom observes , is not taken , by s. paul , meerly for the body , but for the corrupt part of our selves , as consisting of soul and body . it is observed by cicero 3. de rep. that mankind come into the world in a very ill condition , with a body naked , frail and infirm , with a mind subject to troubles , dejected with fears , impatient of labour , prone to lust ; but in the midst of all this , there is a certain divine flame of wit and vnderstanding , which lies as it were busied and overwhelmed ; but with great care and industry may be so preserved and improved , as to command our appetites and govern our passions . but , alas ! how little doth the reason of mankind signifie to the greatest part of them ? it helps them to see their folly , and like a sea-light to a sinking ship in a dark night , makes those who are aboard , to behold their misery , without helping them out of it . if the frame of human nature be considered in it self , and by way of speculation , we have no cause to complain of it ; for as god hath given us inferiour faculties suitable to the constitution of our bodies , so he hath likewise superiour , which are capable of controlling and governing them . but when habit and custom is joyned with a vicious inclination , how little doth human reason signifie ? all the considerations of natural order , and decency , and regularity , and good example , are easily over-born by the strong propensities of a corrupt inclination ; which hurries men on to satisfie first their brutal appetites , and leaves consideration 'till afterwards . so that reason seems by such an after-game , rather given to torment , than to reform them . therefore the wise god hath superadded his own law to inforce that of reason by a greater authority ; that men may think themselves more concerned to take care of their actions , when they must give an account of them to one infinitely above them . but what can mankind do in such a wretched condition ? for the law of it self is but like a toyle to a wild beast ; the more he struggles , the more he is intangled ; so that he sees his misery by it , but not his remedy . but such is the goodness and mercy of god towards mankind , that he hath never refused to accept those , who have sincerely endeavour'd to do his will according to the measure of that assistance which he hath given them . thus we find characters of men in all ages , who were said to be righteous before god , just and upright and perfect men ; and yet some of the most eminent of these had remarkable failings , as noah , abraham and job ; yet they had extraordinary testimonies of god's approving their integrity and passing by those faults which were contrary to the general design and tenour of their lives . i confess we meet with two instances to the contrary in scripture , which deserve our consideration ; and those were of extraordinary persons too , eminent for their long and faithfull service of god ; and yet upon single faults committed by them , he was very severe with them . which may seem to take much off from this lenity and goodness of god towards such who have a general sincerity of mind towards him . but , if we more strictly consider these two cases , we shall find there was something very provoking in the circumstances of them , which made god so much more displeased with the committing them . for , they were sins committed by them , in their publick capacities , and about such things wherein the honour of god was more particularly concerned . the first is the case of moses , who was a great pattern of wisdom and meekness and faithfulness , for forty years together , in the conduct of a very froward people in the wilderness ; yet at last he happen'd to fail in some part of his duty , and god was so angry with him , that he would not hear his prayer for going into canaan , but he cut him off in the wilderness at last , as he did the people for their unbelief . but what was this sin of moses which made god so highly displeased with him ? if we read the passage as it is related in the history of the fact , it is not so easie to find it out . the people murmured for want of water , god upon moses his prayer commands him , to take his rod , and in the assembly of the people , to speak to the rock and the water should issue out . moses assembles the people , expostulates the matter with them , strikes the rock twice and the waters came . where is the great sin of moses all this while ? yet , he often repeats it , that god was angry with him for something done at that time . god himself saith , moses and aaron rebelled against him ; and that they did not sanctifie him before the people : the psalmist saith , they provoked his spirit , so that he spake unadvisedly with his lips. after all , the sin of moses was a mixture of anger and some kind of infidelity : for , the psalmist saith , he was highly provoked ; and god himself saith , they believed him not , to sanctifie him in the eye of the children of israel . the fault then seems to lie in this , that they were more concerned for their own honour than god's , and did not so clearly attribute the power of the miracle to god , but that the people might think they assumed it to themselves , as appears by their words to the people , hear now , ye rebels , must we fetch you water out of the rock ? which expression doth not give god the glory he expected from them ; and he is so tender in matters of his own honour , that he would suffer none to encroach upon it , no not his faithfull servants , but he made them smart for attempting it . the other case is that of david's numbering the people ; and he was a man after god's own heart , of great sincerity and courage and constancy in his service . yet of a sudden he took up a resolution that he would have all the people number'd , without any apparent reason for it . and although he was discouraged from the attempt by those about him , yet he would be obey'd . and what came of it ? truly , before the thing was compleated he grew very uneasie at what he had done , for it is said , his heart smote him after that he had numbred the people ; and david said to the lord , i have sinned greatly in what i have done . and yet in the book of chronicles it is said , that he finished it not , because wrath fell for it against israel . what was the cause of all this severity against david ? was it such an unpardonable sin for a king to understand the number of his people ? suppose it a failing , yet why should god be so angry for one such failing in him that had served god so sincerely as david had done ? there must be something extraordinary in this case ; for , god sometimes supposes the people to be number'd ; and in some cases he requires or allows it ; why then is he so displeased now at the doing it ? the best account i know of it , is this ; it was not a meer piece of vanity and ostentation in david , ( altho' that be displeasing to god , ) but it was a thing ( as designed by him ) which was generally look'd on as inconsistent with the fundamental promise made to abraham ; and so it is mention'd in the chronicles , why the numbering was not exactly taken , because the lord had said he would increase israel like the stars of the heavens . which seems to imply that there was a general notion received among the people , that since god promised to increase them beyond number , no one ought to go about to take the exact number of them . for , this must seem to savour of infidelity , and a contempt or mistrust of god's fundamental promise . but however upon such occasions god might use two of his most faithfull servants thus , yet we have no reason to question his readiness to pardon these and other their failings upon a sincere repentance , and to accept of their general care and endeavour to please him instead of a perfect obedience . but i have something farther to offer , for the clearing these two difficult cases , viz. that there is a difference to be observed between the rule of god's proceedings with particular persons , as to the general sincerity of their actings ; and the measure of god's political justice as to persons in publick capacities the reason is , because in the latter cases , god may justly have a regard , not meerly to the actions themselves , but to the circumstances of the people they are related to . thus moses , mentions it three several times . the lord was angry with me for your sakes ; and again , the lord was wroth with me for your sakes and would not hear me ; and the lord said unto me , let it suffice thee , speak no more to me of this matter . it seems he was so much concerned as to pray to god , and that earnestly , that he would give him leave to conduct the people into canaan : but god would not grant his request . but he tells the people that it was for their sakes that he was denied . furthermore the lord was angry with me for your sakes , and sware that i should not go over jordan , &c. so that the blow which was given to the head was for the sake of the whole body . and it is remarkable in the case of david , that before he fell into the sin of numbering the people , the anger of the lord was kindled against israel ; and he moved david against them to say , go number israel and judah . from whence it is evident , that the sins of a people may provoke god to let princes fall into such sins , which may give just occasion to god to punish both together . but this is a very different case from the method of god's dealings with particular persons with regard to their integrity , according to the terms of the covenant of grace . which is established on such foundations , that we need not give way to despondencies for the sake of such particular acts of severity . ii. i am now to consider the different consequences of these two , to be carnally minded is death , but to be spiritually minded is life and peace ; which , in short , is , that the advantage is far greater which comes to mankind by one than by the other . and that will appear by comparing them together , ( 1. ) as under equal circumstances . ( 2. ) as under unequal circumstances . 1. as under equal circumstances . and here we have two sorts of persons to consider . 1. those who have convictions of conscience going along with a carnal mind . such who look on the conditions of men in this world at a distance , and judge only by appearance , would be apt to think that those who do allow themselves all the liberties which a carnal mind doth incline them to , have very much the advantage of those who are under the restraints of a spiritual mind ; for they are bound to severe rules of vertue and mortification , to deny all vngodliness and worldly lusts , and to live soberly and righteously and godly in this present world ; and these are thought to be very hard things ; whereas such who are not under these difficulties , seem to lead the most pleasant and easie lives , enjoying themselves and being full of noise and confidence and appear to be all mirth and good humour . but there is another account to be taken of these things : if men could look within and see all the secret misgivings , the inward horrours of conscience , the impatience and dissatisfaction they have , when they seriously reflect on their evil courses , it would quite alter their apprehensions of these things , and make them conclude with the roman orator , that one day spent according to the rules of vertue were to be preferr'd before everlasting debaucheries . and he was no fool , no pedant , no mean and contemptible person , who said this , but a man of wit and sense , of quality and experience , who had opportunities and means enough to have pursued the most sensual and voluptuous course of life ; which yet we see out of judgment and choice he despised , and preferr'd a far shorter life according to the rules of vertue , before a vicious immortality . and yet , how short were the incouragements to a good life , and the dissuasives from sin among the best of them , in comparison of what we all know now by the gospel of christ ? they went no farther than meer natural reason and the common sense of mankind carried them ; but we profess to believe the wrath of god revealed from heaven against all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men ; and that there will be a great and terrible day , wherein men must receive according to their works , whether they be good or evil. and will not this dreadfull consideration awaken the drowsie and secure sinner and make him look about him betimes , while there is yet any hopes of mercy ? will he not become so wise at least , as to enter into the consideration of his ways , and to look back on the former course of his life , to examin and compare that with the law of god by which he must be judged ? and if we have but patience to do this , he will have no farther patience with himself , for being guilty of such unspeakable folly. he will abhorr himself for all his sensual and sinfull delights ; which will turn into the greatest bitterness and anguish to his soul ; he will lament his folly and wickedness with the deepest sorrow ; and take up sincere and firm resolutions to return no more to the practise of them . and if this be the result , as it ought to be , of all the distinguishing sinfull pleasures of a carnal mind , i leave it to the most impartial mind to resolve whether there will be the least advantage by pursuing them . 2. but we have too great reason to suppose that men may harden themselves to such a degree of wickedness , as to be insensible of the folly of it , and to mock at those who go about to reprove them for it . such as these are at ease , because they have no sense of their condition ; but so are those in a lethargy : is their case therefore to be envied ; or compared with those in health , although more sensible of pain and danger ? who seem to be better pleased at sometimes , and transported with their own imaginations than men in a frenzy ? and yet no man thinks their condition happier for it . there is a sort of moral frenzy which possesses some part of mankind , who , are not only extravagant in their actions , but assume such a degree of confidence in committing them , as though the wise men of all ages had been the only remarkable fools in it . but it is no such easie matter to run down the principles of vertue and religion , they have stood the shock of all the sarcasms and reproaches of former times ; and there is still nothing at the bottom of all the scorn and contempt that is cast upon them : but a carnal and profane temper of mind ; which may bear them up for a while , but it will be sure to end in everlasting confusion ; and then they will find what they were so unwilling to believe , that to be carnally minded is death . not a meer state of insensibility , but the worst kind of death ; a death of perpetual horrour and torment ; a death without the power of dying , and yet with a perpetual desire of it ; a death whose sting can never be taken out ; and whose terror is said to be as everlasting as the joys of heaven . and shall not the apprehension of such a death , as this , so dreadfull , so unavoidable , so insupportable , make the greatest sinners to tremble , and be confounded at the apprehension of it ? and , if once such thoughts break into their minds , farewell then to all the imaginary pleasure and satisfaction of a carnal mind ; for it must sink it into the confusion if not the despair of hell. ( 2. ) but i have hitherto represented the disadvantages , of one side ; but are there not such on the other too ? some are too apt to think a spiritual mind to be nothing but a disorder'd fancy , and melancholy imaginations of invisible things . if this were all , it were so far from being life and peace , that there could be no real satisfaction about it . but a spiritual mind is truly the most desirable thing we are capable of in this world. for , it is the best improvement of our minds , which are spiritual . it is , the purging and refining them from the dross and corruption which debased them . it is , the advancing them towards the divine nature , by a gradual participation of it . it is , the raising them above the carnal delights , and the sollicitous cares and perplexing fears of this world ; and fitting them for a perpetual conversation with divine and spiritual objects . and what then can be more agreeable to the best part of our selves here , than to have a mind so disengaged from this world and so fit for a better ? so that we may be content to take a view of the worst which can be supposed as to disadvantage here , which is , that good men may be under unequal circumstances as to their condition in this life ; that is , when the regarding another world more than this , may make their outward condition more uneasie here , than it might have been , if they had follow'd only the dictates of a carnal mind . there are two sorts of troubles we are to expect in this world , ( 1. ) such as we bring upon our selves by our own acts : ( 2. ) such as are common to all mankind : in both these the spiritual mind hath the advantage . ( 1. ) as to such which men bring upon themselves . let this be supposed ; as it ought to be , when god pleases among christians , who are to follow christ in taking up his cross : is there any thing in this , which overthrows the advantage of a spiritual mind above a carnal ? can a carnal mind secure men from pains and diseases , from losses and disappointments ? nay doth not the pursuit of carnal pleasures bring more troubles upon men in this life , than the case of persecution doth upon the best christians ? if the loathsome diseases , the reproachfull and untimely deaths , which of all things ought to be most avoided , by such who believe no life after this , be compared with the pains and martyrdoms of those who have suffer'd for their religion , these will appear to be far more eligible than the other , because the mind hath far greater satisfaction under them , and a certain expectation of an infinite reward to follow upon them . whereas the others can have no comfort in looking back on what they have done , or forward in what they are to expect . for they have destroy'd their own happiness and hasten'd that upon themselves which they account their only misery . ( 2. ) as to the common calamities of life , which none can prevent or avoid , the spiritual mind hath very much the advantage of the carnal ; for the one fills them with inward peace and satisfaction of mind , which of all things carry men best through the troubles of life ; being joyned with patience , humility , self-denial , and submission to the will of god ; which are all the genuine effects of a spiritual mind ; but a carnal mind is froward and impatient , uneasie to it self and to all about it , and this makes every pain and trouble to be much greater than it would have been ; like the ass in the fable : which lay down in the water with his burthen of wool and so made it heavier than before . there were two things the philosophical men of pleasure sought to comfort themselves by , under the unavoidable troubles of life ; which the spiritual mind hath far greater advantages than any of them had , as to both of them ; and these are reflection and expectation . ( 1. ) reflection . when epicurus was in his last agonies under the stone , what a miserable way was it for him to go about to comfort himself , by reflecting upon his atoms and his maxims , his imaginary notion of the happiness of life consisting in pleasure , when his life was so near being ended by excessive pain ? but a good man that hath sincerely endeavour'd to serve god in his generation , and to do all the good he could , and to promote the interests of religion and vertue in the world , may in the midst of many failings and infirmities , look back with comfort on the course of his former life , and by the peace of a good conscience may injoy inward satisfaction , under such pains and distempers , which make life uneasie and death more welcome , as it is a passage to a far better state. and that is the next thing . ( 2. ) expectation . it was a sorrowfull expectation which epicurus supported himself with , when he was in the prospect of death ; which was no more , than that the subtle atoms which made up his soul , would soon be scatter'd and dispersed , he knew not where , and then he should be , as if he had never been . but what comfort is there in such a dissolution ? men that have deserved it , may heartily wish it ; , but they have deserved something worse , and that they must expect . for , the just and holy god , will certainly call them to an account for all their vices and follies ; and it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living god ; and what a miserable case are those in , who have nothing to look for but judgment and fiery indignation , which shall consume the adversaries of god and religion ? but o the blessed hope and joyfull expectation that attends a spiritual mind ! especially when it is enliven'd and assisted by the powerfull influences of divine grace . for without that , even good men may be liable to some dejections and fears as to another world , from the vastness of the change , the sense of their failings , the weakness of their minds , and mistrust of their own fitness for heaven ; but so great is the goodness and mercy of god towards them that sincerely love and fear him , that he always makes their passage safe , though it be not so triumphant . and although the valley of the shadow of death may seem gloomy and uncomfortable at a distance ; yet when god is pleased to conduct his servants through it , he makes it a happy passage into a state of a glorious immortality and everlasting life and peace . to which god , &c. finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61624-e150 rom. 7.14 . 19 , 20. 7.24 . 25. 8.1 . 2. 3. 4. ver. 5. joh. 7.38 . joh. 3.3 , 6. 1.13 . rom. 8.8 , 9. 2 cor. 5.17 . 1 joh. 3.9 , 10. rom. 7.7 , 8 , 9. 12.14.22 . psal. 73.25 . gal. 5.17 . 24. chrysost. in gal. 5.17 . aug. c. julian . l. 4. c. 12. gen. 6.9.17.1 . job 1.1 , 2 , 3. psal. 37.37 deut. 3.24 , 25. numb . 20.2 , 3. 6. 8. 10. deut. 1.37 . 4.21 . num. 27.14 psal. 106.33 . num. 20.12 ver . 10. 1 sam 24.9 . 1 chr. 27.24 . exod. 30.11.38.25 . num. 1.2 , 19 26.4 1 sam. 11.8 . 2 sam. 18.1 . 1 chr. 27.23 . deut. 1.37 . 3.26 . 4.21 . 2 sam. 24.1 . est autem unus dies benè & ex praeceptis tuis actus peccanti immortalitati anteferendus . cicer. tuss . qu. l. 5. c. 2. rom. 1.18 . 2.5 , 6. 16. 14.10 . 2 cor. 15. 10 , 11. epicurus hermacho . v. ciceron . de finibus , l. 2. c. 30. heb. 10.31 . 27. reformation of manners the true way of honouring god with the necessity of putting the laws in execution against vice and profaneness : in a sermon preached at white-hall / by the late right reverend father in god, edward, lord bishop of worcester ; and published by their majesties special command. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1700 approx. 45 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 22 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61593 wing s5629 estc r27503 09905148 ocm 09905148 44333 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61593) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 44333) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1368:9) reformation of manners the true way of honouring god with the necessity of putting the laws in execution against vice and profaneness : in a sermon preached at white-hall / by the late right reverend father in god, edward, lord bishop of worcester ; and published by their majesties special command. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. the second edition. 38 p. printed for tho. bennet, london : 1700. "not printed in any of the volumes of his lordship's sermons." reproduction of original in the trinity college library, cambridge university. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng church of england -sermons. bible. -o.t. -samuel, 1st, ii, 30 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 rachel losh sampled and proofread 2004-05 rachel losh text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion reformation of manners , the true way of honouring god. with the necessity of putting the laws in execution against vice and profaneness . in a sermon preached at white-hall . by the late right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . and published by their majesties special command . the second edition . not printed in any of the volumes of his lordship's sermons . london , printed for tho. bennet , at the half-moon in st. paul's church-yard , 1700. the way of honouring god by a reformation of manners . in a sermon preached at white-hall . 1 samuel 2. 30. for them that honour me i will honour ; and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed . these words were spoken by , a prophet of the lord to eli● at that time , the high-priest and judge over israel , upon occasion of the wickedness of his sons , and the hishonour brought upon religion thereby ; which was so great that it is said , they made the people abhor the offering of the lord. but that we may the better comprehend their scope and design , there are some remarkable particulars to be considered ; with respect to the circumstances that attend them . ( 1. ) that their sins were of a high and scandalous nature , being an open affront both to the ceremonial and moral law. the offering of the lord was that which himself had appointed in the law of moses ; wherein it was expresly required , that the fat of the sacrifices of peace-offerings must be burnt upon the altar , and after that , the joints were to be divided , and the priest was to have his share , and the people that offer'd them the rest . but these sons of eli thought themselves too great to be tied up to such a strict observance of the niceties of the law ; and therefore they sent their servants to demand what they pleased , without any regard to that order which the laws appointed . it is possible , they might think ( although such lewd and and profane persons are not much given to thinking ) that the matter was not great , how , or in what manner , they took the share which belong'd to them ; but god , who best knew what was pleasing to himself , saith , the sin of the young men was very great before the lord. for god will and ought to be served in his own way , and they , who thought to be wiser than his laws , smarted for their folly . thus nadah and abihu ( two brisk young men ) had a mind to try the experiment of offering strange fire before the lord ( not taking it from the altar as god had appointed . ) and what came of this presumptuous violation of god's law ? they were immediately consumed by a strange fire themselves ; for , it is said , a fire went out from the lord and devoured them , and they died before the lord ; i. e. they were struck dead with lightning upon the place , and their dead bodies were carried forth from before the sanctuary out of the camp ; that all the people might observe the truth of what moses said to aaron on this occasion : this is that the lord spake , saying , i will be sanctified in them that come nigh me , and before all the people i will be glorified . it is true , god did not punish hophni and phinehas in the same manner , who added great lewdness and immorality to their other faults ; but he severely threatens the whole house of eli for their sins ; and as a sign of the rest , he declares , that these profligate wretches should both be taken off the same day ; which was accordingly accomplished with dreadful circumstances ; for , the ark of god was taken at the same time . ( 2. ) that the house of eli was advanced to that dignity which it then enjoy'd by an extraordinary method of providence : for , when nadab and abihu the sons of aaron were destroy'd , there remained eleazar and ithamar , ( for the other died childless , ) from them descended two branches of aaron's family . eleazar was of the elder house ; but eli , who descended from ithamar , was in possession of the high priesthood by god's approbation . and when abiathar in solomon's time was put by the high priesthood , it is said , that he descended from ithamar , and was of the house of eli ; and he was therefore thrust out that god might fulfil his word , which he spake concerning the house of eli in shiloh . by which we find , that god had raised up the house of eli after an extraordinary manner ; and no doubt , according to the wise methods of divine providence for an extraordinary end ; and we find no ill character fixed upon eli himself , although he had judged israel forty years ; but there were those about him , and very near him , who were loose , profane and dissolute persons , and although , those who are most concerned , do commonly hear the last of the miscarriages of those related to them ; yet the cry was so great that it came to his ears , and he took notice of it , and reproved them for it ; and he said to them , why do ye such things ? &c. the good old man seems to be heartily concerned and troubled for his sons follies ; but this did not answer god's end ; for the reason he gives of the heavy judgments denounced against his family , was , because his sons made themselves vile , and he restrained them not . god expects something more than meer words , or bare reproofs , where his honour , and that of religion , are so much concerned . but when profaneness , looseness and irreligion , crept in among them , and grew too hard for the government , god threatens to do such a thing in israel , at which both the ears of every one that heareth it shall tingle . i need go no farther . ( 3. ) that although god was justly provoked by the sins of the house of eli ; yet there was a concurrence of the peoples sins in bringing down such severe and astonishing judgments . there was no great loss in hophni and phinehas , unless they had been better ; but it was a terrible judgment to have the ark of god taken , and carried captive ; and thereby their whole religion exposed to scorn and contempt among their neighbours , who hated them for the sake of their religion . for when the idolatrous nations about them had corrupted themselves and the worship of god , he was pleased , by the ministry of moses , to set up a form of worship among the people of israel according to his own will. this gave great dissatisfaction to all their neighbours , and encreased their spight and malice against them ; which they were ready to shew on all occasions ; but never more than when the ark of god was taken captive and carried about in triumph among them : for this was the symbol of god's particular presence among the people of israel . the tabernacle , with all its rich and admirable furniture , was as his court ; but the holy of holies , as his chamber of presence ; and there the ark was the place where god gave his answers to his people on great and solemn occasions . and what could be more grievous and dishonourable to them , than to have this ark of god carried away by their enemies ? for , then the name of the whole nation might have been ichabod , for the glory was departed from israel . but was all this meerly for the sins of hophni and phinehas ? no ; the punishment on that account related to the house of eli ; but this was a judgment on the whole nation : and god himself gives a sad account of it , but it was such , as reached to the nature and extent of the judgment . go ye now , saith god in the prophet jeremiah , unto my place which was in shiloh , where i set my name at the first , and see what i did to it for the wickedness of my people israel . so that here was a complication of the sins of all sorts to bring down so heavy a judgment upon them . and thus i have endeavour'd to clear the way towards the right apprehending the full scope and design of these words , them that honour me i will honour ; and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed . wherein are two things to be spoken to ; i. the nature of that honour which is due to god. ii. the rules and measures whereby god bestows honour on mankind . them that honour me i will honour ; and they that despise me , &c. ( 1. ) the nature of that honour which is due to god. there are three sorts of men to be consider'd with respect to the honour due to god ; ( 1. ) such as despise him instead of honouring him . ( 2. ) such as pretend to honour him but do not . ( 3. ) such as give him that real honour which is due to him . ( 1. ) there are such as despise him instead of honouring him . such as the sons of eli here mention'd , who are said to be the sons of belial , who knew not the lord. a strange character of such , who had not only the general advantages of the people of israel to know god above all nations of the world ; but a particular obligation to serve and worship him ! but those do not know god who despise his service . it is impossible to despise infinite goodness and power and wisdom ; for those are things , which all that understand them cannot but reverence and highly esteem . for a poor creature to despise his creatour ; or one that lives upon the bounty of another to despise his benefactour , seems to be such an inconsistency in morality , as if humane nature were uncapable of it . but not withstanding , god himself , who knows the most secret thoughts of mens hearts , saith here , they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed ; although god cannot be despised for his glorious perfections ; yet his authority may be despised , when men presumptuously break his laws ; when they do not regard what he hath commanded or forbidden ; when they profess to know god , but in works they deny him ; when they own a god , and yet live as if there were none , giving themselves over to a profane and irreligious temper of mind , if not to all sorts of wickedness in their lives . and if once such a temper prevails , there is nothing to be expected but an inundation of the other . for those who despise god and religion can have little regard to the differences of good and evil ; and when once the awe of god and conscience is gone , there is nothing can be effectual enough to restrain the violence of natural inclinations . there are two sorts of profane persons too easie to be observed in the world. some are profane in their practises ; who give way to their sensual inclinations and pursue them , as they see occasion , without reflection or consideration . these do not presently shake off the principles of religion and vertue , although they act against them . they know they ought to fear god and to abstain from evil ; but they do neither , leading a loose , dissolute , and wicked life , although if they would but consider what they do , they might soon be convinced of the folly of their actions ; because they act against those principles which they have seen no reason to question , but they have not the grace and resolution to observe them . while they continue thus , there is some hold to be taken of them ; and although their sins be against conscience , yet they are not past hope ; because there is some life left , but under great struglings and decays . but there are others ( i wish i could only say there had been ) who are profane out of principles ; who not only neglect religion , but despise it ; and affront and ridicule it , as far as they dare with regard to their own safety . the other are mischievous to the world by example , but these by design ; those are enemies to themselves and to such as follow them ; but these ought to be look'd on , as the subverters of all that is good , and the promoters of all evil and mischief , and therefore as the truest enemies to mankind , and the pest and bane of humane society ; the dishonour and reproach of their age and country ; and not meerly enemies to mankind , but to god himself , the best and wisest being in the world ; whom as far as in them lies , they endeavour to dethrone from his soveraignty over it . and where such monsters of impiety grow numerous and bold , they bode the most fatal consequences to such a people , where they appear without a publick detestation of them . ( 2. ) there are such who pretend to honour god , but do not . honour is an act of the mind , ( if it be spoken of real and inward honour , and not of the external signs of it ) and it is in him that gives , and not in him that receives it . but yet those who intend to give honour to another , may do it in such an improper and unsuitable manner , that he for whom it is intended , may look on it as an affront and dishonour to him . therefore he that would give true honour to another must have a just apprehension of his worth and excellency , and give it in such a manner as is most becoming and agreeable to him . now , there are two ways whereby men may be guilty of dishonouring god under a pretence of honouring him . ( 1. ) by entertaining false notions of god in their minds , and worshiping their own imaginations instead of him. ( 2. ) by doing honour to him , not according to his nature and will , but according to their own intentions and imaginations . ( 1. ) by false notions of god in their minds , and by worshiping their own imaginations instead of him ; i. e. when persons form in their minds false imaginations or conceptions of him ; and so give their worship not to the true god , but to an idol of their own fancy . but there is a great deal of difference between such conceptions of god in our minds , which fall short of the perfections of the divine nature , ( as all ours must do for want of faculties to comprehend him ) and such which attribute something to him which is unworthy of him . not , that if any happen to be mistaken in their conceptions of god , we must presently charge them with idolatry ; for the scripture makes that to lie in an open and publick dishonouring of god , by giving that worship which is alone due to him , to any thing besides himself ; it is the setting up of another interest among mankind in opposition to his power and soveraignty ; it is such an exposing the proper object of divine worship as to render it mean and contemptible : for nothing can be a greater disparagement to the divine nature , than to be supposed to be like the work of mens hands ; or to have any of his own creatures to have that worship given to them which belongs to himself ; and so it takes away the due apprehension , which ought to be always maintained of the infinite distance between god and the workmanship of his hands . but these consequences do not reach to inward false conceptions of god ; yet they ought by all possible means to be avoided by those who would give unto god in their minds the honour which is due unto him . and to avoid all wrong apprehensions concerning him , we must settle in our minds such a fixed notion of him , as results from those evidences which prove his being . for , the invisible things of god , saith the apostle , are understood by the things that are made ; i. e. the visible frame of the world doth afford such plain evidence of the wisdom , power , and goodness of the maker of them , that from thence we may form a distinct and clear notion of god in our minds , as a being infinitely wise , powerful and good. this is the most natural , easie , and orderly conception we can have of god in our minds ; because it arises from the same arguments which prove his being . and when our minds are fixed and settled herein , the next thing is to exclude all mean and unworthy thoughts of him , as inconsistent with his divine perfections . therefore , whatever savours of impotency or cruelty ; whatevertends to abate our reverence , to lessen our esteem , to damp our affections , or to cool our devotion towards him , cannot be agreeable to those just conceptions we ought to have always in our minds concerning him . for the honour of god doth not lie in having such terrible apprehensions of his majesty and power and justice as may drive us into horrour and despair ; but in entertaining such an opinion of his wisdom , goodness and loving kindness as may incline us to love him and to trust in his mercy . and then god is truely honoured by us , when we preserve a deep sense and awe of him upon our minds ; when we adore him for his infinite perfections ; when we esteem him as the most proper object of our love , as well as of our fear ; when we put our trust and confidence in him , and depend upon him as to the conveniencies of this life and the happiness of another ; when the desire of our soul is towards him , and our meditation of him is frequent and serious and delightful to us ; when we set him always before us , and direct the course of our lives and actions to the pleasing him ; when we dare not wilfully do any thing to offend him ; but make it our chief study and business to do what tends to his honour , and to promote it in the world. it is therefore of very great consequence , as to the whole course of religion to keep up in our minds , such a true and setled notion of god , as may influence our devotion , reform our disorders , inflame our affections , and keep us from being led aside by the violent and impetuous heats of imagination . for this is the true source of most of the extravagancies of mankind about religion ; they have no true notion of god in their minds , but they dread his power , and know not how to please him ; and so run from one thing to another , through the several methods of superstitions , or enthusiasm , as agrees best with their fancies ; which is so unstable and uncertain a principle , that no steady course of religion can be steer'd by it . a man who acts by imagination , is like a ship at sea without anchor or compass , which rouls up and down just as the wind and the waves carry her . but reason and understanding is a steady and uniform principle , and being well fixed from a due and thorough consideration of the nature and will of god , keeps the mind even and constant , and goes on its course as well as it can , and makes its way , notwithstanding the force of the current and tide of natural inclination be against it ; and that the clouds and vapors of imagination often hinder the freedom of its motion . nothing is so uncomfortable , nothing so ungovernable as a restless imagination ; and when it is oppressed with a religious melancholy , then every thing seems dark and confused ; we neither know god nor our selves as we ought to do , and we must judge amiss when we judge by such a false light : and therefore our wisest course in such a case is to be humble and patient ; to suspend any peremptory judgment as to our selves till we have clearer light , and those mists and vapors are dispersed , which darken and perplex our thoughts . ( 2. ) men dishonour god , when they pretend to honour him , not according to his will , but their own intentions and imaginations . there are some things practised and defended in the christian world , which one would hardly think possible to have ever prevailed , had it not been that they thought to do honour to god by them . i shall not insist upon the pretences in the church of rome of honouring god against his will , by giving divine and religious worship to images , saints and angels , &c. because though there be a great deal of folly and superstition , and real dishonour to god in them , yet there is no such mischief to the rest of mankind , unless they take up an imagination that god will be honoured by rooting out and destroying all such as cannot comply with them in their superstitious follies . but as the true spirit of religion wears off , that of persecution often comes in the place of it , like wasps and hornets out of a dead carkass . thus in the jewish church in our saviour's time , there was the same outward shew and pomp of religion , which had been in their best times ; and our saviour himself frequented both the synagogue worship and the solemn festivals at the temple ; nay he allow'd that the scribes and pharisees sate in moses's chair , and that his disciples should observe what they taught agreeable to the law ; but yet , he elsewhere charges them that by their traditionary doctrines they had enervated the force of the law ; and therefore they did honour him with their lips , but their heart was far from him ; i. e. they had no true love of god or their neighbour , but they thought to make amends for all that , by a wonderful zeal for their own traditions and the lesser things of the law ; which they shewed not only by an unwearied diligence to gain proselytes , but by dedestroying all such as opposed their designs ; and that not in an ordinary way of passion and revenge , but they would needs have all this to be done for the honour and service of god. whosoever killeth you will think that he doth god service . a strange kind of service indeed , to take away the lives of his best and most useful servants ! but although no religion in the world be so directly contrary to all acts of cruelty an inhumanity as the christian is , yet upon the degeneracy of that , the same kind of spirit hath risen up and prevailed over too great a part of the christian world. but especially the very same jewish spirit of zeal and hypocrisy and cruelty had enter'd in these last ages into a society of men ( whom i need not name ) who have undermined the genuine principles of morality , inflamed the spirits of princes to all the effects of a cruel war and a merciless persecution ; and used their utmost endeavours to root out all such as dare not sacrifice their consciences to the will of a prince under their direction : and which adds to all this , they have the impudence to assume that motto to themselves , ad majorem dei gloriam ; as though they aimed at nothing but doing greater honour to god. such as these go beyond hophni and phinehas ; for their wickedness , although great , was confined to a narrow compass , but these disperse themselves into all states and kingdoms , and carry on the same uniform design , viz. to do all the mischief they can under the pretence of advancing the honour of god. ( 3. ) but certainly there is a way left to give to god that honour which is due to him ; otherwise , it were to little purpose to say , them that honour me i will honour . but i shall not take in here all the ways how we may honour god , but consider that which is most proper to the design of these words . for which we are to observe , that the external worship and service of god was in general , well enough kept up and observed in the tabernacle at shiloh . there the high priest attended , the daily sacrifices were offer'd , and the people resorted thither at the solemn feasts from all parts of the land : but the great examples of wickedness in the sons of eli had spread themselves so far , that the people were generally corrupted , and the best part of their religion , which lies in a reformation of manners , was almost gone . there were some pious and devout persons , such as eli himself ( a good man but a bad magistrate , being remiss and careless in the execution of his office ) and no doubt , many among the people , as well as elkanah and hannah , were devout and serious in the service of god , and other duties of religion ; but yet god himself takes notice of the wickedness of his people israel , at the time when the ark was removed from shiloh . and therefore we have reason to take particular notice of that passage to eli , concerning the reason of the punishment of his house , because his sons made themselves vile and he restrained them not . for , their sins were of a very contagious nature , and by not restraining them , the people were run into a great degree of looseness and profaneness . so that it was not for eli's personal miscarriages , that god thought himself so dishonoured by him , but for want of taking due care for the suppressing profaneness and corruption of manners in others . and this shews the true way how god may and ought to be honoured by those who are bound to take care of others ; viz. by giving all due encouragement to true religion and vertue , and by making use of the most effectual means for suppressing irreligion and profaneness . and this indeed is a great and noble design fit for the greatest minds and persons of the highest station to to be employed about . i cannot deny , that it is a difficult work ; for it is easier to subdue the bodies than the passions of men ; and how many will rather venture their lives than mortify their lusts ? and let them pretend what they will , we find that they will sooner part with any thing than with their sins . do we not daily see that they will let go honour , reputation , interest , health , and the hopes of heaven , rather than those vices they have been accustomed to the practice of ? how can we then imagine , that the meer fears of the execution of humane laws should presently restrain those , whom no fear of hell or damnation could hitherto reform ? but yet a stop may , and ought to be put to the insolent growth of profaneness ; for if it be suffered to be too hard for our laws , it will in time be too hard for all sort of government . yet how shall a stop be put to it under such difficulties ? for it cannot be denied , that we have excellent laws against vice and debauchery , and that magistrates have had sufficient countenance from authority for the due execution of them . but yet the complaints are great of a mighty overflowing of all sorts of wickedness still among us ; i hope they are not all true ; but yet i am afraid , there is too much ground for them . what is the reason of such a complaint of profaneness and irreligion among us at a time we pretend so much to reformation ? it is no wonder that the bad examples of those who ought to reform others bring vice into fashion ; but when that cannot be alledged , what is the reason that good examples do so little towards the reforming others ? it is easie to resolve all into the corruption of humane nature ; but that is a general answer which serves for all times and places , and must suppose them alike : and if it be a good and sufficient answer , it is to little purpose to talk of laws , religion and reformation : for unless they may have some power to alter and amend the course of mens actions , they signify very little to the real benefit of mankind , no more than sea-marks do towards hindring the course of the tide ; but meer examples , although of excellent use to all ingenuous minds , yet to others they are but like statues of mercury in the road , which point to the right way , but men will go which way they please notwithstanding . therefore to laws and examples the magistrates power must be added , which was appointed for this purpose , to be terrour to those that do evil , as well as an encouragement to those that do well . and then the apostle supposeth the sword is born in vain , when the magistrate is not the minister of god in this respect ; a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil . it was the great and just honour of princes of old , that by their means , mankind was reduced from a rude and disorderly kind of life , to the practice of civility and good manners ; and it is as great a foundation of honour still , when men are so much apostatized from them , to bring them back again to the due order and decency of living . the case is much harder of those who are degenerate under laws , than of those who were so without them ; for they have learnt to despise their remedy , and by arts and subtilties to avoid the force of that , which was intended for their good. but , however , none ought to be discouraged from so excellent a design ; which recommends it self to all wise and good men , and will never want the assistance and prayers of all that are so ; and god himself will in an especial manner give honour to those who thus honour him in his own way ; by using the most effectual means for the reforming the manners of men. but what are those ways which may be called effectual ? it 's true , that depends upon the favour and blessing of god ; but it is no hard matter for us to judge what are the most likely means to be effectual . such as , ( 1. ) an universal discountenancing of all sorts of vice and profaneness , be the persons of what rank or quality soever . for , if those of the house of eli be suffer'd to transgress , the people will follow their examples ; although the good old man did not like their doings , but he did not take care enough to restrain them . ( 2. ) an even , steady , vigorous and impartial execution of the laws against looseness and debauchery ; so that it may not look like a sudden heat or design of popularity , but proceeding from a due and well-temper'd zeal for god and religion . ( 3. ) a wise choice of fit instruments to pursue so good an end ; i mean such as jethro recommended to moses , men of courage and integrity , fearing god and hating covetousness . and such i hope are to be found in the several parts of the nation . ( 4. ) lastly , a diligent inspection into the behaviour of those who are the proper and immediate instruments for carrying on so good a design . for , if there be no inspection afterwards , it will be look'd on as a meer matter of form , or an order given out to satisfie the importunities of some and the clamours of others . it were to be wished , that all who are imploy'd in such a work had an equal mixture of wisdom and zeal ; but it is not possible to hinder some from having unequal shares of these ; and it is great pity so good a cause should miscarry through the indiscretion of any who are zealous for it . on the other side , it is possible that some who pretend to an equal zeal for it in general , may use such artifices and fair pretences , as may effectually baffle and undermine it , while they seem to be concerned to promote it . so that , what through the intemperate heats of some , the coldness and indifferency of others , and the certain averseness all bad men have to any real design of reformation , there is a necessity for such an affair to be often look'd into , and an account taken of the management of it , if any great advantage be expected by it . and surely no greater advantage can be expected as to this world , than from such a design managed , as it ought to be . for , what can we propose to our selves , that can tend more to promote the honour of almighty god , which we ought above all other things to be concerned for . for , the righteous god loveth righteousness ; and he abhors all kind of wickedness : what then can be more pleasing to him , than to have all sorts of impiety and profaneness discountenanced , punished , and if it be possible , rooted out ? what can tend more to the honour of his vicegerents , than to shew so much of a resemblance to him , as to love what god loves , and to hate what he hates ; and to imploy their power for the same end which god himself doth his , viz. to advance his glory and to do good to mankind ? what can tend more to the honour of our church and nation , than to let the world see by such good works as these , what the reformation is , which we aim at ; not meerly of some disputable points , as to doctrine and practise , ( which we have earnestly contended for , and with great reason , ) but a true and serious reformation of the hearts and lives of men ; without which all our other pretences will fall infinitely short of what god expects from us , and the very name of reformation will be a reproach to us . ii. i now proceed to the second particular , viz. the rules and measures which god observes in distributing honour among men , them that honour me , i will honour ; but they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed . which may be understood two ways ; i. as to the societies of men which have one common interest . ii. as to the interests and honour of particular persons . i. as to such societies of men , which have one common interest . and so it implies , that the welfare and reputation , and flourishing condition of such , depends upon their zeal and concernment for god and religion . but here , we meet very great difficulties ; for reason and experience seem to contradict each other about it . on the one side , it seems most agreeable to the justice of divine providence to reward and punish those in this world who will not be capable of being rewarded or punished in another ; for there will be no communities in another world. but on the other side , we cannot deny matter of common experience ; for , how long have the turkish and papal monarchies ( to name no other ) flourished , when the seven churches of asia , and the churches of africa have been long since destroyed ? how strangely hath mahometism spread in the eastern parts of the world ? and what a check hath there been , upon the reformation in these western parts ? with what a mighty torrent did it prevail at first ? then it stood at a stand , and hath of late years gone so much backward , and suffer'd so very much in many parts of it : and yet we think , and that very justly , that the honour of god is concerned in all this . what shall we say to the insolent oppressors of mankind who make no conscience of ruining cities and countries , and offering violence to the bodies and consciences of men to advance and support their own grandeur ; and yet have been suffer'd to prevail so far as to be made an argument against providence by atheistical men ? it is to be hoped that god in his own time will vindicate his honour and clear this point to the satisfaction of all reasonable men ; but yet , we cannot penetrate into the wisdom and secrets of providence . god will ( no doubt ) take care of his own honour ; but he is not bound to give such men an account of the ways and methods and seasons of his doing it . he often raises up a nation fit for his purpose , and makes them as a scourge to neighbour nations ; and when they have done his work , he suffers them to be humbled , if not destroyed , by the same methods they have used to others . sometimes he raises up one kingdom and nation against another , when their sins make them ripe for vengeance ; and so he takes the potsheards of the earth and breaks them upon one another ; and thus , by their mutual punishment , they both become the executioners of his wrath ; and we cannot determine by the event which was in the greater guilt . so that god takes care of his own honour , by methods we are not able to comprehend . for who can weigh the nations in a balance , and determine how far the sins of one doth exceed the other ? and if we cannot know the number and aggravation of a people sins , we can never fix the measures and degrees of their punishment . but , however , some things are certain ; ( 1. ) that the sins of a nation do naturally tend to the weakness and dishonour of it . thus a factious , seditious , turbulent temper , not only is the reproach of a people ; but the ready way to destroy it . and yet it hath so happen'd , that when the factions have been almost equally poised , as at rome and carthage , they have raised such an emulation between them , which by their endeavours to out-vie each other , hath for some time preserved their country . who can deny that luxury and debauchery , and all sorts of intemperance , not only sink the reputation of a people , but effeminates and softens them , and makes them careless and idle , regardless of any thing but what makes for their own ease and voluptuousness ? and in all humane probability , such a nation must sink , when a people of more wisdom and courage and resolution , makes it their business to overcome them . so that these sorts of sins are natural causes of weakning the power and interest of a nation . but there are other sins , as profaneness and contempt of god and religion , hypocrisy , idolatry , &c. and of such which work as moral causes , god himself is the only judge , when the measure of their iniquity is filled up . ( 2. ) sometimes god steps out of his ordinary method and course of providence , either in a way of judgment or mercy . and then he more particularly shows , that those that honour him , he will honour ; and those who despise him shall be lightly esteemed . these things are not every days experience , but when they do happen they deserve to be taken notice of , in a more than ordinary manner . aristotle , who was no great friend to providence , as to humane affairs , professes , that he did not know what to make of the extraordinary success some persons had in their affairs , without any extraordinary visible causes . it is possible , he might have the success of his macedonian friends in his thoughts ; who swallow'd up the common-wealths of greece , as so many morsels , and then destroy'd the mighty persian monarchy . but in these cases , he allows a divine impulse , carrying them on beyond the ordinary measures of humane prudence ; and over-ruling so many things in order to success , as nothing but a divine hand could manage . and when great advantages come to a nation in such a manner , a more than ordinary degree of thankfulness is justly expected , that god may be honoured in a particular manner for the deliverance he works by such means , and the mercies he bestows or continues thereby . ( 2. ) as to particular persons ; how far this holds , will appear by these things : ( 1. ) that esteem and honour naturally follows the opinion of anothers desert or excellency . for it is not an arbitrary thing , but is founded on the supposition of something that deserves it . it is like the assent given to mathematical evidence , which is not because they will do it , but because they cannot help it . ( 2. ) the sincere practise of piety and vertue doth command esteem and reverence . hypocrisy indeed lessens it to the utmost degree ; because it argues a mean and false temper of mind ; but there is nothing in true religion but what tends to raise esteem , for it implies all the things which are allow'd by all persons to gain honour among men. for one that is truely religious is a true lover of god and of mankind ; he is grateful to his benefactour , and always owns in the most solemn manner his dependence upon him , both by prayers and praises ; he is ready to do good to all men , as far as is consistent with his duty to god ; he is just , righteous , and merciful , sober and temperate in the whole course of his life ; he acts not by chance , or for by ends ; but by a fixed principle of being and doing good ; he keeps himself within the bounds which god hath set him ; and with chearfulness and resolution sets himself to do and suffer his will ; and hath so much courage , as to dare to do his duty , and is afraid of nothing so much as offending god. and now let any one judge , whether there be any thing mean or contemptible in all this ; whether every one that hears this character doth not wish it belonged to himself . and that is a certain token that it brings honour and esteem with it . let me then , for a conclusion of all , recommend the practise of reliligion and vertue to all such as are the most concerned for honour and esteem . the world is always vain enough to flatter greatness , either out of weakness or design ; but true greatness of mind despises flattery ; and where that is wanting in any , this very flatterer despises them . but this is a way to be above the reach of contempt , to do justly , and to love mercy , and to walk humbly with god ; and these are the things which god himself assures us are the main parts of our duty . if we be careless of god's honour and service now , the time will shortly come , when we shall heartily wish we had been otherwise . for , how great soever your honour be now , you and that together must in a little time be laid in the dust. and then the main difference will be according to the honour we have done to god ; for , although the text doth hold good , as to this world , as i have already shew'd ; yet the most glorious accomplishment of it will be made evident to all mankind , that those that honor him , god will honour ; and they that despise him shall be lightly esteemed . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61593-e190 v. 17. lev. 7. 31. v. 33 , 34. v. 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. v. 17. lev. 10. 1. lev. 1. 7. ch . 6. v. 12. ch . 16. v. 12. ch . 10. v. 2. v. 4. v. 3. v. 22. v. 34. ●● . 4. v. 11. lev. 10. 6. 1 chr. 24. 2. num. 3. 4. 1 chr. 14. 2. 5. 1 kings 24. 27. 1 sam. ● 18. ch . 2. v. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25. ch . 3. v. 13. ch . 3. v. 11. ch . 4. v. 22. jer. 7. 12. 1 sam. 2. 12. tit. 1. 16. rom. 1. 20 luk. 4. 16. mat. 23. 2. mat. 15. 8. joh. 16. 2. rom. 13. 3. ver . 4. exod. 18. 21. eudem . l. 7. c. 14. micah 6. 8. a sermon preached at white-hall, february the 19th, 1685/6 being the first friday in lent / by edw. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1681 approx. 45 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61618 wing s5658 estc r18636 11939678 ocm 11939678 51247 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61618) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 51247) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 515:34) a sermon preached at white-hall, february the 19th, 1685/6 being the first friday in lent / by edw. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 36 p. printed for henry mortlock..., london : 1681. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -luke xv, 18 -sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 rachel losh sampled and proofread 2004-05 rachel losh text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached at white-hall , february the 19 th , 1685 / 6. being the first friday in lent . by edw. stillingfleet , d.d. dean of st. paul's , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . london , printed for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . mdclxxxvi . st. luke xv . 18. i will arise and go to my father , and will say to him , father , i have sinned against heaven and before thee . in the foregoing verse , we find the prodigal son so far awakened and come to himself , as to be sensible of the miserable condition he had brought himself into by his own folly and wickedness . but , before he came to this , there is a remarkable turn in the course of his life , set down by our saviour in the beginning of this excellent parable . for , he was first very impatient of being under the wise conduct of his father , and thought he could manage his own affairs far more to his contentment and satisfaction , if he were but permitted to use his liberty , and were not so strictly tyed up to the grave and formal methods of living , observed and required in his father's house . which might pass for wisdom in age , and be agreeable enough to such whose life and vigour were decayed ; and who were now to maintain their authority over their children by seeming to be so much wiser than they : but it is a rare thing for youth and age to agree in the opinion of wisedom : for it is not the care , the experience , the judgment of a wise and tender father , that can allay the heats , or calm the passions , or over-rule the violent inclinations of youth ; but whatever is cost them afterwards , some will be still trying the experiment , whether it doth not more conduce to the happiness of life to pursue their own fancies and designs , than to hearken to another's directions ( though a father's ) whose circumstances are so much different from their own . thus our blessed saviour represents in the parable this young prodigal , as weary of being rich and easie at home , and fond of seeing the pleasures of the world : and therefore nothing would satisfie him unless he were intrusted with the stock which was intended for him , that he might shew the difference between his father's conduct and his own . and this very soon appeared ; for this hopefull manager had not been long abroad , but he wasted his substance with riotous living . and to make him the more sensible of his folly , there happened a more than ordinary scarcity , which made his low and exhausted condition more uneasie to him . but the sense of shame was yet greater with him than that of his folly ; and whatever shifts he underwent , he would by no means yet think of returning home ; but rather chose to submit to the meanest and basest employment in hopes to avoid the necessity of it . but at last , reason and consideration began to work upon him , which is called , his coming to himself : and then he takes up a resolution to go home to his father , and to throw himself at his feet , to confess his fault ingenuously and freely , and to beg pardon for his former folly , in hopes of forgiveness and reconciliation . i will arise and go to my father , and say to him , father , i have sinned against heaven , and before thee . under this parable , our saviour sets forth the state of a sinner , ( 1. ) in his wilfull degeneracy from god , his father , both by creation and providence ; his uneasiness under his just and holy laws ; his impatience of being restrained by them ; his casting off the bonds of duty to him ; and running into all kind of disorders without regard to god , or his own soul. ( 2. ) in the dissatisfaction he found in his evil courses ; being very much disappointed in the great expectations he had in the pleasures of sin ; wasting his health , interest , reputation , estate , and above all , the peace and tranquillity of his mind , which was more valuable than any other delight whatsoever , and he now found impossible to be enjoy'd in a course of rebellion against his heavenly father . ( 3. ) in the conviction of his folly upon due consideration of what he had done ; which is emphatically called coming to himself ; having before acted so much below himself , and against himself ; unworthy of the relation he stands in to god ; of those faculties he had bestow'd upon him ; and of those hopes and expectations he might have had from him either as to this or another world. ( 4. ) in the resolution he takes upon this conviction , no longer to delay his purpose of repenting and returning home , but to embrace the present opportunity of doing it freely , heartily and ingenuously , i will arise and go to my father , &c. having formerly in this place , and on a like occasion considered the prodigal son 's coming to himself , i shall now pursue the method of his repentance in the resolution he here takes to arise and go to his father , &c. and therein i shall enquire into these things , i. what grounds a sinner hath to incourage him to repent ; or to form such a resolution in his mind that he will arise and go to his father , when he knows he hath so much provoked and offended him . ii. how necessary it is in order to true repentance to form a fixed and steady resolution to go through with it , i will arise and go , &c. first , what grounds a sinner hath to incourage him to repent ; or to make application to his father in order to forgiveness , since he is convinced he hath so justly offended him . for , if we consider the circumstances here mention'd , he had no such reason to hope to be receiv'd into favour upon such easie terms , as are here expressed ; for , ( 1. ) he had wilfully forsaken his father's house , without any just cause of complaint of and hard usage there . ( 2. ) he had embraced such a course of life , which he knew was displeasing to him , living riotously and disorderly , in a way contrary to his will. ( 3. ) he never thought of returning home , till mere necessity forced him ; till hunger and poverty made him come to himself . and what could be more disobliging to a father , than such circumstances as these ? ( 1. ) his father never forced him from home , nor made his condition uneasie there . our saviour here represents almighty god , as dealing with mankind like a tender and indulgent father , and not like a severe and hard master ; his laws being intended for our good , and not for his own advantage . there is no duty of ours towards god , or our selves , or others , but is founded on this relation to god as a father to mankind . nothing can be more reasonable in general than that the father should order and direct his children , and give such rules which are fitting for them to observe ; and if we examine the particular laws of nature , or the dictates of reason as to good and evil , we shall find them very agreeable to god's paternal government . what is the duty of prayer to god , but asking daily blessing of our heavenly father ? what is our thanksgiving , but a solemn owning his paternal care and bounty towards us ? and in these two , the main duties of natural religion consist . the neglect whereof , is such a disrespect to our heavenly father , as is not consistent with our believing him to be so . for , as god himself argues in the prophet , a son honoureth his father , and a servant his master : if then i be a father , where is mine honour ? and if i be a master , where is my fear ? god was a father by the right of creation and providence : but he was a master to the jews in respect of the bondage of the law ; and as there was a spirit of bondage on that account in them , which inclined them to a more servile fear ; so there ought to have been a natural spirit of adoption toward god as their supreme creatour and father ; which should excite all men to such a dutifull love , such a reverential esteem , such a mixture of awe and kindness as is in children towards their parents . yea , it ought to be much greater than that can be supposed ; because the distance is infinite between god and us ; and our dependence more immediate and necessary ; and there is in him a concurrence of all perfections , which may cause in us the highest esteem , and the humblest adoration . there is an unquestionable duty owing by children to their earthly parents , but how much rather ( saith the apostle ) ought we to be in subjection to the father of spirits ? the fathers of our flesh may be very kind , but not wise in their love ; or wise and not so kind ; or they may be both wise and kind , but not able to help their children . they may love and pity , and pray for them , when they are in misery , or sickness and pain , but after all , they are unable to relieve them ; for the most indulgent father , when his bowels yearn , and his heart is ready to break at the sight of a child lying under the agonies of death , is not able to give a moments respite to the terrible pangs , which he can neither behold nor abate . but our heavenly father hath not onely infinite wisdom , but infinite kindness and power ; and where all these are joined together , what honour , what love , what fear is due unto him ! although there be defects in their parents , yet children are still bound to obey them , and to shew a mighty regard and reverence towards them ; but here it is so much otherwise , that if we could conceive our selves without this relation to god , yet his perfections are so many , so great , so infinite , as to deserve and require our utmost veneration . the prodigal son could then have no reason to complain of the duty which he owed to his father . and was it not fit for him to appoint the orders of his family , and to expect that his children should behave themselves therein , as became the relation they stood in to himself and to one another ? that they should have a decent regard to themselves in sobriety , temperance , command of their passions , and care of their words ; that they should behave themselves towards their brethren with sincerity , kindness and justice ; which comprehend all the duties we owe to one another ? and what now was there in all this , that the prodigal could have any cause to complain of , or that should make his father's house so uneasie to him ? but his father had just cause to be provoked , when his wise counsels , and prudent care , and constant kindness , and righteous government were so much slighted and despised by a disobedient and ungratefull son ; who had so little sense of his duty or his interest as to be weary of being so well at home , and therefore impatiently desiring to find out new methods of living well , as he then thought , when the best orders of his father's family were become so displeasing to him . ( 2. ) but what were these new and fine contrivances for his own happiness ? he began to suspect his wife father did not allow his children liberty enough at home , and that he concealed from him the great mystery of the happiness of life , and therefore concluded , that if he did give way to those desires which he found to be natural , but his father thought unreasonable , he should enjoy much more pleasure and satisfaction than he did at home . and being resolved upon this , he gives way to those inclinations he found strongest in himself , denies himself no pleasures of life , accounts vertue but a name which sowre and morose persons put upon their own humours ; and religion but a device for fools to deceive themselves , and knaves to deceive others by . and so he throws off all checks and restraints upon himself , and never regards the good or evil of what he doeth , for his lusts are his laws , and the satisfaction of them he now looks upon as the onely real happiness of mankind . and could any thing be supposed more provoking to his heavenly father than such a wicked and dissolute way of living ? so contrary to his father's will , to his own reason , conscience , interest , reputation ; and which soon brought him to shame and misery ? ( 3. ) but that which added yet more to the height of the provocation was , that he did not think of returning home to his father , upon the first apprehension of his own folly ; but he resolved to undergo any difficulty , and submit to any hardship , rather than doe what was necessary in order to reconciliation with his father . how hard a matter then is it to bring an habitual sinner to repentance ! it is not easie to bring him to any due and serious conviction of the evil of his doings ; but it is far more difficult to change the inward disposition of the mind , and to alter all the great designs and pleasures of life . it is but a mean notion of repentance which is apt to prevail in the world , as though it implied no more than some acts of contrition for greater sins , when the habit and disposition remain the same . but true repentance is the turn of the whole soul from the love , as well as the practice of sin ; and this is not a thing to be done easily or suddenly ; a sinner will bear a great many checks and reproofs of conscience before he will part with his beloved sins ; he will struggle a great while with himself ; and endure many conflicts between an awaken'd conscience and rooted lnclinations before the penitent sinner can assure himself that his repentance hath had its due and effectual operation upon him . for we see here nothing but extremity brought the prodigal to himself , and made him at last to resolve to arise and go to his father , &c. as themistocles said of the people of athens , they did by him , as men commonly doe by a great tree , they run to it for shelter in a storm , but care not how they use it another time ; that is too true of sinners with respect to god ; when they can make a shift for themselves any other way , they despise religion ; and make god their refuge onely at a day of extremity , but not their choice , when their conditions please them . but when the prodigal son had so slighted his father , broken his commands , despised the advantages he had at home , and was so hardly brought to think of returning thither , how came he now to be so incouraged in his mind to arise and go to his father , and confess his fault with hopes of being forgiven after all this ? we find no other account here given , but that he was his father , however he had offended him ; and therefore he was resolved he would arise and go to his father ; as though there were charms and force enough in that word to answer all discouragements . which being an argument taken from the bowels of pity and compassion which a father hath towards a relenting child , we must enquire , how far this will hold with respect to god , who is so infinitely above all the fond passions of humane nature , that it is a diminution to his glory and majesty to be thought like to mankind ; and therefore his thoughts and ways are said to be as far above ours as the heavens are above the earth ? to clear this , we are to consider , not onely that our blessed saviour doth here lay the force and weight of the parable upon the tenderness of a father to his son ; but that he elsewhere argues from it in such a manner as to convince us that god hath far greater pity and compassion towards mankind when they make due applications to him , than fathers can have towards their children even when they ask for necessary sustenance . what man is there of you , whom if his son ask bread , will he give him a stone ? or , if he ask a fish , will he give him a serpent ? if ye then being evil know how to give good gifts unto your children , how much more shall your father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him ? there have been philosophers so severe against the passions of humane nature , that they would not allow any pity or commiseration towards others , whatever their condition or relation were , but onely acting according to reason in supplying their wants . but the christian religion doth far more reasonably allow such passions in mankind as dispose them to doe good to others , by fixing such an impression on their minds of others misery as doth excite them to doe what is fitting for their ease and support . and compassion is not , as some imagine , such a mean and selfish passion , as doth arise onely from the apprehension that we may suffer the same things our selves , which we pity others for ; but it is a generous sense of what others feel joined with a readiness to help them according to our power . and in this sense , our saviour not onely allows it in fathers towards children , but looks on it as necessary in humane nature in order to the good and advantage of mankind ; and therefore himself taking our nature upon him is said to be touched with the feeling of our infirmities ; and to have compassion on the ignorant , and on them that are out of the way . but although this be allowable in humane nature , how can such a thing as compassion be attributed to the divine nature which is uncapable of such impressions and motions , which we are subject to ? and yet the scripture is very full and clear in attributing pity and compassion to almighty god with respect to his creatures . the psalmist saith , the lord is full of compassion and mercy ; long-suffering , and of great goodness . st. james saith , he is very pitifull , and of tender mercy . and in that wonderfull appearance to moses , when god himself declared his own attributes , the greatest part consists of his kindness and mercy towards mankind ; the lord god , mercifull and gratious , long-suffering , and abundant in goodness and truth , keeping mercy for thousands , forgiving iniquity , transgression and sin . and the psalmist useth the very same similitude of a father's pity to his children , like as a father pitieth his children , so the lord pitieth them that fear him . and when the prophet speaks of god's thoughts and ways being so much above man's , it is for this end to prove thereby that god may shew more pity to mankind , than they find in their hearts to shew to one another . let him return unto the lord , and he will have mercy upon him ; and to our god , for he will abundantly pardon ; for my thoughts are not your thoughts , &c. but setting aside all this , the whole scheme of the gospel is drawn upon the supposition of god's pity and compassion towards penitent sinners ; which is the reason our saviour insists so much on the proof of it in this whole chapter . wherein we not onely reade of joy in heaven at the repentance of a sinner ; but the compassion of god almighty towards a penitent sinner is set forth with all the tenderness of an indulgent father running into the embraces of his son , when he saw him at a distance coming towards him . what now is the meaning of all this ? are we to conceive of god as one like to our selves , who either do not see faults in those we love ; or do not hate them , as we should do ; or are too apt to pass them over ; or are at first , it may be , apt to be angry upon a slight provocation , and then as easily made friends upon as little reason as we were made angry ? but none of these things ought to enter into our minds concerning god with respect to the follies of mankind . and in this case , if we will form in our minds right and true conceptions of the divine nature ( as we ought to doe ) we must have a great care lest we attribute any thing to god , which looks like weakness and imperfection , as the motions and changes of passions do ; therefore to understand his pity and compassion , and reconciliation to penitent sinners , we must first know what his anger and displeasure against sinners mean. some think that epicurus did in earnest believe a god , but he was therefore forced to deny providence , because he could not conceive that the government of the world could be managed without such resentments as were inconsistent with the complete happiness of the divne being ; and therefore he rather chose to make him careless and easie , than active and liable to passion . the stoicks attributed to god all that was good and kind and obliging ; but would by no means endure that ever he should be said to be angry or displeased ; which doctrine did in effect overthrow providence with respect to moral actions , as much as the epicureans . for if god did not regard the difference of mens actions , but was equally kind to them whether they did good or evil , such a providence would have as little influence on mens lives as if there were none at all . we must then suppose , if we would uphold religion and morality in the world , not onely that there is a providence , but that god hath a different regard to men according to the good or evil of their actions . the regard he hath to men for being good and doing good is called his love , his kindness , his good-will , his grace and favour ; that which he hath to things that are evil is called his hatred ; that which he hath to persons for doing evil is his anger , wrath , displeasure , indignation ; according to the different nature and circumstances of their evil actions . but in order to the preventing any false or mean apprehensions of the divine nature , when the passions of mankind are attributed to it , we must consider these two things ; ( 1. ) that we must by no means attribute to god any thing that is unreasonable in our selves ; such are all irregular motions , which we call violent passions , arising from surprise , mistake , inadvertency , weakness , or corrupt inclination . but setting all these aside , the original passions of mankind , which are agreeable to reason , are no other than what arise from an inclination to what we judge to be good , and an aversion from what we apprehend to be evil ; which holds as to the divine nature . ( 2. ) that there is an observable difference in the very nature of some passions , which imply a repugnancy in themselves to the divine perfections , which others do not . for love and kindness , and joy , and inward satisfaction have nothing in them supposing their object good , but what agrees with the divine nature ; but the passions contrary to these , as envy , ill-will and revenge are not onely repugnant as passions , but in their own nature ; for god cannot envy the good of his creatures , nor bear ill-will to them as such , nor take pleasure in their torments . and of this nature anger properly taken is , as it doth imply a present disorder and disturbance within , from the apprehension of some injury done or intended , with a desire of revenge on those who doe it ; all which is inconsistent with the necessary perfections of god ; for they argue meanness , imperfection and mutability . we must therefore fix on such a notion of anger as becomes the almighty wisdom and goodness ; and that lies in , ( 1. ) a displeasure against the sinner on the account of his sins ; for god cannot have any complacency in those who displease him , as all sinners do , whether they design it or not . ( 2. ) a will to punish sinners according to their demerits ; which being according to the rules of wisdom and righteous government , cannot be said to argue an indecent passion . ( 3. ) the actual execution of his justice upon great provocations . and so god is said to be angry when he punishes ; especially when he doeth it suddenly and severely ; as men in their passion are wont to doe . but whatever god doeth in this kind , he doth it with the wisdom and temper of a judge , and not with the fury or passion of an angry being . and there is nothing in all this unbecoming the divine nature , but very agreeable thereto . and this is all which in strictness of reason is understood by god's being angry with mankind . for we must never imagine that god acts according to sudden heats and passions ; but whatever he doth is according to the counsels of infinite wisdom and goodness . i do not deny that the scripture doth represent anger in god as if it were a passion raised upon great provocation , and capable of being laid by submission and true repentance . thence we read , of god's wrath waxing hot , of his anger kindling against his people , and his turning away from his fierce anger , and many such expressions ; but so we read of the fire of his indignation , the sword of his wrath , the stretching forth of his hand ; which all grant are not to be literally understood . lf then in these expressions , the perfections of the divine nature are to be our rule , according to which we must interpret them , because the literal sense implies an incongruity to the divine perfections which are all wholly spiritual ; then from the same reason we must remove all perturbations from it which are as inconsistent with the absolute perfection of it , as eyes and ears and hands and feet are , although they are all mention'd in scripture . from whence we justly infer , that there is a wonderfull condescention to the ordinary capacities and common apprehensions of mankind in the language of scripture , concerning the divine nature , which makes deeper impressions on meaner understandings , and those who are ▪ of finer thoughts will see cause to attribute onely such a sense of things relating to god , as is consistent with his infinite and divine perfections . but what now shall we say to this tenderness and compassion of god towards penitent sinners ? can he be moved by our trouble and sorrow and acts of contrition for our sins ? if we be righteous what doth it profit the almighty ? and if we be evil , how can it hurt him ? and if when we have sinned , we repent , we doe no more than is fitting for us ; but why should we imagine the great and wise god should have compassion upon us , when we become sensible of our own folly ? for when we sin against god , wilfully , deliberately , knowingly , habitually , we doe what lies in us to provoke him to wrath and indignation against us ; we reject his wise government , we slight his righteous laws , we prefer the pleasing our corrupt inclinations and sensual lusts before our heavenly father . and what can be more provoking to him than to be so despised by one who had his being and all the comforts of life from him ? suppose now such a disobedient , rebellious son , as here in the parable , be made sensible of his folly , is his father bound to receive him ? was it not his own choice to go from him ? if he hath suffered by his folly , he may thank himself for it ; and if his father lets him alone in it , he hath no cause to complain . but such was the tenderness of the father towards his repenting son , that he shew'd the greatest compassion imaginable ; for he did not stay at home expecting his son 's solemn submission before his family , but he ran towards him , and fell upon his neck , and kissed him . what conceptions now ought we to have of god's compassion towards penitent sinners answerable to all this ? this i shall endeavour to clear in these particulars . ( 1. ) that god's hatred is not primarily against persons who are his creatures ; but against that which is evil , which is none of his making ; and against persons onely so far as they are corrupted with evil. thou lovest righteousness , and hatest wickedness , saith the psalmist . god hates nothing for its own sake , but sin ; and for the sake of that he hates all workers of iniquity . ( 2. ) there may be good-will towards the person of a sinner at the same time when god discovers the hatred of his sins . i do not say , god takes any pleasure in him while he goes on in sin , for that is against the eternal rules of righteousness in god ; but that he may have so much good-will towards him , as to design to reduce him from his evil ways . and this every father finds in himself towards a disobedient son ; while he hates his evil courses , yet he would make use of the best methods to bring him to himself , and to his duty . and upon this is grounded that love and kindness of god towards mankind , in sending his son to be our saviour , and all the promises and invitations which are made to sinners in the doctrine of the gospel . ( 3. ) it is very agreeable to infinite wisdom and goodness for god to shew himself full of pity and compassion towards penitent sinners , i. e. so as to forgive them their former sins , and to receive them into his favour . for pity and compassion in god is to be judged , not according to the inward motions we find in our selves , but according to these two things . ( 1. ) a readiness to doe good to his creatures according to their necessities . which being in general , is his bounty and goodness ; but considered with respect to the persons of sinners , it is his clemency , or readiness to forgive ; and with respect to the punishment they deserve by their sins , it is his mercy and pity : which in us is aegritudo ex miseriâ alterius , and therefore called misericordia , because the heart is touched with the sense of another's misery ; but we are not so to apprehend it in god ; but that such is the goodness of god towards repenting sinners , that he is as willing to shew mercy as they are to repent . ( 2. ) god's pity and compassion lies in the proper effects of it ; which here in the case of the prodigal were , passing by his former extravagances , and receiving him into as much favour as if he had not gone astray . this is my son was dead , and is alive again ; was lost , and is found . those who think , they stand not in need of so much pardoning mercy as others do , are apt to repine at the favour shew'd to great sinners when they repent ; and therefore the elder brother could not bear the expressing so much kindness towards such a disobedient son , though now a penitent . but that there is nothing disagreeing to infinite wisdom and goodness in such compassion towards penitent sinners , will more fully appear , if we consider , ( 1. ) that god is not bound to deal with sinners according to the utmost rigour and severity of his justice . because he is under no fatal necessity ; no superiour law ; and therefore may act freely in the forgiving offenders as seems best to his infinite wisdom . the whole race of mankind is a perpetual evidence that god doth not act according to the strictness of his justice , for if he had dealt with them after their sins , or rewarded them according to their iniquities ; their spirits would have failed before him , and the souls which he had made ; they had been long since destroy'd from the face of the earth , and not suffer'd to continue in their provocations . but god hath not onely forborn sinners long when he might justly have punished them ; but he gives them many real blessings and comforts of life , freely and bountifully . now if god deal so mercifully with sinners while they continue such , is there not greater reason to suppose he will be far more so , when they cease to be such ? ( 2. ) a penitent sinner doth what in him lies to vindicate god's honour . i do not say , he can make satisfaction to divine justice ; for that is impossible for him to doe ; and god hath provided for that by his own son , whom he hath made a propitiation for the sins of the world. but a true penitent takes all the shame and dishonour to himself ; he clears the justice of god's government , and the equity of his laws , and owns himself guilty of unspeakable folly in his disobedience . o how justly , saith he , might god have taken me away in the midst of my sins , when my conscience checked me for my sins , and yet i had no heart to repent of them ! when i could not but see my danger , and yet was unwilling to come out of it . i can never be sufficiently thankfull for so great a mercy as his bringing me to my self hath been ; i had gon on in the same secure , stupid , senseless condition , that others lie in , if he had not throughly awaken'd me , and roused me out of my impenitent state. how dreadfull had my condition for ever been , if my first awakening had been in the flames of hell ? nothing but infinite goodness and patience would have waited so long for the repentance of such an offender as i have been . i have sinned so often , that i am ashamed to think of the number of my transgressions ; so deeply , that i am confounded at the thoughts of them ; so foolishly , that i am unworthy to be called thy son , who have acted so unlike thy children ( so the prodigal son here speaks to his father ) and if thou wouldst admit me but to the meanest condition of thy servants , i shall ever esteem it as the greatest privilege of my life , and endeavour to serve thee for the future , though in the lowest capacity . thus the repenting prodigal goes on , v. 19. and in a sutable manner every true penitent behaves himself towards god with great humility , and a deep sense of his own unworthiness ; and is thereby rendred more capable of divine favour . for god resisteth the proud , but giveth grace to the humble . and therefore it is very agreeable to infinite wisdom and goodness to shew pity towards a truly humble and penitent sinner ; for a broken and contrite heart he will not despise . ( 3. ) if god were not so full of compassion to penitent sinners , there would have been no lncouragement for sinners to repent ; but they must have sunk into everlasting despair . for if god should forgive none that sin , then all mankind must be condemned to eternal misery ; for all have sinned ; and there is not a just man upon earth who sinneth not ; and so the best and worst , and all sorts of sinners must here suffer together ; which would have taken away all the notion of any such thing as mercy and clemency in god towards mankind . but if we set bounds to it as to some particular kinds and degrees of sinning ; we limit that which is infinite ; we determine what we know not , viz. how far god's mercy doth extend ; we destroy the power of divine grace in changing and reforming the worst of men. but the scripture hath recorded some remarkable instances of great sinners , who have been great penitents , and upon that have been pardon'd ( such as manasses , and some others ) that no penitent sinner might be discouraged in the work of repentance . for a true penitent searching to the bottom , and setting all his sins before him , with their several aggravations , can be kept from despair by nothing less than the infinite mercy of god to those who truly repent . ( 4. ) because there is nothing so provoking in sin , as obstinate impenitency , and continuance in it . it is true , god hates all sin for its own sake ; but not all equally ; some sins being of a higher nature than others are ; being against plainer light , stronger convictions , more easie commands , stricter obligations than others are ; but yet it is the temper of a sinner's mind , which is most provoking , when sins are committed not through infirmity , or sudden surprise , or a violent temptation ; but habitually , knowingly , wilfully ; especially when they are done in contempt of god and his laws , and with an obstinate resolution to continue in the practice of them . this is so provoking to god , that the chief reason of the severe punishments of sinners in another world is taken from thence ; because god hates obstinate and impenitent sinners . and thus he will by no means acquit the guilty . there is a sin unto death , saith st. john , and there is a sin not unto death . there is a sin unto death , which christ hath said he will never pardon ; and that is blasphemy against the holy ghost ; a sin which none who do truly own christianity , are capable of committing . but is there then no sin unto death to them ? yes , it is possible for men who have clear convictions in their minds of the truth of the gospel , to act so plainly , and wilfully , and directly against it , as either to provoke god to take them away by an extraordinary judgment , and so it is properly a sin unto death ; or to withdraw his grace from them , and leave them to the hardness of their own hearts , and so it becomes a sin unto a spiritual death . but besides these cases ; every wilfull sinner who adds impenitency to his sin , commits the sin unto death ; because there is no other condition of pardon allow'd by the gospel without true repentance . how infinite is the goodness of god that excludes no sinners from the hopes of pardon who have a heart to repent sincerely of their sins ! and how just is god in the final punishment of those sinners , who still go on in their sins , and refuse to repent ; after all the invitations and incouragements which are given them to that end ! can we in reason suppose that god should stoop lower towards sinners , than to offer them pardon of former sins , if they do repent ; and to tell them they must expect no mercy in another world if they do not repent ? but suppose we are come thus far , that we are convinced we must repent , what course and method must we take in order to it ? of this briefly , and so to conclude . secondly , i know no better than to follow the example of the prodigal son here : and in the first place to form a present , sincere , fixed and peremptory resolution of doing it ; i will arise and go to my father , &c. if we suffer convictions to cool upon our minds , the force and spirit of them will soon be gone . it hath been of late observed by the strictest enquirers into nature , that the beginnings of life are very small , and hardly discernible . it is but as a spark that appears , and may easily be extinguished ; but if it be incouraged by a continual heat , a wonderfull alteration soon follows , and the distinct parts begin to be formed ; the first which is discerned is the eye , but the fountain of life is in the heart ; and when the course of the bloud is there setled , the other parts come to their due formation with greater quickness . this may be a representation of the first beginnings of spiritual life , that which answers to the eye is the conviction of the mind , where the inward change first appears ; that which answers to the heart is resolution , and when that is fixed , a mighty reformation will soon follow . but spiritual life as well as natural is in its first beginnings a very nice and tender thing , it may be easily stopt , and very hardly recovered : it is therefore of very great concernment to keep up the warmth of our first resolutions , and to improve them into a present practice agreeable thereto ; as the prodigal son here did , who when he had resolved upon it , did accordingly arise and go to his father , v. 20. i do not think there are many persons in the world who have convictions upon their minds of the evil of their ways ; but do resolve at one time or other before they die to repent of their sins , and to make their peace with god. but alas ! these are ova subventanea , they make a fair appearance , but there is no principle of life in them ; or as st. jude expresses it , they are clouds without water ; of no consistency , but carried about with winds ; hurried to and fro with the force and power of temptations ; and then their resolutions are like the vapours st. james speaks of , which appear for a little time , and then vanish away . trees they are without fruit , as st. jude goes on , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; not that make no shew or appearance of fruit ; but it hath no such firmness and substance in it as to endure the nipping frosts , and so it drops off , and withers away . just such are the effects of faint and imperfect resolutions , they never hold out long , and onely aggravate the sins committed after them . for every such sin is a plain sin against conscience ; or else they would never have made any resolution against it . and those who continue to sin after resolutions against their sins , not onely lose all the peace and comfort of their minds , but make it much harder for them , either to make or trust their resolutions again , and consequently to be satisfied of the sincerity of their repentance . if we would then lay a sure foundation for the satisfaction of our minds in a matter of such unconceivable moment as the truth of our repentance is , let us call our selves to an account as to this matter of the firm purpose and resolution of our minds . have we strictly examin'd our selves as to our particular sins ? for there is no age , no imployment , no condition of life but hath its temptations belonging to it ; which require not onely our care and consideration , but resolution to keep us from them . but suppose we have been overcome by the sin which doth so easily beset us ; the work is harder to recover the ground we have lost , than at first to maintain it ; but if we have sinned , we must repent ; and the sooner the better ; but it is not to be done without awakening the drousie and benummed faculties of our minds , and exercising the secret and hidden powers therein . not as though this were to be done without the grace of god preventing and assisting us ; but because god worketh in us to will and to doe of his good pleasure , we ought to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling . let us then trifle no longer in a work we can never doe too well , nor too soon ; nor go about it with too much resolution . it is the want of this , which ruins such a number of those who would fain go to heaven , but have not courage and resolution enough , to own their repentance , and to break off their former sins : they are half penitents ; they are inwardly troubled for them , and wish themselves able to withstand the next temptation ; but when it comes , they yield and suffer themselves to be drawn away , as a bird hasteth to the snare , and knoweth not that it is for his life . now in such cases , resolution is not onely a convenient and proper thing ; but a very wise thing . for , when once a resolution is found to be serious , and in good earnest , the former companions in wickedness will leave off to solicit ; and if once a penitent sinner can endure to be despised , and exposed for a time by evil men for owning his repentance , he will find the other parts of his change grow more easie to him ; and the devil's instruments in tempting will be like himself ; i. e. they will give over tempting when they see no hopes to prevail . and let no men ever complain that they want power to break off their former sins , till they have tried what the strength of a vigorous resolution will doe . but because we have always reason to suspect our selves , let us make our devout applications to almighty god to give us the assistence of his grace through the onely mediation of his son jesus christ. to whom , &c. the end . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61618-e140 malac. 1.6 . heb. 12.9 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . aelian . var , hist. l. 9. c. 18. is. 55.8 , 9. matt. 7.9 , 10 , 11. heb. 4.15 . 5.2 . ps. 103 , 8. jam. 5.11 . exod. 3● . 6 , 7. ps. 103.13 . is. 55.7 . v. 7.10 . lact. de ira dei. c. 4. exod. 32.10 . is. 5.26 . jon. 3.9 . psal. 45.7 . tit. 3.4 . v. 24.32 . jam. 4.6 . ps. 51.17 . rom. 3.23 . eccl. 7.20 . exod. 34.7 . 1 john 5.16 , 17. matt. 12.32 . harv . exerc . 16 , 17 , 18. jud. v. 12. jam. 4.14 . prov. 7.23 . a sermon preached before the honourable house of commons at st. margarets westminster, octob. 10, 1666 being the fast-day appointed for the late dreadfull fire in the city of london / by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1666 approx. 63 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 26 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61600 wing s5639 estc r34613 14523439 ocm 14523439 102516 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61600) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 102516) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1072:7) a sermon preached before the honourable house of commons at st. margarets westminster, octob. 10, 1666 being the fast-day appointed for the late dreadfull fire in the city of london / by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. the fourth edition. [2], 37 p. printed by robert white for henry mortlock ..., london : 1666. reproduction of original in the union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -o.t. -amos iv, 11 -sermons. fast-day sermons. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the honourable house of commons , at st. margarets westminster octob. 10. 1666. being the fast-day appointed for the late dreadfull fire in the city of london . by edward stillingfleet , b. d. rector of st. andrews holborn , and one of his majesties chaplains in ordinary . published by order of the said house . the fourth edition . london , printed by robert white , for henry mortlock , and 〈…〉 sold at his shop , at the sign of the white 〈◊〉 in westminster hall. 1666. amos 4. 11. i have overthrown some of you , as god overthrew soodom and gomorrah , and ye were as a firebrand pluckt out of the burning : yet have ye not returned unto me , saith the lord. it is but a very little time since you met together in this place to lament the remainders of a raging pestilence , which the last year destroyed so many thousand inhabitants of the late great and famous city : and now god hath given us another sad occasion for our fasting and humiliation , by suffering a devouring fire to break forth and consume so many of her habitations . as though the infected air had been too kind and partial , and like saul to the amalekites , had only destroyed the vile and refuse , and spared the greatest of the people ; as though the grave had surfeited with the bodies of the dead , and were loth to go on in the execution of gods displeasure ; he hath imployed a more furious element , which by its merciless and devouring flames might in a more lively manner represent unto us the kindling of his wrath against us . and that by a fire , which began with that violence , and spread with that horrour , and raged with that fury , & continued for so long a time with that irresistible force ; that it might justly fill the beholders with confusion , the hearers of it with amazement , and all of us with a deep and humble sense of those sins which have brought down the judgements of god in so severe a manner in the midst of us . for whatever arguments or reasons we can imagine , that should compose the minds of men to a sense of their own or others calamities , or excite them to an apprehension of the wrath of god as the cause of them , or quicken them to an earnest supplication to him for mercy , they do all eminently concurr in the sad occasion of this dayes solemnity . for if either compassion would move , or fear awaken , or interest engage us to any of these , it is hard to conceive there should be an instance of a more efficacious nature , than that is which we this day bewail ; for who can behold the ruines of so great a city , and not have his bowels of compassion moved towards it ? who can have any sense of the anger of god discovered in it , and not have his fear awakened by it ? who can ( as we ought all ) look upon it as a judgement of universal influence on the whole nation , and not think himself concerned to implore the mercy of heaven towards us ? for certainly , howsoever we may vainly flatter and deceive our selves , these are no common indications of the frowns of heaven ; nor are they meerly intended as the expressions of gods severity towards that city which hath suffered so much by them ; but the stroaks which fall upon the head ( though they light upon that only ) are designed for the punishment of the whole body . were there nothing else but a bare permission of divine providence as to these things , we could not reasonably think , but that g●d must needs be very angry with us , when he suffers two such dreadful calamities to tread almost upon each others heels ; that no sooner had death taken away such multitudes of our inhabitants , but a fire follows it to consume our habitations . a fire , so dreadfull in its appearance , in its rage and fury , and in all the dismal consequences of it ( which we cannot yet be sufficiently apprehensive of ) that on that very account we may justly lie down in our shame , and our confusion cover us : because god hath covered the daughter of sion with a cloud in his anger , and cast down from heaven to earth the beauty of israel , and remembred not his footstool in the day of his anger . for such was the violence and fury of the flames , that they have not only defaced the beauty of the city , and humbled the pride and grandeur of it ; not only stained its glory , and consumed its palaces ; but have made the houses of god themselves a heap of ruines , and a spectacle of desolation . and what then can we propose to our selves as arguments of gods severe displeasure against us , which we have not either already felt , or have just cause to fear are coming upon us without a speedy and sincere amendment ? if a sword abroad and pestilence at home , if fire in our houses and death in our streets , if forreign wars and domestick factions , if a languishing state and a discontented people , if the ruines of the city and poverty of the countrey , may make us sensible how sad our condition at present is , how much worse it may be ( if god in his mercy prevent it not ) we shall all surely think we have reason enough this day to lay to heart the evil of our doings which have brought all these things upon us , and abhor our selves , repenting in dust and ashes . that would seem indeed to bear some analogy with the present ruines of the city , and the calamities we lie under at this time ; but god will more easily dispense with the pompous shews , and solemn garbs of our humiliation ; if our hearts bleed within for our former impieties , and our repentance discovers its sin●erity , by bringing us to that temper ; that , though we have done iniquity , we will do so no more . that is the true and proper end , which almighty god aims at , in all his judgements : he takes no delight in hurling the world into confusions , and turning cities into ruinous heaps , and making whole countries a desolation : but when he sees it necessary to vindicate the honour of his justice to the world , he doth it with that severity that may make us apprehend his displeasure , and yet with that mercy which may incourage us to repent and return unto the lord. thus we find in the instances recorded in the text , when some cities were consumed by him ; so that as far as concerned them , they were made like to sodom and gomorrah : yet he doth it with that kindness to the inhabitants , that they are pluckt as firebrands out of the burning : and therefore he looks upon it as a frustrating the design both of his justice , and of his mercy , when he is fain to conclude with that sad reflection on their incorrigibleness ; yet have ye not returned unto me saith the lord. thus ye see what the design and scope of the words is , which i have read unto you , wherein we may consider , 1. the severity of the judgement which god was pleased to execute upon them . i have overthrown some of you , as god overthrew sodom and gomorrah . 2. the mixture of his mercy in the midst of his severity , and ye were as a firebrand pluckt out of the burning . 3. the incorrigibleness of the people notwithstanding both . yet have ye not , &c. in the first we have gods rod lifted up to strike , in the second we have gods hand stretched out to save , yet neither of these would make them sensible of their disobedience ; though their cities were overthrown for their sakes , though they themselves escaped not for their own sakes , but for his mercies sake only whom they had so highly provoked ; yet have ye not returned unto me , saith the lord. i am sure i may say of the two former parts of the text , as our saviour doth in another case , this day hath this scripture been fulfilled among you : we have seen a sad instance of gods severity , a city almost wholly consumed as sodom and gomorrah , and a great expression of his kindness , the inhabitants saved , as firebrands pluckt out of the burning : o let it never be said that the last part of the words is fulfilled too , yet have ye not returned unto me , &c. which , that it may not be , i shall first consider the severity of god in his judgement this day , and then discover the mixture of his kindness with it , and the result of both will be the unreasonableness of obstinate disobedience after them . 1. the severity of the judgement here expressed : which though we take it not in reference to the persons of men , but to the cities wherein they dwelt : as it seems to be understood not only by the original , wherein the words relating to persons are left out : but by the following clause , expressing their preservation : yet we shall find the judgement to be severe enough , in regard 1. of the nature and kind of it . 2. the series and order of it . 3. the causes moving to it . 4. the author of it . i have overthrown some of you , as god overthrew , &c. 1. the nature and kind of it : we can imagine nothing more severe when we consider what it is set forth by , the most unparalleld judgement we read of , viz. the destruction of sodom and gomorrah by a fire from heaven . although in all circumstances the instance might not come up to the parallel , yet in several respects there might be so sad a desolation , that any other example but that might fall beneath the greatness and severity of it . and we may better understand of how sad and dreadfull a nature such a judgement must be , if we consider it with relation to the suddenness and unexpectedness of it , to the force and violence of it , and to all that sad train of circumstances which attend and follow it . 1. the suddenness and unexpectedness of it ; as god overthrew sodom and gomorrah , i. e. when they least of all looked for such a desolation . for thus it was in the dayes of lot ( as our saviour tells us ) they did eat , they drank , they bought , they sold , they planted , they builded ; but the same day that lot went out of sodom , it rained fire and brimstome from heaven , and destroyed them all . they were all immersed either in their pleasures or in their business , they little thought of destruction being so near them as it proved to be ; thus it was with the jews in their first and latter destruction both of their city and countrey ; they were as high and as confident of the contrary as might be to the very last ; nothing could perswade them that their temple or their city should be burnt with fire , till they saw them flaming before their eyes . thus josephus observes of his countrey-men , that in the midst of all their miseries they had no kind of sense at all of their sins , but were as proud , presumptuous and arrogant , as if all things went well with them ; and were like to do so . they thought god could not possibly punish such a people as they were in such a manner ; they could easily have believed it of any other people but themselves : but that god should punish his own people in covenant with him , that judgement should begin at the house of god , that they who had loved to be called by his name , should be made examples to all other nations ; this seemed so harsh & incredible that by no means could they entertain it . but god & wise men too thought otherwise of them than they did of themselves : they could not but see an outward shew of religion joyned with a deep and subtil hypocrisie ; there being among them an heap of pride and luxury , of fraud and injustice , of sedition and faction guilded over with a fair shew of greater zeal for god and his glory : which that impartial historian ( as one who knew them well ) hath described at large : and although they could not believe that such heavy judgements should befall them , yet others did not only believe , but tremble at the apprehensions of them . who among all the citizens of london could have been perswaded , but the day before the fire brake out , nay when they saw the flames for near a day together , that ever in four days time , not a fourth part of the city should be left standing ? for when were they ever more secure & inapprehensive of their danger than at this time ? they had not been long returned to their houses , which the plague had driven them from , and now they hoped to make some amends for the loss of their trade before ; but they returned home with the same sins they carryed away with them ; like new moons , they had a new face and appearance , but the same spots remained still : or it may be , increased by that scumm they had gathered in the countries where they had been . like beasts of prey that had been chained up so long till they were hunger-bitten , when they once got loose they ran with that violence and greediness to their wayes of gain , as though nothing could ever satisfie them . but that which betrayed them to so much security , was their late deliverance from so sweeping a judgement as the plague had been to the city and suburbs of it : they could by no means think , when they had all so lately escaped the grave , that the city it self should be so near being buried in its own ruines ; that the fire which had missed their blood should seize upon their houses ; that there should be no other way to purge the infected air , but by the flames of the whole city . thus when the mariners have newly escaped a wreck at sea , the fears of which have a long time deprived them of their wonted rest , they think they may securely lye down and sleep , till it may be another storm overtake and sink them . we see then there is neither piety nor wisdom in so much security when a great danger is over , for we know not but that very security it self may provoke god to send a greater . and no kind of judgements are so dreadful and amazing , as those which come most unexpectedly upon men ; for these betray the succours which reason offers , they infatuate mens councils , weaken their courage , and deprive them of that presence of mind which is necessary at such a time for their own and the publick interest . and there needs no more to let us know how severe such a judgement must be when it comes upon men in so sudden and unexpected a manner ; but that is not all , for the severity of it lyes further , 2. in the force and violence of it : and surely that was very great which consumed four cities to nothing in so short a time , when god did pluere gehennam de coelo as one expresses it , rained down hell-fire upon sodom and gomorrah . and this is that which some think is called the vengeance of eternal fire , which all those in sodom and gomorrah are said to suffer ; i. e. a fire which consumed , till there was nothing left to be consumed by it . not but that those wicked persons did justly suffer the vengeance of an eternal fire in another life , but the apostle seems to set out and paint forth to us that in the life to come , by the force and violence of that fire which destroyed those cities ; and it would be harsh to say , that all who were involved in that common calamity ( who yet were innocent as to the great abominations of those places , viz. the infants there destroyed ) must be immediately sentenced to eternal misery . but although god since that perpetual monument of his justice in the destruction of those cities hath not by such an immediate fire from heaven consumed and razed out the very foundations of other cities ; yet at some times there are fires which break out and rage with a more than ordinary violence , and will not yield to those attempts for quenching them , which at other times may be attended with great success . such might that great fire in rome be in nero's time , which whether begun casually , or by design ( which was disputed then , as it hath been about others since ) did presently spread it self with greater speed over the cirque ( as the historian tells us ) than the wind it self , and never left burning , till of fourteen regions in rome , but four were left entire . such might that be in the emperour titus his time , which lasted three dayes and nights , and was so irresistible in its fury , that the historian tells us , it was certainly more than an ordinary fire . such might that be in the same city in the time of commodus , which though all the art and industry imaginable were used for the quenching it , yet it burnt , till it had consumed besides the temple of peace , the fairest houses and palaces of the city , which on that account , the historians attribute to more than natural causes . such might that be ( which comes the nearest of any i have met with , to that fire we this day lament the effects of ) i mean that at constantinople , which happened a. d. 465. in the beginning of september ; it brake forth by the water side , and raged with that horrible fury for four days together , that it burnt down the greatest part of the city , and was so little capable of resistance , that as evagrius tells us , the strongest houses were but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , like so much dryed stubble before it ; by which means the whole city was , as he calls it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a most miserable and doleful spectacle ; so that as baronius expresses it , that city which before was accounted the wonder of the world , was made like to sodom and gomorrah . such likewise might those two great fires have been which have formerly burnt down great part of the then city of london ; but neither of them come near the dreadfulness of this , considering how much bigger the habitations of the city were now , and how much greater the riches of it then could be imagined at those times . how great must we conceive the force of this fire to have been , which having at first gotten a head where there was little means of resisting it , and much fuel to increase it ; from thence it spread it self both with and against the wind ; till it had gained so considerable a force , that it despised all the resistance could be made by the strength of the buildings which stood in its way ; and when it had once subdued the strongest and the tallest of them , it then roared like the waves of the sea , and made its way through all the lesser obstacles , and might have gone on so far , till it had laid this city levell with the ruines of the other , had not he who sets the bounds to the ocean , and saith , thus far shalt thou go and no further , put a stop to it in those places which were as ready to have yielded up themselves to the rage of it , as any which had been consumed before . 3. the severity of it will yet more appear from all the dreadful circumstances which attend and follow it . could you suppose your selves in the midst of those cities which were consumed by fire from heaven , when it had seized upon their dwellings , o what cryes and lamentations , what yellings and shriekings might ye then have heard among them ! we may well think how dreadful those were , when we do but consider how sad the circumstances were of the fire we mourn for this day . when it began like sampson to break in pieces all the means of resisting it , and carryed before it not only the gates , but the churches and most magnificent structures of the city , what horrour and confusion may we then imagine had seized upon the spirits of the citizens ; what distraction in their councils , what paleness in their countenances , what pantings at their hearts , what an universal consternation might have been then seen upon the minds of men ? but o the sighs and tears , the frights and amazements , the miscarriages , nay the deaths of some of the weaker sex at the terrour and apprehension of it ! o the hurry and useless pains , the alarms and tumults , the mutual hinderances of each other that were among men at the beholding the rage and fury of it ! there we might have seen women weeping for their children , for fear of their being trod down in the press , or lost in the crowd of people , or exposed to the violence of the flames ; husbands more solicitous for the safety of their wives and children , than their own ; the souldiers running to their swords , when there was more need of buckets ; the tradesmen loading their backs with that which had gotten possession of their hearts before . then we might have heard some complaining thus of themselves : o that i had been as carefull of laying up treasures in heaven as i have been upon earth , i had not been under such fears of losing them as now i am ! if i had served god as faithfully as i have done the world , he would never have left me as now that is like to do . what a fool have i been which have spent all my pretious time for the gaining of that which may be now lost in an hours time ! if these flames be so dreadful , what are those which are reserved for them who love the world more than god! if none can come near the heat of this fire , who can dwell with everlasting burnings ! o what madness then will it be to sin any more wilfully against that god who is a consuming fire , infinitely more dreadful than this can be ! farewell then all ye deceitful vanities : now i understand thee and my self better , o bewitching world , then to fix my happiness in thee any more . i will henceforth learn so much wisdom to lay up my treasures there where neither moths can corrupt them , nor thieves steal them , nor fire consume them . o how happy would london be , if this were the effect of her flames on the minds of all her inhabitants ! she might then rise with a greater glory , and her inward beauty would outshine her outward splendour , let it be as great as we can wish or imagine . but in the mean time who can behold her present ruines , without paying some tears as due to the sadness of the spectacle , and more to the sins which caused them ? if that city were able to speak out of its ruines , what sad complaints would it make of all those impieties which have made her so miserable . if it had not been ( might she say ) for the pride and luxury , the ease and delicacy of some of my inhabitants , the covetousness , the fraud , the injustice of others , the debaucheries of the prophane , the open factions and secret hypocrisie of too many pretending to greater sanctity , my beauty had not been thus turned into ashes , nor my glory into those ruines which make my enemies rejoyce , my friends to mourn , and all stand amazed at the beholding of them . look now upon me , you who so lately admired the greatness of my trade , the riches of my merchants , the number of my people , the conveniency of my churches , the multitude of my streets , and see what desolations sin hath made in the earth . look upon me , and then tell me whether it be nothing to dally with heaven , to make a mock at sin , to slight the judgements of god , and abuse his mercies , and after all the attempts of heaven to reclaim a people from their sins , to remain still the same that ever they were ? was there no way to expiate your guilt but by my misery ? had the leprosie of your sins so fretted into my walls , that there was no cleansing them , but by the flames which consume them ? must i mourn in my dust and ashes for your iniquities , while you are so ready to return to the practice of them ? have i suffered so much by reason of them , and do you think to escape your selves ? can you then look upon my ruines with hearts as hard and unconcerned as the stones which lye in them ? if you have any kindness for me , or for your selves , if you ever hope to see my breaches repaired , my beauty restored , my glory advanced , look on londons ruines and repent . thus would she bid her inhabitants not weep for her miseries , but for their own sins ; for if never any sorrow were like to her sorrow , it is because never any sins were like to their sins . not as though they were only the sins of the city , which have brought this evil upon her ; no , but as far as the judgement reaches , so great hath the compass of the sins been , which have provoked god to make her an example of his justice . and i fear the effects of londons calamity will be felt all the nation over . for , considering the present languishing condition of this nation , it will be no easie matter to recover the blood and spirits which have been lost by this fire . so that whether we consider the sadness of those circumstances which accompanied the rage of the fire , or those which respect the present miseries of the city , or the general influence those will have upon the nation , we cannot easily conceive what judgement could in so critical a time have befallen us , which had been more severe for the kind and nature of it , than this hath been . 2. we consider it in the series and order of it . we see by the text , this comes in the last place , as a reserve , when nothing else would do any good upon them : it is extrema medicina , as st. hierom saith , the last attempt that god uses to reclaim a people by , and if these causticks will not do , it is to be feared he looks on the wounds as incurable . he had sent a famine before , v. 6. a drought , v. 7 , 8. blasting and mildew , v. 9. the pestilence after the manner of egypt , v. 10. the miseries of war in the same verse . and when none of these would work that effect upon them , which they were designed for , then he comes to this last way of punishing before a final destruction , be overthrew some of their cities as he had overthrown sodom and gomorrah . god forbid , we should be so near a final subversion , and utter desolation , as the ten tribes were , when none of these things would bring them to repentance ; but yet the method god hath used with us seems to bode very ill in case we do not at last return to the lord. for it is not only agreeable to what is here delivered as the course god used to reclaim the israelites , but to what is reported by the most faithfull historian of those times of the degrees and steps that god made before the ruines of the british nation . for gildas tells us the decay of it began by civil wars among themselves , and high discontents remaining as the consequents of them , after this an universal decay and poverty among them , after that , nay during the continuannce of it , wars with the picts and scots their inveterate enemies ; but no sooner had they a little breathing space , but they return to their luxury and other sins again ; then god sends among them a consuming pestilence , which destroyed an incredible number of people . when all this would not do , those whom they trusted most to , betrayed them , and rebelled against them , by whose means , not only the cities were burnt with fire , but the whole island was turned almost into one continued flame . the issue of all which at last was , that their countrey was turned to a desolation , the ancient inhabitants driven out , or destroyed , and their former servants , but now their bitter enemies , possessing their habitations . may god avert the omen from us at this day . we have smarted by civil wars , and the dreadful effects of them ; we yet complain of great discontents and poverty as great as them , we have inveterate enemies combined abroad against us , we have very lately suffered under a pestilence as great almost as any we read of , and now the great city of our nation burnt down by a dreadful fire . and what do all these things mean ? and what will the issue of them be ? though that be lockt up in the councils of heaven , yet we have just cause to fear , if it be not our speedy amendment , it may be our ruine . and they who think that incredible , let them tell me whether two years since , they did not think it altogether as improbable , that in the compass of the two succeeding years , above a hundred thousand persons should be destroyed by the plague in london and other places , and the city it self should be burnt to the ground ? and if our fears do not , i am sure our sins may tell us , that these are but the fore-runners of greater calamities , in case there be not a timely reformation of our selves . and although god may give us some intermissions of punishments , yet at last he may , as the roman consul expressed it , pay us intercalatae poenae usuram , that which may make amends for all his abatements , and give us full measure according to that of our sins , pressed down , shaken together , and running over . which leads to the third particular . 3. the causes moving god to so much severity in his judgements , which are the greatness of the sins committed against him . so this prophet tels us , that the true account of all gods punishments is to be fetched from the sins of the people , amos 1. 3. for three transgressions of damascus , and for four i will not turn away the punishment thereof : so it is said of gaza , v. 6. of tyrus , v. 9. of edom , v. 11. of ammon , v. 13. moab , ch . 2. 1. judah , v. 4. and at last israel , v. 6. and it is observable of every one of these , that when god threatens to punish them for the greatness of their iniquities , and the multitude of their transgressions , ( which is generally supposed to be meant by the three transgressions and the four ) he doth particularly threaten to send a fire among them to consume the houses and the palaces of their cities . so to damascus , chap. 1. 4. to gaza , v. 7. to tyrus , v. 10. to edom , v. 12. to ammon , v. 14. to moab , ch . 2. v. 2. to judah , v. 5. i will send a fire upon judah , and it shall devour the palaces of jerusalem : and israel in the words of the text . this is a judgement then , which when it comes in its fury , gives us notice to how great a height our sins are risen ; especially when it hath so many dreadful fore-runners , as it had in israel , and hath had among our selves . when the red horse hath marched furiously before it all bloody with the effects of a civil war , and the pale horse hath followed after the other with death upon his back , and the grave at his heels , and after both these , those come , out of whose mouth issues fire , and smoak , and brimstone , it is then time for the inhabitants of the earth , to repent of the work of their hands . but it is our great unhappiness that we are apt to impute these great calamities to any thing rather than to our sins ; and thereby we hinder our selves from the true remedy , because we will not understand the cause of our distemper . though god hath not sent prophets among us , to tell us for such and such sins , i will send such and such judgements upon you , yet where we observe the parallel between the sins and the punishments agreeable with what we find recorded in scripture , we have reason to say that those sins were not only the antecedents , but the causes of those punishments which followed after them . and that because the reason of punishment was not built upon any particular relation between god and the people of israel , but upon reasons common to all mankind ; yet with this difference , that the greater the mercies were which any people enjoyed , the sooner was the measure of their iniquities filled up , and the severer were the judgements when they came upon them . this our prophet gives an account of , chap. 3. 2. you only have i known of all the nations of the earth , therefore will i punish you for your iniquities . so did god punish tyre and damascus , as well as israel and judah ; but his meaning is , he would punish them sooner , he would punish them more severely . i wish we could be brought once to consider what influence piety and vertue hath upon the good of a nation , if we did , we should not only live better our selves , but our kingdom & nation might flourish more than otherwise we are like to see it do . which is a truth hath been so universally received among the wise men of all ages , that one of the roman historians , though of no very severe life himself , yet imputes the decay of the roman state , not to chance or fortune , or some unhidden causes ( which the atheism of our age would presently do ) but to the general loosness of mens lives , and corruption of their manners . and it was the grave observation of one of the bravest captains ever the roman state had , that it was impossible for any state to be happy , stantibus moenibus , ruentibus moribus , though their walls were firm , if their manners were decayed . but it is our misery , that our walls and our manners are fallen together , or rather the latter undermined the former . they are our sins which have drawn so much of our blood , and infected our air , and added the greatest fuell to our flames . but it is not enough in general to declaim against our sins , but we must search out particularly those predominant vices , which by their boldness and frequency have provoked god thus to punish us ; and as we have hitherto observed a parallel between the judgements of israel in this chapter , and our own : so i am afraid we shall find too sad a parallel between their sins and ours too . three sorts of sins are here spoken of in a peculiar manner , as the causes of their severe punishments , their luxury and intemperance , their covetousness and oppression , and their contempt of god and his laws , and i doubt we need not make a very exact scrutiny to find out these in a high degree among our selves : and i wish it were as easie to reform them , as to find them out . 1. luxury and intemperance ; that we meet with in the first verse , both in the compellation , ye kine of bashan , and in their behaviour , which say to their masters , bring , and let us drink . ye kine of bashan , loquitur ad principes israel & optimates quosque decem tribuum , saith st. hierom , he speaks to the princes of israel , and the chief of all the ten tribes ; those which are fed in the richest pastures , such as those of bashan were . who are more fully described by the prophet in his sixth chapter . they are the men who are at ease in sion , v. 1. they put far away from them the evil day , v. 3. they lye upon beds of ivory , and stretch themselves upon their couches , and eat the lambs out of the flock , and the calves out of the midst of the stall , v. 4. they chaunt to the sound of the viol , and invent to themselves instruments of musick like david , v. 5. they drink wine in bowls , and anoint themselves with the chief oyntments , but they are not grieved for the affliction of joseph . the meaning of all which is , they minded nothing but ease , softness , and pleasure , but could not endure to hear of the calamities which were so near them . nothing but mirth , and jollity , and riot , and feasting , and the evil consequences of these were to be seen or heard among them . their delicate souls were presently ruffled and disturbed at the discourse of any thing but matters of courtship , address and entertainment . any thing that was grave and serious , though never so necessary , and of the greatest importance , was put off , as felix put off st. paul to a more convenient time : especially if it threatned miseries to them , and appeared with a countenance sadder than their own . these were the kine of bashan , who were full of ease and wantonness , and never thought of the day of slaughter , which the other were the certain forerunners of . symmachus renders it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which others apply to the rich citizens of samaria , i am afraid we may take it in either sense without a soloecism . bring and let us drink , which as st. hierom goes on , ebrietatem significat in vino & luxuria quae statum mentis evertunt , it implies the height of their luxury and intemperance . it is observed by some , that our prophet retatins still the language of his education in the bluntness of his expressions , the great men that lived wholly at their ease , in wantonness and luxury , he styles like the heardsman of tekoa , the kine of bashan . that he thought was title good enough for such who seemed to have souls for no other end , than the other had . and hath not that delicata insania , as st. austin calls it , that soft and effeminate kind of madness taken possession of too many among us , whose birth and education designed them for more manly imployments ? yea , what an age of luxury do we live in , when instead of those noble characters of men from their vertue , and wisdom , and courage , it is looked on among some as a mighty character of a person , that he eats and drinks well : a character that becomes none so much as the kine of bashan in the literal sense , for surely they did so , or else they had never been in so much esteem among the heardsmen of tokoa . a character which those philosophers would have been ashamed of , who looked upon no other end of humane life but pleasure ; but in order to that , they thought nothing more necessary than temperance and sobriety ; but whatever esteem they had then , they have lost all their reputation among our modern epicures , who know of no such things as pleasures of the mind , and would not much value whether they had any faculties of the mind or no , unless it were for the contrivance of new oaths and debaucheries . but if this were only among some few persons , we hope the whole nation would not suffer for their madness : for scarce any age hath been so happy , but it hath had some monsters in morality as well as nature . but i am afraid these vices are grown too epidemical ; not only in the city , but the countries too ; what mean else those frequent complaints ( and i hope more general then the causes of them ) that the houses of great men in too many places are so near being publick schools of debauchery , rather than of piety and vertue , where men shall not want instructers to teach them to forget both god and themselves ; wherein sobriety is so far from being accounted a matter of honour , that the rules of the persian civility are quite forgotten , and men are forced to unman themselves . i know nothing would tend more to the honour of our nation , or the advantage of it , then if once these publick excesses were severely restrained , i do not mean so much by making new laws , ( for those generally do but exercise peoples wits by finding out new evasions ) but by executing old ones . 2. covetousness and oppression . you see what these great men in samaria did when they had any respite from their excesses and intemperance , then woe be to the poor who come in their way ; vvhich oppress the poor , and crush the needy : v. i. either by the hands of violence , or by those arts and devices which either their honesty or poverty have kept them from the knowledge of . and if there be not so much of open violence in our dayes , the thanks are due to the care of our magistrates , and the severity of our laws , but it is hard to say whether ever any age produced more studious and skilful to pervert the design of laws , without breaking the letter of them , than this of ours hath done . fraud and injustice is now managed with a great deal of artifice and cunning ; and he thinks himself no body in the understanding of the world , that cannot over-reach his brother , and not be discovered : or however in the multiplicity and obscurity of our laws cannot find out something in pretence at least to justifie his actions by . but if appeal be made to the courts of judicature , what arts are then used either for concealing or hiring witnesses , so that if their purses be not equal , the adverse party may overswear him by so much as his purse is weightier than the others . i heartily wish it may never be said of us , what the orator once said of the greeks , quibus jusjurandum jocus , testimonium ludus , they made it a matter of jest and drollery to for swear themselves , and give false testimonies . but supposing men keep within the bounds of justice and common honesty , yet how unsatiable are the desires of men ? they are for adding house to house , and land to land , never contented with what either their ancestors have left them , or the bountiful hand of heaven hath bestowed upon them . till at last it may be in the prophets expression for their covetousness , the stone cry out of the wall , and the beam out of the timber answer it ; i. e. provoke god to give a severe check to the exorbitant and boundless desires of men , as he hath done by this dayes calamity . thus while the city thought with babylon to sit as a lady for ever , while she dwelt carelesly , and said i am , and there is none else besides me ; evil is come upon her , and she knows not from whence it comes , and mischief is fallen upon her , and she hath not been able to put it off , and desolation is come upon her suddenly , which she did not foresee . 3. contempt of god and his laws . that we read of v 4. where the prophet speaks by an irony to them , come to bethel and transgress , &c. he knew well enough they were resolved to do it , let god or the prophet say what they pleased . for these kine of bashan were all for the calves of dan and bethel , and some think that is the reason of the title that is given them . these great men of samaria thought it beneath them to own religion any further than it was subservient to their civil interests . they were all of jeroboams religion , who looked on it as a meer politick thing , and fit to advance his own designs by . i am afraid there are too many at this day who are secretly of his mind , and think it a piece of wisdom to be so : blessed god , that men should be so wise to deceive themselves , and go down with so much discretion to hell ! these are the grave and retired atheists , who , though they secretly love not religion , yet their caution hinders them from talking much against it . but there is a sort of men much more common than the other ; the faculties of whose minds are so thin and aiery , that they will not bear the consideration of any thing , much less of religion ; these throw out their bitter scoffs , and prophane jests against it . a thing never permitted that i know of in any civilized nation in the world ; whatsoever their religion was , the reputation of religion was alwayes preserved sacred : god himself would not suffer the jews to speak evil of other gods though they were to destroy all those who tempted them to the worship of them . and shall we suffer the most excellent and reasonable religion in the world , viz. the christian , to be profaned by the unhallowed mouths of any who will venture to be damned , to be accounted witty ? if their enquiries were deeper , their reason stronger , or their arguments more perswasive , than of those who have made it their utmost care and business to search into these things , they ought to be allowed a fair hearing ; but for men who pretend to none of these things , yet still to make religion the object of their scoffs and raillery , doth not become the gravity of a nation professing wisdom to permit it , much less the sobriety of a people professing christianity . in the mean time such persons may know that wise men may be argued out of a religion they own , but none but fools and mad men will be droll'd out of it . let them first try whether they can laugh men out of their estates , before they attempt to do it out of their hopes of an eternal happiness . and i am sure it will be no comfort to them in another world , that they were accounted wits for deriding those miseries which they then feel and smart under the severity of : it will be no mitigation of their flames that they go laughing into them ; nor will they endure them the better because they would not believe them . but while this is so prevailing a humour among the vain men of this age and nation , what can we expect but that god should by remarkable and severe judgements , seek to make men more serious in religion , or else make their hearts to ake , and their joynts to tremble , as he did belshazzars , when he could find nothing else to carouse in but the vessels of the temple . and when men said in the prophet zephany , chap. 1. 12. that god neither did good nor evil , presently it follows , therefore their goods shall become a booty , and their houses a desolation : the day of the lord is near , a day of wrath , a day of trouble and distress , a day of wasteness and desolation ; as it is with us at this time . thus we see how sad the parallel hath been not only in the judgements of israel , but in the sins likewise which have made those judgements so severe . 4. the severity of the judgement appears not only from the causes , but from the author of it . i have overthrown some of you as god overthrew sodom and gomorrah . god challenges the execution of his justice to himself , not only in the great day , but in his judgement here in the world . shall there be evil in a city , and the lord hath not done it ? when god is pleased to punish men for their sins , the execution of his justice is as agreeable to his nature now , as it will be at the end of the world . we all know that he may do it if he please , and he hath told us , that he doth and will do it ; and we know withall , that without such remarkable severities , the world will hardly be kept in any a we of him . we do not find that love doth so much in the world as fear doth , there being so very few persons of tractable and ingenuous spirits . it is true of too many , what lactantius observes of the romans , nunquam dei meminerunt , nisi dum in malis sunt , they seldom think of god , but when they are afraid of him . and there is not only this reason as to particular persons why god should punish them , but there is a greater as to communities , and bodies of men ; for although god suffers wicked men to escape punishment here , as he often doth ; yet he is sure not to do it in the life to come ; but communities of men can never be punished but in this world ; and therefore the justice of god doth often discover it selr in these common calamities , to keep the world in subjection to him , and to let men see that neither the multitude of their associates , nor the depth of their designs , nor the subtilty of their councils can secure them from the omnipotent arm of divine justice , when he hath determined to visit their transgressions with rods , and their iniquities with stripes . but when he doth all this , yet his loving kindness doth he not utterly take from them : for in the midst of all his judgements he is pleased to remember mercy ; of which we have a remarkable instance in the text , for when god was overthrowing cities , yet he pluckt the inhabitants as firebrands out of the burning : and so i come from the severity of god , 2. to the mixture of his mercy in it . and ye were as a fire-brand pluckt out of the burning . that notes two things , the nearness they were in to the danger , and the unexpectedness of their deliverance out of it . 1. the nearness they were in to the danger , quasi torris , cujus jam magna pars absumpta est , as some paraphrase it ; like a brand , the greatest part of which is already consumed by fire ; which shews the difficulty of their escaping . so joshua is said to be a brand pluckt out of the fire , zech. 3. 2. and to this st. hierom upon this place , applyes that difficult passage , 1 cor. 3. 15. they shall be saved , but so as by fire , nothing the greatness of the danger they were in , and how hardly they should escape . and are not all the inhabitants of this city , and all of us in the suburbs of the other , whose houses escaped so near the flames , as firebrands pluckt out of the burning ? when the fire came on in its rage and fury , as though it would in a short time have devoured all before it , that not only this whole city , but so great a part of the suburbs of the other should escape untouched , is ( all circumstances considered ) a wonderful expression of the kindness of god to us in the midst of so much severity . if he had suffered the fire to go on to have consumed the remainder of our churches and houses , and laid this city even with the other in one continued heap of ruines , we must have said , just art thou o lord , and righteous in all thy judgements . we ought rather to have admired his patience in sparing us so long ; then complain of this rigour of his justice in punishing us at last ; but instead of that he hath given us occasion this day with the three children in the fiery furnace to praise him in the midst of the flames . for even the inhabitants of london themselves who have suffered most in this calamity , have cause to acknowledge the mercy of god towards them , that they are escaped themselves ; though it be ( as the jews report of joshua , the high priest , when thrown into the fire by the chaldeans ) with their cloaths burnt about them . though their habitations be consumed , and their losses otherwise may be too great , yet that in the midst of so much danger by the flames , and the press of people so very few should suffer the loss of their lives , ought to be owned by them and us as a miraculous providence of god towards them . and therefore not unto us , not unto us , but to his holy name be the praise of so great a preservation in the midst of so heavy a judgement . 2. the unexpectedness of such a deliverance ; they are not saved by their own skill and counsell , nor by their strength and industry , but by him who by his mighty hand did pluck them as firebrands out of the burning . though we own the justice of god in the calamities of this day , let us not forget his mercy in what he hath unexpectedly rescued from the fury of the flames ; that the royal palaces of our gracious soveraign , the residence of the nobility , the houses of parliament , the courts of judicature , the place where we are now assembled and several others of the same nature , with other places and habitations to receive those who were burnt out of their own , stand at this day untouched with the fire ( and long may they continue so ) ought chiefly to be ascribed to the power and goodness of that god , who not only commands the raging of the sea , and the madness of the people , but whom the winds and the flames obey . although enough in a due subordination to divine providence can never be attributed to the mighty care and industry of our most gracious soveraign , and his royal highness , who by their presence and incouragement inspired a new life and vigour into the sinking spirits of the citizens , whereby god was pleased so far to succeed their endeavours , that a stop was put to the fury of the fire in such places where it was as likely to have prevailed , as in any parts of the city consumed by it . o let us not then frustrate the design of so much severity mixed with so great mercy : let it never be said , that neither judgements nor kindness will work upon us : that neither our deliverance from the pestilence which walks in darkness , nor from the flames which shine as the noon-day , will awaken us from that lethargy and security we are in by our sins : but let god take what course he pleases with us , we are the same incorrigible people still that ever we were . for we have cause enough for our mourning and lamentation this day , ( if god had not sent new calamities upon us ) that we were no better for those we had undergone before . we have surfetted with mercies , and grown sick of the kindness of heaven to us , and when god hath made us smart for our fulness and wantonness , then we grew sullen and murmured and disputed against providence , and were willing to do any thing but repent of our sins and reform our lives . it is not many years since god blessed us with great and undeserved blessings , which we then thought our selves very thankful for ; but if we had been really so , we should never have provoked him who bestowed those favours upon us in so great a degree as we have done since . was this our requital to him for restoring our soveraign , to rebell the more against heaven ? was this our thankfulness , for removing the disorders of church and state , to bring them into our lives ? had we no other way of trying the continuance of gods goodness to us , but by exercising his patience by our greater provocations ? as though we had resolved to let the world see , there could be a more unthankful and disobedient people than the jews had been . thus we sinned with as much security and confidence , as though we had blinded the eyes , or bribed the justice , or commanded the power of heaven : when god of a sudden like one highly provoked drew forth the sword of his destroying angel , and by it cut off so many thousands in the midst of us . then we fell upon our knees , and begg'd the mercy of heaven that our lives might be spared , that we might have time to amend them : but no sooner did our fears abate , but our devotion did so too , we had soon forgotten the promises we made in the day of our distress , and i am afraid it is at this day too true of us which is said in the revelations of those who had escaped the several plagues which so many had been destroyed by . and the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues , yet repented not of the work of their hands . for if we had not greedily suckt in again the poison we had only laid down while we were begging for our lives , if we had not returned with as great fury and violence as ever to our former lusts , the removing of one judgement had not been as it were only to make way for the coming on of another . for the grave seemed to close up her mouth , and death by degrees to withdraw himself , that the fire might come upon the stage , to act its part too in the tragoedy our sins have made among us : and i pray god this may be the last act of it . let us not then provoke god to find out new methods of vengeance , and make experiments upon us of what other unheard of severities may do for our cure . but let us rather meet god now by our repentance , and returning to him , by our serious humiliation for our former sins , and our stedfast resolutions to return no more to the practice of them . that , that much more dangerous infection of our souls may be cured as well as that of our bodies , that the impure flames which burn within may be extinguished , that all our luxuries may be retrenched , our debaucheries punished , our vanities taken away , our careless indifferency in religion turned into a greater seriousness both in the profession and the practise of it . so will god make us a happy and prosperous , when he finds us a more righteous and holy nation . so will god succeed all your endeavours for the honour and interest of that people whom you represent . so may he add that other title to the rest of those you have deserved for your countries good , to make you repairers of the breaches of the city as well as of the nation , and restorers of paths to dwell in : so may that city which now sits solitary like a widow , have her tears wiped off , and her beauty and comeliness restored unto her . yea so may her present ruines , in which she now lyes buried , be only the forerunners of a more joyfull resurrection . in which though the body may remain the same , the qualities may be so altered , that its present desolation may be only the puting off its former inconveniencies , weakness , and deformities , that it may rise with greater glory , strength and proportion : and to all her other qualities , may that of incorruption be added too , at least till the general conflagration . and i know your great wisdom and justice will take care , that those who have suffered by the ruines , may not likewise suffer by the rising of it , that the glory of the city may not be laid upon the tears of the orphans and widows , but that its foundations may be setled upon justice and piety . that there be no complaining in the streets for want of righteousness , nor in the city for want of churches , nor in the churches for want of a setled maintenance . that those who attend upon the service of god in them may never be tempted to betray their consciences to gain a livelihood , nor to comply with the factious humors of men that they may be able to live among them . and thus when the city through the blessing of heaven shall be built again , may it be a habitation of holiness towards god , of loyalty towards our gracious king and his successours , of justice and righteousness towards men , of sobriety , and peace , and unity among all the inhabitants , till not cities and countries only , but the world and time it self shall be no more . which god of his infinite mercy grant through the merits and mediation of his son , to whom with the father and eternal spirit , be all honour and glory for evermore . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61600-e140 lam. 2. 1. luke 17. 28 , 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . de bell . jud. l. 7. c. 14. jude 7. tacit. an. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . x●phil . in epit. dion . in tito . p. 227. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . herod . an in commod . hist. l. 1. p. 22. v. x●phil . ad fin . commodi . nic●p● . l. 15. c. 21 evagr. l. 2. cap. 13. baron . tom. 5. a. 465. 1 hieron . in lo● . gildas de ●xcid . brit. scipio apud ang. de civ . d. l. 1. c. 33. cicer. pro flacco . hab. 2. 11. is● . 47. 7 , 8 , 11. zeph. 1. 13 , 14 , 15. amos 3 6. lact. l. 2. c. 11. rev. 9. 20. the case of an oath of abjuration considered and the vote of the honourable house of commons vindicated in a letter. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1693 approx. 70 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 19 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61528 wing s5564 estc r19563 12221021 ocm 12221021 56403 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61528) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 56403) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 899:19) the case of an oath of abjuration considered and the vote of the honourable house of commons vindicated in a letter. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 36 p. [s.n.], london : 1693. reproduction of original in huntington library. attributed to edward stillingfleet. cf. bm. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng england and wales. -parliament. -house of commons. allegiance. oaths -great britain. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-05 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the case of an oath of abjuration considered : and the vote of the honorable house of commons vindicated . in a letter to a friend . london , printed for the author . 1693. sir , i was greatly amazed to hear you , the other day , so passionately concerned in behalf of the oath of abjuration ; as tho our whole stake and safety , depended on its passing on the nation . this convinc'd me , that it is not impossible for people to intend the same end by the most different means imaginable ; for i verily believe , there are not two men in england , that in their hearts do more sincerely love their present majesties , nor that , according to their poor capacities and stations , serve them better than you and i. and yet i tell you now , as i forbore not to tell you then , that i think an oath of abjuration , is as unlikely a thing to serve their present majesties , as any one thing in the world besides . you told me then moreover , that some good understanding people of your acquaintance were very much offended at the house of commons , for throwing out that bill twice , in two successive sessions , and that they were looked upon rather as enemies , than friends , to the present government . i told you then moreover , that your acquaintance might be both good and understanding people , but that they made very bold with the house of commons , and were not understanding enough in these affairs , to pass a true judgment on them ; and that it was a most pernicious thing , to look on all , that are not of our mind , as enemies . there being nothing more sure , than that two parties may do , as you and i do , differ exceedingly in the means of securing and supporting the government , and yet both wish and intend the securing and supporting of it ; as there is no doubt to be made , but both sides of the house of commons did . both sides may be right in their intention , i. e. intend the peace and welfare of the kingdom , tho the means they pitch upon , may be very different ; so different that the contrary side may fancy they are truly destructive of the end they aim at , without believing that the persons concerned , design any other than good , to their majesties and the kingdom . with this you seem'd to be for the present satisfied ; but since , i understand , you begin to change your mind again , and desire me to set down in writing , upon what reasons i ground my opinion of the mischief of an oath of abjuration , and send them to you , i have agreed to do so ; and i suppose , i shall sufficiently satisfie all your scruples , if i shall shew you these three things : first , that an oath of abjuration is altogether new and strange in england . secondly , that it is altogether needless . thirdly , that it is altogether impossible to be kept . 1. an oath of abjuration is altogether strange and new in england . the line of succession hath been as frequently interrupted in england , as in any hereditary kingdom in the world besides . and therefore there hath been as much need of an oath of abjuration here , as any where , and yet we have never had one . it is not for want of instances , but to spare your time and patience , that i run not up beyond the conquest , but will begin there . what right or title william the conqueror had to these kingdoms , every body knows as well as any body . the right of promise from edward the confessor , if it were true , as he pretended it , yet was no right at all ; for what power has a king of england of himself to give or bestow the kingdom to whom he pleases ? but however , he also gave it to harold on his death-bed . so the chron. saxon. ann. 1066. tunc haroldus comes capessit regnum , sicut rex ei c●ncesserat , omnesque ad id eum eligebant , & consecratus est in regem in festo epiphaniae . so chron. walt. hemingford , cap. 1. et juxta quod ipse rex edwante mortem statuerat , sibi successit in regnum haroldus . tho william of malmesbury and matth. paris , and others , tell us he seised upon the crown against the will of almost all the great men , and especially the bishops . extortâ à principibus fide , arripuit diadema . but let harold and the conqueror come to the crown how they could , it is manifest beyond dispute , that the right heir was then alive , who was edgar atheling , the son of edward , grandchild of edm. ironside . this edgar was not only heir to the crown by lineal descent , but design'd to succeed edward the confessor , by him himself , and sent for , for that purpose , from abroad , where he , his mother , and his sisters were ; and it was look'd upon to be so much his due , that he was actually set up king by some parts of the nation , insomuch that edwin and morcar , the great earls of those times , with aldred , archbishop of york , and the citizens of london , agreed thereto , and promised to stand by him . and the saxon chron. gives us an instance of the abbot of peterborough newly elected , being sent to edgar , as king , for confirmation . for ( says it ) the inhabitants of that country thought that he should be the king. but the noise of william's invasion , made the nation bethink themselves ; and the people that had been most forward to set up edgar , began to look upon him now as a defenceless youth , and not able to make head against so wise and hardy a prince as william was ; and therefore leaving him to shift as he could , they made their terms with the conqueror . the nation had had the same good intentions towards this poor prince edgar , upon the death of edward the confessor , and some had actually endeavoured to set him up ; but harold was more powerful both in friends and money , and stept into the throne before him , as did the conqueror this second time . the use i intend to make of this , will be , ( as you may easily foresee ) to shew you , that edgar had a title to the throne , in the general opinion of all english men ; and consequently , that he was a dangerous competitor to king william the conqueror . but notwithstanding this , king william , when he was crown'd by aldred ( the same aldred who would have set up edgar , and who has this character bestowed upon him by walt. hemingford , cap. 2. vir bonus & prudens , intelligensque cedendum esse tempori , & divine nequaquam resistendum ordinationi , ) took the oath of fealty of all that were concern'd , without any farther notice taken of edgar atheling above the rest , and carrying him with other lords and bishops over into normandy , he set him at liberty as soon as any of the others . and tho he afterwards gave both the conqueror and william rufus some disturbance , by his siding with the scots , and danes , and duke robert , yet both of them had him in their hands , and let him go again , without any farther mischief ; he lived for some time in both their courts , and what became of him at last , we are not certain . all that we know of it is from w. malmesbury , who making mention of him adds , lib. 2. pag. 25. qui post occisionem haroldi à quibusdam in regem electus est , & vario lusu fortunae rotatus nunc penè decrepitum diem ignobilis ruri agit . in the same place he says , that david , his sister margaret's son , was king of scotland , which was not before the year 1124. so that he lived at least to the age of seventy , if we allow him to be twelve at the death of harold , when he was thought unfit to reign , for want of years . and yet in all the reigns of these three kings , william the first , and second , and henry the first , there was no oath of abjuration ; no renouncing to the rightful title of edgar atheling . each of these princes receiv'd the oath of fealty and allegiance from their subjects , and looked no farther after the exclusion of edgar , than that oath did naturally carry them , which is far enough in all conscience , when honest people take it . 1087. when william the conqueror died , he left the duchy of normandy to his eldest son robert. ( mezeray is mistaken when he makes the father yield up the duchy to the son 1077 , when he was reconciled to him , upon his mounting him again upon his horse , when he had ignorantly met and overthrown him ) and england to his second son william rufus , and to henry his third son , a mighty summ of money , with a prophetical presage , that he would one day come to greater matters . rufus was then with his father , and before his funeral exequies were performed ( to secure himself the better of his appointed succession ) slipt over into england , and got himself crowned king , by lanfranc , archbishop of canterbury ; but he was hardly warm in his seat , before a great and deep conspiracy was form'd against him , in behalf of his elder brother robert , contriv'd and carried on especially by odo , bishop of baieux and earl of kent , his uncle , geofrey bishop of constance , and other great lords , intending to deliver up the king and kingdom into the hands of robert. this so startled and amazed rufus , that he thereupon calls all the english men together , and lays before them the danger he was in , promising the redress of many present grievances , and ample privileges to them and theirs , upon their assistance , which they consented to give , and accordingly , by their help , he pursued and utterly defeated his enemies , and became thereby enabled to forget his fair promises . robert in vain attempted to invade england , being repulsed with great loss by the king's ships and seamen ; and william , in his turn , made over for normandy , to do as much as robert had design'd ; but by the mediation of great men on both sides , the brothers came to an agreement , that such and such places should be delivered to each the other , and that whichsoever of the brothers died first , without children , the other should succeed him in all his estates : and to these covenants twelve of the most considerable men , on each side , were very solemnly sworn . this was done 1090 , and in 1094 , the brothers disagreed again , and all the fault was laid upon the king who again prepar'd for normandy , where each of them did a great deal of mischief to each other ; till , very luckily , the pope engag'd duke robert to take upon him the croisade , who being easily persuaded thereto ( as one who was always a light and giddy-headed prince ) he sent to the king , to acquaint him with his purpose , to conclude a peace , and to borrow money for that expedition , engaging his dukedom for it , to which the king assented readily , and carried him the money himself , and took possession of his pledge ; the money came to six thousand six hundred sixty six pound of silver : and robert behaved himself very honourably abroad , where he continued till the death of king william , 1100. in all these quarrels and conspiracies , occasioned by d. robert and his partisans , rufus desired , nor had , no other security of his subjects , than the oath of fealty and allegiance , which obliged them to be true to him , without excluding or abjuring robert ; and yet , i take it , robert was a very formidable competitor , and that such an oath was as necessary then , as it ever was to this day , well , this unfortunate robert was again put by the crown , as well by his absence , as by the cunning management of his younger brother henry , who got so well into the good graces of the lords and bishops , that he was crowned king before duke robert could return to make his claim . but , see the inconstancy of english-men ! henry had made large promises of amending all things that were amiss in the former reigns , and confirming the liberties of the church , and a great many other good things ; and thereupon was received by all the nobility and clergy with g●eat expressions ofjoy and satisfaction , and crowned by maurice bishop of london , ( for anselm had been driven away by w. rufus ) but before they could have time to see whether king henry would be as good as his word , they generally engaged in a conspiracy to call in robert , and deliver up the government to him : some of the king's ships went over to robert , and a great conflux of people there was gathered to him when he landed at portsmouth ; but before they came to try their fortune in the field of battel , an accord was made between them , by the mediation of some principal men of both sides ; by which it was agreed upon that robert should continue duke of normandy , and henry , king of england , paying his brother yearly three thousand marks ; that all adherents to robert should be clear'd , and enjoy their estates , and that whichsoever of the two died childless first , the other should succeed in both the kingdom and the dutchy ; with some other particulars , which were all of them sworn to ( as before ) by twelve great men on each side . this agreement was made in 1101 , and in a few years came to nothing ; for after many depredations and reprisals , skirmishes , and taking and retaking of towns in normandy , the fatal battel was fought in 1106 , where robert was taken prisoner , and never after obtained his liberty , but having his eyes put out ( a piece of cruelty much in use in those days ) he lived and died at cardiff , a miserable captive , in the year 1134 , and was buried at gloucester . an unhappy prince from the beginning to the end , if we except two or three years , spent to his honor in the holy-land . but i have nothing to do with any thing relating to him , but to remark , that notwithstanding the great and continual disturbance and alarms he gave both william ii , and henry , yet neither of them took an oath of abjuration from the nation , and it is the more remarkable in henry , because that robert had a son called william , a brave and noble youth , and a prince of great hopes , and like enough to prove a strong competitor to henry's children . he was afterwards greatly favoured by the french king , and married his queen's sister , and had the county of flanders , and other strong places put into his hands , by which he created great troubles to his uncle henry , till he was unfortunately wounded at a siege , and being unskilfully dressed , died in a monastery five days after , in the year 1128. but what did henry do with regard both to his brother robert and this vigorous prince , young william , who had sworn severely to revenge his father's injuries and eyes ? why he contented himself to swear his own son , who was also called william , into the succession of normandy , in the year 1115 , and of england in 1116 , having for that purpose called a parliament at salisbury . conventio optimatum & baronum totius angliae apud searesberiam xiv . kal. aprilis facta est , qui in praesentia regis henrici homagium filio suo wilielmo fecerunt , & fidelitatem ei juraverunt . sim. dunelm . an 1116. and , as annales de margan have it , 1116. filius regis henrici juratur ab omnibus haeres patris fieri . but in the year 1120 , william and the rest of the king's children , with a great company of people of quality , were unfortunately drowned , the ship being run upon a rock not far from the shoar from whence they put to sea , by the mariners and pilot , who were got drunk . the prince might have been saved , had he not hearkned over-tenderly to the cries and lamentations of one of his poor sisters that continued in the ship , whom thinking to take into his boat , so many of the ship leap'd presently into it , as sunk it immediately , and so they all perished together . the king had now but one daughter left , which was maud , first married to the emperor of germany , whose widow she became in the year 1125 , and afterwards , in 1127 , to geofry plantagenet earl of anjou ; but before the king sent his daughter away to this second husband , upon news of his nephew william's promotion to the earldom of flanders , and his attempting great matters by the assistance of the king of france , he was exceedingly distressed and troubled , and calling his parliament together ( saith brompton , thomas wikes , and chron. saxon. and every body else ) at westminster ( or , as others , at windsor ) he made both david king of scotland , all the archbishops , and bishops , abbots and great men , take the oath of fidelity , and do homage to his daughter , and her heirs lawfully begotten , in case himself should die without any issue male ; which they accordingly did ; and , amongst the rest , none forwarder to do it than stephen earl of blois , who either administred the oath himself to the rest , after he had taken it himself , or else contrived the form thereof ; for i know not well which is the construction of those words in tho. wikes's chronology , in the year 1127. non solum in persona propria sacramentum fidelitatis emisit , sed & aliis regni proceribus jurisjurandi formam praestruxit . but you see , i hope , plainly , that henry was apprehensive enough of the growing power of his nephew william , and yet thought fit to take no other security of the nation against him than a common oath of allegiance ; there was no talk or offers after an oath of abjuration , in those days ; tho it had been much to his purpose , and he had power enough had it been otherwise convenient . this oath of fidelity was again renewed to maud at northampton in 1131. habitoque non parvo procerum conventu apud northantonam priscam fidem apud eos qui dederant novavit , ab iis qui non dederant accepit , saith w. of malmesbury , hist. novel . l. 2. p. 177. which i mention not as if it were done out of fear of any particular person ( for william died , as i have said , in 1128 ) but , in all probability to exclude geofry her husband from ruling , with whom he was exceedingly offended . i have it from wil. of malmesbury who tells us , that when king henry lay on his death-bed , de successione interrogatus , filiae omnem terram suam citra & ultra mare legitima & perenni successione adjudicavit : marito ejus subiratus , quod eum & minis & injuriis aliquantis irritaverat . notwithstanding all this caution and security , and this last declaration of the dying king in favour of his daughter ; 1135 , stephen earl of blois , his nephew by his sister adeliza daughter of the conqueror , got over from normandy into england , and tho he was repulsed at dover , and by the men of kent , yet he was entertained by the londoners , and by the dexterous management of his brother the bishop of winton , who promised for him all that could be wanted or desired , he was crowned by the archbishop of canterbury , whose scruples about the former oath to maud were satisfied by the oath of a bold nobleman , who swore he heard king henry , on his death-bed , disinherit his daughter maud , and appoint e stephen to succeed him in the kingdom . some of our historians tell us , that there was but a poor show of bishops and great-men at the coronation , and that many ill omens were seen thereat ; others say otherwise , and tell us it was performed annuentibus praesulibus & próceribus regni , and that they pitch'd on stephen , because that maud had no children , and they wanted a considerable person to look after the affairs of the kingdom . but all of them in general cry out aloud upon the sudden change of the english nobility , had so lately sworn fidelity to maud , omnis anglia , quasi in ictu oculi , ei subjecta est , saith walt. hemingford , from malmesbury , c. 56. even robert of gloucester swore to stephen , tho with a very evil mind undoubtedly , because he could not otherwise be in any capacity of serving his sister-in-law maud and her son ( for now she was brought to bed of her son henry ) ; this reason wil. of malmesbury , his client , gives for him , he was afraid of his former oath to maud , and he was afraid he should never do her any service if he swore not to stephen , and therefore he did it , tho conditionally , that he should preserve his honor and his covenants . robert was the only man alive he feared , for he was wise and valiant to a wonder in those days , and he was glad to have any hold at all of such a man , and therefore accepted of his conditional homage . you shall take the words , and see what you can make of them your self , itaque homagium regifecit , sub conditione quadam , scilicet , quamdiu ille dignitatem suam integrè custodiret , & sibi pacta servaret : spectato enim jamdudum regis ingenio instabilitatem ejus fidei praevidebat . malmsb. hist. novel . l. 1. p. 179. i am greatly afraid , there are many roberts of gloucester now alive , that have taken the oaths to their present majesties , with no better design than to capacitate themselves to do them a shrewd turn , when it lies in their way ; although they see no shadow of unfaithfulness or ill design in them ; but this is a remark out of my way , which you will pardon . it is only to my purpose to say , that stephen contented himself with the ordinary oath of allegiance , tho maud was his competitor ; and put no nobleman or commoner upon adjuring her or hers by name , tho he were sensible that they must prove continual thorns in his side ; and upon those apprehensions , as soon as he was settled in his throne , he passed over with an army into france , with purpose only of subduing geofry of anjou , her husband , prospexerat'enim ( saith tho , wikes , 1136 , ) quod si imperatrix prolem de corpore suo generaret , bella sibi minime defutura , knowing full well that if she had children , he must look for little quiet . but children she had , and you know how troublesome this woman , with her son and brother robert , were to him for many years , the many miserie 's this poor kingdom endured under the time of their dissensions ( for in most wars a country finds but little difference between friends and enemies ) and the agreement made at last betwixt them . i will not insist on any of these matters : king stephen took all usual care to secure the crown to himself and his posterity ; but it went no farther than to take the common oath of allegiance to himself , and in 1152 , to cause the same to be taken to eustace his son. for so annales waverleienses 1152 , apud londoniam eustachio filio r. stephani fide & jurejurando universi comites & barones angliae se subdiderunt . he would have had him crowned , but the clergy , by order of the pope , opposed it strongly , and he could not carry his point , as gervasius tells us , in stephano , 1131. p. in the year 1152 , died stephen's wife , and in 1153 , eustace his son , a stomachful young prince ; so that stephen , consum'd almost with care and grief , and finding himself decay , and his adversary young henry daily increasing in riches and the favour of the people , began to incline to peace , which was agreed upon , you know , on condition that stephen should continue king during his natural life , and henry to succeed him : and that william , stephen's only remaining son , should be possessed of all his father's estate , whilst a private subject ; but he liv'd not long to enjoy it , dying in king henry's service , at the siege of tholouse , in the year 1159 : stephen himself went before him , dying in the year 1154. leaving peace , the greatest and most wanted blessing , to this distracted kingdom . consider , sir , i pray , whether an oath of abjuration , was not full as seasonable in this king stephen's case , as it can possibly be in any others , and then i will go on . henry ii , being possessed of the throne , took the usual oath of fidelity from his subjects , without any manner of regard had to william , stephen's son , who served him four years , and died at last , as i have said , in 1159. he reigned thirty five years , and endured great troubles and afflictions from an untoward queen , and most ungracious children , the eldest of which called henry ( sometimes called secundus , sometimes tertius , sometimes junior and minor ) he caused to be crowned king whilst himself lived , and quickly found good reason to repent him of such favour . but having no competitor for the crown , his troubles are nothing to my purpose , since he could have no occasion for an oath of abjuration : and therefore i have done with him , when i have observed to you , that notwithstanding the oath the nation took in general to his mother maud her self , yet henry succeeded stephen , without any manner of notice taken of her . polydor virgil makes her present at the treaty of agreement , but mentions no cession or yielding up her right ; no historian , i have seen , takes any notice of her at all ; and yet , undoubtedly , she took all those pains , in her wars with stephen for her self , and upbraided stephen and all his followers with perjury ; and yet she appears no ways concerned in the treaty , nor makes any manner of declaration that she absolved them of their oaths to her , or that she was willing they should transfer their allegiance to her son. perhaps they took these things for granted , because she put in no new claim at that time : all that we know further of her is , that she died , as some say , in the 13th or , as others , in the 14th year of her son henry's reign , who died hlmself in 1189 , and left his crown and kingdom uncontested to richard i , who was his eldest son then living . he was a brave prince , and , according to the superstitious humour of those times , engaged in the recovery of the holy sepulchre out of the hands of infidels , where he performed wonders , and was accounted one of the religious heroes of that age. but certainly he was very ill paid at home , for these his glorious pains abroad , by john his brother . most of our common historians are mistaken in representing these matters , and confound actions done at different times ; i shall take a little pains to set them in better order , and that in short , from roger hoveden , walt. hemingford , and john brompton , &c. when richard went into the east , he left the government of england in the hands of william longchamp , lord chancellor and bishop of ely , who ( for ought appears ) managed it with great fidelity to the king his master , but to the great dislike of john and his adherents , who made many grievous complaints of his tyrannick government , and seem resolved to have him laid aside at any rate ; the thing that offended john at the bottom was this , that the chancellor , being a man of great abilities and power , abetted and maintained the right of arthur of brettany , son and heir of geofry elder brother to john , and sent underhand to the king of scotland , who was his great uncle , for his protection and assistance , in case king richard should do otherwise than well in the holy-land ; protesting moreover to him , that by letters directed to him from sicily , king richard had appointed arthur his successor , if he should die . it is not very certain whether the chancellor acted thus in favour of young arthur , out of a good principle , as knowing him the rightful heir ; or with ambitious purpose of continuing in his great authority and regency , as he was likely to do , if a child succeeded ; but whatever the motive was to his asserting arthur's right , his doing so must needs be enough to make earl john his mortal enemy . the chancellor was a warm and haughty man , and imprudently administred an occasion of commotion , by commanding girard de camvilla to yield up to him the castle of lincoln , who ( having had it committed to his care by the king ) refus'd to do it , and immediately took part with john , whose ambitious restless temper took hold of this occasion to put himself in arms ; and , whilst the chancellor was besieging girard , he seized on the two castles of nottingham and tickill . so that now they came to open hostilities ; in which the chancellor finding himself the weaker , and knowing he had many mens persons about him , whose hearts were with john , he made his peace with him , upon the vile unworthy terms of forsaking arthur . but this was not what john wanted , which was his dègradation and removal ; to which the following passage ministred occasion , geofry archbishop of york was forbid ( for some cause or other ) by k. richard to enter england in three years space ; but he , unmindful of the king's command ( and some say of his own oath ) resolved to take the opportunity of the king's absence , and enter on his bishoprick , which attempting to do , at dover , he was watched by the chancellor's spies and taken from the altar of a church , whither he fled for refuge , and dragged from thence , and carried and committed to the constable of dover castle . this made a great noise , you may be sure , in those days , and opened the mouths of the clergy , with whose cries earl john fell in immediately ( tho no great friend to church-men , who are even with him in most of their histories ) and wrote to the chancellor to set the archbishop at liberty ; who refusing to do it , he raised a considerable army , and drove his enemy to great straits , and at last suffered him to transport himself out of the land ; having first , in the presence and with the consent of many bishops , judges , and great-men , and the citizens of london , decreed , that he was not fit to bear any rule , or live any longer in the kingdom . when this good company was got together , earl john resolved they should not part without a tast of his intentions , and therefore the same day both he and the archbishop of roan ( who was put into the chancellor's place , as one of the administrators of the kingdom ) and others of the king's justices granted to the citizens of london , habere communam suam ; and again in the same year , john and the archbishop of roan , with almost all the bishops , earls , and barons , swore they would most firmly and inviolably ( as long as it should please the king ) observe and keep communam illam . the glossary to the x. scriptores interprets communam by association and confederation , as if it were , that these lords and great folks took the citizens of london into council with them , and made them join with them in passing their decree and sentence on the chancellor . they did indeed do so ; but this is not enough methinks . i have the authority of a most excellent skilled person both in these and all other learned matters whatsoever , that communa signifies in the place , privileges , and immunities , and by the sense , i believe we should all of us construe it so : for by the passage , with its circumstances , it appears , that there was a combination of lords and bishops and the citizens of london , in favour of john , against any other successor . and the citizens of london on their part , swore faithful service [ took the oath of fidelity ] to king richard and his heirs , and engaged , that if he died without issue , they would receive john for their lord and king. and thereupon sware fidelity to him against all men , saving their oath to richard. radulph . de diceto , and joh. bromton make no mention of these londoners swearing ; but roger hoveden does ( in his annals , pag. 702. ) who lived and wrote in king john's days ; and to him i refer you , if you please . this makes me inclinable to interpret communam by something that the citizens of london liked , because they seemed to do a very bold and an unjust thing , in lieu of it : they took an oath of fidelity to one , who was neither heir by god's , nor by the laws of the land , nor yet by designation and appointment of the king then living , who was very angry at these proceedings , and spoke very hard words of his brother john ; and there is great reason to believe these strange doings ( as well as the departure of his enemy king philip of france ) hastened his return the sooner into england . but in his return he was unfortunately taken prisoner by the duke of austria , and delivered into the emperor's hands , and there continued sixteen or eighteen months . this opportunity his brother john laid hold on , and by the instigation of the french king , opened his purposes and sought the crown , sometimes giving out the king was dead , and sometimes that the emperor resolved never to let him go . ( and some historians tell us that the king of france , and john , made mighty offers to the emperor , either to detain him , or deliver him up into their hands , which he had much ado to resist . ) but the nobility opposed him constantly , and kept their faith inviolable to their king , to their great praise , and however careless and injurious they had been with respect to arthur's right of succession , yet they were very bold and faithful to their present king in possession ; insomuch that instead of delivering up the kingdom , and swearing allegiance to him , as he demanded , they very vigorously besieged him and his , in windsor-castle , and forc'd him to surrender that and other holds , and fly the kingdom ; which he did , and betook himself to his old friend the king of france , to whom he became liege-man , and did homage for normandy , which yet would not submit to john , but declared it self for its old master , whom they hoped to see at home again , and safe in a short time . and so they did ; for richard came and landed at sandwich in kent , and was joyfully receiv'd of all his subjects throughout the kingdom , excepting some few places which held out for john , which in a little time were reduc'd , and taken into mercy by the king , who , by the advice of the bishops , was again crown'd , with great pomp at winchester . this is a long history , you will think , tho i have greatly shortened it ; but whereto does it serve ? why some have confounded these two attempts of john , and made but one of them ; and some have only mentioned his attempt during his brother's imprisonment , which yet , you see , was a second undertaking , in pursuance of the first , which made way ( as he imagined ) for it . the use i make of it , is this , to shew you , that john , by this first treasonable attempt of causing people to swear fidelity to him , against the king's will , and without his knowledge , and when he was not so much as presumptive heir , must make him justly liable both to the king's anger , and to the punishment of the laws of the land ; but that his second attempt upon the crown made him undoubtedly a traitor , and not to be endur'd either by king or subject . i know not how a subject can become more dangerous , and to be suspected , than by having once been sworn into the succession , without his prince's knowledge and good will , and having afterwards demanded openly the crown , altho his king was then alive : and sure , his succeeding so well as he did the first time , and his attempting it the second time , must make him a dangerous competitor to the king , and fit to be excluded by an oath of abjuration . but nothing of this was thought upon . richard , after the reduction of the castles that held out in john's favour , summoned a parliament at nottingham , ( such as the parliament was then ) on the thirtieth of march 1194. [ trigesima die mensis martii feria quarta ricardus rex angliae celebravit primum concilii sui diem apud nottingham : as r. hoveden , pag. 737. ] where were present elianor the king's mother , the two archbishops , david the king of scotland's brother , the bishops and the barons : and on the day following , the king demanded justice should be done him , on his brother john , who against his oath of allegiance , had seised on his castles , destroyed his countries , both at home and abroad , and leagued against him with the king of france , his enemy . and it was adjudged , that earl john should be cited to appear within forty days , and stand to the law , and that if he did not — judicaverunt comitem johannem demeruisse regnum , saith hoveden . ipsum fratrem suum rex exhaeredavit . annal. waverl . an. 1194. omne jus pristinum & honorem impensum solenni judicio procerum suorum abjudicavit , saith j. brompton , from w. hemingford ( whom he constantly copies , and cites by the name of walter de giseburn , pag. 1278. lin . 19. ) judicio procerum omni honore privavit , saith h. knighton , l. 2. pag. 2408. but the annales de margan , ( put out by the most excellently learned dr. gale , in 1691 , ) go , to my thinking , a great way farther than all the rest . the passage is somewhat long , but remarkable enough to make you amends for the patience of reading it . thus then in the year m c xc ix . after richard's death , john his brother , in the octaves of easter , having entred upon the dukedom of normandy , coming over into england , was crowned king on ascension-day at westminster , may 27. against the judgment and decree of the archbishops , bishops , earls and barons , and all the rest of the great men of england , which they had passed at nottingham in the presence of king richard his brother , where for the treason he had acted against the king , and kingdom , in confederacy with the king of france , he was disinherited and depriv'd ( abjudicatus , which i cannot construe better ) not only of all the lands he had in england , but also of all honors which he might hope for , or expect to have from the crown of england . it was also decreed , that he should be summoned to appear , in such a space of time , within the king's courts , to answer and defend himself , if he could , upon the war and treason aforesaid , raised and committed whilst his brother was abroad , and detain'd in germany ; but he came not himself , nor sent any other to answer for him . upon which , three earls , his peers , were sent to the court of france , there to convict him of the same treason ; but neither did he make his appearance there , or answer for himself . and yet against this judgment and decree , he is crowned king ; william de breuse , together with his faction , pressing instantly for his coronation . in which coronation all that were concerned , offended grievously , as well because john had no right to the kingdom , arthur , his elder brother's son , being then alive , as also , that if he had been heir of the kingdom , yet by and for the above repeated treason , he had been deprived and difinherited . this is a famous passage , and makes very much for a bill of exclusion , at least , if i mistake not ; and there was so much in it , that when the pope's legat was dissuading the king of france from sending his son lewis into england ( as the barons and great men had by express messengers desir'd him to do ) and told him , england then was s. peter's patrimony , by the resignation of king john ; the king of france told him , that england never was john's to give , ( as well because no king can give away his kingdom , without their consent , as also ) because he had forfeited all right to the crown ( if right he had had ) by his treasons against richard , of which he stood convict , and had had sentence passed upon him , as a traitor , by hugh de pudsey , bishop of durham . thus matth. westm. tho matth. paris represents it a little otherwise . but tho the king and parliament proceeded to an act of exclusion , yet they put no one upon abjuring john by name . they thought it enough to secure the present king by an oath of allegiance , and to put by john from succeeding him ; but no one ever was constrain'd to swear he never should , nor ought to , be king. they hurt john as much as they could , by freeing the subject from swearing to him ; but they intended not to hurt the subjects , by compelling them to swear against him . methinks there is great deal of difference betwixt these two points ; and that 's the use i would have you make of this long story , which i will conclude , when i have added , that tho john afterwards did actually succeed his brother richard ; tho arthur had been declared successor to richard ; tho it was the opinion of all the world , both abroad and at home , that arthur was the undoubted heir of the crown ; tho many nobles sided with him ; tho he claim'd the crown himself openly , and gave john abundance of trouble , and alarm'd him daily ; yet did john never attempt to get him abjured by the nation , nor to secure himself any other way than by the common oath of allegiance . he afterwards caught him , and in all likelyhood ordered him to be made away privately ; but that was nothing to the people of england . he died , 't is thought , about 1203 , but his sister ellinor , commonly called the damosel of britanny , lived till after 1240. tho she undoubtedly was the heiress of the crown , if the nation had regarded the lineal and immediate succession , as much in those , as in these latter days , which it is manifest they did not . the long and troublesome reign of henry the third , the times of edward the first and second afford me nothing to my present purpose : they had no rivals or competitors to fear , nor consequently any occasion of securing themselves by any oath of abjuration . when edward the third was crowned king , upon the deposition of his father , tho edmond of kent , and others , attempted to deliver him from his imprisonment , and re-instate him again , yet the young king sought not his safety and establishment by any oath of abjuration of his father . it was enough , that the several estates of the kingdom , had by deputies appointed for the purpose , solemnly renounced their allegiance to him , and chosen his son to reign in his stead and taken the usual oath of allegiance to him ; this was then esteemed sufficient security for the young king , without concerning the whole kingdom in an oath of abjuration . and this was the case of henry the fourth , when richard the second was deposed , the crown was entail'd by parliament on him and his sons , but there was no abjuring richard , by an oath to be taken by the subjects . the estates of the realm deposed him very solemnly ( even without any notice taken of his resignation , though after he had made it ) objecting such and such crimes , as deserv'd it ; which they might well have spar'd , and surely would have done it , even for pities sake , if they had not intended thereby to shew and exercise a power they thought inherent in them , on such extraordinary occasions . i will not trouble you with the instance of henry vi. with regard to richard duke of york , who made claim upon him ; nor of edward iv. with regard to henry vi. neither of which princes thought of securing themselves by any oath of abjuration . because you may say , there was no need of their doing so , since both of them looked upon themselves as rightful possessors of the throne ; and what need was there of causing the subjects to abjure the right of one who had no right at that time ; nor , ( as they thought ) at any time besides ? for i make no question but henry vi. look'd on himself as most rightful king ; and truly the succession of three generations , and the possession , for above threescore years , of royalty , might have made a more devout and conscientious prince than henry was ( if it could be ) believe so too . neither will it serve to my purpose , to instance in richard iii. with regard to the son and daughter of his elder brother george duke of clarence , because he confided so far in the attaindour of the father , that he had no suspicion of the children ; he bastardiz'd , depos'd , and murther'd , the children of his brother edward iv. but he thought the act of parliament had secur'd him against the family of clarence , and therefore was regardless of them . we have no reason to think he acted out of any better principle , towards them . and it was not then perhaps so clear in law , as since , that the crown takes away all defects and stops in blood ; and that from the time the king assumes the crown , the fountain is cleared , and all attaindors and corruption of blood discharged ; which was the resolution of the judges , in the case of henry vii . the instances i have mentioned before , from edgar atheling to richard ii. are enow , and sufficient to my purpose , or none are . and i hope from them , you will be able to see , what i design'd to shew you , in the first place , that , though we have had so many occasions , where an oath of abjuration was full as reasonable , as convenient , and as necessary , as it can possibly be at this day , yet we have never had one . and therefore , that an oath of abjuration would be altogether strange and new in england . and if you do not also see , as it were by the by , from these collections , that the oaths of fidelity and allegiance , have been constantly imposed on , and taken by , the subjects of the land ( concern'd to take them ) . to such persons as were by the consent and approbation of the three estates of the kingdom , invested with the regal power , although they could not lay claim thereto , by lineal and legal succession : if you do not see this , i shall think i have represented matter but confusedly . believe me then , in short , an oath of allegiance was always taken , but an oath of abjuration , never . i am now , in the second place , to shew you , according to my skill , that an oath of abjuration is altogether needless . if it be needful , it is only needful to the securing their present majesties in the possession of the throne , which they ( in our opinion i am sure ) fill most deservedly . but this is not to be done by an oath of abjuration , if it will not be done by an oath of allegiance . and i may well presume , that such as refuse the oath of allegiance , will never take an oath of abjuration ; so that here will be no new subjects gain'd we may be sure ; and if it will neither gain new subjects , nor fasten the old ones closer to their majesties interest , where is the necessity of imposing it ? do their majesties , i pray , want any thing more than allegiance and fidelity from all , or any of their subjects , in the respective stations they stand related to their princes in ? no one , i think , will say they do . if all men therefore would fulfil their oaths of allegiance and fidelity , what need would there be of imposing any new ones ? it is not taking new oaths , but keeping the old ones , that must secure their present majesties ; and will any man that does not make a conscience of fulfilling the oaths he has taken , be scrupulous of either taking , or breaking , any new ones ? what should hinder one from taking an oath of abjuration , who has no regard to his oath of allegiance ? and what security can you have against the breach of a second oath , from one who shews apparently he values not his first ? do you not therefore see that such as knowingly break their allegiance oath , will take at last ( though not without some kind of scruple neither ) the oath of abjuration and break it , when it is convenient , full as knowingly ? we see men , frequently , that are nice and squeamish , with respect to some offences , who yet make very bold with others , altogether as heinous ; but it is seldom seen that a man grows tenderer in a point wherein he has once or twice : offended . he who has taken the oath of allegiance to their majesties , and yet will comfort , and abett , and correspond with any of their enemies , will take the oath again , and proceed to whatever oath you shall impose , and still retain the same mind , and pursue the same . design ; and he may do it all , upon the same principle , by which he acts , when he breaks his oath of allegiance . so that an oath of abjuration , will neither gain their majesties any new friends , nor fix the old ones faster to them , nor yet discover any old or new enemies . and what is an oath good for , that will answer to none of these ends and purposes ? that will neither discover truth nor falshood ? that will neither make nor keep . men honester or more loyal than they were before , nor yet prevent them from being false and traiterous , or shew us when they are so ? i make no doubt but this is the pretence and plea for an oath of abjuration , that it will discover who are enemies to the present government ; and this is that which may make it appear most reasonable to be imposed . if it will not therefore do this , it will do nothing , or it will do mischief . this i conclude it will never do ( i. e. discover who are enemies to the government ) for this reason . because ( supposing all along , that none will take an oath of abjuration , who have refused to take the oath of allegiance , and therefore that they alone who have taken the oath of allegiance , will take the abjuration oath ) they who have taken the oath of allegiance malâ fide , who design ( or whether they design or no , do actually do it ) to serve and succour the late king , will also certainly take the abjuration oath . they who have falsified their faith to king william and queen mary , in favour of the late king will not stand out upon another oath , by which they shall not only lose perhaps a beneficial office , but also incapacitate themselves for either hurting their present majesties , or serving their late master . this i have before shewed , and it is not in man to find out , or assign , one tolerable reason why they should not do it . will therefore any such persidious men as these be discovered by an oath of abjuration ? will they not rather be enabled to do more mischief by being more trusted for such an oath , which they esteem and will keep just as they did the other ? so that the king and queens enemies will lie as safe and close under an oath of abjuration , as under an allegiance oath : for what , i would know , does the most solemn and tremendous oath signifie , unless the party think himself oblig'd in conscience to observe it ? and if he do not think himself oblig'd in conscience , to observe and keep his oath of allegiance , what is there that should tie an abjuration oath upon him ? for the tie and sanction of both these oaths must be the same , and the breach of them must be alike criminal , and will be punished alike , in both worlds , inasmuch as a man is equally perjur'd in little and in great matters : and if any man will shew how he may safely violate his oath of allegiance , with a good conscience , i will do as much for him , for the violation of the strictest oath of abjuration , in the world. i hope you perceive then , that they who will take an oath of allegiance to their present majesties , and make no manner of conscience of performing it , but actually serve , and correspond with their enemies , will also make no bones of taking and breaking an oath of abjuration ; which is the reason from whence i conclude an oath of abjuration will not serve to discover the king and queens enemies , which yet it certainly pretends to do . they are , it seems , to be discovered by refusing the oath ; but they intend to take the oath , and where is the discovery ? well , but will all that take the oath of allegiance take the oath of abjuration ? no , unquestionably no. will not therefore those who refuse it , be thereby discovered to be enemies to the present government ? i say again no. they will not be discovered to be enemies , because they will not be thereby its enemies . let us , for once divide the people that have taken the oath of allegiance to their majesties into , 1. such as have taken and kept it bona side . 2. such as have taken and broken it wittingly and willingly , and with an evil mind . of these latter , we have seen , no manner of good can be expected . they will neither be made good subjects , by a new oath , nor discovered to be bad ones by it . a new oath will therefore only affect such as have taken the oath of allegiance bonâ fide , and kept it very honestly . and is it likely that they who have done so should be enemies to the government ? i grant you , that a great many scrupled and considered long , before they ventur'd on the oaths ; but are not scruple and consideration tokens of a good and honest mind ? and if after scruple and consideration , they took the oaths , and since have kept them well and honestly , what reason is there to think , or call , these people enemies to the government , though they should go no farther ? the legislative power imposed the oath of allegiance on the subject , and intended it for the security and establishment of the present government ; the subject takes the oath and keeps it faithfully , how is he then an enemy ? my friend desires me to walk a mile with him , to conduct him homewards , and see him safe through such a thieving lane , and i consent ; and when he comes to the miles end , his fears grow greater , and he desires me to walk another mile , but i tell him , it is late , and i can go no farther without inconveniency and danger to my self , and for this he quarrels me , and accounts me his enemy . i leave you to judg with what reason . i did what he desir'd at first , and thought , with all his foresight and distrust , would be sufficient to secure him ( and so did all that passed that way before him ) but i can do no more , and be secure my self . sure , though i can no longer serve him , yet i have served him hitherto , and may deserve a better name than enemy . what think you of the application ? must those be enemies to the present government , who took the oath of allegiance to their majesties , which was all that was required and thought sufficient for their safety , and have all along kept it inviolable , and served them faithfully and diligently ; must these be reckon'd enemies , because they will not also take an oath of abjuration ? will therefore an oath of abjuration discover who are the king and queens enemies ? but that i may not seem to deny every thing to an oath of abjuration , after having shewn you what i think it will not discover , i will now shew you , what , i think , it will discover . and first , it will discover the nakedness of the land ; it will discover the distress and straits , we find our selves reduc'd to , when we must have recourse to such extremities . when that which secures all other governments in the world besides , and that which has secured our own , as well as any other , for so many hundreds of years ( viz. an oath of allegiance to the possessors of the throne ) will not secure , or be thought sufficient to secure , the present government , on what foundation will the world about us think we stand ? they have seen us choose , and place upon the throne , our princes , with all good liking and affection possible : and they will see us now , forc'd to be chain'd to our obedience , and tied down groveling on the ground for fear of rising up against them . this posture will not please our friends abroad , who understand our generous tempers better ; they will fear the effects of such unusual bonds . and for our enemies abroad , they undoubtedly will do , as our enemies at home do , rejoyce exceedingly , at such an oath , the jacobites ( as all the discontented disaffected people are now call'd ) have hitherto shewn themselves but puny politicians ; their designs have neither wanted malice nor barbarity , but they have laid and manag'd them , with so much weakness and simplicity , that they seem to be infatuated very much : but yet they are wise enough to foresee the advantages they are like to reap from the distractions an oath of abjuration will undoubtedly produce amongst us . and though some of them may be set to decry it publickly , as a most abominable unheard-of thing , and others of them , in their weakness , truly believe it is so , yet the managers of the party , and more understanding people amongst them , do underhand abett , and favour it exceedingly , well knowing they shall find their account therein . this is one thing an oath of abjuration will discover , it will discover our distress . secondly , it will discover , who can serve the king no longer ; that is certain : we shall see thereby , who they are , that can pay their majesties no more than allegiance and fidelity ; that is , who can pay no more , than has at any time been paid , to all or any of their predecessors , for above six hundred years ; no more than any of their predecessors have at any time demanded ; this we shall see , and these discoveries will be made thereby . but what shall we get by such discoveries ? they will please no good subjects ; there will be little joy in seeing a great number of good people , that serve their present majesties with faithfulness , and honesty , and diligence , and with affection too , dispossess'd of their employments , and incapacitated to serve them any longer : for to be sure , no other but the honest , faithful , and the conscientious will be dispossess'd thereby . no false subjects , none that can play with an allegiance-oath , will forfeit any thing for fear of an abjuration-oath . an abjuration-oath will therefore discover those who can serve their majesties as far as an oath of allegiance can carry them , but no farther ; and that is a second discovery , but such a one , as no good english man can desire to make , in your opinion . thirdly , an abjuration-oath , will discover , it is hoped — a short passage to the west and east indies — a fresh spanish wreck — a new and ready way to benesicial offices , and great preferments . if it do not lay open the road to good employments , by new vacancies , it will be good for just nothing . if those who take the allegiance-oath , should chance to take ( as who can tell ? ) the abjuration-oath , and continue as they were , you would hear no more talk of its great security , and tendency to the establishment of the present government . if this could be foreseen , an oath of allegiance would suffice ( in their opinion ) for any king or queen in christendom . if you think , sir , i go too far in this matter , i retract . i had rather much , be mistaken in my guesses , than that any considerable body of english gentlemen should prefer so vile and selfish a design , to the peace and welfare of their natural country . but if you knew this part of mankind as well as i do , you would still fear , that the way to offices and good preferments , was one of the discoveries design'd to be made by an oath of abjuration , by a great many people . but , to draw to a conclusion of this head ; an oath of abjuration must be altogether needless , if it will effect no greater matters to the security of the present government , than an oath of allegiance will do . now , though all the men in england who have taken the oath of allegiance , should also take the oath of abjuration , yet it is from the oath of allegigiance and fidelity , the government must look for , and find its security , and not from the oath of abjuration . for he who has sworn allegiance and fidelity to king william and queen mary , has sworn , he will obey and serve them according to his power , and shew himself a good and faithful subject to them in the respective post and station , he is in . he is not only tied thereby to live peaceably and quietly under their government , without offending against their laws , or doing any thing to their prejudice , but he is tied to activity in their behalf and defence , if his post and station be such as requires him to be active . no one , that in good conscience took the oath to their present majesties can find himself at liberty to serve , by any ways or means , one that would certainly dethrone them . this is , undoubtedly , the least that an oath of allegiance can do , that it ties the hands of all that take it , from lending any manner of aid or assistance to the late king james . but if his post be active , he is farther oblig'd thereby to be active in their defence . if a privy councellor , a bishop , and a general , take the oath of allegiance to king william and queen mary , they are undoubtedly oblig'd thereby , to advise faithfully and keep the secrets , to pray for the prosperity , and fight the battles , of them . so that as far as , and wherever , the office requires activity , the oath obliges to it : and all the security a prince can expect must come and arise from the obligation of such an oath . on the other hand , what would it signifie , or contribute , to the security of their present majesties , that a man should swear they were the legal , lineal , just , and rightful possessors of the crown , and renounce , abjure , and disclaim , all right and title of the late king james thereto ; unless he held himself oblig'd , by virtue of his oath of allegiance , to keep and defend them in their present possession , to the best of his power , against all claimers whatsoever ? i know there is a great deal of difference , betwixt an oath of allegiance and fidelity simply such , and an oath of allegiance which is also declarative of right . but the difference does not lie , in this , that an oath declarative of right , is of greater security to the prince , than an oath of allegiance . without such declaration . for he who takes an oath of allegiance , gives him●●●f to whom he swears , a right to his allegiance for the time to come , although he may be suppos'd to have had no right to it before , and therefore owes the prince as much allegiance after his oath , as if he had in the oath acknowledged him to be the most rightful prince in the world. as if a man oblige himself by oath to pay another an hundred pound , he is as strongly oblig'd to pay it him , by virtue of his oath , as if he had truly borrowed it in time past of him . the oath has given the other a right to the mony , and by the oath the promiser is oblig'd to pay it . i do not say , that a man would not choose , if he could , rather to have a double right to his mony , both that of debt , and that of oath , than a single one of oath ; but i say that an oath , ( if the man be able and conscientious ) will as certainly secure the mony to the other , as both an oath and debt . by this i mean to say , that the oath of allegiance is of it self as great security to the prince , as if a man should withal both recognize the princes right , and abjure , and renounce to the title and right of any other . because the security arises to the prince from the positive engagement of the subject to do something for him , to do nothing against him , to pay him service and obedience , and to defend him against his enemies , to his power ; and not from acknowledging him to be the rightful prince , and swearing that another has no right to his allegiance , which may be true , but signifie nothing to his security . it is therefore evident , that all the security that can arise to the prince , depends upon the honest taking , and the honest keeping of the oath of allegiance , which implies obedience and assistance ; and that he who hath taken that oath with good intent , hath thereby given himself a bondsman , to pay obedience and assistance , which is as much as any prince can either want , or have , from all the recognitions and acknowledgments of right that can be made . and these are the considerations upon which i ground my second conclusion , that an oath of abjuration is altogether needless . it will not secure a king where an oath of allegiance will not . it will make no new friends . it will fix no old ones faster . it will discover no enemies . it will do nothing but mischief . iii. i have only now to shew you , in the third place , that an oath of abjuration is impossible to be kept . i have already considered the abjuring the right and title of the late king in the foregoing article , and shewn the doing so ( tho done with good faith ) would prove no manner of security to their present majesties . the other part of abjuration is of his person and government ; as if we should swear — we will not have this man to reign over us . i say such an abjuration-oath is , or may be , impossible to be kept ; and therefore should not be imposed . for if he should come in by conquest , how can any single subject hinder him ? if the obstinate fight at landen had determin'd of that valuable life , upon which our safeties do all so much depend ; if god in his anger should remove our excellent princess ( neither of which things were or are any way impossible ) what would become of us ? if therefore we mean any thing more by abjuring his person , than that we wish he may never return , and that we will contribute neither money , counsel , neither intelligence , nor corporal aid , we must mean no sense , for all besides is no sense ; and if we mean nothing but this , we certainly mean and intend this , by our oaths of allegiance and fidelity ; for they exact as much as this comes to , at our hands ; to abjure him beyond this , is as if a man should take an oath , never to have a fever , which yet he cannot possibly prevent ; he may promise safely , that he does not covet it , that he will live temperately , and pray to god to keep it from him , but he can't forswear its seizing on him ; and when it comes he must be patient under it . and sure , it would be a hardship on a man , to have more than this required , when 't is impossible he should perform more . this , sir , is my sense and opinion of an oath of abjuration . if it hit not with yours , or any man as wise and good , you will pardon it . if it convince any one otherwise minded , if it confirm and settle any one in the like ; in a word , if it will do any good ; if it will prevent any evil or confusion , if it will any ways tend to the security of their present majesties , and the prosperous continuance of their government over us , i shall be glad , and think my time and pains well spent . and whether it do any of this or no , i must be contented ; i know i design'd it well , and i know moreover , that if i err in my judgment , i err with good company , even with the major part of the honorable house of commons , in two successive sessions , whose judgment i must needs prefer to the best and most understanding acquaintance you can possibly have . i am , sir , your affectionate humble servant . finis . the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese, in his primary visitation begun at worcester, sept. 11, 1690 stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1691 approx. 103 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 30 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61530 wing s5565a estc r17405 12727921 ocm 12727921 66382 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61530) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 66382) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 369:11) the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese, in his primary visitation begun at worcester, sept. 11, 1690 stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [6], 52 p. printed for henry mortlock ..., london : 1691. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng church of england -pastoral letters and charges. church of england -clergy. visitations, ecclesiastical -england. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 jonathan blaney sampled and proofread 2004-04 jonathan blaney text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese , in his primary visitation , begun at worcester , sept. 11. 1690. london , printed for henry mortlock , at the phenix in s. paul's church-yard . m dc xc i. to the reverend clergy of the diocese of worcester . my brethren , what i lately delivered among you in the several places of my visitation , and what i have since thought fit in some particulars to add , i have here put together , and sent it to you , that it might remain with you , not only as an instance of my duty , but as a monitor of your own . and i may reasonably hope , as well as desire , that the frequent reading and considering the things i here recommend to you , will make a deeper impression on your minds , than a mere transient discourse ; for i know nothing will more effectually preserve the honor and interest of the church of england , than a diligent and conscientious discharge of the duties of our several places . in this time of general liberty , our adversaries , of all kinds , think themselves let loose upon us ; and therefore we have the more reason to look to our selves , and to the flock committed to our charge . yet , i do not question , but through the goodness of god , and the serious and vigorous application of our minds to the great business of our high and holy calling , that church which we so justly value , will escape sinking in the quick-sands , as it hath hitherto , being dashed against the rocks . if we behave our selves with that prudence and zeal and circumspection which becomes us , i hope the inclinations of the people will never be made use of as an argument against us . for , although in a corrupt age , that be one of the weakest arguments in the world ( if it be true ) and only shews the prevalency of folly and faction ; yet there is no such way to prevent the spreading of both , as our constant care to instruct our people in the main duties of religion , and going before them in the ways of holyness and peace . in the following discourse , i have first endeavoured to assert and vindicate the authority of bishops in the christian church ; and in as few words , and with as much clearness as i could , i have proved their apostolical institution . and the judgment and practice of the universal church from the apostles times , will prevail with all unbyas'd persons above any modern violent inclinations to the contrary . in the next place i have recommended to you such things , which i am sure are much for the churches service and honour , as well as our own , and therefore , i hope you will the more regard them . in the last place , i have made it my design to clear several parts of the ecclesiastical law , which concerns church-men , and have shewed the nature , force , and extent of it ; and how agreeable it is to the common law of england . in these things , my aim was to do something towards the good of this church , and particularly of this diocese . and that the glory of god , the salvation of souls , and holiness and peace may be promoted therein , is the hearty prayer of westminst . jan. 33. 1690 / 1. your affectionate brother , and fellow-servant to our common lord , ed. wigorn. my brethren , this being my primary visitation , i thought it fitting to acquaint my self with the ancient as well as modern practice of episcopal visitations , and as near as i could , to observe the rules prescribed therein , with respect to the clergy , who are now summon'd to appear . and i find there were two principal parts in them , a charge and an enquiry . the charge was given by the bishop himself , and was called admonitio episcopi , or allocutio ; wherein he informed them of their duty , and exhorted them to perform it . the enquiry was made according to certain articles drawn out of the canons , which were generally the same ; according to which the juratores synodi ( as the ancient canonists call them ; or testes synodales ) were to give in their answers upon oath ; which was therefore called juramentum synodale ; for the bishop's visitation was accounted an episcopal synod . the former of these is my present business ; and i shall take leave to speak my mind freely to you , this first time , concerning several things which i think most useful , and fit to be considered and practised by the clergy of this diocess . for , since it hath pleased god , by his wise and over-ruling providence , ( without my seeking ) to bring me into this station in his church , i shall esteem in the best circumstance of my present condition , if he please to make me an instrument of doing good among you . to this end , i thought it necessary in the first place , most humbly to implore his divine assistance , that i might both rightly understand , and conscientiously perform that great duty which is incumbent upon me ; for without his help , all our thoughts are vain , and our best purposes will be ineffectual . but god is not wanting to those who sincerely endeavour to know , and to do their duty ; and therefore in the next place , i set my self ( as far as my health and other occasions would permit ) to consider the nature and extent of my duty ; with a resolution not to be discouraged , altho i met with difficulties in the performance of it . for such is the state and condition of the world , that no man can design to do good in it ; but when that crosses the particular interests and inclinations of others , he must expect to meet with as much trouble as their unquiet passions can give him . if we therefore consulted nothing but our own ease , the only way were to let people follow their humors and inclinations , and to be as little concerned as might be , at what they either say or do . for if we go about to rowze and awaken them , and much more to reprove and reform them , we shall soon find them uneasie and impatient ; for few love to hear of their faults , and fewer to amend them . but it is the peculiar honour of the christan religion , to have an order of men , set apart , not merely as priests , to offer sacrifices ( for that all religions have had ) but as preachers of righteousness , to set good and evil before the people committed to their charge ; to inform them of their duties , to reprove them for their miscarriages ; and that , not in order to their shame , but their reformation : which requires not only zeal , but discretion , and a great mixture of courage and prudence , that we may neither fail in doing our duty , nor in the best means of attaining the end of it . if we could reasonably suppose , that all those who are bound to tell others their duties , would certainly do their own , there would be less need of any such office in the church as that of bishops ; who are to inspect , and govern , and visit , and reform those who are to watch over others . but since there may be too great failings even in these ; too great neglect in some , and disorder in others ; too great proneness to faction and schism , and impatience of contradiction from mere equals ; therefore s. jerom himself grants , that to avoid these mischiefs , there was a necessity of a superior order to presbyters in the church of god ; ad quem omnis ecclesiae cura pertineret , & schismatum seminatollerentur ; as he speaks , even where he seems most to lessen the authority of bishops . but whatever some expressions of his may be , ( when the bishop of jerusalem and the roman deacons came into his head ) his reasons are very much for the advantage of episcopal government . for can any man say more in point of reason for it , than that nothing but faction and disorder followed the government of presbyters , and therefore the whole christian church agreed in the necessity of a higher order , and that the peace and safety of the church depends upon it ; that if it be taken away , nothing but schisms and confusions will follow . i wish those who magnifie s. jerom's authority in this matter , would submit to his reason and authority both , as to the necessity and usefulness of the order of bishops in the church . but beyond this , in several places , he makes the bishops to be successors of the apostles , as well as the rest of the most eminent fathers of the church have done . if the apostolical office , as far as it concerns the care and government of churches , were not to continue after their decease , how came the best , the most learned , the nearest to the apostolical times , to be so wonderfully deceived ? for if the bishops did not succeed by the apostles own appointment , they must be intruders and usurpers of the apostolical function ; and can we imagine the church of god would have so uniuersally consented to it ? besides , the apostles did not die all at once ; but there were successors in several of the apostolical churches , while some of the apostles were living ; can we again imagine , those would not have vindicated the right of their own order , and declared to the church , that this office was peculiar to themselves ? the change of the name from apostles to bishops , would not have been sufficient excuse for them ; for the presumption had been as great in the exercise of the power without the name . so that i can see no medium , but that either the primitive bishops did succeed the apostles by their own appointment and approbation , ( which irenaeus expresly affirms , qui ab apostolis ipsis instituti sunt episcopi in ecclesiis ) or else those who governed the apostolical churches after them , outwent diotrephes himself ; for he only rejected those whom the apostle sent ; but these assumed to themselves the exercise of an apostolical authority over the churches planted and settled by them . but to let us see how far the apostles were from thinking that this part of their office was peculiar to themselves , we find them in their own time , as they saw occasion , to appoin r others to take care of the government of the churches , within such bounds as they thought fit . thus timothy was appointed by st. paul at ephesus , to examine the qualifications of such as were to be ordained ; and not to lay hands suddenly on any ; to receive accusations , if there were cause , even against elders , to proceed judicially before two or three witnesses ; and if there were reason , to give them a publick rebuke . and that this ought not to be thought a slight matter , he presently adds , i charge thee before god , and the lord jesus christ , and the elect angels , that thou observe these things , without prefetring one before another , doing nothing by partiality . here is a very strict and severe charge for the impartial exercise of discipline in the church upon offenders . and although in the epistle to titus , he be only in general required to set in order the things that are wanting , and to ordain elders in every city , as he had appointed him ; yet we are not to suppose , that this power extended not to a jurisdiction over them when he had ordained them . for if any of those whom he ordained ( as believing them qualified according to the apostles rules ) should afterwards demeam themselves otherwise ; and be self willed , froward , given to wine , brawlens , covetous , or any way scandalous to the church , can we believe that titus was not as well bound to correct them afterwards , as to examine them before ? and what was this power of ordination and jurisdiction , but the very same which the bishops have exercised ever since the apostles times ? but they who go about to unbishop timothy and titus ; may as well unscripture the epistles that were written to them ; and make them only some particular and occasional writings , as they make timothy and titus to have been only some particular and occasional officers . but the christian church preserving these epistles , as of constant and perpetual use , did thereby suppose the same kind of office to continue , for the sake whereof those excellent epistles were written : and we have no greater assurance that these epistles were written by st. paul , than we have that there were bishops to succeed the apostles in the care and government of churches . having said thus much to clear the authority we act by , i now proceed to consider the rules by which we are to govern our selves . every bishop of this church , in the time of his consecration , makes a solemn profession , among other things , that he will not only maintain and set forward , as much as lies in him , quietness , love and peace among all men ; but that he will correct and punish such as be unquiet , disobedient and criminous within his diocess , according to such authority as he hath by god's word , and to him shall be committed by the ordinance of this realm . so that we have two rules to proceed by , viz. the word of god , and the ecclesiastical law of this realm . ( 1. ) by the word of god ; and that requires from us , diligence , and care , and faithfulness , and impartiality , remembring the account we must give , that we may do it with joy , and not with grief . and we are not merely required to correct and punish , but to warn and instruct , and exhort the persons under our care , to do those things which tend most to the honour of our holy religion , and the church whereof we are members . and for these ends there are some things i shall more particularly recommend to you. ( 1. ) that you would often consider the solemn charge that was given you , and the profession you madeof yourresolution to do yourduty at your ordination . i find by the provincial constitution of this church , that the bishops were to have their solemn profession read over to them twice in the year , to put them in mind of their duty . and in the legatine constitutions of otho , ( 22 h. 3. ) the same constitution is renewed , not merely by a legatine power , but by consent of the archbishops , and bishops of both provinces ; wherein it is declared , that bishops ought to visit their diocesses at fit times , correcting and reforming what was amiss , and sowing the word of life in the lord's field ; and to put them the more in mind of it , they were twice in the year to have their solemn profession read to them ; it seems then , that profession contained these things in it ; or else the reading that could not stir them up to do these things . what the profession was which presbyters then made at their ordination , we have not so clear an account , but in the same council at oxford , 8 h. 3. it is strictly enjoined , that all rectors and vicars should instruct the people committed to their charge , and feed them , pabulo verbi dei , with the food of gods word ; and it is introduced with that expression , that they might excite the parochial clergy to be more diligent in what was most proper for those times . and if they do it not , they are there called canes muti : and lyndwood bestows many other hard terms upon them , which i shall not mention ; but he saith afterward , those who do it not , are but like idols , which bear the similitude of a man , but do not the offices proper to men. nay , he goes so far as to say , that the spiritual food of god's word is as necessary to the health of the soul , as corporal food is to the health of the body . which words are taken out of a preface to a canon in the decretals de officio jud. ordinarii , inter caetera . but they serve very well to shew how much even in the dark times of popery , they were then convinced of the necessity and usefulness of preaching . these constitutions were slighted so much , that in 9 edw. i the offices of preaching was sunk so low , that in a † provincial constitution at that time , great complaint is made of the ignorance and stupidity of the parochial clergy , that they rather made the people worse than better . but at that time the preaching friers had got that work into their hands by particular privileges , where it is well observed , that they did not go to places which most needed their help ; but to cities and corporations , where they found most incouragement . but what remedy was found by this provincial council ? truly , every parochial priest four times a year was bound to read an explication of the creed , ten commandments , the two precepts of charity , the seven works of mercy , the seven deadly sins , the seven principal vertues , and the seven sacraments . this was renewed in the province of york , ( which hath distinct provincial constitutions ) in the time of edw. 4. and here was all they were bound to by these constitutions . but when wicliff and his followers had awakened the people so far , that there was no satisfying them without preaching , then a new provinciat constitution was made under arundel , archbishop of canterbury ; and the former constitution was restrained to parochial priests who officiated as curates ; but several others were authorised to preach ; as ( 1. ) the mendicant friars were said to be authorised jure communi ; or rather privilegio speciali , ( but therefore lyndwood saith , it is said to be jure communi , because that privilege is recorded in the text of the canon law ) these were not only allowed to preach in their own churches , but in plateis publicis , saith lyndwood , out of the canon law ( wherein those words were expressed ) , and at any hour , unless it were the time of preaching in other churches ; but other orders , as augustinians and carmelites , had no such general licence . those preaching friars were a sort of licensed preachers at that time , who had no cures of souls ; but they were then accounted a kind of pastors . for jo. de athon distinguisheth two sorts of pastors ; those who had ecclesiastical offices , and those who had none ; but were such only verbo & exemplo ; but they gave very great disturbance to the clergy , as the pope himself confesses in the canon law. ( 2. ) legal incumbents authorised to preach in their own parishes jure scripto . all persons who had cures of souls , and legal titles were said to be missi à jure ad locum & populum curae suae , and therefore might preach to their own people without a special licence ; but if any one preached in other parts of the diocess , or were a stranger in it , then he was to be examined by the diocesan , and if he were found tam moribus quam scientia idoneus , he might send him to preach to one or more parishes , as he thought meet ; and he was to shew his licence to the incumbent of the place before he was to be permitted to preach , under the episcopal seal . and thus , as far as i can find , the matter stood as to preaching , before the reformation . after it , when the office of ordination was reviewed and brought nearer to the primitive form ; and instead of delivering the chalice and patten , with these words , accipe potestatem offerre deo sacrificium , &c. the bishop delivered the bible with these words , take thou authority to preach the word of god , and to minister the holy sacraments in the congregation , &c. the priests exhortation was made agreeable thereto , wherein he exhorts the persons in the name of our lord jesus christ , to consider the weight and importance of the office and charge they are called to ; not barely to instruct those who are already of christ's flock ; but to endeavour the salvation of those who are in the midst of this naughty world. and therefore he perswades and charges them from a due regard to christ , who suffered for his sheep , and to the church of christ , which is so dear to him , to omit no labor , care , or diligence in instructing and reforming those who are committed to their charge . and the better to enable them to perform these things , there are some duties especially recommended to them , viz. prayer and study of the holy scriptures , according to which that they are to instruct others , and to order their own lives , and of those who belong to them . and that they might the better attend so great a work , they are required to forsake and set aside ( as much as they may ) all worldly cares and studies , and apply themselves wholly to this one thing , that they may save themselves and them that hear them . after which follows the solemn profession , wherein they undertake to do these things . this is that , my brethren , which i earnestly desire of you that you would often consider . you are not at liberty now , whether you will do these things or not ; for you are under a most solemn engagement to it . you have put your hands to the plow , and it is too late to think of looking back ; and you all know the husbandman's work is laborious and painful , and continually returning . it is possible after all his pains , the harvest may not answer his expectation ; but yet if he neither plows nor sows , he can expect no return ; if he be idle and careless , and puts off the main of his work to others , can he reasonably look for the same success ? believe it , all our pains are little enough to awake the sleepy and secure sinners , to instruct the ignorant , to reclaim the vitious , to rebuke the profane , to convince the erroneous , to satisfie the doubtful , to confirm the wavering , to recover the lapsed , and to be useful to all , according to their feveral circumstances and conditions . it is not to preach a sermon or two in a weeks time to your parishoners , that is the main of your duty ; that is no such difficult task , if men apply their minds as they ought to do to divine matters , and do not spend their retirements in useless studies ; but the great difficulty lies in watching over your flock , i. e. knowing their condition , and applying your selves suitably to them . he that is a stranger to his flock , and only visits them now and then , can never be said to watch over it ; he may watch over the fleeces ; but he understands little of the state of his flock , viz. of the distempers they are under , and the remedies proper for them . the casuists say , that the reason why there is no command for personal residence in scripture , is , because the nature of the duty it self requires it ; for if a person be required to do such things which cannot be done without it , residence is implyed . as a pilot to a ship needs no command to be in his ship ; for how can he do the office of a pilot out of it ? let none think to excuse themselves by saying that our church only takes them for curates , and that the bishops have the pastoral charge ; for , by our old provincial constitutions ( which are still in force so far as they are not repugnant to the law of the land ) even those who have the smallest cures are called pastors ; and lyndwood there notes , that parochialis sacerdos dicitur pastor ; and that not merely by way of allusion , but in respect of the care of souls . but we need not go so far back . for what is it they are admitted to ? is it not ad curam animarum ? did not they promise in their ordination , to teach the people committed to their care and charge ? the casuists distinguish a threefold cure of souls . 1. in foro interiori tantum , and this they say is the parochial cure. 2. in foro exteriori tantum , where there is authority to perform ministerial acts , as to suspend , excommunicate , absolve , ( sine pastorali curâ : ) and this archdeacons have by virtue of their office. 3. in utroque simul ? where there is a special care , together with jurisdiction : this is the bishops . and every one of these , say they , secundum commune jus canonicum , is obliged to residence ; i. e. by the common law ecclesiastical ; of which more afterwards . the obligation is to perpetual residence , but as it is in other positive duties , there may other duties intervene , which may take away the present force of it ; as care of health , necessary business , publick service of the king , or church , &c. but then we are to observe , that no dispensation can justifie a man in point of conscience , unless there be a sufficient cause ; and no custom can be sufficient again the natural equity of the case , whereby every one is bound from the nature of the office he hath undertaken . i confess the case in reason is different , where there is a sufficient provision by another fit person , and approved by those who are to take care that places be well supplied , and where there is not ; but yet , this doth not take off the force of the personal obligation , arising from undertaking the cure themselves , which the ecclesiastical law understands to be , not merely by promise , but cum effectu , as the canonists speak ; which implies personal-residence . not that they are never to be away ; non sic amare intelligi debet ut nunquam inde recedat , saith lyndwood ; but these words are to be understood civili modo , as he expresses it , i. e. not without great reason . there must not be , saith he , callida interpretatio sed talis ut cessent fraudes & negligentiae ; i. e. there must be no art used to evade the law , nor any gross neglect of it . it 's true , the canonists have distinguished between rectoriēs and vicarages , as to personal residence ; but we are to consider these things . 1. the canon law strictly obliges every one that hath a parochial cure to perpetual residence ; and excepts only two cases , when the living is annexed to a prebend or dignity ; and then he who hath it , is to have a perpetual vicar instituted , with a sufficient maintenance . 2. after this liberty obtained for dignified persons to have vicars endowed in their places , the point of residence was strictly injoyned to them : and we find in the provincial constitutions a difference made between personatus and vicaria ; but this was still meant of a vicarage endowed . this was in the time of stephen langton , archbishop of canterbury ; and in another constitution he required an oath of personal residence from all such vicars , altho' the place were not above the value of five marks ; which , as appears by lyndwood else where , was then sufficient for maintenance and hospitality . and to cover the shameful dispensations that were commonly granted to the higher clergy , under pretence of the papal power , the poor vicars by a constitution of otho , were bound to take a strict oath of continual residence ; and without it their institution was declared to be null . but even in that case the gloss there saith , that they may be some time absent for the benefit of the church or state ; but not for their own particular advantage . 3. the obligation in point of conscience remains the same , but dispensing with laws may take away the penalty of non-residence in some cases . joh. de athon , canon of lincoln , who wrote the glosses on the legatine constitutions , doth not deny , but that rectors are as well bound to residence as vicars ; but these are more strictly tied by their oath , and because a vicar cannot appoint a vicar , but a parson may . and altho that name among some be used as a term of reproach , yet in former ages personatus and dignitas were the same thing ; and so used here in england in the time of henry ii. but afterwards it came to be applied to him that had the possession of a parochial benefice in his own immediate right ; and was therefore bound to take care of it . for the obligation must in reason be supposed to go along with the advantage ; however local statutes may have taken off the penalty . ii. when you have thus considered the obligation which lies upon you , to take care of your elock , let me in the next place recommend to you a plain , useful , and practical way of preaching among them . i mean , such as is most likely to do good upon them ( which certainly ought to be the just measure of preaching . ) i do not mean therefore a loose and careless way of talking in the pulpit , which will neither profit you , nor those that hear you . he that once gets an ill habit of speaking extempore , will be tempted to continue it by the easiness of it to himself , and the plausibleness of it to less judicious people . there is on the other side a closeness and strength of reasoning , which is too elaborate for common understandings ; and there is an affected fineness of expression , which by no means becomes the pulpit : but it seems to be like stroaking the consciences of people by feathers dipt in oil. and there is a way of putting scripture phrases together without the sense of them , which those are the most apt to admire , who understand them least : but for those who have not improved their minds by education , the plainest way is certainly ●he best and hardest , provided , it be not flat , and dry , and incoherent , or desultory , going from one thing to another , without pursuing any particular point home to practice , and applying it to the consciences of the hearers . and give me leave to tell you , that mere general discourses have commonly little effect on the peoples minds ; if any thing moves them , it is particular application as to such things which their consciences are concerned in . and here i must recommend to you the pursuing the design of his majesties letter , which hath been some time since communicated to you ; by it you are required to preach at some times on those particular vices which you observe to be most prevalent in the places you relate to , such as drunkenness , whoredom , swearing , profaning the lord's day , &c. if ever we hope to reform them , you must throughly convince them , that what they do is displeasing to god. and there are two sorts of men you are to deal with , 1. profane scoffers at religion . these seldom trouble you ; but if any good be to be done upon them , it is by plain and evident proofs of the good and evil of moral actions . for , as long as they think them indifferent , they will never regard what you say , as to the rewards or punishments of them . 2. stupid and sensless people , whose minds are wholly sunk into the affairs of the world , buying and selling , and getting gain . it is a very hard thing to get a thought into them above these matters . and whatever you talk of mere religion , and another life , is like metaphysicks to them ; they understand you not , and take no care to do it : but if you can convince them , that they live in the practice of great sins , which they shall certainly suffer for , if they do not repent , they may possibly be awakened this way ; if not , nothing but immediate grace can work upon them ; which must work on the will , whatever becomes of the understanding . iii. after preaching , let me intreat you to look after catechising and instructing the youth of your parishes . he that would reform the world to purpose , must begin with the youth ; and train them up betimes , in the ways of religion and virtue . there is far less probability of prevailing on those who have accustomed themselves to vicious habits , and are hardened in their wickedness . it seems strange to some , that considering the shortness of human life , mankind should be so long before they come to maturity ; the best account i know of it is , that there is so much longer time for the care of their education , to instil the principles of virtue and religion into them , thereby to soften the fierceness , to direct the weakness , to govern the inclinations of mankind . it is truly a sad consideration that christian parents are so little sensible of their duties , as to the education of their children ; when those who have had only natural reason to direct them , have laid so much weight upon it . without it , plato saith , that mankind grew the most unruly of all creatures . aristotle , that as by nature they are capable of being the best , so being neglected , they become the worst of animals , i. e. when they are brought up without virtue . education and virtue , saith he , is a great thing , yea , it is all in all , and without it they will be much worse than beasts . the main care of the education of children must lie upon parents ; but yet ministers ought not only to put them in mind . of their duty , but to assist them all they can , and by publick catechising , frequently to instruct both those who have not learned , and those who are ashamed to learn any other way . and you must use the best means you can to bring them into an esteem of it ; which is by letting them see , that you do it , not merely because you are required to do it , but because it is a thing so useful and beneficial to them , and to their children . there is a great deal of difference between peoples being able to talk over a set of phrases , about religious matters , and understanding the true grounds of religion ; which are easiest learned , and understood , and remembered in the short catechetical way . but i am truly sorry to hear , that where the clergy are willing to take pains this way , the people are unwilling to send their children . they would not be unwilling to hear them instructed , as early as might be , in the way to get an estate , but would be very thankful to those who would do them such a kindness ; and therefore it is really a contempt of god and religion , and another world , which makes them so backward to have their children taught the way to it . and methinks those who have any zeal for the reformation should love and pursue that which came into request with it . indeed the church of rome it self hath been made so sensible of the necessity of it ; that even the council of trent doth not only require catechising children , but the bishops to proceed with ecclesiastical censures against those who neglect it . but in the old provincial constitutions i can find but one injunction about catechising ; and that is when the priest doubts whether the children were baptized or not ; and if they be born eight days before easter and whitsuntide , they are not to be baptized till those days , and in the mean time they are to receive catechism . what is this receiving catechism by children , before they are eight days old ? it is well exorcism is joyned with it ; and so we are to understand by it the interrogatories in baptism : and lyndwood saith , the catechism is not only required for instruction in faith , but propter sponsionem , when the godfather answers , de fidei observantiâ . it is true the canon law requires in adult persons chatechising before baptism ; but i find nothing of the catechising children after it ; and no wonder , since lynd. wood faith , the laity are bound to no more than to believe as the church believes ; nor the clergy neither , unless they can bear the charges of studying , and have masters to instruct them . this was good doctrin , when the design was to keep people in ignorance . for learning is an irrecøncileable enemy to the fundamental policy of the roman church ; and it was that which brought in the reformation , since which a just care hath still been required for the instruction of youth ; and the fifty ninth canon of our church is very strict in it , which i desire you often to consider with the first rubrick after the catechism , and to act accordingly . iv. after catechizing , i recommend to you the due care of bringing the children of your parishes to confirmation . which would be of excellent use in the church , if the several ministers would take that pains about it , which they ought to do . remember that you are required to bring or send in writing , with your names subscribed , the names of all such persons in your parish , as you shall think fit to be presented to the bishop to be confirmed . if you take no care about it , and suffer them to come unprepared for so great , so solemn a thing , as renewing the promise and vow made in baptism , can you think your selves free from any guilt in it ? in the church of rome indeed great care was taken to hasten confirmation of children all they could : post baptismum quam citius poterint , as it is in our constitution provincial ; in another synodical , the parochial priests are charged to tell their parishioners , that they ought to get their children confirmed as soon as they can . in a synod at worcester , under walter de cantilupo , in the time of henry iii. the sacrament of confirmation is declared necessary for strength against the power of darkness ; and therefore it was called sacramentum pugnantium : and no wonder then that the parochial priests should be called upon so earnestly to bring the children to confirmation ; and the parents were to be forbidden to enter into the church , if they neglected it for a year after the birth of the child , if they had opportunity . the synod of exeter allowed two years , and then if they were not confirmed , the parents were to fast every friday , with bread and water , till it were done . and to the same purpose , the synod of winchester in the time of edw. i. in the constitutions of richard bishop of sarum , two years were allowed , but that time was afterwards thought too long ; and then the priest as well as the parents was to be suspended from entrance into the church . but what preparation was required ? none that i can find : but great care is taken about the fillets to bind their heads to receive the unction , and the taking them off at the font , and burning them , lest they should be used for witchcraft , as lyndwood informs us . but we have no such customs nor any of the reformed churches ; we depend not upon the opus operatum , but suppose a due and serious preparation of mind necessary , and a solemn performance of it . i hope , by god's assistance , to be able , in time , to bring the performance of this office into a better method ; in the mean time , i shall not fail doing my duty , have you a care you do not fail in yours . v. as to the publick offices of the church , i do not only recommend to you a due care of the diligent but of the devout performance of them . i have often wondered how a fixed and stated liturgy for general use , should become a matter of scruple and dispute among any in a christian church ; unless there be something in christianity which makes it unlawful to pray together for things which we all understand beforehand to be the subject of our prayers . if our common necessities and duties are the same ; if we have the same blessings to pray and to thank god for in our solemn devotions , why should any think it unlawful or unfitting to use the same expressions ? is god pleased with the change of our words and phrases ? can we imagine the holy spirit is gi ven to dictate new expressions in prayers ? then they must pray by immediate inspiration ( which i think they will not pretend to , lest all the mistakes and incongruities of such prayers be imputed to the holy ghost ) , but if not , then they are left to their own conceptions , and the spirits assistance is only in the exciting the affections and motions of the soul towards the things prayed for ; and if this be allowed , it is impossible to give a reason why the spirit of god may not as well excite those inward desires , when the words are the same as when they are different . and we are certain , that from the apostles times downwards , no one church or society of christians can be produced , who held it unlawful to pray by a set form. on the other side , we have very early proofs of some common forms of prayer , which were generally used in the christian churches , and were the foundations of those ancient liturgies , which , by degrees , were much enlarged . and the interpolations of latter times , do no more overthrow the antiquity of the ground-work of them , than the large additions to a building , do prove there was no house before . it is an easie matter to say that such liturgies could not be s. james's or s. mark 's , because of such errors and mistakes , and interpolations of things and phrases of latter times ; but what then ? is this an argument ; there were no ancient liturgies in the churches of jerusalem or alexandria ; when so long since , as in origen's time we find an entire collect produced by him out of the alexandrian liturgy ? and the like may be shewed as to other churches , which by degrees came to have their liturgies much inlarged by the devout prayers of some extraordinary men , such as s. basil and s. chrysostom in the eastern churches . but my design is not to vindicate our use of an excellent liturgy , but to put you upon the using it in such manner , as may most recommend it to the people . i mean with that gravity , seriousness , attention , and devotion , which becomes so solemn a duty as prayer to god is . it will give too just a cause of prejudice to our prayers , if the people observe you to be careless and negligent about them ; or to run them over with so great haste , as if you minded nothing so much as to get to the end of them . if you mind them so little your selves , they will think themselves excused , if they mind them less . i could heartily wish , that in greater places , especially in such towns where there are people more at liberty , the constant morning and evening prayers were duly and devoutly read ; as it is already done with good success in london , and some other cities . by this means religion will gain ground , when the publick offices are daily performed ; and the people will be more acquainted with scripture , in hearing the lessons , and have a better esteem of the prayers , when they become their daily service , which they offer up to god as their morning and evening sacrifice ; and the design of our church will be best answered , which appoints the order for morning and evening prayer daily to be said , and used throughout the year . vi. as to the dissenters from the church ; the present circumstances of our affairs require a more than ordinary prudence in your behaviour towards them . it is to no purpose to provoke or exasperate them , since they will be but so much more your emies for it ; and if you seem to court them too much , they will interpret your kindness to be a liking their way better than your own ; so that were it not for some worldly interest , you would be just what they are ; which is in effect to say , you would be men of conscience , if ye had a little more honesty . for they can never think those honest men , who comply with things against their consciences , only for their temporal advantage ; but they may like them as men of a party , who under some specious colours promote their interest . for my own part , as i do sincerely value and esteem the church of england ( and i hope ever shall ) , so i am not against such a due temper towards them , as is consistent with the preserving the constitution of our church . but if any think , under a pretence of liberty , to undermine and destroy it , we have reason to take the best care we can , in order to its preservation . i do not mean by opposing laws , or affronting authority , but by countermining them in the best way ; i. e. by outdoing them in those things which make them most popular , if they are consistent with integrity and a good conscience . if they gain upon the people by an appearance of more than ordinary zeal for the good of souls ; i would have you to go beyond them in a true and hearty concernment for them ; not in irregular heats and passions , but in the meekness of wisdom ; in a calm and sedate temper ; in doing good even to them who most despightfully reproach you , and withdraw themselves and the people from you . if they get an interest among them by industry , and going from place to place , and family to family ; i hope you will think it your duty to converse more freely and familiarly with your own people . be not strangers , and you will make them friends . let them see by your particular application to them , that you do not despise them . for men love to value those who seem to value them ; and if you once slight them , you run the hazard of making them your enemies . it is some tryal of a christians patience as well as humility , to condescend to the weaknesses of others ; but where it is our duty , we must do it , and that chearfully , in order to the best end , viz. doing the more good upon them . and all condescension and kindness for such an end , is true wisdom , as well as humility . i am afraid distance and too great stiffness of behaviour towards them , have made some more our enemies than they would have been . i hope they are now convinced , that the persecution which they complained lately so much of , was carried on by other men , and for other designs than they would then seem to believe . but that persecution was then a popular argument for them ; for , the complaining side hath always the most pity . but now that is taken off , you may deal with them on more equal terms . now there is nothing to affright them , and we think we have reason enough on our side to persuade them . the case of separation stands just as it did in point of conscience , which is not now one jot more reasonable or just than it was before . some think severity makes men consider ; but i am afraid it heats them too much , and makes them too violent and refractory . you have more reason to fear now , what the interest of a party will do , than any strength of argument . how very few among them understand any reason at all for their separation ! but education , prejudice , authority of their teachers sway them ; remove these and you convince them . and in order thereto , acquaint your selves with them , endeavour to oblige them , let them see you have no other design upon them , but to do them good ; if any thing will gain upon them , this will. but if after all , they grow more headstrong and insolent by the indulgence which the law gives them ; then observe , whether they observe those conditions on which the law gives it to them . for these are known rules in law , that he forfeits his privilege who goes beyond the bounds of it ; that no privileges are to be extended beyond the bounds which the laws give them ; for they ought to be observed as they are given . i leave it to be considered , whether all such who do not observe the conditions of the indulgence , be not as liable to the law as if they had none . but there is a very profane abuse of this liberty among some , as though it were an indulgence not to serve god at all . such as these , as they were never intended by the law , so they ought to enjoy no benefit by it . for this were to countenance profaneness and irreligion ; which i am afraid will grow too much upon us , unless some effectual care be taken to suppress it . vii . there is another duty incumbent upon you , which i must particularly recommend to your care , and that is , of visiting the sick. i do not mean barely to perform the office prescribed , which is of very good use , and ought not to be neglected ; but a particular application of your selves to the state and condition of the persons you visit . it is no hard matter to run over some prayers , and so take leave ; but this doth not come up to the design of our church in that office : for , after the general exhortation and profession of the christian faith , our church requires , that the sick person be moved to make special confession of his sins , if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter ; and then if the sick person humbly and heartily desires it , he is to be absolved after this manner , our lord jesus christ , who hath left power in his church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him , &c. where the power of absolution is grounded upon the supposition of true faith and repentance ; and therefore , when it is said afterwards , and by his authority committed to me , i absolve thee from the same , &c. it must proceed on the same supposition . for the church cannot absolve when god doth not . so that all the real comfort of the absolution depends upon the satisfaction of the person 's mind , as to the sincerity of his repentance and faith in christ. now here lies the great difficulty of this office ; how to give your selves and the wounded conscience satisfaction , as to the sincerity of those acts ; i do not mean as to the sincerity of his present thoughts , but as to the acceptableness of his faith and repentance with god in order to remission of sins . but what if you find the persons so ignorant , as not to understand what faith and repentance mean ? what if they have led such careless and secure lives in this world , as hardly ever to have had one serious thought of another ? is nothing to be done but to come and pray by them , and so dismiss them into their eternal state ? is this all the good you can , or are bound to do them ? i confess , it is a very uncomfortable thing to tell men how they are to begin to live , when they are liker to dye than to live ( and the people generally have a strange superstitious fear of sending for the minister , while there is any hope of recovery ) . but at last you are sent for ; and what a melancholy work are you then to go about ? you are , it may be , to make a man sensible of his sins , who never before considered what they were , or against whom they were committed , or what eternal misery he deserves by committing them . but i will suppose the best i can in this case , viz. that by your warm and serious discourse , you throughly awaken the conscience of a long and habitual sinner ; what are you then to do ? will you presently apply all the promises of grace and salvation to one whose conscience is awakened only with the fears of death , and the terrors of a day of judgment ? this , i confess , is a hard case ; on the one side , we must not discourage good beginnings in any ; we must not cast an awakened sinner into despair ; we must not limit the infinite mercy of god : but on the other side , we must have a great care of encouraging presumptuous sinners to put off their repentance to the last , because then upon confession of their sins , they can so easily obtain the churches absolution , which goes no farther , than truly repenting and believing . but here is the difficulty , how we can satisfie our selves that these do truly repent and believe ; who are out of a capacity of giving proof of their sincerity by amendment of life ? i do not question the sincerity of their present purposes ; but how often do we find those to come to nothing , when they recover and fall into the former temptations ? how then shall they know their own sincerity till it be tryed ? how can it be tryed , when they are going out of the state of tryal ? the most we can do , is to encourage them to do the best they can in their present condition , and to shew as many of the fruits of true repentance as their circumstances will allow ; and with the greatest humility of mind , and most earnest supplications to implore the infinite mercy of god to their souls . but besides these , there are many cases of sick persons , which require very particular advice and spiritual direction , which you ought to be able to give them , and it cannot be done without some good measure of skill and experience in casuistical divinity . as , how to satisfie a doubting conscience , as to its own sincerity , when so many infirmities are mixed with our best actions ? how a sinner who hath relapsed after repentance can be satisfied of the truth of his repentance , when he doth not know , but he may farther relapse upon fresh temptations ? how , he shall know what failings are consistent with the state of grace , and the hopes of heaven , and what not ? what measure of conviction and power of resistance is necessary to make sins to be wilful and presumptuous ? what the just measures of restitution are in order to true repentance , in all such injuries which are capable of it ? i might name many others , but these i only mention to shew how necessary it is for you to apply your selves to moral and casuistical divinity , and not to content your selves barely with the knowledg of what is called positive and controversial . i am afraid there are too many who think they need to look after no more than what qualifies them for the pulpit ; ( and i wish all did take sufficient care of that ) but if we would do our duty as we ought , we must inquire into , and be able to resolve cases of conscience . for the priests lips should keep this kind of knowledge ; and the people should seek the law at his mouth ; for he is the messenger of the lord of hosts , mal. 2. 7. if this held in the levitical priesthood , much more certainly under the gospel , where the rates and measures of our duties are not to be determined by levitical precepts , but by the general reason and nature of moral actions . viii . among the duties of publick worship , i must put you in mind of a frequent celebration of the lords supper . there is generally too great a neglect of this , which is the most proper part of evangelical worship . the duties of prayers and praises , are excellent and becoming duties , as we are creatures with respect to our maker and preserver . the duty of hearing the word of god read and explained , is consequent upon our owning it to be the rule of our faith and manners ; and all who desire to understand and practise their duty , can never despise or neglect it . but that solemn act of worship wherein we do most shew our selves christians , is the celebrating the holy eucharist . for , therein we own and declare the infinite love of god in sending his son into the world to die for sinners , in order to their salvation ; and that this is not only a true saying , but worthy of all men to be credited . therein , we lift up our hearts , and give thanks to our lord god ; we joyn with angels and archangels in lauding and magnifying his glorious name . therein , we not only commemorate the death and sufferings of our lord , but are made partakers of his body and blood , after a real , but sacramental manner . therein we offer up our selves to god , to be a reasonable , holy and lively sacrifice unto him . therein we adore and glorifie the ever blessed trinity ; and humbly implore the grace and assistance of our ever blessed mediator . and what now is there in all this , which is not very agreeable to the faith , hope , and charity of christians ? nay , what duty is there , which so much expresses all these together , as this doth ? nor , whereby we may more reasonably expect greater supplies of divine grace to be bestowed upon us ? what then makes so many to be so backward in this duty , which profess a zeal and forwardness in many others ? if we had that warmth and fervor of devotion , that love to christ , and to each other , which the primitive christians had , we should make it as constant a part of our publick worship , as they did ; but this is not to be expected . neither did it always continue in the primitive church , when liberty , and ease , and worldly temptations made persons grow more remiss and careless in the solemn duties of their religion . s. chrysostom takes notice in his time of the different behaviour of persons , with respect to the holy eucharist . there were some who pretended to greater holiness and austerity of life than others , who withdrew from the common conversation of mankind , and so by degrees from joining in the acts of publick worship with them . which did unspeakable mischief to christianity ; for then the perfection of the christian life , was not supposed to consist in the active part of it , but in retirement and contemplation . as tho our highest imitation of christ lay in following him into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil ; and not in walking as he walked , who frequented the synagogues , and went about doing good . but this way of retirement happening to be admired by some great men , the publick worship came to be in less esteem ; and others upon reasons of a different nature withdrew themselves from such acts of devotion as required a stricter attendance , and a more prepared temper of mind . and there were some who did abstain , because they were not so well satisfied with themselves as to their own preparations ; and such as these s. chrysostom seems to favor , rather than such who came often without due care , as to the whole course of their lives ; only out of custom , or out of regard to the orders of the church . from hence many thought it better to forbear , as long as they did it not out of contempt . and so by degrees the people were content to look on it as a sacrifice for them to be performed by others , rather than as an office , wherein they were to bear a part themselves ; at least , they thought once or thrice a year sufficient for them . and to this , as appears by our old provincial constitutions , they were forced by severe canons . when the reformation began , this disuse of this holy sacrament , was looked on , by the chief reformers , as a great abuse and corruption crept into the church , which ought by all means to be reformed ; and the frequent celebration of it set up in the reformed churches . but unreasonable scruples in some , and misapprehensions in others , and a general coldness and indifference , as to matters of religion , have hitherto hindered the reviving this primitive part of devotion among us . i do not go about to determine the frequency in your parishes , which the scripture doth not as to the christian church , but supposes it to be often done ; but i may require you to take care , that christ's institution be observed among you ; and that with your utmost care , both as to the decency and purity of it . the last thing i recommend to you all , is , to have a great care of your conversations . i do not speak it out of a distrust of you ; i hope you do it already : and your case will be so much worse , if you do it not , because you very well know how much you ought to do it . for the honor of god and religion , and the success of your ministry , as well as your own salvation , depend very much upon it . lead your flock by your example , as well as by your doctrine , and then you may much better hope that they will follow you ; for the people are naturally spies upon their ministers , and if they observe them to mind nothing but the world all the week , they will not believe them in earnest , when on the lord's days they persuade them against it . and it takes off the weight of all reproof of other mens faults , if those they reprove have reason to believe them guilty of the same . i do not think it enough for a preacher of righteousness merely to avoid open and scandalous sins , but he ought to be a great example to others in the most excellent virtues which adorn our profession , not only in temperance and chastity , in justice and ordinary charity , but in a readiness to do good to all , in forgiving injuries , in loving enemies , in evenness of temper , in humility and meekness , and patience , and submission to god's will , and in frequent retirements from the world , not merely for study , but for devotion . if by these and such things you shine as lights among your people , they will be more ready to follow your conduct ; and in probability you will not only stop their mouths , but gain their hearts . for among all the ways of advancing the credit and interest of the church of england , one of the most successful will be the diligent labors , and the exemplary lives of the clergy in it . but if men will not regard their own , or the churches interest in this matter ; if they will break their rules in such a manner , as to dishonor god , and the church , and themselves by it ; then you are to consider the next thing i was to speak to , which is , ii. what authority is given to us for the punishing offenders in our diocesses by the ecclesiastical law of this realm . for this we are to consider , that our authority herein is not derived from any modern canons or constitutions of this church ( altho due regard ought to be shewed to them ) but from the ancient common law ecclesiastical in this realm , which still continues in force . for as there is a common law with respect to civil rights , which depends not on the feudal constitutions , altho in many things it be the same with them ; but upon ancient practice , and general consent of the people from age to age. so , i say , there is a common law ecclesiastical , which altho in many things it may be the same with the canon law , which is read in the books ; yet it hath not its force from any papal or legatine constitutions , but from the acceptance and practice of it in our church . i could easily shew ( if the time would permit ) that papal and legatine constitutions were not received here , altho directed hither ; that some provincial constitutions never obtained the force of ecclesiastical laws ; but my business is to shew what did obtain and continue still to have the force of such ecclesiastical laws among us . by the statute of 25. h. 8. c. 19. it is declared , that such canons , constitutions , ordinances and synodals provincial being already made , which be not contrariant nor repugnant to the laws , statutes and customs of this realm , nor to the damage or hurt of the king's prerogative royal , shall now still be used and executed as they were afore the making of this act , &c. it 's true , a review was appointed , but such difficulties were found in it , as to the shaking the foundations of the ecclesiastical law here , that nothing was ever legally established in it ; and therefore this law is still in force . in the statute 25. h. 8. c. 21. it is said , that this realm recognising no superior under god but the king , hath been , and is free from subjection to any mans laws , but only to such as have been devised , made , and observed within this realm , for the wealth of the same : or to such other , as by the sufferance of the king and his progenitors , the people of this realm have taken at their free liberty , by their own consent , to be used amongst them , and have bound themselves by long use and custom to observance of the same , not as to the observance of the laws of any foreign prince , potentate , or prelate , but as to the customs and ancient laws of this realm , originally estabished , as laws of the same , by the said sufferance , consent , custom , and none otherwise . all that i have now to do , is to shew what authority the bishops had over the clergy by the ancient ecclesiastical law of this realm ; and what censures they were lyable to for some particular offences . i. by the ecclesiastical law the bishop is judg of the fitness of any clerk presented to a benefice . this is confessed by the ord coke in these words . and the examination of the ability , and sufficiency of the person presented , belongs to the bishop , who is the ecclesiastical judg , and in the examination he is a judg , and not a minister , and may and ought to refuse the person presented , if he be not persona idonea . but this is plain to have been the ancient ecclesiastical law of this realm by the articul . cleri . in edw. 2. time , de idoneitate personae praesentatae ad beneficium ecclesiasticum pertinet examinatio ad judicem ecclesiasticum , & ita est hactenus usitatum & fiat in futurum . by the provincial constitutions at oxford in the time of hen. 3. the bishop is required to admit the clerk who is presented , without opposition , within two months , dum tamen idoneus sit ; if he thinks him fit . so much time is allowed , propter examinationem , saith lyndwood ; even when there is no dispute about right of patronage . the main thing he is to be examined upon is his ability to discharge his pastoral duty , as coke calls it ; or as lyndwood saith , whether he be commendandus scientia & moribus . as to the former , the bishop may judg himself ; but as to the latter , he must take the testimonials of others ; and i heartily wish the clergy would be more careful in giving them , by looking on it as a matter of conscience , and not merely of civility ; for otherwise it will be impossible to avoid the pestering the church with scandalous and ignorant wretches . if the bishop refuses to admit within the time ( which by the modern canons is limited to twenty eight days after the presentation delivered ) he is liable to a duplex querela in the ecclesiastical courts , and a quare impedit at common law ; and then he must certifie the reasons of his refusal . in specot's case it is said , that in 15 hen. 7. 7 , 8. all the judges agreed , that the bishop is judg in the examination , and therefore the law giveth faith and credit to his judgment . but because great inconveniencies might otherwise happen , the general allegation is not sufficient , but he must certifie specially and directly ; and the general rule is , and it was so resolved by the judges , that all such as are sufficient causes of deprivation of an incumbent , are sufficient causes to refuse a presentee . but by the canon law * more are allowed . in the constitutions of othobon , the bishop is required particularly to enquire into the life and conversation of him that is presented ; and afterwards , that if a bishop admits another who is guilty of the same fault for which he rejected the former , his institution is declared null and void . by the canon law , if a bishop maliciously refuses to admit a fit person , he is bound to provide another benefice for him ; but our ecclesiastical law , much better puts him upon the proof of the cause of his refusal . but if the bishop doth not examin him , the canonists say it is a proof sufficient that he did it malitiosè . if a bishop once rejects a man for insufficiency , he cannot afterwards accept or admit of him ; as was adjudged in the bishop of hereford's case . if a man brings a presentation to a benefice , the bishop is not barely to examin him as to life and abilities , but he must be satisfied that he is in orders . how can he be satisfied , unless the other produce them ? how can he produce them , when it may be they are lost ? what is to be done in this case ? the canon is express , that no bishop shall institute any to a benefice , who hath been ordained by any other bishop ( for if he ordained him himself , he cannot after reject him , because the law supposes him to have examined and approved him ) except he first shew unto him his letters of orders , and bring him a sufficient testimony of his former good life and behaviour , if the bishop shall require it , and lastly shall appear upon due examination to be worthy of the ministry . but yet in palmes and the bishop of peterborough's case , it was adjudged that no lapse did accrue by the clerk's not shewing his orders , for the bishop upon his not coming to him again , collated after six months . but the court agreed , that the clerk ought to make proof of his orders ; but they differed about the manner of their proof . anderson said , the bishop might give him his oath . but if a proof were necessary , and the clerk did not come to make proof , it seems to me to be a very hard judgment . ii. the bishop by the ecclesiastical law , is to visit his diocess , and to take an account of the clergy how they behaye themselves in the duties of their places . by the eldest canons i can find , the bishops visitation is supposed as a thing implyed in his office ; whereby he is obliged to look after the good estate of his whole diocess , and especially of the clergy in it . in the time of hubert arch-bishop of canterbury , in the beginning of king johns time care is taken in the canons then made , that bishops should not be burdensom to the clergy in the number of the attendants in their visitations ; which then were parochial , and the number allowed of 20 or 30 horse , was too heavy for the clergy to bear . and therefore by degrees it was thought fit to turn that charge into a certainty , which was the original of procurations . by the fourth council of toledo , the bishop was to visit his whole diocess , parochially , every year . the gloss saith , if there were occasion for it ; and that the bishop may visit as often as he sees cause ; but if he be hindred , the canon saith , he may send others ( which is the original of the arch-deacons visitation ) to see not only the condition of the churches , but the lives of the ministers . the council of braca in the latter end of the sixth century , makes this the first canon , that all bishops should visit their diocesses by parishes , and there should first examin the clergy , and then the people ; and in another canon he was required to receive only his cathedraticum , i. e. a certain sum in lieu of entertainment ; which came to be setled by prescription . the council of cavailon in france , a. d. 831. fixed no sum , but desired the bishops to be no burdens to the clergy in their parochial visitations . lyndwood saith the ancient procuration here was a day and nights entertainment ; which after came to be a customary payment : but however it was paid , it is an evident proof of the right of the bishops visitations by the ancient ecclesiastical law ; and by such a custom as is allowable by the rules of our common law. iii. there are some faults , which make the clergy lyable to deprivation by virtue of the ecclesiastical law , which was here received . i shall name only some of them and conclude ; these being sufficient for my present purpose . i. excessive drinking . all drinking ( ad potus aequales ) was absolutely forbidden to clergymen , on pain of suspension after admonition ; not only by a synodical , but by a provincial constitution under edmund arch-bishop of canterbury . the canon law saith in that case , ab officio vel beneficio suspendatur : but our constitution is more severe , à beneficio & officio . the council of oxford not only strictly forbids all clergymen whatever tends to gluttony and drunkenness ; but it requires the bishops to proceed strictly against those who are guilty , according to the form of the general council , i. e. the lateran 4. viz. by admonition first , and then suspension . lyndwood complains , that this was not so much looked after as it should be , because it brought no profit ; i hope that reason will not hold among those who pretend to reformation ; which will be very defective if it extend not to our lives as well as our doctrines : for there can be no greater reproach , than to see those loose and dissolute in their conversations , who think it their honour to be ministers of a reformed church . it was a stinging reflection upon our church by the arch-bishop of spalato , ( who was no very strict man himself ) that he saw nothing reformed among us but our doctrines . i hope there was more of satyr than of truth in it ; for i do not question , but there were many then ( as there are now ) of exemplary lives and unblameable conversations ; but if there be any others , it will be the more shame not to proceed against them ; since even before the reformation , the canons were so strict and severe in this matter . in the council at westminster in henr. ii. time , under richard arch-bishop of canterbury , all clergymen are forbidden going into taverns to eat or drink , unless upon travelling ; and the sanction of this canon is , aut cesset , aut deponatur . the same was forbidden in the council at york , in the time of richard i. in the council at london under hubert , in the time of king john. and since the reformation , the same canon is renewed , that no ecclesiastical persons shall at any time other than for their honest necessities , resort to any taverns or alehouses . and there have been instances of the severity of our ecclesiastical censures against drunkenness in clergy-men . in 8 jac. parker was deprived of his benefice for drunkenness , and moved for a prohibition , but it was denyed him . in 9 jac. another was deprived for the same fault and the judges at common law allowed the sentence to be good . no doubt there are other instances , but we had not known of these , if they had not been preserved in books of reports . ii. incontinency . lyndwood saith , those who are proved to be guilty of it , are ipso jure privati ; but he thinks a declaratory sentence of the ecclesiastical judges necessary for the execution of it . since the reformation , we have instances of deprivation for adultery in our law books . one 12 eliz. another 16 eliz. a third 27 eliz. these are enough to shew that the ecclesiastical law is allowed by the judges of common law , to continue in sufficient force for deprivation in this case . iii. simony . which is the name given by the ecclesiastical law , to all contracts for gain in the disposing or obtaining any ecclesiastical promotion or ministry . it is true , these do not come up to the very sin of simon magus , which related to the immediate gifts of the holy ghost ; but because the whole ministerial office in all the parts of it ( especially the cure of souls ) is of a spiritual nature ; and all bargains are so repugnant to the design of it , therefore the ecclesiastical law hath fixed that detestable name upon it : for , all contractus non gratuiti in these things savour of turpe lucrum , and tend to bring in turpe commercium into the church ; which would really overturn the whole design of that ministry , which was designed for the salvation of souls . and therefore it was necessary , that when persons had received ( by the favor of temporal princes and other benefactors , who were founders of churches ) such endowments as might encourage them in their function , that severe laws should be made against any such sordid and mischievous contracts . and such there were here in england long before the excellent stat. of 31 eliz. c. 6. although it seems the force of them was so much worn out , as to make that statute necessary for avoiding of simony ; which is there explained to be corruption in bestowing or getting possession of promotions ecclesiastical . in a council at london under lanfranc in the conqueror's time , simony was forbidden , under the name of buying and selling of orders . and it could be nothing else before the churches revenue was setled : but in the time of henr. i. ecclesiastical benefices were forbidden to be bought or sold , and it was deprivation then to any clergy-man to be convicted of it ; and a lay-man was to be out-law'd and excommunicated , and deprived of his right of patronage . and this was done by a provincial synod of that time . in the reign of henr. ii. it was decreed , that if any person received any mony for a presentation , he was to be for ever deprived of the patronage of that church ; and this was not merely a provincial constitution , but two kings were present ( hen. 2. and his son ) , and added their authority to it . this was not depriving a man of his freehold by a canon , as a learned gentleman calls it ; for here was the greatest authority , temporal as well as ecclesiastical added to it . but we are told , these canons were of as little effect , as that of othobon , which made all simoniacal contracts void ; but some of the most judicious lawyers have held , that simony being contractus ex turpi causâ , is void between parties . all that i aim at is to shew , that by our old ecclesiastical law , simoniaeus incurred a deprivation and disability before the stat. 31. eliz. and therein i have the opinion of a very learned judge concurring with me . iv. dilapidations . by which the ecclesiastical law understands any considerable impairing the edifices , woods and revenues belonging to ecclesiastical persons , by virtue of their places . for it is the greatest interest and concernment of the church to have things preserved for the good of successors ; and it is a part of common justice and honesty so to do . and the lord coke positively affirms , that dilapidation is a good cause of deprivation . and it was so resolved by the judges in the king's bench , 12. jac. not by virtue of any new law or statute , but by the old ecclesiastical law. for which coke refers to the year-books , which not only shew what the ecclesiastical law then was , but that it was allowed by the common law of england ; and we are told , that is never given to change ; but it may be forced to it by a new law , which cannot be pretended in this case . and by the old constitutions here received , the bishops are required to put the clergy in mind of keeping their houses in sufficient reparations , and if they do it not within two months , the bishop is to take care , it be done out of the profits of the benefice . by the injunctions of ed. vi. and queen elizabeth , all persons having ecclesiastical benefices are required to set apart the fifth of their revenue to repair their houses ; and afterwards to maintain them in good condition . v. pluralities . by the ecclesiastical law , which was here received , the actual receiving institution into a second benefice made the first void ipso jure ; and if he sought to keep both above a month , the second was void too . lyndwood observes , that the ecclesiastical law had varied in this matter . and it proceeded by these steps , ( which are more than lyndw. mentions . ) i. it was absolutely forbidden to have two parishes , if there were more than ten inhabitants in them , because no man could do his duty in both places . and if any bishop neglected the execution of it , he was to be excommunicated for two months , and to be restored only upon promise to see this canon executed . ii. the rule was allowed to hold , as to cities , but an exception was made as to small and remote places , where there was a greater scarcity of persons to supply them . iii. if a man had two benefices , it was left to his choice , which he would have : but he could not hold both . this kind of option was allowed by the ecclesiastical law then in force . iv. that if he takes a second benefice ; that institution is void , by the third council of lateran , under alexander iii. v. that by taking a second the first is void ; which is the famous canon of the fourth lateran council . vi. that if he were not contented with the last , but endeavour to keep both , he should be deprived of both . and this was the ecclesiastical law as it was declared in our provincial constitutions . but the general practice was to avoid the former , according to the lateran council . these were very severe canons , but that one clause of the pope's dispensing power made them to signifie little , unless it were to advance his power and revenue . for when the dispensing power came to be owned , the law had very little force ; especially as to the consciences of men. for if it were a law of god , how could any man dispense with it ? unless it were as apparent that he had given a power in some cases to dispense , as that he had made the law. those casuists are very hard put to it , who make residence jure divino , and yet say the pope may dispense with it ; which at last comes only to this , that the pope can authoritatively declare the sufficiency of the cause : so that the whole matter depends upon the cause ; whether there can be any sufficient to excuse from personal residence . it is agreed on all hands , that the habitual neglect of a charge we have taken upon our selves , is an evil thing , and that it is so to heap up preferments merely for riches , or luxury , or ambition ; but the main question in point of conscience is , what is a sufficient cause to justifie any man's breaking so reasonable and just a rule as that of residence is . it cannot be denied , that the eldest canons of the church were so strict and severe , that they made it unlawful for any man to go from that church in which he first received orders ; as well as to take another benefice in it : and so for any bishop to be translated from that place he was first consecrated to ; as well as to hold another with it . but the good of the church being the main foundation of all the rules of it ; when that might be better promoted by a translation ; it was by a tacit consent looked on , as no unjust violation of its rules . the question then is , whether the churches benefit may not in some cases make the canons against non-residence as dispensable , as those against translations ? and the resolution of it doth not depend upon the voiding the particular obligation of the incumbent to his cure ; but upon some more general reason with respect to the state of the church . as being imployed in the service of it , which requires a persons having , ( not a bare competency for subsistence , but ) a sufficiency to provide necessaries for such service . for those seem to have very little regard to the flourishing condition of a church , who would confine the sufficiency of a subsistence , merely to the necessaries of life . but it seems to be reasonable , that clergy-men should have incouragement sufficient , not only to keep them above contempt , but in some respect agreeable to the more ample provision of other orders of men. and by god's own appointment the tribe of levi did not fall short of any of the rest , if it did not very much exceed the proportion of others . we do not pretend to the privileges they had , only we observe from thence , that god himself did appoint a plentiful subsistence for those who attended upon his service . and i do not know , what there is levitical , or ceremonial , in that . i am sure , the duties of the clergy now require a greater freedom of mind from the anxious cases of the world , than the imployments of the priests and levites under the law. but we need not go so far back ; if the church injoyed all her revenues as entirely , as when the severe canons against pluralities were made , there would not be such a plea for them , as there is too much cause for in some places , from the want of a competent subsistence . but since that time , the abundance of appropriations ( since turned into lay-fees ) hath extremely lessened the churches revenues , and have left us a great number of poor vicarages , and arbitrary cures , which would hardly have afforded a maintenance for the nethinims under the law , who were only to be hewers of wood , and drawers of water . but this doth not yet clear the difficulty : for the question is whether the subsistence of the clergy can lawfully be improved by a plurality of livings ? truly , i think this ( if it be allowed in some cases lawful ) to be the least desireable way of any ; but in some circumstances it is much more excusable than in others . as when the benefices are mean , when they lie near each other , when great care is taken to put in sufficient curates with good allowance ; when persons take all opportunities to do their duties themselves , and do not live at a distance from their benefices in an idle and careless manner . but for men to put in curates merely to satisfie the law , and to mind nothing of the duties of their places , is a horrible scandal to religion and our church , and that , which if not amended , may justly bring down the wrath of god upon us . for the loosest of all the popish-casuists , look upon this as a very great sin , even those who attributed to the pope the highest dispensing power in this case . but when the greate liberty of dispensing had made the ecclesiastical laws in great measure useless , then it was thought fit by our law-makers to restrain and limit it by a statute made 21. h. 8. wherein it is enacted , that if any person or persons having one benefice with cure of souls , being of the yearly value of eight pounds , or above , accept or take any other with cure of soul , and be instituted , and inducted in possession of the same , that then , and immediately after such possession had thereof , the first benefice shall be adjudged to be void . and all licenses and dispensations to the contrary , are declared to be void and of none effect . this , one would have thought had been an effectual remedy against all such pluralities and dispensations to obtain them ; and this , no doubt , was the primary design of the law ; but then follow so many proviso's of qualified men to get dispensations , as take off a great deal of the force and effect of this law. but then it ought well to be considered , whether such a license being against the chief design of a law , can satisfie any man in point of conscience , where there is not a just and sufficient cause ? for , if the popes dispensation , with the supposed plenitude of his power , could not satisfie a mans conscience without an antecedent cause , as the casuists resolve , much less can such proviso's do it . it is the general opinion of divines , and lawyers , saith lessius , that no man is safe in conscience by the popes dispensation for pluralities , unless there be a just cause for it . no man can with a safe conscience , take a dispensation from the pope for more benefices than one , merely for his own advantage , saith panormitan ; and from him sylvester and summ. angelica . a dispensation , saith card. tolet , secures a man as to the law , ; but as to conscience there must be a good cause for it . and that is , when the church hath more benefit by it , than it would have without it . but the pope's dispensing power went much farther in point of conscience in their opinion , than that which is setled among us by act of parliament . for it is expressed in the stat. 21 hen. 8. that the dispensation is intended to keep men from incurring the danger , penalty , and forfeiture in this statute comprised . so that the most qualified person can only say , that the law doth not deprive him ; but he can never plead that it can satisfie him in point of conscience , unless there be some cause for it , which is of more moment to the church , than a man 's sole and constant attendance on a particular cure is . but this stat. is more favourable to the clergy , than the canon law was before , in two particulars . 1. in declaring that no simple benefices , or mere dignities , as the canonists call them , are comprehended under the name of benefices , having cure of souls , viz. no deanery , arch-deaconry , chancellorship , treasurership , chantership , or prebend in any cathedral or collegiate church , nor parsonage that hath a vicar endowed , nor any benefice perpetually appropriate . but all these before were within the reach of the canon law , and a dispensation was necessary for them : which shews , that this law had a particular respect to the necessary attendance on parochial cures , and looked on other dignities and preferments in the church , as a sufficient encouragement to extraordinary merit . 2. that no notice is taken of livings under the value of 8l . which i suppose is that of 20 e. 1. for that of h. 8. was not till five years after . but after that valuation , it was to be judged according to it , and not according to the real value , as the judges declared 12 car. i. in the case of drake and hill. now here was a regard had to the poorness of benefices , so far , that the statute doth not deprive the incumbent upon taking a second living , if it be under 8 l. the question that arises from hence is , whether such persons are allowed to enjoy such pluralities by law ; or only left to the ecclesiastical law , as it was before ? it is certain , that such are not liable to the penalty of this law ; but before any person might be deprived by the ecclesiastical law for taking a second benefice without dispensation , of what value soever ; now here comes a statute which enacts , that all who take a second benefice of 8l . without qualification , shall lose his legal title to the first ; but what if it be under ? shall he lose it or not ? not , by this law. but suppose the ecclesiastical law before makes him liable to deprivation ; doth the statute alter the law without any words to that purpose ? the bishop had a power before to deprive , where is it taken away ? the patron had a right to present upon such deprivation ; how comes he to lose it ? and i take it for granted , that no antecedent rights are taken away by implications ; but there must be express clauses to that purpose . so that i conclude the ancient ecclesiastical law to be still in force , where it is not taken away by statute . and thus my brethren , i have laid before you the authority and the rules we are to act by ; i have endeavoured to recommend to you , the most useful parts of your duty ; and i hope you will not give me occasion to shew what power we have by the ecclesiastical law of this realm to proceed against offenders . nothing will be more uneasie to me , than to be forced to make use of any severity against you . and my hearts desire is , that we may all sincerely and faithfully discharge the duties of our several places , that the blessing of god may be upon us all ; so that we may save our selves and those committed to our charge . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61530-e410 regino l. 2. p. 205. hispan . concil . p. 29. regino collect. canon . lib. 2. p. 204. burchrd . l. 1. c. 91 , 92. gratian. 35. q. 5. c. 7. hieron comment . ad titam . epist. ad evagr. advers luciferian . hier. in psal. ad evagr. ad marcell . cyprian . ep. 3. 66. aug. in ps. 44. 44. ambros. ad eph. 4. 11. 1 cor. 12. 28. theod. ad 1 tim. 1. 3 , iren. l. 3. c. 3. 3 john 9 , 10. 1 tim. 3. 2 , 3 , &c. 5. 22. 19. 20. 21. titus 1. 5. de voto & voti redempt . lyndw. f. 103. co●cil . anglic. vol. 2. f. 182. constit. othor . f. 292. concil . angl. vol. 2. f. 227. constit. provinc . de officio archi-presbyteri , f. 33. concil . anglic. vol. 1. p. 183. lyndw. v. latratu f. 33. v. pabulo v. dei. † prov. constit. de offic. arch-presbyt f. 282. concil . anglic. vol. 2. p. 332. concil . anglic. 2 vol. p. 700. 707. concil . anglic. 2 vol. p. 649. constit. de haeret . f. 156. lyndw. f. 156. c. dudam . clem. de sepulturis . jo. de athon . in constitut. othobon . f. 46. c. dudam . de sepulturis . non potest esse pastoris excusatio , si lupus oves comedit , & pastor nescit . extr. de reg. juris c. 10. reginald . pra●is , l. 30. tr . 3. c. 5. p. 52. constit. provinc . de clericis non resid . c. quum hostis . joh. athon . ad constit. othon . f. 14. reginald . ib. n. 53. can. relatum . ex. de clericis non resid . lyndw. in c. quum host is . resideant cum effectu . joh. de athon . in constit. othon . f. 14. continui . can. echipandae . de praebend . & dign . de praesumpt . f. 55. 2. de clericis non resident . cum hostis , &c. lynd. f. 34. joh. de athon . in consist . othon . f. 12. otho de instit. vic. f. 14. othobon f. 46. joh. de athon . in constit. othon . can. quia nonnulla de clericis non resid . quadrilog . 1. 1. c. 5. plato de leg. l. 6. arist. polit. l. 1. c 2. nicom . l. 2. c. 1 7. c 7. sess. 24. de reform . c. 4. lyndw. prov. cost . f. 134 , 135. concil . anglic. 2. vol. 324. 330. de consecr . dist. 4. c. 54 57 lynd. f. 1. 11. sciat . si enim habeant expensas & magistros , peccarent ni●● plus sciant quam laici . provinc . constit . de sacro unct. f. 18. concil . anlg. 2. vol. p. 353. concil . angl. 2. vol. p. 140. 165. p. 353. p. 440. p. 143. lyndw. f. 19. orig. in jer. hom. 14. p. 141. ed. haet . 11. q 3. c. 63. lyndw ad l. de ●oenis f. 161. extr. de priv. c. porro in g●●●● . in hebr. h●m . 17. in ephes. hom. 3. concil . anglic. tom. 2. p. 144 , 166 , 299. calvin . inst. l. 4. c. 17. n. 44. pet. martyr . l. c. l. 4. c. 10. n. 48. in. 1. cor. 11. p. 55. bucer in matth. 16. p. 186. concil . anglic. 2 vol. p. 328. 2. inst. 632. 2 inst. 632. provinc . const. quum secund . f. 71. can. 95 : 5. rep. 57. * multa impe . diunt promovendum quae non de●iciunt . gloss. in c 15. de vit. & honest. cleric . c. christiano , f. 63. de jure pa●tron . c. pastoralis officii . gloss. in can. & malitiose . moor 26. el. 3● 3 cr. 27. can. 39● 3 cr. 341. 1 leon. 230. reginol 1. c. 5. 6 , 7 , 8 , 10 , baluz . ad reginon . p. 531. concil . angl. 2 vol. 124. c. 10. q. 1. episcopum regino . l. 1. c. 7. concil . braca . 2. c. 1. 10 q. 1. placait . concil . cabil . 2. c. 14. de censibus , f. 121. de officio vicarii c. quoniam v. procurari . concil . anglic. vol. 2. 140. 200. extr. de vita & honestat . cleric . c. 14. prov. const. f. 61. epist. ad jos. hall. concil . anglic. 2. vol. 104. f. 122. 126. can. 78. brownlow's rep. f. 37. id. f. 70. lyndw. f. 9. 6. c. 14. hob. 293. owen 87. 1. cr. 41. 789. officium curae animarum ést praecipuum ac spiritualissimum dei donum . cajetan in act. 8. concil . anglic. 2 vol. p. 8. 10. p. 35. p. 105. constit. prov. 152. parsons counsellor , sect. 5. hob. 167. 1 rolls . 237 joh. de athon . in constit. othob . f. 55. 2. 35. e. 1. 11 r. 72. 3. inst. 204. moor 917. godbolt 279. rolls 813. 29. e. 3. 16. 2 h. 4. 3. 11 h. 6. 20. 9 e. 4. 34. constit. othob . f. 55. 2. othob . f. 55. 2. provinc . constit . f. 59. lyndw. ib. v. sit content . 10. q. 3. c. unio . concil . tolet. 16. c. 5. 21. q. 1. c. 1. clericus . ex. de praebc . referente . ex. de cleric . non-resident . c. quia nonnulli . ex. de praebc , de . multâ . less . l. 2. c. 34. dub. 27. pan. c. dudum . 2. de elect. sylv. benef. 4. sum. angel. ben. 35. tolet. summa ●asim . 5. c. 82. cr. car. f. 456. c. 4. 75. holland's case . a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall, novemb. 29, 1691 by the right reverend father in god, edward lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1692 approx. 45 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 18 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61623 wing s5663 estc r8215 13730076 ocm 13730076 101604 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61623) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101604) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 852:8) a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall, novemb. 29, 1691 by the right reverend father in god, edward lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 35, [1] p. printed for tho. bennet ...., london : 1692. "published by their majesties special command." errata: p. 35. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -o.t. -samuel, 1st, ii, 30 -sermons. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-07 jonathan blaney sampled and proofread 2004-07 jonathan blaney text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the king & queen at white-hall , novemb. 29. 1691. by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . published by their majesties special command . london , printed for tho. bennet at the half-moon in st paul's church-yard . 1692. a sermon preached before the king and queen at white-hall , novemb. 29. 1691. 1 samuel ii. 30. for them that honour me i will honour ; and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed . these words were spoken by a prophet of the lord to eli , at that time , the high priest and iudge over israel , upon occasion of the wickedness of his sons , and the dishonour brought upon religion thereby ; which was so great that it is said , they made the people abhor the offering of the lord. but that we may the better comprehend their scope and design , there are some remarkable particulars to be considered ; with respect to the circumstances that attend them . ( 1. ) that their sins were of a high and scandalous nature , being an open affront both to the ceremonial and moral law. the offering of the lord was that which himself had appointed in the law of moses ; wherein it was expresly required , that the fat of the sacrifices of peace-offerings must be burnt upon the altar , and after that , the joints were to be divided , and the priest was to have his share , and the people that offer'd them the rest . but these sons of eli thought themselves too great to be tied up to such a strict observance of the niceties of the law ; and therefore they sent their servants to demand what they pleased without any regard to that order which the law appointed . it is possible , they might think ( although such lewd and profane persons are not much given to thinking ) that the matter was not great , how , or in what manner , they took the share which belong'd to them ; but god , who best knew what was pleasing to himself , saith , the sin of the young men was very great before the lord. for god will and ought to be served in his own way , and they , who thought to be wiser than his laws , smarted for their folly. thus nadab and abihu ( two brisk young men ) had a mind to try the experiment of offering strange fire before the lord ( not taking it from the altar as god had appointed . ) and what came of this presumptuous violation of god's law ? they were immediately consumed by a strange fire themselves ; for , it is said , a fire went out from the lord and devoured them , and they died before the lord ; i.e. they were struck dead with lightning upon the place , and their dead bodies were carried forth from before the sanctuary out of the camp ; that all the people might observe the truth of what moses said to aaron on this occasion : this is that the lord spake , saying , i will be sanctified in them that come nigh me , and before all the people i will be glorified . it is true , god did not punish hophni and phinehas in the same manner , who added great lewdness and immorality to their other faults ; but he severely threatens the whole house of eli for their sins ; and as a sign of the rest , he declares , that these profligate wretches should both be taken off the same day ; which was accordingly accomplished with dreadfull circumstances ; for , the ark of god was taken at the same time . ( 2. ) that the house of eli was advanced to that dignity which it then enjoy'd by an extraordinary method of providence : for , when nadab and abihu the sons of aaron were destroy'd , there remained eleazar and ithamar , ( for the other died childless , ) from them descended two branches of aaron's family . eleazar was of the elder house ; but eli , who descended from ithamar , was in possession of the high priesthood by god's approbation . and when abiathar in solomon's time was put by the high priesthood , it is said that he descended from ithamar and was of the house of eli ; and he was therefore thrust out that god might fulfill his word , which he spake concerning the house of eli in shiloh . by which we find , that god had raised up the house of eli after an extraordinary manner ; and no doubt , according to the wise methods of divine providence for an extraordinary end ; and we find no ill character fixed upon eli himself , although he had judged israel forty years ; but there were those about him and very near him , who were loose , profane and dissolute persons , and although , those who are most concerned , do commonly hear the last of the miscarriages of those related to them ; yet the cry was so great that it came to his ears and he took notice of it , and reproved them for it ; and he said to them , why do ye such things ? &c. the good old man seems to be heartily concerned and troubled for his sons follies ; but this did not answer god's end ; for the reason he gives of the heavy judgments denounced against his family , was , because his sons made themselves vile and he restrained them not . god expects something more than meer words or bare reproofs , where his honour and that of religion are so much concerned . but when profaneness , and looseness and irreligion crept in among them and grew too hard for the government , god threatens to do such a thing in israel , at which hath the ears of every one that heareth it shall tingle . i need go no farther . ( 3. ) that although god was justly provoked by the sins of the house of eli ; yet there was a concurrence of the peoples sins in bringing down such severe and astonishing judgments . there was no great loss in hophni and phinehas , unless they had been better ; but it was a terrible judgment to have the ark of god taken , and carried captive ; and thereby their whole religion exposed to scorn and contempt among their neighbours , who hated them for the sake of their religion . for when the idolatrous nations about them had corrupted themselves and the worship of god , he was pleased by the ministry of moses to set up a form of worship among the people of israel according to his own will. this gave great dissatisfaction to all their neighbours , and encreased their spite and malice against them ; which they were ready to shew on all occasions ; but never more than when the ark of god was taken captive and carried about in triumph among them : for this was the symbol of gods particular presence among the people of israel . the tabernacle with all its rich and admirable furniture , was as his court ; but the holy of holies , as his chamber of presence ; and there the ark was the place where god gave his answers to his people on great and solemn occasions . and what could be more grievous and dishonourable to them , than to have this ark of god carried away by their enemies ? for , then the name of the whole nation might have been ichabod , for the glory was departed from israel . but was all this meerly for the sins of hophm and phinehas ? no ; the punishment on that account related to the house of eli ; but this was a judgment on the whole nation : and god himself gives a sad account of it , but it was such , as reached to the nature and extent of the judgment . go ye now , saith god in the prophet ieremiah , unto my place which was in shiloh , where i set my name at the first , and see what i did to it for the wickedness of my people israel . so that here was a complication of the sins of all sorts to bring down so heavy a judgment upon them . and thus i have endeavour'd to clear the way towards the right apprehending the full scope and design of these words , them that honour me i will honour ; and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed . wherein are two things to be spoken to ; i. the nature of that honour which is due to god. ii. the rules and measures whereby god bestows honour on mankind . them that honour me i will honour ; and they that despise me , &c. ( 1. ) the nature of that honour which is due to god. there are three sorts of men to be consider'd with respect to the honour due to god ; ( 1. ) such as despise him instead of honouring him . ( 2. ) such as pretend to honour him but do not . ( 3. ) such as give him that real honour which is due to him . ( 1. ) there are such as despise him instead of honouring him . such as the sons of eli here mention'd , who are said to be the sons of belial , who knew not the lord. a strange character of such , who had not only the general advantages of the people of israel to know god above all nations of the world ; but a particular obligation to serve and worship him ! but those do not know god who despise his service . it is impossible to despise infinite goodness and power and wisdom ; for those are things , which all that understand them cannot but reverence and highly esteem . for a poor creature to despise his creatour ; or one that lives upon the bounty of another to despise his benefactour ; seems to be such an inconsistency in morality , as if human nature were uncapable of it . but notwithstanding , god himself , who knows the most secret thoughts of mens hearts , saith here , they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed ; although god cannot be despised for his glorious perfections ; yet his authority may be despised , when men presumptuously break his laws ; when they do not regard what he hath commanded or forbidden ; when they profess to know god , but in works they deny him ; when they own a god , and yet live as if there were none ; giving themselves over to a profane and irreligious temper of mind , if not to all sorts of wickedness in their lives . and if once such a temper prevails , there is nothing to be expected but an inundation of the other . for those who despise god and religion can have little regard to the differences of good and evil ; and when once the awe of god and conscience is gone , there is nothing can be effectual enough to restrain the violence of natural inclinations . there are two sorts of profane persons too easie to be observed in the world. some are profane in their practises ; who give way to their sensual inclinations and pursue them , as they see occasion , without reflection or consideration . these do not presently shake off the principles of religion and vertue , although they act against them . they know they ought to fear god and to abstain from evil ; but they do neither , leading a loose , dissolute , and wicked life , although if they would but consider what they do , they might soon be convinced of the folly of their actions ; because they act against those principles which they have seen no reason to question , but they have not the grace and resolution to observe them . while they continue thus , there is some hold to be taken of them ; and although their sins be against conscience , yet they are not past hope ; because there is some life left , but under great struglings and decays . but there are others ( i wish i could only say there had been ) who are profane out of principles ; who not only neglect religion , but despise it ; and affront and ridicule it , as far as they dare with regard to their own safety . the other are mischievous to the world by example , but these by design ; those are enemies to themselves and to such as follow them ; but these ought to be look'd on , as the subverters of all that is good , and the promoters of all evil and mischief , and therefore as the truest enemies to mankind , and the pest and bane of humane society ; the dishonour and reproach of their age and country ; and not meerly enemies to mankind , but to god himself , the best and wisest being in the world ; whom , as far as in them lies , they endeavour to dethrone from his soveraignty over it . and where such monsters of impiety grow numerous and bold , they bode the most fatal consequences to such a people , where they appear without a publick detestation of them . ( 2. ) there are such who pretend to honour god , but do not . honour is an act of the mind , ( if it be spoken of real and inward honour , and not of the external signs of it ) and it is in him that gives , and not in him that receives it . but yet those who intend to give honour to another , may do it in such an improper and unsuitable manner , that he for whom it is intended , may look on it as an affront and dishonour to him . therefore he that would give true honour to another must have a just apprehension of his worth and excellency , and give it in such a manner as is most becoming and agreeable to him . now , there are two ways whereby men may be guilty of dishonouring god under a pretence of honouring him . ( 1. ) by entertaining false notions of god in their minds , and worshipping their own imaginations instead of him. ( 2. ) by doing honour to him not according to his nature and will , but according to their own intentions and imaginations . ( 1. ) by false notions of god in their minds , and by worshipping their own imaginations instead of him ; i.e. when persons form in their minds false imaginations or conceptions of him ; and so give their worship not to the true god , but to an idol of their own fancy . but there is a great deal of difference between such conceptions of god in our minds , which fall short of the perfections of the divine nature , ( as all ours must do for want of faculties to comprehend him ) and such which attribute something to him which is unworthy of him . not , that if any happen to be mistaken in their conceptions of god , we must presently charge them with idolatry ; for the scripture makes that to lie in an open and publick dishonouring of god by giving that worship which is alone due to him to any thing besides himself ; it is the setting up of another interest among mankind in opposition to his power and soveraignty ; it is such an exposing the proper object of divine worship as to render it mean and contemptible : for nothing can be a greater disparagement to the divine nature , than to be supposed to be like the work of mens hands ; or to have any of his own creatures to have that worship given to them which belongs to himself ; and so it takes away the due apprehension , which ought to be always maintained of the infinite distance between god and the workmanship of his hands . but these consequences do not reach to inward false conceptions of god ; yet they ought by all possible means to be avoided by those who would give unto god in their minds the honour which is due unto him . and to avoid all wrong apprehensions concerning him , we must settle in our minds such a fixed notion of him , as results from those evidences which prove his being . for , the invisible things of god , saith the apostle , are understood by the things that are made ; i.e. the visible frame of the world doth afford such plain evidence of the wisdom , power and goodness of the maker of them , that from thence we may form a distinct and clear notion of god in our minds , as a being infinitely wise , powerfull and good. this is the most natural , easie and orderly conception we can have of god in our minds ; because it arises from the same arguments which prove his being . and when our minds are fixed and settled herein , the next thing is to exclude all mean and unworthy thoughts of him , as inconsistent with his divine perfections . therefore , whatever savours of impotency or cruelty ; whatever tends to abate our reverence , to lessen our esteem , to damp our affections , or to cool our devotion towards him , cannot be agreeable to those just conceptions we ought to have always in our minds concerning him . for the honour of god doth not lie in having such terrible apprehensions of his majesty and power and justice as may drive us into horrour and despair ; but in entertaining such an opinion of his wisdom , goodness and loving-kindness as may incline us to love him and to trust in his mercy . and then god is truely honoured by us , when we preserve a deep sense and awe of him upon our minds ; when we adore him for his infinite perfections ; when we esteem him as the most proper object of our love , as well as of our fear ; when we put our trust and confidence in him , and depend upon him as to the conveniencies of this life and the happiness of another ; when the desire of our soul is towards him , and our meditation of him is frequent and serious and delightfull to us ; when we set him always before us , and direct the course of our lives and actions to the pleasing him ; when we dare not wilfully do any thing to offend him ; but make it our chief study and business to do what tends to his honour , and to promote it in the world. it is therefore of very great consequence , as to the whole course of religion to keep up in our minds , such a true and setled notion of god , as may influence our devotion , reform our disorders , inflame our affections , and keep us from being led aside by the violent and impetuous heats of imagination . for this is the true source of most of the extravagancies of mankind about religion ; they have no true notion of god in their minds , but they dread his power , and know not how to please him ; and so run from one thing to another , through the several methods of superstitions , or enthusiasm , as agrees best with their fancies ; which is so unstable and uncertain a principle , that no steady course of religion can be steer'd by it . a man who acts by imagination , is like a ship at sea without anchor or compass , which rouls up and down just as the wind and the waves carry her . but reason and understanding is a steady and uniform principle , and being well fixed from a due and thorough consideration of the nature and will of god , keeps the mind even and constant , and goes on its course as well as it can , and makes its way , notwithstanding the force of the current and tide of natural inclination be against it ; and that the clouds and vapors of imagination often hinder the freedom of its motion . nothing is so uncomfortable , nothing so ungovernable as a restless imagination ; and when it is oppressed with a religious melancholy , then every thing seems dark and confused ; we neither know god nor our selves as we ought to doe , and we must judge amiss when we judge by such a false light : and therefore our wisest course in such a case is to be humble and patient ; to suspend any peremptory judgment as to our selves till we have clearer light , and those mists and vapors are dispersed , which darken and perplex our thoughts . ( 2. ) men dishonour god , when they pretend to honour him , not according to his will , but their own intentions and imaginations . there are some things practised and defended in the christian world , which one would hardly think possible to have ever prevailed , had it not been that they thought to doe honour to god by them . i shall not insist upon the pretences in the church of rome of honouring god against his will , by giving divine and religious worship to images , saints and angels , &c. because though there be a great deal of folly and superstition and real dishonour to god in them , yet there is no such mischief to the rest of mankind , unless they take up an imagination that god will be honoured by rooting out and destroying all such as cannot comply with them in their superstitious follies . but as the true spirit of religion wears off , that of persecution often comes in the place of it , like wasps and hornets out of a dead carkass . thus in the iewish church in our saviour's time , there was the same outward shew and pomp of religion , which had been in their best times ; and our saviour himself frequented both the synagogue worship and the solemn festivals at the temple ; nay he allow'd that the scribes and pharisees sate in moses's chair , and that his disciples should observe what they taught agreeable to the law ; but yet , he elsewhere charges them that by their traditionary doctrines they had enervated the force of the law ; and therefore they did honour him with their lips , but their heart was far from him ; i.e. they had no true love of god or their neighbour , but they thought to make amends for all that , by a wonderfull zeal for their own traditions and the lesser things of the law ; which they shewed not only by an unwearied diligence to gain proselytes , but by destroying all such as opposed their designs ; and that not in an ordinary way of passion and revenge , but they would needs have all this to be done for the honour and service of god. whosoever killeth you will think that he doth god service . a strange kind of service indeed , to take away the lives of his best and most usefull servants ! but although no religion in the wold be so directly contrary to all acts of cruelty and inhumanity as the christian is , yet upon the degeneracy of that , the same kind of spirit hath risen up and prevailed over too great a part of the christian world. but especially the very same jewish spirit of zeal and hypocrisy and cruelty hath enter'd in these last ages into a society of men ( whom i need not name ) who have undermined the genuine principles of morality , inflamed the spirits of princes to all the effects of a cruel war and a merciless persecution ; and used their utmost endeavours to root out all such as dare not sacrifice their consciences to the will of a prince under their direction : and which adds to all this , they have the impudence to assume that motto to themselves , ad majorem dei gloriam ; as though they aimed at nothing but doing greater honor to god. such as these go beyond hophni and phinehas ; for their wickedness , although great , was confined to a narrow compass , but these disperse themselves into all states and kingdoms , and carry on the same uniform design , viz. to doe all the mischief they can under the pretence of advancing the honour of god. ( 3. ) but certainly there is a way left to give to god that honour which is due to him ; otherwise , it were to little purpose to say , them that honour me i will honour . but i shall not take in here all the ways how we may honour god , but consider that which is most proper to the design of these words . for which we are to observe that the external worship and service of god was in general , well enough kept up and observed in the tabernacle at shiloh . there the high-priest attended , the daily sacrifices were offer'd , and the people resorted thither at the solemn feasts from all parts of the land : but the great examples of wickedness in the sons of eli had spread themselves so far , that the people were generally corrupted , and the best part of their religion , which lies in a reformation of manners , was almost gone . there were some pious and devout persons , such as eli himself ( a good man but a bad magistrate , being remiss and careless in the execution of his office ) and no doubt , many among the people , as well as elkanah and hannah , were devout and serious in the service of god and other duties of religion ; but yet god himself takes notice of the wickedness of his people israel , at the time when the ark was removed from shiloh . and therefore we have reason to take particular notice of that passage to eli concerning the reason of the punishment of his house , because his sons made themselves vile and he restrained them not . for , their sins were of a very contagious nature , and by not restraining them , the people were run into a great degree of looseness and profaneness . so that it was not for eli's personal miscarriages , that god thought himself so dishonoured by him , but for want of taking due care for the suppressing profaneness and corruption of manners in others . and this shews the true way how god may and ought to be honoured by those who are bound to take care of others ; viz. by giving all due encouragement to true religion and vertue , and by making use of the most effectual means for suppressing irreligion and profaneness . and this indeed is a great and noble design fit for the greatest minds and persons of the highest station to be employed about . i cannot deny , that it is a difficult work ; for it is easier to subdue the bodies than the passions of men ; and how many will rather venture their lives than mortify their lusts ? and let them pretend what they will , we find that they will sooner part with any thing than with their sins . do we not daily see that they will let go honour , reputation , interest , health , and the hopes of heaven , rather than those vices they have been accustomed to the practice of ? how can we then imagine , that the meer fears of the execution of humane laws should presently restrain those , whom no fear of hell or damnation could hitherto reform ? but yet a stop may and ought to be put to the insolent growth of profaneness ; for if it be suffered to be too hard for our laws , it will in time be too hard for all sort of government . yet how shall a stop be put to it under such difficulties ? for it cannot be denied , that we have excellent laws against vice and debauchery , and that magistrates have had sufficient countenance from authority for the due execution of them . but yet the complaints are great of a mighty overflowing of all sorts of wickedness still among us ; i hope they are not all true ; but yet i am afraid , there is too much ground for them . what is the reason of such a complaint of profaneness and irreligion among us at a time we pretend so much to reformation ? it is no wonder that the bad examples of those who ought to reform others bring vice into fashion ; but when that cannot be alledged , what is the reason that good examples do so little towards the reforming others ? it is easie to resolve all into the corruption of humane nature ; but that is a general answer which serves for all times and places , and most suppose them alike : and if it be a good and sufficient answer , it is to little purpose to talk of laws , religion and reformation : for unless they may have some power to alter and amend the course of mens actions , they signify very little to the real benefit of mankind , no more than sea-marks do towards hindring the course of the tide ; but meer examples , although of excellent use to all ingenuous minds , yet to others they are but like statues of mercury in the road , which point to the right way , but men will go which way they please notwithstanding . therefore to laws and examples the magistrates power must be added , which was appointed for this purpose , to be a terrour to those that do evil , as well as an encouragement to those that do well . and then the apostle supposeth the sword is born in vain , when the magistrate is not the minister of god in this respect ; a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil . it was the great and just honour of princes of old , that by their means , mankind was reduced from a rude and disorderly kind of life , to the practice of civility and good manners ; and it is as great a foundation of honour still , when men are so much apostatized from them , to bring them back again to the due order and decency of living . the case is much harder of those who are degenerate under laws , than of those who were so without them ; for they have learnt to despise their remedy , and by arts and subtilties to avoid the force of that , which was intended for their good. but , however , none ought to be discouraged from so excellent a design ; which recommends it self to all wise and good men , and will never want the assistance and prayers of all that are so ; and god himself will in an especial manner give honour to those who thus honour him in his own way ; by using the most effectual means for the reforming the manners of men. but what are those ways which may be called effectual ? it 's true , that depends upon the favour and blessing of god ; but it is no hard matter for us to judge what are the most likely means to be effectual . such as , ( 1. ) an universal discountenancing of all sorts of vice and profaneness , be the persons of what rank or quality soever . for , if those of the house of eli be suffer'd to transgress , the people will follow their examples ; although the good old man did not like their doings , but he did not take care enough to restrain them . ( 2. ) an even , steady , vigorous and impartial execution of the laws against looseness and debauchery ; so that it may not look like a sudden heat or design of popularity , but proceeding from a due and well-temper'd zeal for god and religion . ( 3. ) a wise choice of fit instruments to pursue so good an end ; i mean such as iethro recommended to moses , men of courage and integrity , fearing god and hating covetousness . and such i hope are to be found in the several parts of the nation . ( 4. ) lastly , a diligent inspection into the behaviour of those who are the proper and immediate instruments for carrying on so good a design . for , if there be no inspection afterwards , it will be look'd on as a meer matter of form , or an order given out to satisfie the importunities of some and the clamours of others . it were to be wished , that all who are imploy'd in such a work had an equal mixture of wisdom and zeal ; but it is not possible to hinder some from having unequal shares of these ; and it is great pity so good a cause should miscarry through the indiscretion of any who are zealous for it . on the other side , it is possible that some who pretend to an equal zeal for it in general , may use such artifices and fair pretences , as may effectually baffle and undermine it , while they seem to be concerned to promote it . so that , what through the intemperate heats of some , the coldness and indifferency of others , and the certain averseness all bad men have to any real design of reformation , there is a necessity for such an affair to be often look'd into , and an account taken of the management of it , if any great advantage be expected by it . and surely no greater advantage can be expected as to this world , than from such a design managed , as it ought to be . for , what can we propose to our selves , that can tend more to promote the honour of almighty god , which we ought above all other things to be concerned for . for , the righteous god loveth righteousness ; and he abhorrs all kind of wickedness : what then can be more pleasing to him , than to have all sorts of impiety and profaneness discountenanced , punished , and if it be possible , rooted out ? what can tend more to the honour of his vicegerents , than to shew so much of a resemblance to him , as to love what god loves , and to hate what he hates ; and to imploy their power for the same end which god himself doth his , viz. to advance his glory and to do good to mankind ? what can tend more to the honour of our church and nation , than to let the world see by such good works as these , what the reformation is , which we aim at ; not meerly of some disputable points , as to doctrine and practise , ( which we have earnestly contended for , and with great reason , ) but a true and serious reformation of the hearts and lives of men ; without which all our other pretences will fall infinitely short of what god expects from us , and the very name of reformation will be a reproach to us . ii. i now proceed to the second particular , viz. the rules and measures which god observes in distributing honour among men , them that honour me , i will honour ; but they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed . which may be understood two ways ; i. as to the societies of men which have one common interest . ii. as to the interests and honour of particular persons . i. as to such societies of men , which have one common interest . and so it implies , that the welfare and reputation , and flourishing condition of such , depends upon their zeal and concernment for god and religion . but here , we meet with very great difficulties ; for reason and experience seem to contradict each other about it . on the one side , it seems most agreeable to the justice of divine providence to reward and punish those in this world who will not be capable of being rewarded or punished in another ; for there will be no communities in another world. but on the other side , we cannot deny matter of common experience ; for , how long have the turkish and papal monarchies ( to name no other ) flourished , when the seven churches of asia , and the churches of africa have been long since destroyed ? how strangely hath mahometism spread in the eastern parts of the world ? and what a check hath there been , upon the reformation in these western parts ? with what a mighty torrent did it prevail at first ? then it stood at a stand , and hath of late years gone so much backward , and suffer'd so very much in many parts of it : and yet we think , and that very justly , that the honour of god is concerned in all this . what shall we say to the insolent oppressors of mankind who make no conscience of ruining cities and countries , and offering violence to the bodies and consciences of men to advance and support their own grandeur ; and yet have been suffer'd to prevail so far as to be made an argument against providence by atheistical men ? it is to be hoped that god in his own time will vindicate his honour and clear this point to the satisfaction of all reasonable men ; but yet , we cannot penetrate into the wisdom and secrets of providence . god will ( no doubt ) take care of his own honour ; but he is not bound to give such men an account of the ways and methods and seasons of his doing it . he often raises up a nation fit for his purpose , and makes them as a scourge to neighbour nations ; and when they have done his work , he suffers them to be humbled , if not destroyed , by the same methods they have used to others . sometimes he raises up one kingdom and nation against another , when their sins make them ripe for vengeance ; and so he takes the potsheards of the earth and breaks them upon one another ; and thus , by their mutual punishment , they both become the executioners of his wrath ; and we cannot determine by the event which was in the greater guilt . so that god takes care of his own honour , by methods we are not able to comprehend . for who can weigh the nations in a balance , and determine how far the sins of one doth exceed the other ? and if we cannot know the number and aggravation of a peoples sins , we can never fix the measures and degrees of their punishments . but , however , some things are certain ; ( 1. ) that the sins of a nation do naturally tend to the weakness and dishonour of it . thus a factious , seditious , turbulent temper not only is the reproach of a people ; but the ready way to destroy it . and yet it hath so happen'd , that when the factions have been almost equally poised , as at rome and carthage , they have raised such an emulation between them , which by their endeavours to out-vie each other , hath for some time preserved their countrey . who can deny that luxury and debauchery and all sorts of intemperance , not only sink the reputation of a people , but effeminates and softens them , and makes them careless and idle , regardless of any thing but what makes for their own ease and voluptuousness ? and in all human probability , such a nation must sink , when a people of more wisdom and courage and resolution , makes it their business to overcome them . so that these sorts of sins are natural causes of weakning the power and interest of a nation . but there are other sins , as profaneness and contempt of god and religion , hypocrisy , idolatry , &c. and of such , which work as moral causes , god himself is the only judge , when the measure of their iniquity is filled up . ( 2. ) sometimes god steps out of his ordinary method and course of providence either in a way of judgment or mercy . and then he more particularly shews , that those that honour him , he will honour ; and those who despise him shall be lightly esteemed . these things are not every days experience , but when they do happen they deserve to be taken notice of , in a more than ordinary manner . aristotle , who was no great friend to providence , as to human affairs , professes , that he did not know what to make of the extraordinary success some persons had in their affairs , without any extraordinary visible causes . it is possible , he might have the success of his macedonian friends in his thoughts ; who swallow'd up the common-wealths of greece , as so many morsels , and then destroy'd the mighty persian monarchy . but in these cases , he allows a divine impulse , carrying them on beyond the ordinary measures of human prudence ; and over-ruling so many things in order to success , as nothing but a divine hand could manage . and when great advantages come to a nation in such a manner , a more than ordinary degree of thankfulness is justly expected , that god may be honoured in a particular manner for the deliverance he works by such means , and the mercies he bestows or continues thereby . ( 2. ) as to particular persons ; how far this holds , will appear by these things : ( 1. ) that esteem and honour naturally follows the opinion of anothers desert or excellency . for it is not an arbitrary thing , but is founded on the supposition of something that deserves it . it is like the assent given to mathematical evidence , which is not because they will do it , but because they cannot help it . ( 2. ) the sincere practise of piety and vertue doth command esteem and reverence . hypocrisy indeed lessens it to the utmost degree ; because it argues a mean and false temper of mind ; but there is nothing in true religion but what tends to raise esteem ; for it implies all the things which are allow'd by all persons to gain honour among men. for one that is truely religious is a true lover of god and of mankind ; he is gratefull to his benefactour , and always owns in the most solemn manner his dependence upon him , both by prayers and praises ; he is ready to doe good to all men , as far as is consistent with his duty to god ; he is just , righteous , and mercifull , sober and temperate in the whole course of his life ; he acts not by chance or for by ends ; but by a fixed principle of being and doing good ; he keeps himself within the bounds which god hath set him ; and with chearfulness and resolution sets himself to doe and suffer his will ; and hath so much courage , as to dare to doe his duty , and is afraid of nothing so much as offending god. and now let any one judge , whether there be any thing mean or contemptible in all this ; whether every one that hears this character doth not wish it belonged to himself . and that is a certain token that it brings honour and esteem with it . let me then , for a conclusion of all , recommend the practise of religion and vertue to all such as are the most concerned for honour and esteem . the world is always vain enough to flatter greatness , either out of weakness or design ; but true greatness of mind despises flattery ; and where that is wanting in any , this very flatterer despises them . but this is a way to be above the reach of contempt ; to doe iustly , and to love mercy , and to walk humbly with god ; and these are the things which god himself assures us are the main parts of our duty . if we be careless of god's honour and service now , the time will shortly come , when we shall heartily wish we had been otherwise . for , how great soever your honour be now , you and that together must in a little time be laid in the dust. and then the main difference will be according to the honour we have done to god ; for , although the text doth hold good , as to this world , as i have already shew'd ; yet the most glorious accomplishment of it will be in the life to come : for , then it will be made evident to all mankind , that those that honour him , god will honour ; and they that despise him shall be lightly esteemed . finis . errata . pag. 23. line 26. for most , reade must . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61623-e140 v. 17. levit. 7. 31. v. 33 , 34. v. 13 , 14 , 15 , 16. v. 17. levit. 10. 1. levit. 1. 7. ch . 6. v. 12. ch . 16. v. 12. ch . 10. v. 2. v. 4. v. 3. v. 22. v. 34. ch . 4. v. 11. levit. 10. 6. 1 chron. 24. 2. numb . 3. 4. 1 chron. 14. 2 , 5. 1 kings 24. 27. 1 sam. 4. 18. ch . 2. v. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25. ch . 3. v. 13. ch . 3. v. 11. ch . 4. v. 22. jerem. 7. 12. 1 sam. 2. 12. titus 1. 16. rom. 1. 20. luke 4. 16. matt. 23. 2. matt. 15. 8. john 16. 2. rom. 13. 3. ver . 4. exod. 18. 21. eudem . l. 7. c. 14. micah 6. 8. a letter to mr. g. giving a true account of a late conference at the d. of p. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1687 approx. 9 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 5 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61567 wing s5602 estc r7652 12193830 ocm 12193830 55950 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61567) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 55950) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 899:22) a letter to mr. g. giving a true account of a late conference at the d. of p. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. godden, thomas, 1624-1688. 8 p. printed for h. mortlock ..., london : 1687. reproduction of original in huntington library. attributed to edward stillingfleet. cf. bm. last page signed: e.s. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng tradition (theology) 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 mona logarbo sampled and proofread 2004-04 mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a letter to mr. g. giving a true account of a late conference at the d. of p. imprimatur , martii 12. 1686 / 7. guil. needham . london , printed for h. mortlock at the phoenix in saint paul's church-yard . 1687. a letter to mr. g. giving a true account of a late conference at the d. of p. sir , i was very much surprised at the sight of several copies you have given out of the conference between us at my house in ianuary last . for although you took great care in the conference it self to keep me from expecting any great ingenuity from you after it ; yet i could hardly believe you would have ventured so far as to have given out such false and imperfect copies of what past as all those have been which came to my hands , and were all said to be dispersed by you . you know very well that the gentleman who wrote for you never read his papers in the conclusion , that we might judge how fairly he had represented both sides : and when they were neither read , nor compared , nor signed as they ought to have been , with what ingenuity can these be dispersed through so many hands for true and authentick copies ? at least you ought to have sent them to me and to have answered my objections against them before you had read them in coffee-houses , and made such descants upon them in places where you were sure i would not be present to contradict you . but when nothing was done to make your copy appear to be good , they must be of very easie faith and understanding who would take your word in this matter , without so much as any motives of credibility . i hear you made great boasts of your victory after the conference , which i onely smiled at , and thought you hoped to make your self considerable by your vanity . if you gain no greater victories , you will very little increase the number of your converts : for the gentleman for whose sake the conference was , declared immediately after it , that he was much more confirmed in the communion of our church by it , and resolved to continue in it ; which he hath since repeated several times to me . but of all the persons of your church , i have yet met with , you had least reason to go away with the boast of a victory . for i pray call but to mind how the conference ended , and i think you will be ashamed of your boasting . when you came to your demonstration of infallibility in the church of rome , which came to this in short , that all traditionary christians believe the same to day which they did yesterday , and so up to the time of our blessed saviour and if they follow this rule they can never err in faith , therefore are infallible ; and you proved they could not innovate in faith unless they did forget what they held the day before , or out of malice alter it ; i thought the best way to shew the vanity of this rare demonstration was to produce an instance of such as followed tradition and yet you could not deny to have erred , and that was of the greek church , which went upon tradition from father to son , as much as ever the roman did : and i desired to know of you whether the greek church notwithstanding did not err in matters of faith ; and if it did , then a church holding to tradition was not infallible . your answer was , that the greek church followed tradition , till the arians left that rule and took up a new one , i. e. scripture privately interpreted . i told you i did not mean the arians , but the present greek church ( which you charge with heresie ) and yet they follow tradition from father to son. this i was forced to repeat over and over , but no answer could i get from you , but you still ran back to the arians , and compared them and the calvinists , which i told you was not at all to the purpose ; for i insisted upon the present greek church , and so you rose up in a heat , and endeavoured to keep those who wrote from setting down this last part as it ought to have been . in the papers dispersed by you , you make me barely put the question , whether the greek church did follow tradition from father to son in matters of faith , or no ? but do not mention the inference i drew from it , and which is set down in the original paper that was read aloud and approved by both parties , that if the greek church followed tradition , which is undeniably true , and is granted by your self in your answer , then a church holding to tradition as its rule may err in matters of faith , which unavoidably overthrows your pretended demonstration . for you cannot make an evasion , by saying , that though the greek church once adhered to tradition , yet in the time of arianism it left that rule and took up another , and so ever since fell into errour as the calvinists did ; for that is apparently false as to the present greek church ( of which i spake ) as is known to every one that knows any thing of the greek church , which in all its differences with the roman church as to the procession of the holy ghost , the pope's supremacy , purgatory , &c. still pleaded tradition and adhered to it . neither is so much of your answer true , as that even the arians went off from the rule of tradition , for they insisted on it , and petavius thinks they had good reason for it . but however i said my instance was not about them , but the present greek church , and this i do affirm , you gave no answer at all to . i know what arts have been used to get mr. t. to approve your copy : i have not seen what he wrote , and i desired him to bring the gentleman to me who wrote for you , that we might compare ours together , but word was left with my servant , that he was not well . but suppose he should now correct his copy , this will be too late for my vindication , since so many imperfect ones have been given out and dispersed , not onely here in town , but over several parts of the nation . and therefore i am 〈◊〉 to take this way to put a stop to such dis 〈…〉 ceeding . i hear mr. m. pretends that i gave but false copies , which is so far from being true , that i was often solicited on the account of your papers , before i let one be seen , and then it was onely to correct the errours of yours . and mine was taken by a person of learning as well as integrity , who was present at the whole conference and very well understood the whole matter . but because your writer's copy was not then read , and none signed , i desire you now to make good these two things , which the whole conference depended upon . ( 1. ) that we have no absolute certainty as to the rule of our faith , viz. the scripture ; although we have a larger and firmer tradition for it , viz. the consent of all christian churches , than you can have for the points of faith in difference between us . ( 2. ) that the tradition from father to son is an infallible conveyance of matters of faith , notwithstanding the greek church is charged by you with errour , which adhered to tradition . if you give a satisfactory account of these two things , you will acquit your self much better than by boasting in coffee-houses , and dispersing such copies of conferences . if you decline giving an answer to this just and necessary vindication of my self , the world will easily see on whose side the victory lay ; but i confess i did not think it worth boasting of . if you are really such a man at controversie , as i hear you would be taken for , i offer you a fair opportunity to shew your self : and i do promise by god's assistance to return an answer to you in such a manner , as will be least liable to the injury of false copies . i am , sir , your humble servant , e. s. march 7. 1686 / 7. the end . christian magnanimity a sermon preached in the cathedral church at worcester at the time of the assizes, september 21. 1690 / by ... edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1690 approx. 49 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 21 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61531 wing s5566 estc r2456 12266160 ocm 12266160 58085 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61531) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 58085) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 899:20) christian magnanimity a sermon preached in the cathedral church at worcester at the time of the assizes, september 21. 1690 / by ... edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [4], 36 p. printed for henry mortclocke ..., london : 1690. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng church of england -sermons. bible. -n.t. -timothy, 2nd, i, 7 -sermons. christian life. sermons, english -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion christian magnanimity . a sermon preached in the cathedral church at worcester at the time of the assizes . september 21. 1690. by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . london , printed for henry mortclocke at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . 1690. to my honoured friends , robert berkely , esq high-sheriff of the county of worcester , and the gentlemen of the grand-jury . gentlemen , it is at your request , that i publish this sermon , which you were pleased to think might be usefull to others , as well as to those who heard it . and i could not deny the first request that was made to me by the gentlemen of this country , in which i have found so much civility and kindness . i thank god , i came hither with no other intention but to do as much good as i could ; and i hope i shall always pursue that design with a sincere and vigorous mind , as far as i have health and opportunity . i thought i could not do my duty at this time , without representing the evil and mischief of some very unseasonable heats and animosities , among those who pretend to the same common interest , as to religion and laws , which are the most certain standard of our publick good ; and none , but such as are enemies to it , can understand it otherwise . may god almighty bless this country and the whole nation , with a hearty zeal and concernment for it . i am , gentlemen , your faithfull servant for the best ends , e. wigorn . worcester , sept. 23 ▪ 1690. a sermon preached at the assizes at worcester , september 21. 1690. 2 tim . i. 7. for god hath not given us the spirit of fear , but of power , and of love and of a sound mind . if we look into the scope and design of this epistle , we shall find s. paul at the time of writing it , under more than ordinary apprehensions of the sad condition of the christian church . as to himself , he had great satisfaction in the particular care of divine providence towards him : for , god had not onely formerly delivered him out of many persecutions ; but had lately rescued him out of the mouth of the lion , i. e. from a great and imminent danger . and though he foresaw , that the time of his departure was at hand ; yet that was so far from giving him any trouble , that he had the comfort of a good conscience in looking back ; i have fought a good fight , i have finished my course , i have kept the faith ; and in looking forward , henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness , which the lord the righteous iudge shall give me at that day . but all his dissatisfaction did arise from looking about him ; for without were fightings , and within were fears . the persecutions abroad were indeed so sharp and severe , that none could keep a good conscience without a share in them ; which makes him say , yea , and all that will live godly in christ iesus shall suffer persecutions . but this was not that which troubled him most ; for there were two things which seem to have made a deep and sad impression upon his mind . ( 1. ) he observed a great coldness and indifferency among some who pretended a mighty zeal for the common interest of their religion before . of this he gives a strange instance in his own case . at my first answer , saith he , no man stood with me , but all men forsook me ; i pray god it be not laid to their charge . they might think it prudence and caution at such a dangerous time , but the apostle certainly thought it a fault , or else he would never have pray'd that it might not be laid to their charge . something might be said in excuse of those who were so near danger ; but what can be said for the general coldness of those at a distance ? this thou knowest , that all they which are in asia be turned away from me . a sad consideration to timothy , who was entrusted by him with the particular care of those in asia ! for , what comfort could he hope for among them , who were turned away from s. paul ? such a defection as this must needs bring great dishonour to religion , as well as dissatisfaction to him . ( 2. ) he observed a busie sort of seducers , who were crept in among them ; who were crafty , restless and designing men ; such as could not compass their own ends without taking upon them a pretence of zeal for religion . they were men of as ill tempers as we can well imagine men to be ; they were lovers of themselves , covetous , boasters , proud , &c. but he concludes their character with what one would have least expected from such a sort of men , that they had a form of godliness . they were such painted sepulchres that made a more than ordinary shew and appearance , but within there was nothing but rottenness and corruption . men who pretended to religion without vertue ; and hoped to be accounted godly without any real goodness . they made a great shew of zeal about some things , and were industrious in gaining proselytes ; for which end they crept into houses , &c. but whatever they pretended , their own interest lay at bottom ; supposing that gain is godliness ; and they were so far from any hopes of amendment , that s. paul gives that dreadfull character of them , that they waxed worse and worse , deceiving and being deceived . and what now should timothy do under such a complication of ill circumstances ? should he onely stand still and see which way things would go ? or should he give way to despondency and sink under the burthen of his fears ? no , s. paul , although at a distance , and a prisoner , yet thinks fit to rouse , to animate , to incourage him ; and not onely to put him in mind of the gift of god which was in him ; but of that spirit and temper , which true christianity possesses mens minds with . for god hath not given us the spirit of fear , but of power , of love and of a sound mind . which words may be considered two ways : i. with respect to difficulties and troubles in the world ; and so it is not a spirit of fear , but of power . some render it spiritum timiditatis , a timerous , pusillanimous spirit ; which is apt to be dejected with fears , so as not to have courage and resolution enough to do ones duty for fear of danger ; and a spirit of power is that which supports and bears up the mind under a prospect of difficulties , so as not to be hinder'd thereby from that duty which lies upon us . ii. with respect to the humours and passions of men ; and so it is a spirit of love and of a sound mind : not a peevish , froward , exasperating , provoking spirit , but a spirit of love ; not a turbulent , seditious , unruly spirit , but of a sound mind . i. with respect to difficulties and troubles . which may be understood two ways : 1. as it may relate to such as s. paul and timothy ; we have not received , i. e. we that have an apostolical spirit given to us . 2. as it may relate to all christians ; we that own christ sincerely and truely have not received , &c. ( 1. ) i shall consider the words with respect to the apostolical spirit ; because this day we commemorate one of them , ( s. matthew . ) those who had the apostolical office committed to them , ( whether primarily by christ himself , or secondarily by the apostles , as timothy and titus and others ) had great need of this apostolical spirit . for , really , the difficulties were so great , which they were to go through , that no ordinary measures of courage and resolution would serve them . when men fight with enemies in the open field , there is a multitude combined together ; among whom there is abundance of noise and heat and examples ; and the hopes of present victory , and the shame and danger of running away ; which animate persons in a day of battel : but it is another kind of courage which is required to make men bear up against the malice and subtilty of the devil and of wicked men ; for here the combination is to all appearance much stronger on the worse side ; and if we are to judge of success by numbers , those who promote vertue and goodness could never bear up against their adversaries ; who were sure to carry it by the poll. there were among the heathens some few great men , who endeavour'd to reform the vices of mankind : but , alas ! what poor success had they in their attempts this way ? although they wanted neither wit , nor learning , nor address to carry on this noble design ; such as socrates at athens and epictetus at rome , and some others , who lived agreeably to their doctrine ; yet how little effect had both their precepts and example on the rest of the people either at athens or rome ? socrates declared a mighty resolution rather to die than to say or do any thing unbecoming the station god placed him in ; and upon the prosecution of two malicious men , the prevailing party were resolved to try the experiment , and took him at his word . after which , his disciples durst not deal so plainly and openly as he had done ; and the artifice they were put to , lost the force of the best part of their philosophy ; which they so mixed with numbers and figures and abstracted speculations , that it became a mystery , instead of a plain design to reform the manners of men. the best and wisest of them seem to have taken more pains to satisfie themselves , than to have instructed others ; or if they did , they were some few chosen disciples , whom they initiated with as much care , as they were wont to do in their solemn mysteries . but the apostles undertook to reform the world , as to two things , which mankind are the hardest brought off from , and those are idolatry and vice. and they went plainly and roundly to work , which men can the least bear ; as we see by the persecutions they underwent almost in every place assoon as their design was understood . there was a general clamour against them as the disturbers of mankind , as those who turned the world upside down ; which in some sense was true , but not as they meant it with respect to order and government . but when men have no mind to be reformed , they must have some terms of reproach to fasten upon those who go about to do it . it being natural for them to put pictures of devils on those , whom they have a mind to execute . and when they undeavour'd to convince them of their immoralities , they were very impatient ; of which we have a clear instance in s. paul's preaching to felix concerning righteousness and temperance and iudgment to come : which were excellent subjects , but they went too near him ; he was too much concerned , to be willing to hear any more of them . the discourse of s. paul had too much force in it for him to bear it any longer ; for it caused such a disorder in his mind as affected his body , for , felix trembled : and then he thought it best to dismiss him to a more convenient season , which never came , that we reade of . which shews , how much more willing men are to continue in their faults , than to hear them reproved in order to amendment . am i therefore become your enemy , saith s. paul , because i tell you the truth ? no doubt of it : for , no truths can be so uneasie and provoking as those which gaul the consciences of men . the false teachers whom s. paul complains so much of , were sensible of the inconveniencies which follow'd plain truth ; and therefore , to avoid persecution , they so mixed and adulterated the doctrine of the true apostles , that it lost its main force and efficacy . and although by their shifts and compliances with iews and gentiles , they escaped the hard usage which others underwent ; yet the effect of it was , that their doctrine took no deep rooting in the world : for , in origen's time , a very inconsiderable number of their disciples were left . but though the plain simplicity of the gospel met with persecutions on all hands ; yet by the undaunted courage of the preachers of it , the more it was opposed , the more it prevailed ; and at last triumphed over its greatest persecutors . ( 2. ) these words may be understood with respect to all christians ; and so they shew what the temper and spirit of christianity is , where it hath its due and proper effect upon mens minds . the moralists speak much of an excellent vertue , which they call magnanimity : which implies such a greatness of mind , that it carries a man on in doing what becomes him , without being discouraged by the fears of what may befall him in it . and this our saviour doth suppose to be so attainable by all his disciples , that he requires it from them . fear not them which can kill the body , but are not able to kill the soul ; or be not afraid of them that kill the body , and after that have no more that they can do . i. e. govern your fears by the consideration of another world and not of this . but is this possible , to be rid of our fears as to this world ? it may be some heroical minds may attain to this ; or those on whom god bestows the extraordinary gifts of his spirit : but can any by the common measures and assistances of grace reach to it ? fear is a natural and violent passion ; which is not easily dissembled , much less cured ; and the weaker any are , as to mind or body , the more they are subject to the power of it . there are some constitutions by reason of their dark and confused and melancholy apprehensions of things , can never get out of the labyrinth of their own fears . and where suspicions and jealousies find an easie entertainment , it is not possible to cure such persons fears ; for they are afraid of all possible things . such i must exclude as labouring under a disease of imagination ; as we do those who are under a feaver ; and for whose vnreasonable fears i know no better cure than there is of madness , which is to bring the persons to the use of reason as well as we can ; and if reason doth not cure them , nothing else will. but let us suppose the fears reasonable , i. e. such as considering the state of the world a prudent man may justly apprehend ; is it not possible to master these fears ? not to cure our apprehension when it is reasonable , but to take care , that it do not torment and disquiet our minds ; but especially that it do not hinder us from doing our duty . and this is that spirit of christian magnanimity which i design to speak of ; and to make the matter as clear as i can ; i shall , ( 1. ) enquire into those things which the nature of magnanimity requires in general . ( 2. ) shew the particular measures of it according to christianity . ( 3. ) consider the possibility of attaining it , and the means in order to it . ( 1. ) as to magnanimity in general ; it is not so much any one vertue , as a result from several put together ; and especially these , ( 1. ) integrity of mind : which implies these things . 1. a freedom from any mean and sinister ends in what we do . aristotle , who considered the nature of moral vertues , as well as any man , saith , there can be no magnanimity without simplicity and truth . and cicero saith , men of courage and magnanimity , are men of simplicity and truth , and not given to tricks . it is the sense of its own weakness which disposes any living creature to craft and cunning : the lion knows his own strength and despises it ; the fox is sensible he hath not strength enough for his own security , and therefore tries all other ways to compass his end. a spirit of magnanimity is above all little arts and shifts , which tend onely to some mean and pitifull end , not worthy to be regarded . men of artifice and design may think it weakness and folly ; but it is really a greatness of mind which makes a good and wise man despise such things as unbecoming that true greatness which lies in a generous integrity : which cunning men can no more reach to , even when they affect it , than an actor upon a stage can the true greatness of a prince . 2. sincere and unaffected goodness . which is that , which aristotle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and makes absolutely necessary to magnanimity . the first thing in the character of a good man among the moralists is , that he be inwardly so ; not taking upon him the appearance and shew of vertue for the sake of others ; but forming his mind and temper according to the principles and rules of it . and when he hath done this , the whole course of his actions will be agreeable thereto : he will not onely be just and temperate , but kind and obliging , ready to do good to all , according to his circumstances ; and behaving himself under all , as becomes a good man. ( 2. ) there must not onely be integrity , but courage and resolution ; without which , in difficult times , it is impossible to maintain integrity . i do not by this mean any sudden and violent heats , which rather shew the greatness of the passions than of the mind ; but a calm and sedate courage , which exceeds the other , as a man of true valour doth one that is rash and fool-hardy . the latter may do bolder things than the other ; but none of the moralists allow it to be true fortitude ; for that must be guided by reason and discretion . the bold and daring man never considers what he doth ; but he is carried on by a sudden and violent impetus , or such an agitation of spirits , that suffer him not to think ; but on he goes , and if he meets with success , it is more owing to his passion and heat , than to his wisdom or courage . violent and furious heats ( although under a pretence of zeal for religion ) are like the furious onsets of undisciplined souldiers , which do more mischief by their want of order , than they do good by unseasonable courage . true courage must be a regular thing ; it must have not onely a good end , but a wise choice of means ; and then the courage lies in the vigorous pursuit of it : not being disheartned by difficulties , nor giving over through despondency or disappointments . ( 3. ) there must be an indifferency of mind , as to the event of doing our duty . not a perfect indifferency , which human nature is hardly capable of ; but such as keeps a mans mind firm and constant so as not to be moved from the dictates of a well-satisfied conscience by the motives of this world. it was a remarkable saying of socrates , which antoninus takes notice of , that man , saith he , is of no value , who regards any thing so much as doing his duty . it is not whether a man lives or dies , but whether what he doth be just or unjust , whether it becomes a good man to do it , or not , which he is to look after . if thou canst not find any thing in life , saith that excellent emperor himself , better than iustice and truth , a sound mind ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word here used ) and a discreet courage ; then make this thy great business and apply thy self to it with all thy heart . let neither popular applause , nor power , nor riches , nor sensual pleasure draw thee off front it . choose that which is best and pursue it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with simplicity of mind and the free inclination of thy will. but the roman orator goes beyond them , when he saith , that nothing argues so mean and narrow a mind , as the love of riches ; nothing savours more of a great mind , than to contemn them ; and if men enjoy them to bestow them in beneficence and liberality . and again , to value iustice and honesty and kindness and liberality above pleasure and riches and life it self , and the common good above ones private interest , argues a truely great mind , and is most agreeable to human nature . these things i have mention'd , not onely to clear the nature of magnanimity ; but to shew what generous notions these heathens had concerning the practise of vertue and integrity , even when it was accompanied with losses and hardships for the sake of it ; and what a mean esteem they had in comparison of that great idol , which the world still worships , i. e. riches . ( 2. ) i now come to shew the true measures of magnanimity according to the christian doctrine . and that consists in two things : 1. in studying to please god above all things . 2. in choosing rather to suffer than to displease him . 1. in studying to please god above all things . aristotle hath observed that magnanimity hath a particular respect to honour : the question then is , whether it relates to what gets esteem and honour among men ; or , to that honour which comes from god. it 's true , the heathen moralists knew very little of this ; although aristotle once mentions the kindness which god hath for persons of the most excellent and vertuous minds , as being nearest of kindred to the gods. but this was not settled as a principle among them ; but it is the foundation of all true religion with us , that our main care ought to be to please god , and to value other things as they are most pleasing to him . the most refined atheists of this age confess , that the doctrine of the prophets and apostles is very pious and vertuous ; although they look on them as deceived in their imaginations . we take what they grant , viz. that the morals of christianity are very good ; but we say , that it is a heightning and improving of moral vertues to make them divine graces ; and not to practise them meerly as agreeable to reason , but as pleasing to god. those who allow a god , who is wise and powerfull , do confess , that no sacrifices are so pleasing to him , as a pious , devout and vertuous mind : but then they were to seek , as to the measures of piety and vertue . but that is the infinite advantage by the scriptures , which we enjoy , that by them we know what is most pleasing to god. he hath shewed thee , o man , what is good , and what hath the lord required of thee ; but to do justly , and to love mercy , and to walk humbly with thy god. when god sheweth us our duty , we have no longer any ground to dispute it ; especially , when it is so agreeable to the divine nature , and our own . what can we do better with respect to mankind , than to do justly and to love mercy ? what can become us more with respect to god , than to walk humbly with our god ? to walk with god , is to have a constant regard to him in the course of our lives ; thus enoch walked with god , and noah and abraham : and to walk humbly with him , is to maintain a due sense of our distance from him and our dependence upon him . and this humility of mind doth not take off from true magnanimity ; for , it is the magnanimity of christians that i am speaking of . the magnanimity of philosophers carried them beyond the due bounds of their dependence upon god ; for they presumed upon their own sufficiency , both as to the support of their minds under difficulties and the making themselves happy . in both which they were lamentably mistaken . but the humility of christians in depending upon god for assistance and happiness is so far from being inconsistent with magnanimity , that it is not to be had without it . for , saith s. paul , i can do all things . can any thing be said greater than that ? but how ? through christ which strengtheneth me . and this dependence upon god for his grace is no more inconsistent with magnanimity , than a favourites greatness is with his duty and service to his prince . the christians magnanimity lies in having but one to please ; but such a one , as is the greatest , the wisest , the happiest being in the world. 2. but if he cannot please god and the world together , then this magnanimity carries him rather to choose suffering under the world's displeasure , than to displease god. this seems a hard choice ; but there would be no magnanimity without difficulty . it may please god , that our duty and interest may lye together , and then it is folly and humour to choose to suffer when we need not . where there is true magnanimity in suffering , there is an impartial and prudent weighing and ballancing all circumstances together , before there can be a just resolution of suffering . and a mans courage in suffering depends very much upon the motives induced him to it ; which every mans conscience must judge of . but there are two sorts of sufferings magnanimity may shew it self in : ( 1. ) the necessary and unavoidable accidents and calamities of life . ( 2. ) the voluntary preferring a suffering condition rather than sinning against god. ( 1. ) as to the common accidents of life . it is observed by the moralists , that it is a harder thing to bear things that are troublesome , than to abstain from things that are pleasant : the sense of pain and suffering being much more uneasie , than the forbearing what is delightfull ; which is onely crossing a natural inclination . and though many persons choose rather to yield to their vicious inclinations than to avoid the pains and diseases which follow them ; yet that is because they look on them as uncertain and at a distance , and hope they may escape them . but when it is certain and present , human nature is very tender and sensible of pain and shrinks from it ; and requires inward courage to support it self under it . it is observed by the roman orator , that a peculiar kind of courage is necessary for suffering pains and diseases ; for many that have been brave men in the field , yet could not virilitèr aegrotare , behave themselves like men when they came to be sick . the truth is , all mankind abhor suffering so much , that one of the great inducements to the study of morality of old , was to find out some antidotes against the common accidents of life . for they soon found there were some sufferings incident to human nature , which all the art and skill of the wisest men could never prevent . our bodies are continually subject to pains , to diseases , to corruption and dissolution . our estates to violence , fraud and misfortune . our houses and cities to flames , to earthquakes , to inundations . our friends and relations are all liable to the same calamities with our selves , and that makes our trouble the greater . what now should wise men do ? can they hope to stem the tide , and to turn back the stream ? no , that is too violent for them . can they raise any banks or sea-walls against them to keep them out ? all such are vain and fruitless . what then ? shall they strip themselves of all the comforts of life , that they may leave nothing to misfortune ? so some did , to no great purpose , unless they could shake off their passions too . but this doth not look like magnanimity , but cowardize ; not overcoming an enemy , but running away from him . by the same method , they must go naked to avoid robbery ; and live on the tops of mountains to escape a deluge . but some thought these things look'd most terrible at a distance ; whereas if they consider'd how common they were , they would learn to bear them better . but carneades said well , malevoli animi solatium est turba miserorum ; it is a kind of ill-natur'd comfort which one draws from the commoness of calamities . and after all , it is no real satisfaction to a mans mind , to think that so many suffer as he doth ; it is like the unnatural pleasure of revenge , which one man takes in anothers pain . there is one thing it serves well for , and that is to shew the folly of great impatience under such things which the rest of mankind bear . thus iulian in his epistle to amerius relates a story of democritus his dealing with darius upon the loss of his beloved wife . after several ineffectual ways of comforting him ; at last he asked him , whether bringing her to life would not put an end to his grief ? no doubt of it . but how should this be done ? let me alone for that , said the philosopher , if you will provide me all the things i shall desire in order to it . after great care taken in providing many things for him , darius asked him if he had all he wanted ? no , said he ; there is one thing more i must have , and you are the most likely person to furnish me with it . in short , you must get me three names to be put upon her monument of such persons who have gone to their graves without sorrow or trouble ; and you , said he , have very large and populous dominions , and no doubt if such a thing be to be had , you can procure it . darius was struck with this , and after some consideration said , he doubted he could not . why then , said the philosopher smiling , are not you ashamed to be guilty of so much folly as to be so exceedingly cast down under such a calamity , as though you were the onely person in the world that underwent it ? this was agreeable enough to his humour in exposing the folly of mankind ; which was a subject large enough for his whole life ; but he was too pleasant upon it . i do not deny but the moralists did find out some very usefull considerations to bear men up under the common accidents of life ; but those of greatest moment , were such as are much improved by christianity ; viz. the wisdom of providence , the usefulness of trials , the benefit of patience , and the expectation of a better state. ( 2. ) as to voluntary and chosen sufferings . we have in scripture several extraordinary instances of this kind of magnanimity ; such was abraham's leaving his kindred and country and going he knew not whither on god's command , and his readiness to sacrifice his son ; which argued an entire sacrifice of himself to the will of god. such was moses his choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of god than to enjoy the pleasures of pharaoh's court. such was the son of god's choosing to suffer for our sakes , with admirable resignation to the divine will ; and praying for his persecutors under the greatest agonies on the cross. such was the apostles resolution and courage , when they rejoyced to be accounted worthy to suffer for the sake of christ ; when they were more than conquerors in the midst of persecutions . and truely the magnanimity of suffering rather than sinning , was never so much shewn to the world as in the case of the primitive christians . there were some few heroick instances of suffering for truth among the heathens ; but they were no more to be compared with the numerous examples of the primitive church than the miracles of the vestal virgins were with those of the apostles . it could not but amaze the common sort of spectators of rome , who were wont to see the gladiators , ( who were either hired or condemned to that cruel entertainment of others with their blood ) to behold a sort of grave and serious persons expose themselves to so much torment and cruelty , when so small a matter as burning a little incense would set them free . this was a new spectacle to the world , and it could not but put them upon thinking what strange sort of philosophy this was , which inspired ordinary persons with such a magnanimity in suffering . they had never found those who pretended to philosophy among them very fond of suffering for the doctrine they taught . they rather liked the example of aristotle than socrates ; who when the people of athens were enraged against him , withdrew to chalcis ; and when he was upbraided with it , made a witty excuse , that he had no mind the city of athens should sin twice against philosophy . whereas the christians were so forward to suffer for their doctrine , that it was imputed as a fault to them ; and it appears by tertullian that some out-went the bounds of christianity in offering themselves too freely to it . this made such as antoninus and others impute all their sufferings to an invincible obstinacy and a sort of madness which possessed them : which had been easily confuted , if they would have had the patience to have examin'd the reasons and grounds of their religion , as they did the peculiar doctrines of the several sects of philosophers . but this is not all which christian magnanimity doth imply ; for it is not onely a spirit of power , but of love and of a sound mind . and so it hath ii. a respect to the humours and passions of men. and truely , there is such a variety and uncertainty in them ; so much folly and mistake ; so much prejudice and peevishness in some ; so much wilfulness and stiffness in others ; so little regard to the true interests of religion and vertue , under all the pretences to it ; that those who sincerely desire to promote them had need of magnanimity to bear them up against such humours and distempers of mens minds . aristotle hath well observed that magnanimity doth go beyond the consideration of dangers . it makes a man more ready to do kindnesses than to receive them ; and to forget injuries . i add , and to forgive them ; for else , it is rather want of memory , than magnanimity . it is well he adds one thing , viz. that he that hath magnanimity is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , contented within himself ; so he had need to be ; for he will find very little satisfaction abroad , especially in an age when sincerity is almost lost : when men have used themselves to so much hypocrisie and dissimulation with god and man , that they can zealously pretend to love what they would be glad to ruine , and cry up peace and unity onely to get an opportunity to destroy them . but still true magnanimity keeps a mans own mind at ease , and makes him to govern himself , as the same philosopher observes , with due temper and moderation in all things . such a one is not onely easie to himself , but to all others , as far as is consistent with his duty . for a mind truely great , hath nothing of bitterness , or sowreness ; peevishness , or ill will to the rest of mankind . all malice and cruelty argue a mean and base spirit . the more noble and generous any tempers are , the more tender and compassionate they are , the more ready to oblige , the more easie to forgive , the more willing to be reconciled . but to be more particular , there are two things implied in this spirit of love and of a sound mind . ( 1. ) the making all reasonable allowances for the infirmities of others . it makes men to consider the prejudices of education ; the variety and weakness of most mens judgments ; the power of perswasion ; the bias of parties ; and the shame and reproach which persons undergo that break off from them , after they have been once ensnared by them . on these accounts it makes them rather pity than triumph over the follies of mankind . there are two things which a great mind doth most abhor in religion , and are most directly contrary to a spirit of love and a sound mind ; and these are hypocrisie and cruelty ; which make men false to god , and enemies to mankind . these two often go together ; and although they are masked under a pretence of religion , yet there are no two things more opposite to the true spirit and design of it . s. iohn concludes that man to have no true love to god who doth not love his brother . he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen , how can he love god whom he hath not seen ? and we may argue the other way ; if a man doth not love god , how can he love his brother ? when the love of god is the best foundation for charity and kindness to our brethren ; who were at first made after the image of god , and have it again renewed in them by the power of divine grace in righteousness and true holiness . and even where that doth not appear , yet there is a tenderness and compassion due to mankind , as far as is consistent with the order and government of the world. ( 2. ) the spirit of love and of a sound mind , consists in laying aside private animosities and heats for a publick and general good. that is a thing too great and too sacred , to be exposed and ridiculed , as though it were onely a popular pretence for faction and sedition . whereas nothing is more directly opposite to it ; for therefore it is called faction and sedition , because it is against it . if it hath been abused by men of ill minds , so have the best things in the world ; but they do not lose their nature and excellency by it . if there be not such a thing as a common good , whence comes any mans obligation to preserve order and government , and to seek the safety and welfare of his country , although it may be to the hazard of his own life ? if there be such a thing , it deserves our regard in the first place , and we ought to lay aside all prejudices , and mutual animosities and the interests of particular parties , and heartily to promote that which is our true common interest , as we are english men and protestants of the church of england ; which is a great and considerable part of the christian church , and the chief of the reformation . it is hard for any not to see that the whole protestant interest lies at stake ; and that the preservation of it depends very much on our conduct and union at this time . but if we find any to be humoursome and peevish , any to struggle more for the interest of a party to make it uppermost , than for our common good , although it be a very sad consideration and bodes very ill to us all ; yet we have that poor comfort left us , that men were as ill disposed even in the apostles times . for , saith s. paul , ( at a time when one would have thought they should have been much better inclined ) all men seek their own , not the things which are iesus christs . i hope it cannot be said of all now ; but i fear it is so true of too many , that it is one of the worst symptoms of the present state of our affairs . and that which makes it more deplorable is , that some men have entertained such suspicion and jealousie of each other , that he that goes about to reconcile them , instead of making them friends , is look'd on as a common enemy . i am afraid there is not sincerity and integrity enough left to be a foundation for uniting several parties among us ; at least there wants an opinion of it . and as long as there are such mistrusts and jealousies , the greatest integrity is so far useless . some learned and good men have been of late apt to perswade themselves and others , that the glorious and happy times of the church are coming on ; i could be glad to be of their opinion ; for it is a comfortable thing to a man who travels in an ill road and with bad company , whom he is perpetually afraid of , to see at a distance a pleasant and safe country , where he shall be rid of his fears and dangers . but i confess , i cannot much please my self with such thoughts , till i see the tempers of mens minds begin to change towards one another . if i could once see the spirit of love and a sound time prevail among us ; if men would be contented to sacrifice their humours and piques to the publick interest ; in short , if there were any hopes men would be wise and good , there were then a great foundation for hope , that all things would be settled among us , so as to continue for succeeding generations . but if men will persist in their own wilfull humours ; if they had rather all should perish , than they not compass their own ends ; we need no foreign enemies to come in upon us , we shall soon come to that height of animosity , as to bite and devour one another ; and then it is an easie inference , that we shall be consumed one of another . i am far from thinking our case desperate ; for i hope men have not lost all their sense and zeal for our common interest ; but if mens heats and passions increase and grow fiercer , a man needs not pretend to prophecy to foretell what the dreadfull consequence will be . the true spirit of religion seems to be buried in mens warm contentions about it ; and some have pretended to a sort of zeal without conscience , to religion without faith , and to scruples without common honesty . if ever god designs to doe us good , there must be a great alteration in mens tempers and manners . we must have more sincerity and integrity among us ; the want of which hath caused such a general mistrust of one another ; that if faith were to save the nation , i am afraid there is hardly enough left in it . and it looks like one of the symptoms of the day of judgment upon us : for , if the son of man should come , he would hardly find faith upon earth . but instead of discoursing of magnanimity , i am sensible i have run into the object and reason of our fears . but therefore to conclude all , i shall speak briefly to the last particular , which was , ( 3. ) to consider what arguments and means there are to support us against our fears ; or to attain to that christian magnanimity i have been discoursing of . and there are two great arguments which christianity doth particularly recommend to us . 1. let things go as ill as we can fear in this world ; if we are sincere christians , there is a far better state to come ; to which we shall be admitted when we are once out of this troublesome and sinfull world. there will be no hurries and confusions , no jealousies and suspicions , no piques and animosities . the highest regions of the air are the most calm and serene ; all the clouds and storms and blustering winds are below and arise from the atmosphere . if our minds were more loose from the world we should be more at quiet : for , at the bottom , the considerations of this world make men so troublesome in it . it is honour or power or riches which make them so unquiet , and endeavouring to supplant and undermine one another . if men could learn to be content with that which they pretend was all they so long and so impatiently desired , there might be some hopes of seeing something like peace and unity among us : but if liberty be thought to signifie nothing without power , it is reasonable to suppose that power will signifie nothing , unless it be all in their own hands . and what can they imagine the rest of the nation will do ? will they suffer an established church , and such a one as ours is ( which i think an apostolical church , as to doctrine , worship and government , if there be any now in the world ) to be run down with the violent heats of some men , and look on as wholly unconcerned ? they are extremely mistaken in the temper of the nation who think so . but if men will not be quiet , when they have all they pretended to desire , what can we expect but further animosities will discourage our friends , animate our common enemies , and expose us all to confusion , if not to ruine . if men loved this world less and another better , they would be more quiet here , and be more carefull to prepare for that better state. if our conversation were in heaven , as it ought to be , with what contempt should we look down upon the busie designs , the restless cares , the vain hopes and the perplexing fears of the greatest part of mankind ? then we should have more peace and tranquillity in our minds while we live , and greater satisfaction when we come to die . for integrity and innocency will keep us most from giving disturbance to others , and from finding any in our own breasts . whoso hearkeneth unto wisdom , shall dwell safely and shall be quiet from the fear of evil. 2. we are assured that we are under the constant care of divine providence . the tranquillity of our minds in this world depends very much upon the esteem we have of providence and the trust we repose in god. what makes children pass their time without solicitous thoughts about themselves , but the confidence they have in the wisdom and care of their parents ? what makes passengers lie down at rest in a ship at sea , but because they trust to the conduct of their pilot ? we cannot alter the methods of providence by all our solicitude ; god will govern the world by his own measures and not by ours . the government is his ▪ the duty of submission is ours . let us not then be peevish and quarrelsome at what he doth ; but make the best use of any extraordinary instance of his providence which seems to be intended for our good , unless we turn it another way . but it is not enough to be meerly contented with providence ; but we ought to be active and usefull in our own places to promote the common interest ; and not to repine and murmure at what is necessary for the support of it . let us not torment our selves with fears of what may and what may not happen ; but let us commit our selves to god in well-doing as to our creator and preserver . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61531-e300 2 tim. iij. 11. ch. iv . 17. ch. iv . 6. vers. 7. vers. 8. vers. 12. ch. iv . 16 ▪ ch. i. 15. ch. iij. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. vers. 5. 1 tim. vj. 5. 2 tim. iij. 13. 2 tim. i. 6. act. xvij . 6. act. xxiv . 25. gal. iv . 16 ▪ matth. x. 28. luke xij . 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . arist. de virt. & vitiis . itaque viros fortes , magnanimos , eosdémque bonos & simplices , veritatis amicos , miniméque fallaces esse volumus . off. l. 1. nicom . l. 4. c. 3. antonin . l. 7. §. 44. l. 3. §. 3. off. l. 1. mor. l. 4. c. 3. l. 10. mic. vj. 8. phil. iv . 13. aristot. mor. l. 3. c. 12. aug. 83. q. 36. epist. 37. tertull. ad scap. antonin . l. 11. §. 3. arrian . l. 4. c. 7. mor. l. 4. c. 3. 1 joh. iv 20. eph. iv . 24. phil. ij . 21. gal. v. 15. pro. i. 23. protestant charity a sermon preached at s. sepulchres church, on tuesday in easter week, a. d. mdclxxxi / by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1681 approx. 71 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 28 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-05 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61587 wing s5622 estc r8099 13725681 ocm 13725681 101595 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61587) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101595) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 852:2) protestant charity a sermon preached at s. sepulchres church, on tuesday in easter week, a. d. mdclxxxi / by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [6], 47, [1] p. printed by m. flesher for henry mortlock ..., london : 1681. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -galatians vi, 9 -sermons. charity -sermons. charity -early works to 1800. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-03 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2004-03 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion protestant charity . a sermon preached at s. sepvlchres church , on tuesday in easter week , a. d. mdclxxxi . by edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean of s t paul's , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . london : printed by m. flesher , for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , and at the white hart in westminster-hall . 1681. to the right honourable sir patience ward , lord mayor of the city of london , and to the court of aldermen . my lord and gentlemen , it is the great honour of this city , since the protestant religion was professed in it , that it hath born a much greater proportion to the rest of the nation , in publick works of charity , than in the largeness of its buildings , and number of its inhabitants . for when , upon the unreasonable clamours of our adversaries of the church of rome , an account was thought fit to be taken of such acts of charity as lay more open to the view of the world , within sixty years from the settlement of the reformation by q. elizabeth , it was found , that they exceeded all that had been done in twice that number of years in the time of popery ; and that therein this city did equal the whole kingdom besides . and although those who make this report , complain of the too great reservedness of some companies in making known their benefactours ; yet upon the diligent search some persons made , it did appear , that as to the best parts of publick charity in founding schools and hospitals , &c. more was done within that time , than from the conquest to the reformation . for , besides the large and constant charity of the city in the care of their hospitals ; many particular citizens did so great things in several parts of the nation upon their own stocks , that within that compass of time , more than forty hospitals were built and endowed , and above twenty free schools , and upon a reasonable computation , near a million of money was thought to be bestowed in works of charity , in london and the two universities . this was the true protestant charity of those times ; which ran in a clear , free and undivided channel , without the mixture of superstition , or being diverted from its proper course to serve private ends and designs . and this brought honour to our religion ; advanced the reputation of the city ; and promoted the good of the whole nation . and such are great and wise ends ; fit to be considered and carried on by those to whom god hath given a heart sutable to the largeness of their estates ; which they can neither carry into another world , nor better employ in this than by doing good to mankind with them . and as there still continued many and undeniable instances among true protestants of extraordinary designs of charity by particular members of this city , whom god had blessed in their imployments ; so i have reason to hope , that this age will afford remarkable examples of the same kind to posterity : that so our protestant faith may be always found fruitfull in good works ; which will be the best means both to adorn and preserve it . to perswade and encourage others to tread in the steps of those worthy citizens , whose faith and charity deserve their imitation , is the chief design of the following sermon ; which out of due respect to the order of your court , i now present to your hands ; with my hearty prayers to almighty god for the continuance of his blessing on this city and the government of it . i am , my lord and gentlemen , your most faithfull and obedient servant , e. stillingfleet . galat. vi. 9. and let us not be weary in well-doing ; for in due season we shall reap , if we faint not . when iulian the apostate designed ( if possible ) to retrieve the honour of the heathen religion , he easily discern'd that it was not enough for him to restore the priesthood , to open the temples , to appoint the sacrifices to be offer'd upon the altars ; but he found it necessary for them to imitate the christians in the strictness of their lives , in the solemnity of their devotions , in the exactness of their discipline , and especially in the erecting hospitals , and taking care of the poor . for he that would not believe the christian religion to be from god , thought himself bound to give some probable account , how a religion so contrary to the interests and designs of this world , should be able to prevail against all the arts and power of its many and potent enemies ; and upon the deepest search which could be made by himself , or the greatest wits of the heathens then about him , they concluded the flourishing and propagation of it to be chiefly owing to those things which he so much commended to the heathens imitation . and from hence they inferred , that if the same things could be brought into practice among the gentiles , they should be able to supplant christianity by its own methods , and restore paganism by the same weapons by which it was overthrown . this was thought so subtle and artificial a device by him whose great design was to extirpate our religion in a soft and gentle manner , without the blood and cruelty of former times , that he writes an epistle on purpose to arsacius the chief priest of galatia , requiring punctual observance of these commands ; and as to the chargeable and expensive part , he offer'd large provisions out of his own revenue to defray it . but saint paul had been beforehand with him in galatia , having planted churches with great success there ; and christianity , by his means , took so deep root in mens hearts , that neither the rage and fury of former persecutions , nor the plausible arts and insinuations of iulian were able to root it out . it is true , that these churches , soon after their planting , were in great danger of being overrun by the pernicious errours of some seducers of that time ; ( the apprehension whereof put saint paul into that astonishment which he expresseth in the beginning of this epistle , i marvel that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of christ unto another gospel , &c. ) yet by the early notice and care which he took to prevent the spreading of these corruptions among them , the galatian churches recover'd the soundness of their faith , and have preserved a name among the eastern churches , though under great variety of conditions , to this day . some take notice , that this is one of the sharpest epistles written by saint paul. he appears indeed , by the beginning of it , to have been much surprised and moved at the news of a great and sudden alteration among them ; which he was sure was not for the better . and by this plain dealing with them , he knew , till they consider'd better , they would be offended with him ; but withall he tells them this did best become a servant of christ , who , like a good physician , hath more regard to the disease than to the palate of his patient ; for if i yet pleased men , i should not be the servant of christ. but having vindicated his own honour , which the evil reports of the false apostles made necessary ; and argued with great strength and conviction against the imposers of the law ; he betakes himself to the inforcing the practice of the general and necessary duties of christianity upon these galatians . if they had such a mind to keep the law , all the law , saith he , is fulfilled in one word , even in this , thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self . it was a vain and foolish thing for them to contend about keeping the law , who did overthrow the main design of it , by their heats and animosities against each other ; which , instead of preserving the honour of the law , was the certain way to destroy one another . but if ye bite and devour one another , take heed that ye be not consumed one of another . from hence he shews , that hatred , variance , emulations , wrath , strife , seditions , heresies , are as much the lusts of the flesh as adultery , fornication , murther , drunkenness , revellings and such like ; and as destructive to mens salvation ; of the which , saith he , i tell you before , as i have also told you in time past , that they which doe such things shall not inherit the kingdom of god. and they that are true christians must crucifie the flesh with all these affections and lusts thereof ; such as vain-glory , love of contention , envying the reputation of others . let us not be desirous of vain-glory , provoking one another , envying one another . but the apostle did not think the design of the law , or the obligation of christianity was satisfied with abstaining from doing injuries to others ; therefore he proceeds to tell them what exercise of tenderness , compassion and readiness to doe good to others were expected from them by the law of christ. ( 1. ) if a man , through the frailty of humane nature , or the sudden surprise of a temptation , be overtaken in a fault , do not , saith he , trample upon him , nor insult over him ; but endeavour with the spirit of meekness to recover him from his fall ; considering that we carry about us the same load of flesh , and are exposed to continual temptations our salves . ( 2. ) if we see others groaning under the heavy burthen of their own infirmities , or the pressures and calamities of the world , do not add more weight to their afflictions ; but put your own shoulders under to bear a part with them , to make their burthen more easie to them ; for herein lies a great deal of that duty which christ hath laid on all his disciples . bear ye one anothers burthens and so fulfill the law of christ. ( 3. ) if it be impossible for men to attend the service of your souls and the affairs of this world together , never grudge nor repine at the exercise of your kindness and liberality towards your spiritual teachers , v. 6. let him that is taught in the word communicate to him that teacheth in all good things . which instances being mention'd , the apostle subjoins two things : 1. a general proposition , viz. that every man shall receive in another world according to the good that he doth in this . be not deceived god is not mocked ; for whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap . for he that soweth to his flesh shall of his flesh reap corruption , but he that soweth to the spirit shall of the spirit reap life everlasting . i. e. he that looks onely after his present advantage in this world and dares not venture to doe any thing out of hopes of recompence for it in another life , he is said to sow to his flesh ; but he that is good and charitable and kind to others without hopes of any other advantage than what god will give him for it , is said to sow to the spirit ; the flesh and spirit being opposed as the two centres of the different worlds : the great thing to which all things tend in this world being something carnal or that relates to the flesh ; and the great principle of another world being wholly spiritual . and these two flesh and spirit are placed as two loadstones drawing our hearts several ways , the one is much stronger , but at a greater distance ; the other hath less force in it self but is much nearer to us , by which means it draws more powerfully the hearts that are already touched with a strong inclination to it . but the apostle useth the similitude of two fields , wherein the product of the seed answers to the nature of the soil ; so he that sowes to the flesh , i. e. that minds onely his present interest in this world , his harvest shall be proportionable to his seed , he may reap advantages to himself in this world sutable to his pains and industry ; but the utmost this world can yield is but of a short continuance , being of a temporary , transient , corruptible nature , he that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption : but he that soweth to the spirit , i. e. hath so great a regard to the rewards of another life , that he is willing to let go a present enjoyment and bury it under ground , casting it in as seed into the earth in hopes of a future resurrection , however he may be condemned as a weak and improvident man by the men of this world , yet as certain as there is a life everlasting to come , so certainly shall all his good deeds yield an abundant increase and meet with a glorious recompence then , if there be no corrupt mixture in the sowing which may spoil the virtue of the seed , for he that soweth to the spirit shall of the spirit reap life everlasting . and let not men deceive themselves ; if they look onely at themselves and the things of this world , let their pretences be never so spiritual , if they dare not doe acts of charity so as to trust god for a reward , they do but sow to the flesh ; and though the world may be cheated , and men may sometimes deceive themselves , yet god cannot be mocked ; he knows the hearts , and intentions , and secret designs of men , and according to them their reward shall be ; for whatsoever a man soweth that shall he reap . this i take to be the natural and genuine meaning of the apostle in those words . 2. a particular exhortation , not to be discouraged in well doing , which is the same with sowing to the spirit before , and with doing good in the following verse , both which are to be understood of the works of charity ; and therefore we ought to take it in that sense here . these are especially called good works in the new testament ; dorcas is said to be a woman full of good works and alms-deeds which she did . the widow that was to be taken into office in the church , must be well reported of for good works ; and these presently follow , the bringing up children , the lodging strangers , washing the saints feet and relieving the afflicted ; in the epistle to titus , saint paul gives him a strict charge , that he deliver it with great assurance ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) that they which believe in god might be carefull to maintain good works ; these things are good and profitable unto men ; where the same word is used in the greek , that is in the words of the text. and to the same purpose other words of a like signification are used , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to doe good and to communicate forget not ; ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , charge them that are rich in this world — that they doe good , that they be rich in good works , ready to distribute , willing to communicate . that ye may abound to every good work , saith saint paul ; which he after explains , by being enriched in every thing to all bountifulness . so that although well doing in the general may extend to every good action , yet by the particular sense of that phrase in the new testament , and especially from the coherence of these words with the foregoing and following verses , it appears that the well doing here spoken of , is to be understood of works of charity . which the apostle , as they were christians , did suppose them to practise , but being apprehensive lest the discouragements they met with in the world , should make them grow cold and remiss in this great duty , he therefore exhorts them not to faint or grow weary of doing it ; and to that end he lays down the most powerfull motive and consideration ; for in due season ye shall reap if ye faint not : i. e. ye shall not miss of a reward from god. so that from the words we may take notice of these two things which deserve our consisideration . 1. the many discouragements men meet with in the world which are apt to make them grow weary in well doing . 2. the mighty incouragement which god gives to our continuance and perseverance in it ; for in due season we shall reap if we faint not . i. the many discouragements men meet with in the world , which are apt to make them grow weary in well doing . the precepts of charity deliver'd by our saviour and his apostles are so plain , so full , so many , so easie to be understood ; and those precepts inforced by so just , and reasonable , and pious considerations , with respect to god , to the world , to fellow christians , to the honour of our religion , and lastly to our selves , from the comfort that is in well doing , and the reward that follows it ; that a man must have great impudence , to profess himself a christian , and yet to think himself not obliged to doe acts of charity . but notwithstanding all this , and much more which might be said to this purpose , there are too many still who are ready to find out some plausible pretences to excuse them from well doing ; which being the greatest discouragements to men from continuing in it ; i shall make it my present business to examin them , and to shew how little weight there is in them , especially being compared with the authority of him who hath made this our duty , and the reward we may justly expect for performing it . and here i shall pass over the more common and trivial objections , which every one can easily answer that makes them ; and rather argue an unwilling mind to perform their duty , than one unsatisfied about the reasonableness of it ; and i shall therefore insist on those that carry a greater appearance of strength in them ; which are chiefly these two , 1. from the different state of our times from those when these commands of charity were given . 2. from the sad prospect of our own affairs , which seem rather to call for a care of our selves than charity to others . 1. the first pretence is from the difference of times ; there was then , say such men , great reason for charity which will not hold now ; those were times of persecution for religion , and many were driven to great streights and necessities on that account who deserved to be relieved , and the christians had been worse than infidels not to doe good to men that were brought to want meerly for christ's and the gospel's sake ; the laws then could take no care of these poor and indigent persons ; for the laws made them so , being then opposite to christianity : but now our religion is settled by the laws ; and we have many laws made for a competent provision for the poor , which will be sufficient if they be put in execution , and if they be not , what charity is this to relieve an idle and disorderly sort of people who live upon alms , when it is greater charity to such to make them work and to provide for their own subsistence ? this is the force of the objection which seems to have a great deal of strength and weight in it ; but before i give an answer to it i must acknowledge the truth of some things contained therein . ( 1. ) that there is a great difference in the case of charity , where our religion is settled by law , and where it is persecuted by it . for a larger measure and degree of charity is justly required in a time of persecution , in as much as those are the truest objects of charity who prefer the keeping faith and a good conscience before the good things of this life . and we ought to look upon it as an unvaluable blessing , that we have the christian , yea the reformed christian religion settled by our laws . and god grant it may ever so continue ! ( 2. ) it cannot be denied that we have very good laws for the maintenance of the poor , and that they might be sufficient for their common necessities , if they were duly executed . and it is a very just and reasonable distinction which our laws make between the involuntary poor , who are made so by the hand of heaven , either by sickness , or lameness , or age , or children , or fire , &c. and the voluntary poor , who may help themselves but will not , being idle , dissolute and slothfull persons . these deserve rather the hand of justice to punish them than that of charity to relieve them : for saint paul himself is so far from thinking this to be true charity , that he hardly thinks it so to keep such from starving if we take that proverbial saying in its strict and literal sense , if any would not work , neither should he eat . ( 3. ) i grant that it is greater charity to put persons upon providing for themselves than to relieve their present necessities . for that is the greatest charity which doth a man the most good . and he that reduceth a dissolute and wandring beggar to the taking pains for himself and family cures an ill habit of his mind ; puts him into the way of vertue and sobriety ; gives him a lasting stock for himself and family ( for diligence and industry is so ) keeps him out of the danger of the worst sort of company ; gains him more friends , who will be far more ready to help a person industrious in his poverty than the most clamorous and importunate beggar . and therefore our laws have wisely determin'd , that work-houses are the best hospitals for the poor , who are able to help themselves . but after these concessions , i am far from thinking the command of charity to be swallowed up in our laws for the relief of the poor . for , ( 1. ) if our laws were the best in the world for this purpose , yet , if they be not duly executed , they leave as much room for charity as if there were none . what if a law were made that there should be no poor at all among us ; but that immediate care should be taken , upon any man's falling into decay , that his stock should be supplied out of the superfluities of the rich ? if this law were not executed , men would be altogether as miserable in their poverty , and as great objects of charity as if there were no such law in being . for the making of a law for their supply without putting it in execution , is but like the person in saint iames , who said to those who were naked and destitute of daily food , be ye warmed and filled ; but notwithstanding gave them nothing needfull for the body ; what doth this profit ? what advantage or satisfaction is it to a man to starve with the law on his side ? or can men be better fed or cloathed with the words of a law than of any particular person ? if not , then if care be not taken for the relief and maintenance of the poor according to the laws , there is as great need of charity as if there were none at all . ( 2. ) if we suppose the laws for relief of the poor to be duly executed , yet there are many particular cases of charity which often happen which the laws cannot be supposed to provide for . the law takes care onely of general , and notorious , and common cases ; but there are continual instances of singular and extraordinary cases where relief is as much wanted , but is rarely challenged . how often is some mens reputation a snare to themselves and families ; who had rather sink silently into the gulf of misery , than have their wants made known to their insulting neighbours , among whom they have lived in as good fashion as themselves ? how many have been tempted rather to put an end to a miserable life than to be despised and contemned for their poverty in their old age ! how many are unwilling to make known their condition for fear of a repulse and being thought liars , or impudent and common beggars ! how hardly will some pinch themselves and families , before they will make known their necessities ! and some have been known to have brought themselves so low , that when their sad condition hath been discovered , they have been past all possibility of recovery . i hope such instances are not frequent among us . and yet we are lately told in print by a member of this city , that he hath reason to believe many hundreds have perished through want of late years . if this be true , and their case was known ; what a shame and dishonour is it , in the midst of so much plenty and luxury , to suffer such a reproach to christianity to be among us ? but if their case were not known in time ; the stain is not quite wiped off , because there ought to be in so great , so rich , so well-governed a city , a due care taken to find out as well as to relieve the truly necessitous . ( 3. ) the obligations of charity reach much farther than the force of our laws doth . for how small a matter within this city doth answer the letter of the law , where persons enjoy very great and plentifull estates ? and is that all which their thankfulness to god , their love to their brethren , and the regard to our saviour's commands will draw from them ? is this being mercifull as our heavenly father is mercifull ? is this giving our alms in secret , that thy father which seeth in secret may reward thee openly ? is this making to our selves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness ? is this being rich towards god ; being rich in good works , being ready to distribute , willing to communicate ? is this doing good to all men as we have opportunity ? is this feeding the hungry , cloathing the naked , visiting the sick and imprison'd ? can we imagine that will be a good answer at the great day , that we have paid our rates to the poor ? if the christian charity had extended no farther , iulian needed not have been so solicitous to have the heathens equal them ? the true charity of christians is a free and voluntary thing , not what men are forced to doe by the laws ; it is a largeness of mind , that disposeth men to doe good to others , and embraceth every opportunity for that purpose ; it is the flowing of a fountain which runs freely , easily and constantly ; and not like the pouring water out of a narrow mouthed vessel , where but little comes , and with a great deal of noise . charity spreads it self like the beams of the sun , and warms and enlivens the colder parts of the earth ; it pierceth into the bowels of it , and makes it self a passage to those secret and hidden objects which are out of the view of the world. true christian charity hath arms so large to comprehend the whole world within them ; but it is the life and spirit of that body whereof christ is the head ; it passeth from one member to another , emptying it self from the larger vessels into the less , and so by a constant motion and course through the body it keeps heat and union in all the parts . to doe good because one cannot help it , is to obey the law of necessity and not of charity . he that resolves to go no farther in charity than the law requires him , declares he would not have gone so far unless the law had forced him ; which is in effect to tell the world , he hath not so much as an inclination to charity . ( 4. ) our laws give great encouragement to the best , the noblest , the most lasting works of charity ; such as erecting work-houses for the poor that are able to work , endowing hospitals and alms-houses for the impotent , distemper'd and aged poor ; setting up free-schools for the education of youth . and i never yet met with any objection against these that will not hold against the best designs in the world. for it is possible they may be abused , and may accidentally prove an occasion of idleness to some persons , and they may exceed the due proportion of persons fit for them , ( although we yet see no great danger of that . ) yet what design can the wit of man pitch upon in a captious and suspicious age , that will not meet with objections from those that have a mind to cavil ? the best religion in the world , the best church , the best government , the best laws , the best men cannot escape the censures of ill-minded men ; and why should we think the best designs of charity should ? but some men whose minds are set upon one particular way of charity , are apt to disparage all other ways to advance their own : which is the common errour of mankind , to think sufficient right is not done to the thing they admire , unless they undervalue all other things in comparison with it . but it is a part of charity to allow , approve and incourage all true ways of charity ; not to set up bodily labour against the improvement of the mind ; nor the learning of arts and sciences to the disparagement of breeding men up for trade and business ; nor to cry down hospitals and infirmaries for the lame and sick and aged in comparison of work-houses for the young and strong and healthfull . for all these are excellent and most commendable ways of charity , and have nothing of contradiction or inconsistency with one another , if they do answer the ends of their institution . i do not go about to lessen the esteem of casual and occasional acts of charity done to particular persons in present want ; when our blessed saviour in the midst of all his poverty took care of the poor , for when he spake to iudas at the table , the disciples supposed it was that he should give something to the poor . what admirable charity was this , when he had not whereon to lay his head , and was at the expence of a miracle to give an entertainment to the people , yet he had an officer , one of his own apostles , to take care of the poor ! and when he pronounceth such blessedness to those who doe acts of charity to them , and accounts them as done unto himself ; which is the highest expression of his gracious acceptance of such acts from us , and of the great obligation that lies upon us to doe them ; since we ought not to think much of any thing we doe for the honour of our lord and saviour , who did and suffer'd so much for our sakes : yet when we compare these with the publick works of charity before mention'd , being done for the same end ; we shall find these to exceed the other in some material circumstances , which add much to the excellency of them . ( 1. ) in the largeness and extensiveness of their design . other charities are for the present relief of some poor and indigent persons , whose bowels are refreshed , and backs are clothed , and hearts are eased , by the kindness of others to them ; but these are soon gone , and mens charity cannot follow them beyond the grave . but publick endowments of charity are to last for ever , and doe good to the poor of many generations . the ages to come will rise up and bless their memory who took care to doe good to those whom they never saw ; and to provide for such , yea very many such , whom it was impossible for them to know . when a man sees a great object of charity , as the widow and fatherless under extreme necessities , the mother weeping and bemoaning her children not having bread to put into their mouths , and the poor children looking ghastly and frightfully crying for want of bread , but not knowing where to get it , the very uneasiness of a man 's own mind at the sense of so much misery in others , will extort some present relief to still their cries , and to put such an unpleasing idea out of his fancy . but if the object it self do not move , yet importunity may : if that doth not , yet custom , reputation , natural humanity , recommendation of friends may prevail on men to be sometimes liberal to persons whom they see under present wants . but how much doth all this fall short of a fixed , certain , perpetual provision for the necessities of those , whom none of those arguments could excite men to shew kindness to ? the other is a more sensible , natural , private charity ; this is a more rational , generous christian charity ; being built upon more free , and noble , and lasting considerations , most agreeable to the design and honour of the christian religion , which puts men upon doing the best things and which tend to the greatest benefit and advantage of mankind . and in the comparison of things that are good , the largest , the most publick , the most lasting ought to have the preeminence . ( 2. ) in their consequence and usefulness ; which ought to be especially regarded in acts of charity . for true charity must be accompanied with wisedom and discretion . it is not a man's profuse liberality to every one that asks ; nor making himself poor to make others rich ; it is not squandering away an estate among idle and indigent persons , that makes him a charitable man ; but it is a wise dispensing the gifts god hath bestowed upon him for the benefit and advantage of others . and the greater the good is that is received the greater is the charity in bestowing it . the schoolmen reckon up seven sorts of corporal alms , and as many of spiritual ; to visit the sick , to feed the hungry , to satisfie the thirsty , to cloath the naked , to redeem the captive , to entertain the stranger , to bury the dead ; are the former : to teach the ignorant , to advise the doubtfull , to comfort the sorrowfull , to correct the wicked , to forgive the injurious , to bear the troublesome , to pray for all ; are the instances of spiritual charity . but this is rather a distribution of the different sorts of charity , than any just rule and measure of our obligation to the acts of it . for although in the general , spiritual acts of charity to mens souls , are to be preferred before what refers onely to their bodies ; yet in particular cases a man may be more obliged to relieve their outward necessities than to give them good counsel for their souls ; i. e. when those necessities are urgent and pressing , and by a present supply they may have longer time and be in better disposition to receive spiritual advice . some dispute if a bad man be in greater want and a good man in less want , which of these two is to be preferred ? and the casuists say , the work of mercy is greater in the former case ; but the work of charity in the latter . for mercy onely relates to another's misery ; but charity takes in other considerations . so i say , when the competition lies between the present supply of some in great want , and making a lasting provision for more persons in less want , there may be more mercy in the former case , but there may be greater charity in the latter : because the more publick , the more common , the more usefull the good is , the greater the charity is in doing of it . i will not dispute , whether the breeding up of youth to learning , or labour , be among us the greater charity ? i know no reason why two such excellent ways of charity should be set at variance with each other . but certainly we are not to judge of mens usefulness to the publick meerly by the strength of their limbs , or the hardness of their hands , or the nimbleness of their fingers . is it not possible that by the charitable education of children in the ways of learning and knowledge some may arrive at a greater capacity of serving god and their country , than if they had been grinding in a mill , or tugging at an oar all that while ? it is not onely keeping people to hard labour , or to continual working , which is the design of charity ; but the most excellent way of charity is , to improve all persons according to their several capacities , so as to make them more usefull and serviceable to the publick . this is not onely doing good to the particular persons , but to the whole nation ; and charity is not barely to be measured by the quality of its acts , but by the largeness of the circumference it fills . the breeding up some few great and usefull persons to a nation is a work of charity the publick good is more concerned in , than in the manual labours of many industrious artificers : who do serve the publick too in their way ; but there is a difference between those lesser stars in the firmament , that wanted a telescope to discover them , and those great and splendid bodies which influence the earth , and direct mens passage in the deep waters . that is therefore the greatest and most usefull charity , which tends to the improving mankind according to their different capacities ; some for labour , others for trade , others to be usefull to the rest of mankind with a respect either to their country or to their estates , their bodies or their souls : and which takes all possible care to prevent the unspeakable and innumerable mischiefs which idleness and debauchery do bring upon mankind . ( 3. ) in the honour they bring to religion . there are some cases , wherein our charity must be so secret , that our left hand must not know what our right hand doth , i. e. when there is danger of vanity and ostentation in the doing of our alms ; but when the honour of god and religion is concerned , then let your light so shine before men , that they may see your good works , and glorifie your father which is in heaven . but how can men see those acts of charity which are done in secret , and are industriously concealed from the knowledge of men ? and if that were to be taken as a strict command in all cases , then all the publick works of charity , which are most considerable for the honour of god and religion would be forbidden by the gospel . but where men do excellent and praise worthy things for great and good ends , without pharisaical hypocrisie , it is the general concernment of religion and the glory of god not to have such things kept from the knowledge of the world. for herein , saith our saviour , is my father glorified that ye bear much fruit , so shall ye be my disciples . so shall ye appear to be my disciples , for christ had owned them for his disciples before , but this would manifest their being so to the world ; which would bring the greatest honour to god and to the christian religion . and it is certain nothing did more advance the reputation of it in the world , than their singular and extraordinary care of the poor . for they not onely relieved in the first place those that were christians , according to the apostle's rule in the next verse ; especially to those of the household of faith ; but their charity extended to the very heathens : which iulian takes notice of with great indignation : is it not a shame for us not to relieve our own poor , when the christians not onely take care of their own but of ours too ? and by the case of lucian's peregrinus , it appears , that some pretended to be christians on purpose that they might be partakers of the great bounty and kindness which the christians shewed to their brethren . but such instances as these did not make them weary in well-doing ; but still as the church increased in riches by the free and large oblations of the people ; so greater care was taken for the erecting hospitals for the reception of the poor , who could provide no habitation for themselves ; and this was then always looked on as a particular concernment of religion , and not as a meer political constitution . thus the matters of charity stood in the christian church , till men came to be perswaded that by the priest's saying so many prayers for the dead , their souls might be removed out of purgatory and translated to heaven . and when this notorious cheat prevailed , the stream of mens charity was diverted from the poor , to the making good bargains for their souls . and who could blame men who had spent all their days in wickedness , or raised an estate by fraud and oppression , if at their death they took care to leave enough to have so many masses said for their souls , as might by a reasonable computation serve for their redemption out of purgatory at a marketable price . when the laying open these cheats to the world , gave the first occasion to the reformation , a mighty out-cry was every where made , that the foundation of all good works was destroyed , and if the reformation prevailed there would be no want of faith , when every one might choose what he pleased , but nothing like charity was to be expected . to remove the former calumny , our reformers published the articles of our religion ; and to take away the latter , they put that admirable prince edward the sixth upon the new founding the famous hospitals of this city , ( for although there were some hospitals before , such as saint mary bethlehem , elsying spittal , saint bartholomew's , yet they were inconsiderable in comparison of what they have been since ) for by the care and charity of the governours and other members of the city , they have yielded a wonderfull support to a mighty number of poor children , and wounded and diseased persons both in body and mind ; which being joyned with another foundation of one single person , this city may justly vye with any other in the christian world as to so many and so great foundations , for the best kind of christian charity , in the education of youth and the care of the impotent and diseased . our religion teacheth us better , than to have so vain and fond an opinion of our good works as to think we merit heaven by them ; but surely our charity is so much the greater , if we doe these things out of a sense of gratitude to god , than if we think to drive a bargain with him , and put our imperfect works in the ballance with an infinite and eternal reward . those of the church of rome may think they carry on a better trade with heaven than we doe ; and that they have a mighty advantage in the overballance of what they hope for in exchange for what they part with ; but they had best look well to the stating their accounts , the due value of their works , and the reason of expecting such a disproportionable return ; lest at last they deceive themselves , and totally fail of their expectations : for in the great day of account , all things will be most exactly weighed ; and although the greatest benefactours rejoyce in the highest acts of kindness , yet when any thing is challenged in a way of iustice , men do not love to be imposed upon or over-reached in a bargain . what madness then is it , for any sinfull creatures to hope that any acts of theirs , being weighed by divine justice , can bear any proportion in a way of merit , with no less than the kingdom of heaven ? this we utterly disclaim , and owe all our hopes of heaven meerly to the infinite goodness and mercy of god through his son christ jesus : and yet we think our selves never the less bound to be fruitfull in good works ; because we hereby testifie our obedience to the laws of christ ; our sincere love to god and our brethren ; our readiness to doe good to others by the mercies which god hath bestowed upon us ; our sense of the obligation we have to one another , as partaking of the same nature , and liable to the same infirmities , and exposed to the same calamities ; our expectation of a blessed reward , though not due to the merit of our works , but to the infinite grace and mercy of god. and i do not see , but where men have a due regard to god and religion , such considerations as these do more effectually stir men up to true acts of charity , than those mercenary and corrupt doctrines in the roman church ; which look rather like cunning devices to pick the peoples pockets than any real arguments for charity . and upon a carefull examination , it hath been found , that our protestant doctrine was so far from stopping up the channel that ran so freely before , that within sixty years after the reformation more great and noble works of charity were done in founding of schools and hospitals , than for some hundreds of years before ; and some say from the conquest till that time of the reformation . but this i have formerly insisted more upon , on the like occasion . the summe of what i have said is this , that we have no reason to be weary in well-doing ; on the account of our laws for the common relief of the poor ; because those laws cannot provide for all cases of charity ; and because they do suppose the greatest works of charity to depend upon the largeness and freeness of those mens minds to whom god gives a heart to doe great and worthy things with the estates he hath given to them . 2. but there is another plausible pretence yet behind , viz. from the consideration of our own times . were the times calm and fixed ; had we a fair prospect of things before us , that were a great encouragement to charity ; but we live in perplexed and doubtfull times , and know not what may become of us all ; mens minds are strangely discomposed and full of fears ; and therefore this is a very unseasonable time to perswade them to charity , when they ought rather to lay up and secure something against an evil day . to which i answer , 1. what times were those the primitive christians lived in , who so much abounded in charity ? saint paul tells us of himself and his brethren , they were hungry and thirsty , naked and buffetted , having no certain dwelling-place ; labouring , working with their own hands , reviled , persecuted , defamed ; and yet nothing relating to this world was so much their care and concernment as providing for the poor . for when he went up to ierusalem , and there conferred with iames , cephas and iohn , at his departure they had nothing to desire of him and barnabas , but to remember the poor , the same which i also was forward to doe ; as saint paul relates it . and you may see how earnest he was in it , by his dealing with the corinthians , when he perswades them to a liberal contribution to the poor christians in iudea , who then suffer'd much either through famine or persecution or both . saint paul had undertaken for the churches of achaia , ( of which corinth , being a populous and trading city , was the chief ) but the collection not being yet made among them , he sends some on purpose to corinth to make all ready against his coming to them , and perswades them to great liberality in their giving : for which end he makes use of the most powerfull and prevailing arguments and great arts of insinuation . ( 1. ) he sets before them the example of the churches of macedonia ; which is truly a very extraordinary instance of christian charity . they were under great trouble and deep poverty at that time themselves , yet understanding by saint paul this occasion of more than ordinary charity , they not onely strained themselves even beyond their abilities , but did it with that cheerfulness and satisfaction of mind , that they intreated the apostle to accept of what they had given , and to undertake the managing of so good a work. and saint paul seems to speak of it with a kind of transport , moreover , brethren , we do you to wit of the grace of god bestowed on the churches of macedonia ; how that in a great trial of affliction , the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty abounded to the riches of their liberality ; for to their power i bear record , yea and beyond their power they were willing of themselves ; praying us with much intreaty that we would receive the gift , and take upon us the fellowship of the ministring to the saints . nothing can be added to the weight of these words and the emphasis wherewith they are penned . ( 2. ) he lets them know what a shame and reproach it would be to so famous a church for other divine gifts to come behind others in charity . therefore as ye abound in every thing , in faith , in utterance , in knowledge , and in all diligence , and in your love to us , ( what artificial insinuations are these ! ) see that ye abound in this grace also . ( 3. ) but lest he should seem to press too hard upon them , he draws off again ; i speak not by commandment , but by occasion of the forwardness of others , and to prove the sincerity of your love . ( 4. ) yet he hath no sooner said this , but he comes on again with the most prevailing argument taken from the example of our blessed saviour : for ye know the grace of our lord iesus christ , that though he was rich , yet for your sakes he became poor that ye through his poverty might be rich . can any thing be more moving to christians than this ? ( 5. ) his design was not to lay a burthen upon them , but to excite mutual compassion in christians to one another . ( 6. ) this would be a demonstration to the world of their kindness to him , and that he had not spoken great things of them without cause . ( 7. ) they might justly expect a retribution sutable to their bounty ; but this i say , he which soweth sparingly shall reap sparingly ; but he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully . ( 8. ) this would be the occasion of many thanksgivings and prayers to god for them . for the administration of this service , not onely supplieth the want of the saints , but is abundant also by many thanksgivings unto god. ( whilst by the experiment of this ministration they glorifie god for your professed subjection unto the gospel of christ , and for your liberal distribution unto them , and unto all men . ) and by their prayer for you , which long after you for the exceeding grace of god in you . thanks be unto god for his unspeakable gift . wherein he supposes the thing as already done , as believing it impossible for them to resist the force of so many arguments . and yet all this while saint paul supposes their condition to be such as in a little time they might stand in need of relief from others ; which he thought was so far from being an argument against present charity , that he useth it the other way ; that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want , that their abundance may also be a supply for your want . i. e. do not consider what times may come upon your selves so as to hinder doing good while it is in your power to doe it ; leave those things to the wise providence of god ; if he think fit to reduce you to want , he that now excites your hearts to doe good to them , will stir up others to make up the same measure to you . so that while the christians were either under great persecutions , or in expectation of them , through the power of the magistrates , or the rage of the people ; yet the apostles pressed them , and that with great success , to a free , cheerfull , liberal contribution to relieve those who labour under greater wants than others . 2. this very consideration is used as an argument in scripture to perswade men to charity , viz. that we do not know what times may come upon us . give thy portion to seven and also to eight ; for thou knowest not what evil shall be upon the earth . this seems to the men of this world a strange way of reasoning , and it may be they suspect from hence that solomon was not so wise a man as they took him to be . what! give away what one hath because one knows not what times may come . no certainly , say they , we ought to get what we can , and to save what we have , for that reason . the difference of reasoning in this case proceeds upon the different principles on both sides . solomon believed a divine providence and they do not . and he thought that would be particularly concerned for the good of those , whom no sad prospect of affairs could discourage from well-doing according to their ability and opportunity . ii. and so i come to the incouragement here given to patient continuance in well-doing ; for , in due season we shall reap if we faint not . wherein are three things considerable . 1. the certainty of a future recompence for well-doing . we shall reap . 2. the time of receiving it , not immediately , but in due season . 3. the condition supposed on our parts , which is continuance in well-doing . if we faint not . some understand it as relating to the reward , that we shall receive it without fainting ; reaping and harvest being a time of labour and sickness ; but the more natural meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , seems to be the taking the participle , as implying the condition on our parts . 1. the certainty of a future recompence for well-doing . god is not unrighteous , saith the apostle , to forget your work and labour of love , which ye have shewed towards his name ; in that ye have ministred to the saints and do minister . though it be a work and labour , though it may seem uneasie and troublesome for a while ; yet being a work and labour of love ; it is but the work and labour of sowing , which a man goes through the more cheerfully because he expects a plentifull increase . he doth not reap presently the very same which he sowed , but a wonderfull improvement of it , when the seed being cast into a fruitfull soil brings forth some thirty , some sixty , some an hundred fold . and this harvest doth not depend upon the uncertainty of the weather ; here are no fears of blasting and mildew , or locust to prevent the joyfull expectation of it ; no danger of the seed rotting in the ground , or being pickt up by the fowls of the air ; but he that ministreth seed to the sower , will multiply the seed sown , and increase the fruits of their righteousness . his word is engaged that they which sow shall reap a plentifull increase ; and therefore god will not be unrighteous in not performing his promise . this men may as certainly depend upon as that night and day shall follow each other ; for heaven and earth may pass away , but the word of god endureth for ever . 2. the time of this retribution , in due season . most men are unwilling to trust god too long upon his bare word ; they would have something in hand , and the remainder hereafter . and god by the course of his wise providence , doth very often order things so in this world that the most charitable men , although they may not abound with the greatest riches , yet generally meet with the fewest difficulties ; and in their straights find more unexpected assistance than other men . david made it the observation of his own time , that in all his days though he was then grown old , he never saw the righteous , i. e. the charitable man , forsaken , nor his seed begging bread . and they have far more reason than other men to hope , that if they do fall into trouble and sickness , god will have a particular regard to them ; and besides this , they have the natural or rather spiritual contentment that follows doing good ; and they have more satisfaction and ease in it , than others have in hoarding up wealth for they know not whom . but none of all these are the reaping here mention'd ; they are like ruth's gleaning of handfulls in the field of boaz , which shewed a more than ordinary kindness ; notwithstanding which he said , the lord recompense thy work , and a full reward be given thee of the lord god of israel , under whose wings thou art come to trust . so it is here , they may have better gleanings and fuller handfulls sometimes in the common field of providence , but this is not the full recompence which the god of mercy will give to those that trust in his word . that is onely to be expected at the great day when the lord the righteous judge shall say , come ye blessed of my father , inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. for i was an hungred and ye gave me meat ; i was thirsty and ye gave me drink ; i was a stranger and ye took me in ; naked and ye clothed me ; i was sick and ye visited me ; i was in prison and ye came unto me : for inasmuch as ye have done it to one of the least of these my brethren ye have done it unto me . o the infinite goodness and unexpressible kindness of our blessed saviour , who in the day of judgment will interpret all acts of charity so much to the advantage of those that doe them ! who would deny any thing to a servant of that lord who takes all kindnesses to them as done to himself , and rewards them accordingly ? what other apprehensions will covetous and hard-hearted wretches then have of their sordid penuriousness in heaping up riches , without any tenderness or compassion to the necessities of their brethren and christ's representatives ? how will they wish ten thousand times , when it will be to no purpose to wish , that they had rather laid out their money in doing good , than laid it up for those , who may go to hell the faster for the great temptations they leave behind them . neither let the prodigal fools think they shall escape better , for being so contrary to the griping and stingy humour of the covetous ; for it is not the vain and careless squandring an estate away in riotous courses will make a man's condition more tolerable at that day ; but it is the provident , seasonable , carefull distribution of our charity for wise and good ends , which shall meet with so glorious a reward . 3. especially , in the last place , if we faint not , and do not repent of what good we have done , but continue so doing to the end of our lives . for this reason i presume it is that many reserve their greatest acts of charity to their deaths ; but it is dangerous putting off their repenting and doing good till they come to die , for fear their hearts , or those whom they trust deceive them . but if men begin to doe well in their health and strength , let them not faint when they come to die ; but continue charitable as well as faithfull unto death , and god will give them a crown of life . and now my business is to make particular application to this great assembly not to be weary in well-doing ; and therefore i shall repeat to you , a true report , &c. you perceive by this relation , how much good hath been already done in the care of the education of poor children , and in the cure of and provision for the maimed and distracted , all which are very commendable ways of well-doing , and it is a great advantage to me this day , that i am onely to perswade you not to be weary in this well-doing , for in due season you shall reap if ye faint not . you have already broke through many discouragements , and since the sad calamities of plague and fire , which made such desolations among us , you have done even as to these charitable foundations , what hath been to the admiration and astonishment of beholders . which of us all who saw the city in its ruines , with so many churches and halls and hospitals buried in its rubbish , could ever hope to have lived to see them rise again with a much greater glory ; and our new-built hospitals to appear with that magnificence , that strangers may easily mistake them for palaces ? we have lived in an age that hath beheld strange revolutions , astonishing judgments , and wonderfull deliverances ; what all the fermentations that are still among us may end in , god alone knows ; our unanswerable returns to god for his great mercies may justly make us fear , that he hath greater scourges provided for us ; the best thing we can doe for our selves , is to amend our ways , and to bring forth fruits worthy of amendment of life ; not barely to own and profess the protestant religion , but to adorn it , by holy and exemplary lives , and doing all the good we can while we have opportunity . and to that end i shall offer these considerations , and so conclude . 1. the more good ye doe , the more comfort you will find in the doing it . therefore be not weary in well-doing . there is a certain secret pleasure and inward satisfaction that follows doing good ; which increases by exercise and continuance . this is so far above the pleasure of the covetous and voluptuous in pursuit of their ends , that it approaches nearest of any thing we can conceive , to the satisfaction of the almighty , who delighteth in doing good. it was a remarkable saying of our saviour , which saint paul preserved , it is more blessed to give than to receive . how happy do the poor think themselves , when those who are rich are bountifull to them ! but the advantage is on your side ; they are the receivers but you are the gainers . what you bestow on them you lay up in store for your selves : which will yield far greater comfort when you come to die than having raised a vast estate : for that is onely carrying a greater account into another world ; but this is a great help to discharge it . 2. doing good is really one of the best parts of our religion . true religion and undefiled before god and the father is this , to visit the widow and fatherless in their affliction , and to keep himself unspotted from the world. it is not giving a cold formal visit to the widow and fatherless that makes any part of religion , but doing all the good we can to them , by advice and counsel , by supplying their wants and taking care of their affairs . no duty takes in so much of the substance of religion as true charity . it is the fulfilling of the law ; the end of the commandment , i. e. of the gospel ; the bond of perfectness . that , without which , all other pretence to religion is but flattering of god and meer hypocrisie . for all our prayers and praises are but verbal acknowledgments ; that which he hath put the trial of our love to himself upon , is our love to our brethren . for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen , how can he love god whom he hath not seen ? 3. doing good to others is taking the best care of our selves . we all seem very apprehensive of dangerous times , and very fearfull what may become of us ; the best course every wise and good man can take in difficult and uncertain times , is to doe his own duty and to leave events to god. and there is no duty more unquestionable , more safe , more advantagious , to himself as well as to others , than to doe good : i. e. to be kind and obliging to all , to forgive injuries , to reconcile enemies , to redeem captives , to visit the distressed , and according to our abilities and opportunities to relieve those that are in wants and necessities . this is the way to dwell safely , and to be quiet from the fear of evil ; for as long as god governs the world he will take care of those who commit themselves to him by patient continuance in well-doing . 4. doing good doth the most answer the obligations god hath laid upon you by the mercies he hath vouchsafed to you . and now give me leave to plead with you the cause of the poor and fatherless children , the cause of the wounded and maimed , who cannot help themselves , the cause of those who deserve so much more pity because they cannot pity themselves , being deprived of the use of their understandings . if god hath provided well for you and for your children , wherein can you better express your thankfulness for such a mercy than by your kindness and charity to those who are destitute of the means to make them men. if you have reason to bless god for your good education , shew it by taking care of theirs who may hereafter bless god for your kindness to them . if god hath blessed you with riches and a plentifull estate in this city , and raised you beyond your hopes and expectations , what can you doe more becoming the members of this city than to be kind to the children of those who have been such and reduced to poverty ? remember from what god hath raised you ; do not think much to consider what you have been , as well as what you are . you can never take the just height of god's mercies to you unless you begin at the bottom ; and let others measure your height now , as some have done that of the pyramid's , by the length of your shadow , by the refreshments they find under you . think what god hath brought you to , and for what end ; was it for your own sakes , that you might be full , while others are empty ; that you might swim in abundance , while others are pinched with necessities ? was it not rather to make you his conduit-pipes to convey blessing and comforts to others through your means ? when you are in health and at ease , then think of the miserable condition of those who lie in hospitals under aches and pains and sores , having nothing to comfort them , but the charity of good people to them . they cannot represent their own condition to you , being unable to come abroad to do it . be you good samaritans to the wounded and hurt , bind up their wounds with your kindness , and help to defray the charges of their cures . this is loving our neighbour as our selves , and that is fulfilling the law , and the great design of the gospel . lastly , when you think what a blessing it is that you do enjoy the use of your reason and vnderstanding , pity the poor creatures whom god hath deprived of it . how easily , how justly , how suddenly may god cast you into their condition ? shew the esteem that you have of this mercy of god to your selves , by the freeness of your charity to those that want it . therefore , i conclude in the words of the text , let us not be weary in any of these ways of well-doing , for in due season we shall reap if we faint not . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61587-e180 dr. willet's synops . papismi , p. 1219. 1224. notes for div a61587-e970 sozom. l. 5. c. 15. hist. trip. l. 6. c. 29. gal. 1. 6. 1. 10. ch. 1 , 2. ch. 3 , 4. part of 5. gal. 5. 14. 15. 20. 21. 24. 26. gal. 6. 1. 6. 2. gal. 6. 7. 8. act. 9. 36. 1 tim. 5. 10. tit. 3. 8. tit. 3. 14. heb. 13. 16. 1 tim. 6. 18. 2 cor. 9. 8. 11. 2 thess. 3. 10. jam. 2. 16. proposals for imployment of the poor , p. 29. 1681. luk. 6. 36. matt. 6. 4. luk. 16. 9. 22. 21. 2 tim. 6. 18. gal. 6. 10. matt. 25. 35 , 36. stat. de 39 eliz. c. 5. & 21 jac. c. 1. 14 car. 2. c. 9. co. 2. instit . 723. john 13. 29. matt. 25. 34. 40. visito , poto , cibo , redimo , tego , colligo , condo . consule , castiga , solare , remitte , fer , ora . 2. 2. q. 32. art . 2. cajet . in 2. 2. q. 32. art . 4. matt. 6. 3. matt. 5. 16. john 15. 8. jul. ep. ad arsac . 1 cor. 4. 11 , 12 , 13. 2 gal. 9. 10. 2 cor. 8 , 9. ch . 2 cor. 8. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. 2 cor. 8. 7. v. 8. v. 9. v. 13 , 14. 2 cor. 8. 24. 9. 6. v. 12. 13. 14. 15. 8. 14. eccles. 11. 2. heb. 6. 10. 2 cor. 9. 10. psal. 37. 25. 41. 1 , 3. ruth 2. 16. v. 12. matt. 25. 34 , 35 , 36. v. 40. act. 20. 35. jam. 1. 27. gal. 5. 14. tim. 1. 5. coloss. 3. 14. 1 john 4. 20. a sermon preached before the king at white-hall, march 7, 1678/9 by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1679 approx. 86 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 28 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61614 wing s5654 estc r8214 13730009 ocm 13730009 101603 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61614) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101603) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 852:7) a sermon preached before the king at white-hall, march 7, 1678/9 by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 52 p. printed for henry mortlock ..., london : 1679. "printed by his majesties command." reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -n.t. -matthew x, 16 -sermons. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-04 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the king at white-hall , march 7. 1678 / 9. by edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. pauls , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . printed by his majesties command . london , printed for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , and at the white hart in westminster hall. 1679. matth . x. 16. be ye therefore wise as serpents , and harmless as doves . in the beginning of this chapter we read of one of the greatest and most improbable designs that ever was , viz. christ's sending out his twelve apostles to convert and to reform the world. for , although the occasion of their first mission , was to prepare the jewish nation for entertaining the doctrine of the messias , and therefore they are commanded to go to the lost sheep of the house of israel ; and as they went to preach ; saying , the kingdom of heaven is at hand ; yet our saviour in his following discourse mentions several things which cannot be applied to their first going abroad ; particularly , that which relates to their hard usage and bad entertainment from the world ; which we do not find they met with from the jews upon this general message , but rather the contrary : for which cause he bids them to provide nothing for themselves , foreseeing that in all places there would be some that would be ready to receive them kindly ; and when the seventy disciples were sent upon a like errand , they returned with joy , which such young beginners would hardly have done , if they had met with such sharp persecutions then , which christ here foretells his apostles should suffer for preaching the gospel . either therefore we must say that st. matthew puts things together by way of common place , as he seems to do the miracles and parables of our saviour , without pursuing the order of time , as s. luke doth , and so upon occasion of christs sending out his apostles sets down all that relates to their mission , although delivered at several times ; or else that christ himself did now at first acquaint them with all the difficulties that should attend their imployment in preaching the gospel to the world , and consequently thought it necessary to give them at once their full instructions for their discharge of so great a trust , and due behaviour under so hard a service . a trust indeed so great , a service so hard as to require the wisdom of an angel , and the innocency of adam in paradise ; so many were the difficulties , so powerful were the prejudices , so dangerous were the snares and temptations , which in all places did hinder the success of so great a work. we are apt to admire and applaud the mighty conquests which men do make over some small parts of the world , by the subtilty of their wit , or by the force of their arms , or by the vastness of their treasure ; but in all these cases , there is nothing wonderful ; for the causes being supposed , there is at least a great probability the event should follow : but for twelve inconsiderable persons , as to all outward circumstances , without craft , without arms , without money , to undertake the conquest of the world , by changing not only mens opinions as to religion , but which is far more uneasie , the hearts and lives of men ; seems at first appearance so unlikely a thing , that though none but very wise men could hope to manage it , yet none who were thought so would ever undertake it . yet no less than this was the work which christ sent abroad his twelve apostles upon ; and he tells them , very little to their comfort , what hardship they were like to meet with , to be betrayed by friends , persecuted by enemies and hated of all men for his names sake : yea so great would the rage and malice and cruelty of men be against them , that he saith in the beginning of this verse , behold i send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves . what! to be destroyed and devoured by them ? no , but to turn those very wolves into sheep . but what powerful charms must they use to secure themselves from present danger , and to work such mighty change ? no other than those which our saviour recommends in the words of the text , be ye therefore wise as serpents , and harmless as doves . not as though we were to search all the properties of serpents and doves to understand the meaning of these words , and to determine the truth or falshood of all the relations that are made concerning both of them ; but as solomon chose the ant for an example of diligence , so our saviour designing to joyn wisdom and innocency together proposes the serpent for one and the dove for the other ; to let his disciples understand that he allows them so much wisdom as is consistent with innocency , and perswades them to no more simplicity than is consistent with wisdom . for wisdom without innocency turns into craft and cunning ; and simplicity without wisdom is meer folly . but the great difficulty lyes in the joyning these two together . for as the world goes and is like to do , men will be apt to say , how can those be as wise as serpents , who must be as harmless as doves ? if all the world were agreed in the practice of innocency , and men did not fare the worse for it , it might pass for wisdom ; but when they have to deal with others who will use all the wisdom of the serpent , and are so far from being harmless as doves , that they will take all the advantages that mens innocency and simplicity gives them , it seems hard to reconcile these two together . to what purpose , may some say , are mens eyes bid to be open , when their hands are tyed up ? had they not better be without the serpents sagacity and quickness of sight , than espy their dangers , and not use the most likely means to prevent them ? what doth the simplicity of the dove signifie , but to make them a more easie quarry for the birds of prey ? simplicity , and innocency , and patience , which our saviour recommends under the phrase of being harmless as doves , are good lessons for another world , but what do they signifie in this , which is made up of nothing but artifice and fraud , and wherein the great art and business of life seems to be overreaching and deceiving one another ? those only seem to have the true subtilty of the serpent who can turn and wind themselves every way as makes most for their advantage ; who by their soft and easie motions , by their artificial glidings and insinuations get an interest great enough to mischief while they watch for an opportunity to do it . as the serpent beguiled eve through his subtilty , i. e. say the fathers by the familiarity and easiness of access which he had , playing as some fancy , about the neck and arms of eve in the state of innocency . those have the true subtilty of the serpent who creep into houses and understand the secrets of persons and families ; and so know how to address , and how to keep in awe : who seem as harmless as doves till they have a fair opportunity of instilling their poison , and do the greater mischief by being thought so innocent . who have the dangerous teeth and the double tongue , who can deny the truth without lying , and forswear themselves without perjury ; who would sanctifie the greatest villanies by their good intentions ; and when they are ravenous as wolves , and as cruel as vultures , would yet be thought as harmless as doves , or as innocent as a child new born . what now can simplicity and innocency , and meekness , and patience signifie against all this serpentine subtilty ? and if you take away from the serpent his artificial motion and his poison , you leave him weak and contemptible , ready to be trampled on by every passenger , having nothing to defend himself but his skin and eye sight . and if you do allow his most natural properties , the innocency of the dove is a very unequal match for him if they be opposed , and seem of so different natures that they can hardly be joyned together in the same subject . and yet notwithstanding all these objections , it was certainly the design of our saviour in these words , 1. to recommend the conjunction and union of these two to his disciples , being wise as serpents , and harmless as doves . 2. to do it chiefly upon this consideration , that this would be the best means to promote his religion against all the arts and designs of men , as well as the best security for themselves . and therefore in the prosecuting this subject i shall endeavour these two things , 1. to shew wherein the conjunction of these two doth consist . 2. that this is the best means to promote the christian religion against all the mischievous arts and devices of men . 1. wherein the conjunction of these two doth consist . it is no hard matter to tell men how they may be wise as serpents , viz. by foresight and caution , so as to discern and prevent unnecessary dangers ; not to run themselves foolishly and vainly upon needless troubles , nor to draw persecutions upon themselves , when they can decently and lawfully avoid them ; not to give advantages to their enemies by their weakness and indiscretion , nor a just occasion of offence to any ; but in all lawful things to endeavour to gain upon them , and by all acts of kindness and charity to recommend our religion to them . neither is it hard to tell wherein we must appear to be harmless as doves , viz. by simplicity and integrity of mind , by meekness and patience , by forgiving injuries , and bearing persecutions as becomes christians , by a holy , innocent , and unblameable conversation : but the difficulty still lyes in the conjunction and mixture of both these ; which as s. chrysostome observes , is the thing which christ especially aims at , so as to make one vertue arise from both of them ; as greg. nazianzen said of his father , that he neither suffered the wisdom of the serpent to degenerate into cunning , nor the innocency of the dove into indiscretion , but made up one compleat kind of vertue from the mixture of both together ; and that i suppose lyes in these things , ( 1. ) integrity of mind , ( 2. ) ingenuity , or fairness of behaviour ; ( 3. ) meekness and patience : and in the due practice of these consists that prudent simplicity which results from these two , being wise as serpents , and harmless as doves . which i shall make appear by shewing , that men cannot be harmless as doves without them ; and that they are so far from being inconsistent with being wise as serpents , that a great part of wisdom lyes in them . 1. integrity of mind ; which is opposed to falseness and hypocrisie ; and therefore s. paul joyns simplicity and godly sincerity together . we read of some in scripture who are said to have a double heart , as well as a double tongue : they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith s. iames , men with two souls , one for god and another for the world ; or rather none at all for god , ( since he must have all or none ) but one to appearance and another in reality , having quite other thoughts , intentions and designs than they make the world believe . some tell us that the serpent hath no forked tongue , but through the quickness of its motion , and suddenness of its vibration it appears to be so ; men have but one heart and mind , but they may use such artificial motions and sudden turnings , as to appear to have more . but this is contrary to that integrity and simplicity which christ requires , and the scripture every where so much extols , as to place mens perfection and wisdom in it . noah was said to be a just man and perfect in his generations , because he maintained his integrity in a very corrupt and degenerate age. iob is said to be a man perfect and upright , one that feareth god and escheweth evil : and in another place of iob , the perfect and the wicked are opposed : he destroyeth the perfect and the wicked ; i. e. the good and the bad . mark the perfect man and behold the upright , saith the psalmist . the righteousness of the perfect shall direct his way , saith solomon ; but the wicked shall fall by his own wickedness ; and in the next words ; the righteousness of the upright shall deliver them , but transgressors shall be taken in their own naughtiness . and if solomons word may be taken , a mans integrity is his greatest wisdom ; for righteousness , saith he , keepeth him that is upright in the way ; but wickedness overthroweth the sinner . he that walketh uprightly , walketh surely ; but he that perverteth his wayes shall be known . and therefore he concludes that a man of understanding will walk uprightly . all this seems a strange paradox , and to come from such as are not versed in business , nor acquainted with affairs of the world , or from those who are resolved to maintain their hypothesis , though against the common sense of mankind , as the stoicks of old who made their wise man beautiful though never so deformed , rich though ready to starve for poverty , and a prince though sold for a slave ; just thus doth it seem to some men to talk of the consistency of wisdom and simplicity together , or to suppose those take the most prudent care of their own interest , who are tied up to the strict rules of downright honesty , and are resolved with iob to hold fast their integrity . but that there is nothing absurd or unreasonable in this supposition , nothing but what is true , and may be justified by the common sense and experience of mankind will appear by these considerations . 1. that is the truest wisdom of a man which doth most conduce to the happiness of life . for wisdom as it refers to action lies in the proposal of a right end , and the choice of the most proper means to attain it . which end doth not refer to any one part of a mans life , but to the whole as taken together . he therefore only deserves the name of a wise man , not that considers how to be rich and great when he is poor and mean , nor how to be well when he is sick , nor how to escape a present danger , nor how to compass a particular design ; but he that considers the whole course of his life together , and what is fit for him to make the end of it , and by what means he may best enjoy the happiness of it . i confess it is one great part of a wise man never to propose too much happiness to himself here ; for whoever doth so , is sure to find himself deceiv'd , and consequently is so much more miserable as he fails in his greatest expectations . but since god did not make men on purpose to be miserable , since there is a great difference as to mens conditions , since that difference depends very much on their own choice , there is a great deal of reason to place true wisdom in the choice of those things which tend most to the comfort and happiness of life . 2. that which gives a man the greatest satisfaction in what he doth , and either prevents or lessens or makes him more easily bear the troubles of life , doth the most conduce to the happiness of it . it was a bold saying of epicurus , that it is more d●sirable to be miserable by acting according to reason , than to be happy in going against it ; and i cannot tell how it can well agree with his notion of felicity : but it is a certain truth , that in the consideration of happiness , the satisfaction of a mans own mind doth weigh down all the external accidents of life . for , suppose a man to have riches and honours as great as ahoshuerus bestowed on his highest favourite haman ; yet by his sad instance we find that a small discontent when the mind suffers it to encrease and to spread its venom , doth so weaken the power of reason , disorder the passions , make a mans life so uneasie to him , as to precipitate him from the height of his fortune into the depth of ruine . but on the other side if we suppose a man to be always pleased with his condition , to enjoy an even and quiet mind in every state , being neither lifted up with prosperity , nor cast down with adversity , he is really happy in comparison with the other . it is a meer speculation to discourse of any compleat happiness in this world ; but that which doth either lessen the number , or abate the weight , or take off the malignity of the troubles of life , doth contribute very much to that degree of happiness which may be expected here . 3. the integrity and simplicity of a mans mind doth all this . ( 1. ) it gives the greatest satisfaction to a mans own mind . for although it be impossible for a man not to be liable to error and mistake , yet if he doth mistake with an innocent mind , he hath the comfort of his innocency when he thinks himself bound to correct his error . but if a man prevaricates with himself and acts against the sense of his own mind , though his conscience did not judge aright at that time , yet the goodness of the bare act with respect to the rule , will not prevent the sting that follows the want of inward integrity in doing it . the backslider in heart , saith solomon , shall be filled with his own ways , but a good man shall be satisfied from himself . the doing just and worthy and generous things without any finister ends and designs , leaves a most agreeable pleasure to the mind , like that of a constant health which is better felt than expressed . when a man applies his mind to the knowledge of his duty , and when he doth understand it , ( as it is not hard for an honest mind to do , for as the oracle answered the servant who desired to know how he might please his master , if you will seek it , you will be sure to find it , ) sets himself with a firm resolution to pursue it , though the rain falls , and the floods arise , and the winds blow on every side of him , yet he enjoys peace and quiet within , notwithstanding all the noise and blustering abroad ; and is sure to hold out after all , because he is founded upon a rock . but take one that endeavours to blind , or corrupt or master his conscience , to make it serve some mean end or design ; what uneasie reflections hath he upon himself , what perplexing thoughts , what tormenting fears , what suspicions and jealousies do disturb his imagination and rack his mind ? what art and pains doth such a one take to be believed honest and sincere ? and so much the more , because he doth not believe himself : he fears still he hath not given satisfaction enough , and by overdoing it , is the more suspected . it is a very unsatisfactory imployment that man hath who undertakes to perswade others of the truth of that which himself at the same time knows to be false ; for he is not convinced by his own arguments , and therefore despises those that are , and is afraid of those that seem to be ; either he thinks them fools for believing him , or that they only flatter and seem to believe when they do not ; and then he thinks his arts are understood and his credit lost , and fears while he goes about to impose upon others , they may do the same by him . so that unless he could see into the hearts of men , ( which would be no very comfortable sight to him ) all his craft and subtilty must leave him under perplexity and continual fear . but suppose that through over-officiousness he happens to take some false step , and so fall into the disfavour of those whom above all he desired to please ; how miserable is that mans condition when he finds himself forsaken of god , despised by men , and without any peace or contentment within ? ( 2. ) because integrity doth more become a man , and doth really promote his interest in the world. it is the saying of dio chrysostom an heathen orator , that simplicity and truth is a great and wise thing ; but cunning and deceit is foolish and mean ; for , saith he , observe the beasts , the more courage and spirit they have , the less art and subtilty they use ; but the more timorous and ignoble they are , the more false and d●ceitful . true wisdom and greatness of mind raises a man above the need of using little tricks and devices . sincerity and honesty carries one through many difficulties which all the arts he can invent would never help him through . for nothing doth a man more real mischief in the world than to be suspected for too much craft ; because every one stands upon his guard against him , and suspects plots and designs where there are none intended ; insomuch that though he speaks with all the sincerity that is possible , yet nothing he saith can be believed . and is this any part of true wisdom to lose reputation , upon which mens power and interest so much depends ? from hence the most artificial men have found it necessary to put on a guise of simplicity and plainness , and make greatest protestations of their honesty when they most lie in wait to deceive . if then the reputation of integrity be so necessary , the main point to be considered as to wisdom is this , whether such reputation can be sooner gained and longer held by meer pretending to simplicity , or by the practice of it ? he that only pretends to it , must act otherwise than he designs , and yet is concerned to make others believe he doth not : but in this he puts a force and constraint upon himself which is uneasie to any man , and he lets the vizard fall off sometimes when it is more observed than he thinks , and then his countenance is taken at the greatest disadvantage , and this is given out for the only true copy . and while he keeps it on ; it is a hard matter to deceive all eyes ; for it may be some by-standers have practised the same arts themselves , and they know the make and the fashion , and all the several strings which help to keep it from falling off : and when the suspicion grows strong , the laying aside the disguise will not be able to give satisfaction . but he that walketh uprigh 〈…〉 and worketh righteousness , and speaketh the truth in hi 〈…〉 t , as the psalmist describeth the practice of integrity , may possibly meet with such as will be ready to condemn him for hypocrisie at first ; but when they find he keeps to a certain rule , and pursues honest designs , without any great regard to the opinion which others entertain concerning him ; then all that know him cannot but esteem and value him ; his friends love him , and his enemies stand in awe of him . the path of the just , saith the wise man , is as the shining light which shineth more and more unto the perfect day . as the day begins with obscurity and a great mixture of darkness , till by quick and silent motions the light overcomes the mists and vapours of the night , and not only spreads its beams upon the tops of the mountains , but darts them into the deepest and most shady valleys : thus simplicity and integrity may at first appearing look dark and suspicious , till by degrees it breaks through the clouds of envy and detraction , and then shines with a greater glory . thus the christian simplicity was despised and reproached as folly and obstinacy , and many hard censures and sharp persecutions did men undergo for the sake of it for a long time , ( as the most durable kingdoms have had the sharpest pangs and been the longest in the birth : ) but at last persecuted and despised innocency prevailed over all the craft and power of the world. it was then the great glory of christians that their enemies could reproach them for nothing but their religion ; that they were in all other things honest and good men , only they were christians : and then true religion is most like to prevail in the world , when mens other vertues commend their religion , and not when zeal for their religion is their only vertue . when righteousness , and peace , and humility , and charity , and temperance , and patience , and a constant integrity make men enquire after a religion which produces such fruits as these are , then it will appear that apostles and preachers of religion are then wise as serpents as to the promoting the honour of their doctrine , when by the innocency and simplicity of their lives they are harmless as dove● . ( 3. ) but suppose that troubles and persecutions do arise , what becomes of the harmless doves then ; they are soon taken and easily destroyed , when those who are only wise as serpents may see many wayes to escape danger , which the innocent doves dare not follow them in ; what wisdom then can there be in so much simplicity as makes suffering unavoidable ? this is the hardest part of the case , but that which our saviour doth here suppose , when he saith , behold i send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves ; be ye therefore wise as serpents , &c. so that , if we cannot make out this to hold in respect of sufferings , we must yield this counsel or advice of christ to his disciples to be defective as to the main occasion of it . to this therefore i answer in these particulars ; 1. our saviour doth allow the wisdom of prevention as to all unnecessary dangers ; for otherwise he would never have bid his disciples be wise as serpents , but only be as quiet as sheep and as harmless as doves . god forbid that christian simplicity should be taken in so ill a sense as to hinder us from a just and necessary care of our own safety : and not only for the preservation of our selves but of our religion too . when we have liberty and opportunity to do it , it is being stupid as sheep , and careless as the ravens of their young ones , and not being only harmless as doves , to neglect the doing it . in such a case it is a violation of the duty we owe to god and to posterity , if we do not use all lawful endeavours for the preservation of our selves and our religion from all the attempts of wicked and unreasonable men . but in case storms do arise after all our care , christ doth not seem to forbid his disciples making use of a present shelter till the storm be blown over ; but when they persecute you in this city , flee to another and some say , the likeness to doves is recommended in regard that its safety lyes chiefly in the quickness of its flight . but our saviour neither imposes a necessity of suffering in all cases , nor allows a liberty of flying upon every apprehension of danger , but leaves this matter to be determined according to circumstances , as makes most for gods honour , and his churches good : i e. herein to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves ; by not exposing themselves to needless dangers when they may be avoided with a good conscience , nor declining any necessary duty for the sake of any trouble which may follow upon it . there were some in the primitive church who thought it unlawful in any case to avoid persecution , and tertullian pleads their cause with many plausible reasons ; saying , that persecution is designed on purpose for tryal by god himself ; that the allowance for flying was peculiar to the apostles case , not to avoid persecution , but for the more speedy propagation of the gospel ; and some of the christians were so far from flying that they ran upon persecution and seemed ambitious of martyrdom . s. chrysostom saith , it was one of the reasons julian gave why he would not openly persecute christianity ; because he knew the christians gloried in being martyrs ; and he would not humour them so much as to spread his nets to catch such silly doves , that never minded the danger they fell into . but the christian church never approved rash and indiscreet suffering , as much as it encouraged all christians to patience and courage and perseverance ; for they required not only a just cause , but a necessary occasion of suffering , and blamed those who hastned their own destruction ; for they observe that christ himself made use of prudent caution when he knew the jews had designed to put him to death ; for it is said , from thence forward he walked no more publickly among the iews . when the storm seemed to threaten the leaders of the church in such a manner that by their withdrawing the people might probably enjoy more quiet , and not want help enough to perform the necessary offices , even the bishops were allowed to retire ; and upon this ground s. cyprian and athanasius justified themselves : but when the case is common , when the necessities of the church require the presence of their pastours , then the good shepherd must lay down his life for the sheep , as s. augustin hath resolved this case in his epistle to honoratus . so that this whole matter belongs to christian prudence , which is then most needful and fit to be used , when the resolution of the case depends upon particular circumstances ; so as not to shun any necessary duty for fear of danger , nor to run upon any unnecessary trouble to shew our courage . 2. since no wisdom is great enough to prevent all troubles of life , that is the greatest which makes them most easie to be endured . if the wisdom of the serpent could extend so far as to avoid all the calamities that mankind is subject to , it would have a mighty advantage over the simplicity of the dove ; but since the most subtle contrivers cannot escape the common accidents of life , but do frequently meet with more vexations and crosses than innocent and undesigning men do , we are then to consider , since the burden must be born , what will make it sit most easily upon our shoulders : and that which abates of the weight , or adds to our strength , or supports us with the best hopes , is the truest wisdom . and who is he that will harm you , saith s. peter , if ye be followers of that which is good ? i. e. innocency is the best security against trouble which one can have in this world ; but since the world is so bad as that the best may suffer in it , and for being such , yet that ought not to trouble or affright them ; but and if ye suffer for righteousness sake , happy are ye ; and be not afraid of their terrour , neither be troubled . but should it not trouble a man to suffer innocently ? yes , with a respect to others , but as to himself he may more justly be troubled if he suffered justly . for nothing makes sufferings so heavy to be born as a guilty conscience : that is a burden more insupportable to an awakened mind than any outward affliction whatsoever . iudas thought himself to be wise as a serpent , not only in escaping the danger which he saw christ and his disciples falling into by the combination of the priests and scribes and pharisees against them ; but in ingratiating himself with them and making a good bargain for his own advantage : but the want of a dove-like innocency marred his whole design ; and filled his conscience with such horrour as to make him own his guilt , and put an end to his miserable life . whereas the other apostles whose chief care was to preserve their innocency as to any wilful sins , though they had too much of the fearfulness as well as the simplicity of doves , till the descent of the holy ghost upon them ; yet they held out in the midst of fears and dangers , and came at last to rejoyce in their sufferings . and s. paul tells us what the cause of it was , for our rejoycing is this , the testimony of our conscience , that in simplicity , and godly sincerity , not with fleshly wisdom , but by the grace of god , we have had our conversation in the world . see here , not only what peace and serenity , but what rejoycing follows an innocent mind , and the testimony of a good conscience ! when all the arts of fleshly wisdom will be found vain and useless , affording no satisfaction to a mans mind , when he looks back upon all of them , then sincerity and integrity of heart will give a man the most comfortable reflections , and fill him with the most joyful expectations . this enables a man to look back without horrour , to look about him without shame , to look within without confusion , and to look forward without despondency . so that as the streight line is the shortest of any ; so upon greatest consideration it will be found that the upright and sincere man takes the nearest way to his own happiness . ii. prudent simplicity implies the practice of ingenuity ; which is such a natural freedom in our words and actions , that men may thereby understand the sincerity of our mind and intention . not that men are bound to declare all they know to every impertinent enquirer , which is simplicity without prudence ; but in all cases wherein men ought to declare their minds , to do it without fraud and dissimulation ; and in no case to design to overreach and deceive others . this is that simplicity of conversation which our saviour requires when he saith , let your communication be yea , yea , nay , nay , i. e. you ought to converse with so much sincerity , that your bare affirmation or denial may be sufficient , this being the proper use of speech that men may understand each others minds by their words : for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil , i. e. the wickedness of mankind and that distrust and suspicion which is occasioned by it , is the reason they are ever put to make use of oaths to make their testimony appear more credible . and therefore nothing but such necessity can justifie the use of them ; oaths and wars being never lawful but when they are necessary . some understand the reduplication of those words , yea , yea , nay , nay , after a more emphatical manner ; viz. that our words must not only agree with the truth of the thing , but with the conception and sense of our minds ; and so the greatest candour and sincerity is commanded by them . truth was described of old , sitting upon an adamant , with garments white as snow , and a light in her hand , to intimate that clearness and simplicity and firmness that doth accompany it ; such as was most remarkable in the primitive christians ; who abhorred any thing that looked like dissimulation and hypocrisie , especially in what concerned their religion . in this they were plain and open , hearty and sincere , neither exasperating their enemies by needless provocations , nor using any artificial ways of compliance for their own security when the casting some few grains of incense on the altar , and pouring out wine before the emperors statue might have saved their lives , they chose rather to dye than to defile their consciences with that impure and idolatrous worship . to be dismissed after summons to the tribunal without compliance was a scandal , and raised suspicions of some secret assurances given ; to be proclaimed to have sacrificed though they had not , and not to contradict it was great infamy ; to procure a certificate of sacrificing though they did not ; or to pay fees to the officers to be excused from doing it , made them a sort of libellati , although their names were never entred in the heathen rolls , and they were forced to undergo severe penance before they were restored to the communion of the church . so much simplicity and singleness of heart was then supposed necessary to the christian profession . no directing the intention , no secret reservation , no absolution either before committing the fact or immediately upon confession of it , were ever heard of or allowed in those days of christian innocency and simplicity . if the heathen officers sought after christians , they neither lied to them , nor betrayed their brethren ; but would rather endure torments themselves , than expose others to them ; for which reason s. augustin highly commends the resolution of firmus an african bishop , who rather chose to be tortured himself than discover a christian committed to his care , who was sought after for no other reason , but because he was a christian ; and the heathen emperour himself was so pleased with it , that for his sake he forgave the other person and suffered him to enjoy his liberty . when the christians were summoned before the heathen tribunals , they used no shifting tricks or evasions , they concealed no part in their minds of what was necessary to make what they spake to be true ; they did not first peremptorily deny what they knew to be true , and then back such a denial with horrid oaths and dreadful imprecations upon themselves , and after all think to justifie the doing so by vertue of some secret reservation in their own minds . is this becoming the simplicity and ingenuity of christians ? such may possibly think themselves wise as serpents in so doing , but i am sure they are far from being innocent as doves . but are there any who go under the name of christians , who own and defend such practices ? i think indeed scarce any who went under the name of honest heathens ever did it . for they did not only require constancy and fidelity in oaths and promises , but simplicity an● sincerity both in the making and keeping 〈◊〉 them . they condemned the romans wh 〈…〉 t to avoid their oath by a trick , and 〈…〉 ck to the carthaginians : they mig 〈…〉 e constancy of regulus in observing the words of his oath as to his return , although very capable of a mental reservation ; and if he did not promise the carthaginians to perswade the roman senate to the peace , he behaved himself with great sincerity as well as constancy . when the king of persia thought by a trick to avoid the oath he had made to one of his neighbour princes , viz. that he would not pass such a stone which was set up as a boundary between them , and he took up the stone and caused it to be carried before his army ; his counsellours told him they feared such deceit would never prosper with him , because as the prince sent him word , covenants are to be understood according to the plain meaning of the words , and not according to any secret reservation . since then the very heathens disallowed such artifices and frauds , are there any worse than heathens that justifie and maintain them ? is not this rather an artifice and fraud of their adversaries to render them odious ? but even in this respect we ought to be harmless as doves , and therein lies a necessary part of christian ingenuity , in not charging on others more than they are guilty of . i shall therefore fairly represent the doctrine held in the church of rome about these matters , and leave you to judge how far it is consistent with christian simplicity . there are some things wherein the divines of the roman church are agreed , and some things wherein they differ . the things wherein they are agreed are these . 1. that an officious lie is but a venial sin . this they do not stick to declare to be the common opinion of all their divines . ex communi-omnium sententiâ , saith azorius , a lie that hurts no-body , but is intended for the good of others is no mortal sin ; and herein all are agreed , saith reginaldus ; because say they , where there is no other fault but the meer falsity , it is not of its own nature and kind any mortal sin ; for a lye of it self is a harmless thing , or at least , saith lessius , the hurt is not great that it doth , and it is no great matter whether men be deceived or not , if they do not suffer much by it ; and from hence he concludes it to be venial in its own nature . it is true , they say an officious lie may become a mortal sin by accident , when it is confirmed by an oath , when it is too publick and scandalous and used by those from whom the people expects truth , as bishops and preachers and religious men , saith sayr . not even in them , saith navarr , unless the scandal be great , or their consciences tell them they are mortal sins ; or some other circumstances make it so . if it be in matter of judicature ; although the thing be small , yet i think a lie a mortal sin , saith cajetan , because men are then bound to speak truth . that reason is of no force at all , say soto and navarr , for that circumstance alone doth not alter the nature of the sin . so that if a man tells never so many lyes , provided he intend to hurt no body by them , they do not make one mortal sin . for that is a fixed rule among the casicists , that an infinite number of venial sins do not amount to one mortal ; and consequently though they have obliquity in them , yet they do not put a man out of the favour of god. but upon these principles what security have men to invent and spread abroad lyes , provided they are intended for a good end in their own opinion ? what sincerity is to be expected , when the confessing a truth may do them injury ; and the telling a lye may do them good ? for even cajetan himself makes that only a pernicious lye , when a man designs to do mischief by it . they cry out upon it as a great scandal for any of us to say , they think it lawful to lye for the catholick cause ; and in truth they do not say so in words ; for they still say , a lye is unlawful for any end whatsoever ; but here lyes the subtilty of it ; they grant it in general to be a fault , but such a venial , such an inconsiderable fault , if it be for a good end ; and they have so many wayes to expiate the guilt of venial sins ; that the difference is very little as to the practice of it , from making it no sin at all . and some think they had better own downright lying , than make use of such absurd wayes of evading it by mental reservations ; by which men may be truly said to affirm that which they do deny , and to deny that which they do affirm . but notwithstanding this , 2. they are agreed , that in some cases , th●… which otherwise would be a lye , is none by 〈◊〉 help of a mental reservation . let us not therefore do the iesuites so much injury to charge that upon them as their peculiar doctrine , which is common to all their divines and casuists . and herein f. parsons was in the right , when he asserted , that the doctrine of equivocation and mental reservation hath been received in the roman church for , four hundred years : only some have extended the practice of it farther than others have done . but in the case of confession they all agree without exception , saith the same author , that if a man hath confessed a thing to a priest , he may deny and swear that he never confessed it , without being guilty either of a lye or perjury ; reserving this in his mind , that he hath not confessed it so as to utter it to another . and i find the greatest enemies to the use of mental reservation in other cases , do allow it in this ; and do not barely allow it , but think a man bound in conscience to use it , under grievous sin , saith parsons , when by no other means of silence , diversion , or evasion the said secresie can be concealed . i do not now meddle with the inviolableness of the seal of confession , which i do not deny a great regard ought to be had to , ( where an obligation greater than that of keeping a secret doth not take it off , as where the life of my prince or the publick safety are concerned ) not from any divine institution , but from the baseness of betraying a trust : but i wonder how they came to think it to be no lye or perjury in this case , and yet to be so in any other ? it is to no purpose to alledge other reasons peculiar to this ase , for the single question is , whether what a man keeps in his mind , can keep him from being guilty of a lye , or of perjury in his words ? if it cannot , then not in the case of confession ; if it may , then a mental reservation will equally do it in any other case . and consequently no man who doth allow it in this case , can on that account disallow it in any other . this navarr very well saw , and therefore from the allowance of it in this case of confession he de duces the lawfulness of the use of it in all cases wherein a man is not bound to speak all he knows . the common answer in this case is , that in confession the priest doth not know as man but as god ; and therefore when he is asked any thing as a man he may deny what he knows as god. but navarr at large shews the folly and absurdity of this answer , because this doth not salve the contradiction , for to say he doth not know is as much as to say he doth not any way know it ; which is false if he doth know it in any capacity : and it is false that he doth not know it as man , because he knows it as a priest , and as such he is not god but man. and the very seal of confession discovers that it is made known to him as a man , and with the consent of the penitent a priest may reveal what he heard in confession ; and in other cases he may make use of that knowledge as a man , without particular discoverie . i do not therefore wonder to see the stout and plain-hearted defenders of the lawfulness of this practice in other cases , to express so much astonishment at the nicety and scrupulosity of those , who dispute against it as so dangerous and pernicious a thing upon other occasions , when they think it so pious and innocent in this . for , say they , if it be a lie to deny what a man knows , it is not in the power of the church or of god himself for any end whatsoever to make it lawful for a priest to deny what he knows . and if it be not a lie in that case , neither is it in any other . but although none in the roman church are able to answer that argument , yet i must do some of them that justice , as to clear them from the owning the allowance of this practice in other common cases upon the same ground . yet i fear upon strict enquiry we shall find that those do equivocate more who seem to deny it , than those who openly assert it . for , although two persons of the roman church seem wholly to reject it , except in the case of confession ; yet the a one of them is charged with † singularity and suspicion of here sie , and the b other with little less than heresie and apostasie ; and their proceedings with him shew what esteem they had of him . c but most of their other divines and casuists do approve it in case of testimony and accusation . soto doth allow a witness being examined about a secret crime to say , he doth not know any thing of it , although he were privy to it : and for this he quotes some divines of great authority before him ; as he might have done many others : but he will not allow him to say he did not see the fact committed , nor that he heard nothing of it , because , saith he , words of knowledge seem to be restrained by judicial proceedings to that which a man is bound to declare . but this ●ubtilty the latter casuists will by no means admit of , and allow denying the fact in any words ; and say of him , that he was afraid where no fear was . they therefore say , it is enough that a witness answers to what ought to have been the intention of the iudge , whatever his actual intention was ; and therefore if a man supposes the judge not to proceed legally against him , he may not only deny the fact he knows , but swear to that denial , provided he keeps this in his mind that he denied any such fact which belonged to the iudges conusance ; or that he did not do it publickly , * and in this case , say they , there is neither lie , nor per jury . others say , no more is necessary to avoid a lie , or perjury in such cases , but only to understand the word of denial with this restriction so as to be bound to tell you . and this is the common case which parsons and others speak of . if a man be examined upon oath whether he be a priest or not , they say , he may with a safe conscience deny it with that poor reservation in his mind ; and that is a known rule in this case among them that what a man may truly say , he may truly swear . so that a priest may not only say , but swear he is none , and yet by this admirable art neither tell a lie , nor forswear himself . some of later times being made sensible of the pernicious consequences of the imputation of such doctrines and practices to their church have endeavoured to qualifie and restrain the abuse of them . but upon due examination we shall find this to be only a greater art to avoid the odium of these things and a design to deceive us with the greater fineness . for they allow the same words to be said either in oaths or testimonies , i. e. a plain denial of what they know to be true , but only differ from the other as to the way of excusing such a denial from being a lie : which say they , depends on the circumstances of denying , and not upon the reservation of the mind . so malderus himself grants , that a guilty person being examined upon a capital offence , may deny the fact with this reservation , so as to be bound to tell it ; but then he saith , the circumstances give that sense and not the reservation in his mind . but saith emonerius ( or rather a famous iesuite under that name ) these circumstances only limit the words to such a sense which they cannot otherwise bear , because in such circumstances a man is not bound to declare what he knows , therefore , saith he , whereever there is a reasonable cause of concealing what a man knows , such mental reservations are to be understood , and so there is the same liberty allowed in practice . among the late casuists none hath seemed to have written with more pomp and vanity against mental restrictions than caramuel ; yet he not only allows a confessour to deny upon oath what he heard in confession ; but in case of secret murder that a man may with a good conscience deny the fact , though the judge be competent and proceed according to due form of law. what way can this be excused from a lye , since he saith , a mental reservation will not do it ? he hath a fetch beyond this . a iudge is only to proceed upon evidence ; if there be no sufficient evidence against him , he may persist in denying it , because it cannot be fully proved , and therefore his denyal , saith he , is of such a fact which he can proceed upon , and what cannot be proved is none in law. these are the shifts of those who seem most to oppose the iesuitical art of equivocation ; and inveigh bitterly against it , as a thing wholly repugnant to the truth of our words and the sincerity of our minds , and that candour and simplicity which ought to be in christians . but in my apprehension they had altogether as good take up with the dull way of lying , or with the common artifice of equivocation and mental reservation , as make use of such refinings as these . but however , we gain this considerable advantage by them , that they do assure us , that mental reservations are so far from excusing the words spoken from being a lye , that they contain a premeditated lye ; and so the sin is the more aggravated by them ; that all such propositions are in themselves false , and designed only to deceive others , and so all the effect and consequence of lying follow them ; that there is nothing so false but may be made true , nothing so true but may be made false by this means . caramuel gives a remarkable instance of this kind in some of the articles of the creed ; for by this way of mental reservation a man might truly say , christ was not born , understanding it secretly , at constantinople . he did not suffer , viz. at paris . he was not buried , viz. in persia. he did not rise again , viz. in japan . nor ascended into heaven , viz. from america : so that by this blessed art , the most abominable heresies may be true doctrine ; and the most cursed lyes prove precious truths . besides , they confess that it takes away all confidence in mens words , and destroys all sincerity of conversation , and the very inclination to speak truth : for as malderus well observes , there is no reason men should not have the same liberty in private conversation which is allowed them before an incompetent iudge : and some iesuites themselves grant , that if the common use of it be allowed , there can be no security as to mens words , there being nothing so false but it may be made true in this way . and no man can be charged with a lye till they know his heart ; nor the devil himself in all his lying oracles ; who surely had wit enough to make some secret reservation ; and a very little will serve for that according to suarez , who saith , it is enough in the general , that a man intend to affirm or deny in some true sense ; although he know not what . since from their own authors , we thus far understand the mischievous consequence of these practices , it will not be amiss to set down briefly the cases , wherein they are commonly allowed . 1. in general , whereever there is a just and reasonable cause for concealing of truth . for that is the most general rule they give in this case ; where a man is not bound to speak his whole mind , he may utter one half , and reserve the other half of one entire proposition . now a just and reasonable cause with them is declining of danger , or obtaining any advantage to themselves either as to body , honour , or estate . in all such cases , they allow that a man may speak what is simply false and swear to it too , provided that he hold something in his mind which makes it true . but if a man happen to do it without just cause , what then ? doth he lye ? doth he forswear himself ? by no means . but he is guilty of indiscretion : and is that all ? then they tell him for his comfort , that an oath that wants only discretion is no mortal sin . 2. if a man be barred the use of equivocation , or mental reservation , that doth not hinder the using it , even in renouncing equivocation . even soto himself saith , that if a magistrate requires from a person to speak simply all he knows of such a matter ; i. e. without any reservation ; a man may still answer he knows nothing of it ; i. e. with this reservation , to tell him . but what if in particular , saith he , he asks about a secret murder ; whether peter killed john , which he alone saw , doth it not seem to be a lye for him to say , he knows nothing of it ? no , saith he ; for still the meaning is , so as he is bound to tell . f. parson speaks home to this point ; suppose , saith he , a iudge asks a man whether he doth equivocate or not ? he may answer , not , but with another equivocation . but if he still suspects he equivocates , what then is to be done ? he may deny it with another equivocation ; and so , toties quoties , as often as he asks , the other may deny and still with a farther equivocation . suppose a priest , saith iacob . à graffiis , be asked a thing he heard in confession , may he deny that he knew it ? yes , saith he , and swear it too ; because he knew it not as man. but suppose he be asked whether he knew it not as man , but as god ? he may deny it still , with another equivocation , i. e. not as god himself , but as his minister . what if a iudge , saith bonacina , be so unreasonable to bar all equivocation ? yet the respondent may equivocate still . and he cites several others of theirs who defended this practice ; and therefore barns saith , it is so slippery a thing , that the faster you think to hold it , the sooner it gets from you . 3. if a man be charged with a secret crime , which cannot be sufficiently proved by testimonies beyond all exception , he may safely deny it , though he were guilty of it . if a man , saith lessius , can make any exception against the witnesses , or shew that it was a report spread abroad by men , that bore ill will to him , or that there was some mistake in it , he is not bound to confess the truth , and consequently he may deny it with a reservation . nay , as long as the thing is so secret , that a man may probably defend himself , and hope to escape , he may persist in denying the fact ; although the iudge do proceed according to due form of law , saith the same lessius . it is no mortal sin to deny it , saith filliucius . not , though others be like to suffer for it , saith em. sà ; especially if the punishment be capital , saith filliucius and others in him . but if a man doth suspect whether the judge doth proceed according to due form of law , which depends upon his opinion of the proofs and witnesses brought against him , they make no question then , but he may deny the fact by help of an easie reservation in his mind . 4. if a man hath denyed the fact when he was bound to confess it in court , according to their rules , yet they will not allow that he is bound to confess it before execution . because saith navarr , confession to a priest and absolution by him is sufficient for salvation . his confessour ought not to put him upon it , saith diana . not unless it be clearer than noon-day that the law compels them to it , say others ; i. e. that they have no kind of exceptions again the judicial proceedings . some thought they ought then to do it for the reputation of the judges who otherwise might suffer in the esteem of the people as condemning innocent persons ; but this is over-ruled by the generality of the later casuists , because the presumption is alwayes on the side of the judges , when they proceed according to law. but one of the latest casuists hath given an excellent reason against * publick confession , because they are accounted cowards and fools that make it . 5. where the judge is supposed incompetent , they make no question of the use of equivocation and mental reservation in denying the crimes they are guilty of . an incompetent iudge is one that wants lawful jurisdiction over the person ; as if a lay-man pretend to judge one in orders according to their doctrine of exemption ; or if a heretick or excommunicated person take upon him to judge good catholicks . and thus they look on all our iudges as incompetent ; of which , besides the general charge of heresie , we have this particular evidence . when the unquietness of the iesuites gave just occasion to those severe laws which were made after the bull of pius 5. several cases were proposed at rome for resolution in order to the better conduct of their affairs here ; and among the rest this , suppose an oath be required in an heretical court before incompetent iudges ( quales sunt omnes nunc in anglia , as all are now in england ) how far doth such an oath bind ? the answer is , no farther than the person that swears did intend it should : and he may either refuse the oath , or he may sophisticè ju● are & sophisticè respondre : he may swear and answer with juggling and equivocation : and he that discovers any by vertue of his oath commits a double sin . and in the answers approved by pius 5. our iudges are declared incompetent ; and our courts of iudicature unlawful courts ; and therefore no man by his oath is bound to conf●ss any thing to the prejudice of the catholick cause ; nor to answer according to the intention of the iudge , but in some true sense of his own . so that we not only see the doctrine and practice of equivocation approved by the holy sec , but all legal authority among us utterly rejected as having no jurisdiction over them . and all who allow this practice do thereby discover that what they call heresie doth take away the civil rights and properties of men . for if heresie makes out iudges incompetent , by necessary consequence it must deprive the king of the right to his throne , it must take away all the obligation of our laws , and the title every man hath to his estate . such pernicious consequences do follow the wisdom of the serpent , where it is not joyned with the innocence and simplicity of the dove : and not only pernicious to government , but to themselves too when these arts are understood and discovered ; for what security can there be from the most solemn oaths , the most deep and serious protestations of those persons who at the same time believe that none of these things do bind them , but by some secret reserve they may turn the sense quite another way than we imagined , and when they pretend the greatest simplicity and seem to renounce all equivocation , may then equivocate the most of all ? if men had invented ways to fill the world with perpetual jealousies and suspicions of their practices and intentions , they could never have thought of any more effectual than these two , that heresie , or differing in opinion from them , deprives them of their civil rights , and that they may deny what is true , and swear to what is false , and promise what they never mean to perform by vertue of some secret reservation in their minds . how can they live as fellow-subjects with others who do not own the same authority , the same laws , the same magistrates , who look on all hereticks in a state of usurpation , and all judicial proceedings against them as meer force and violence , and parallel the case of answering in our courts with that of oaths and promises to thieves and robbers ? for upon these grounds all the bonds of society are dissolved where what they call heresie prevails ; and no obligation can lie upon them by vertue of any laws , or oaths , or promises . i do not say that particular persons may not , upon common principles of honesty , make conscience of these things : but i speak of what follows from these allowed principles and practices among them , and what may be justly expected by vertue of them . how can we be sure that any man means what he saith , when he holds it lawful to reserve a meaning quite different from his words ? what can oaths signifie to the satisfaction of others ; when it is impossible to understand in what sense they swear ? and when they pretend the greatest simplicity in renouncing all arts , may then by allowance of their casuists use them the most of all ? but can men upon sober reflections think it any part of true wisdom to lose all the force of their oaths and promises with those among whom they live ? will they never stand in need of being believed or trusted ? and then , if they desire it never so much , how can they recover any credit with out plain disowning all such principles , and in such a way if such can be found out , which is uncapable of any mental reservation . such kind of artifices can only serve for a time , but when once they are throughly understood , they fall heavily upon those that use them . for although frost and fraud may hold for a while , yet according to the true saying , they both have dirty ends . the summ of what i have to say is this , that however simplicity and sincerity of conversation may in some particular circumstances expose men to greater danger and difficulties than fraud and deceit may do ; yet upon the whole matter considering the consequences of both , it will be found much greater wisdom always to preserve the innocency of the dove , than to use the greatest subtilty of the serpent without it . which although it may seem to take off from the fineness of the serpents wisdom , yet it adds very much to the safety and soundness of it . iii. prudent simplicity lies in the practice of meekness and patience . the serpent doth not imploy its subtilty only in defending it self and avoiding dangers , but in watching its opportunity to do mischief , * being both revengeful and insidious : therefore we read of the adder in the path that lies undiscerned in the sands , that biteth the horse-heels so that the rider shall fall backward . it doth mischief secretly , spitefully and artificially , by fit means and instruments . but christ would have his disciples to be wise to that which is good , but simple or harmless concerning evil ; so s. paul explains these words of our saviour , be ye wise as serpents and harmless as doves . which although they want no gall , yet do not shew that they have any , whatsoever usage they meet with . christ foretels his disciples the injuries and reproaches they were like to suffer under , that their condition was like to be no better than that of sheep in the midst of wolves ; notwithstanding he would not suffer them to be furious as wild beasts , or cruel and rapacious as the birds of prey ; but in gentleness and meekness and patience to be as harmless as doves . not , as though christianity did forbid men the just and lawful ways of preserving themselves , but it takes away all malice and hatred and revenge and cruelty out of mens minds ; it softens and sweetens and calms the tempers of men , and fills them with kindness and good will even to their enemies , not being overcome with evil , but overcoming evil with good. never any religion in the world was such an enemy to all kind of malice , revenge and cruelty as the christian ; that which we call good nature seems to come very near that divine grace which s. paul calls charity , and doth so admirably describe and so highly extol above miraculous gifts and some of the greatest graces . charity suffereth long and is kind ; charity envieth not ; charity vaunteth not it self ; is not puffed up ; doth not behave it self unseemly ; seeketh not her own ; is not easily provoked ; thinketh no evil ; rejoyceth not in iniquity but rejoyceth in the truth ; beareth all things , believeth all things : hopeth all things , endureth all things , i. e. in short , it hopes , believes , and does the greatest good ; it modestly bears and heartily forgives the greatest evil . and herein consists that dove-like temper , which christ would have his disciples remarkable for . which however it may be despised and scorned by furious and self-willed men , yet upon consideration it will be found a great part of the wisdom of living . revenge is the pleasure only of weak and disorderly minds : for what real satisfaction can anothers loss or pain give to any considering man ? the only pretence or colour for it is the preventing more mischief coming on ones self ; and yet every act of revenge is a fresh provocation ; so that either quarrels must continue without end , or some body must think it their wisdom to forgive at last . and if so , i appeal to any mans understanding whether it were not greater wisdom to have prevented at first all the vexation and disquiet , besides other inconveniences , which must needs follow a continued quarrel . if any thing tend to make a mans life easie and pleasant to himself and others , it is innocency and gentleness , and patience , and doing good and vertuous things , whatever the world thinks of them . and this was it which recommended the christian religion to the world , that its great business and design was , to perswade the disobedient to the wisdom of the just ; by laying aside all malice , and all guile , and bypocrisies , and all evil speakings ; not rendering evil for evil , or railing for railing ; and if when they did will they suffered for it , by taking it patiently ; following therein the example of christ himself , who did no sin neither was guile found in his mouth ; who when he was reviled , reviled not again ; when he suffered , he threatned not , but committed himself to him that judged righteously . these are the instructions of s. peter , to the primitive christians , and the ways he judged most effectual to promote the honour of their religion , among those who were most apt to think and speak evil of it . and because that was a very corrupt and a busie and factious age , especially in those cities where the iews and gentiles inhabited together , therefore he adviseth the christians not only to purity and innocency , but to a quiet submission to authority , and however the iews looked on heathen government as a meer appointment of men ; yet he commands them to submit to every ordinance of man for the lords sake , whether it was the imperial , the proconsidar , or the praetorian power , not considering so much the persons imploy'd as the design of the institution , which was for the punishment of evil-doers , and for the praise of them that do well . for so is the will of god , that with this sort of well-doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men , who are apt to quarrel with religion , especially when it appears new , as that which gives occasion to many disturbances of the civil government . and that there might be no colour for any such cavil against christianity , no religion that ever was , did so much inforce the duty of obedience as christ and his apostles did , and that upon the greatest and most weighty considerations , for conscience sake , for the lords sake , for their religions sake . for consider i pray , if the doctrine of christ had given encouragement to faction and rebellion under pretence of it , if s. peter himself had taken upon him to dispose of crowns and scepters , or had absolved christians from their allegiance , even to their greatest persecutors , what a blot this had been upon the whole religion , such as all the blood of the martyrs could never have washed off . for it would have made the condition of princes more precarious , and the duty of subjects more loose and uncertain , and all nations that regarded their own peace and safety shie of entertaining a doctrine which would give so much countenance to rebellion . and yet among all the causes alledged for the persecution of christians , this was never once suggested , which would not have been omitted ( if any such thing had been owned by the christians ) by persons so jealous of their power , as the roman emperours were . it is an intolerable reproach to christianity to impute their patient submission to authority to their weakness and want of force : which is all one as to say , they would have resisted if they durst : this is not to make them harmless as doves , but to have too much of the subtilty of the serpent , in pretending to be innocent when they only wanted an opportunity to do mischief . but the security the christian religion gave to government was from the principles and precepts of it , the design of its doctrine as well as the practice of its followers . so that if their religion were true , it did oblige them to all acts of charity and kindness , to meekness and patience , to peaceableness and a quiet and prudent behaviour in all the changes of humane affairs . from what hath been already said , it is no hard matter to understand the reason why our saviour gave such directions to his apostles , and made choice of such means to promote his religion , because they would hereby see , that he sent not his apostles upon any ambitious or secular design , not to disturb governments upon pretence of setting up a new monarchy in it either of christ or his pretended vicar ; but to prepare men for another world by the love of god and our neighbour , by subduing our lusts and taking off our affections from present things ; and because he knew what persecutions would follow his doctrine , he adviseth his disciples neither to suffer as fools , nor as evil-doers , but to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves . let no man then think our religion weakens their understanding , or impairs their discretion , or puts men upon doing foolish and imprudent things . as it is founded on the best reason , so it brings men to the best temper , and governs their actions by rules of the truest wisdom ; not only as it provides for the most desirable end in another world , but even in this , it secures most the honour , interest and safety of men ; and if circumstances happen to be hard here , it gives the highest assurance of an infinite and eternal recompence . but if men under a pretence of zeal for religion do wicked things , and carry on treacherous and malicious designs , if instead of directing mens consciences in the wayes of innocence and goodness , they teach them the art of putting tricks on god almighty , ( as one called the casuistical divinity of the iesuites ) or the way of breaking his laws by certain shifts and evasions ; if instead of meekness and patience they put men upon acts of revenge and cruelty ; if instead of promoting peace and tranquillity in the world , they plot mischief and stir up faction and rebellion , we are sure whose disciples soever they pretend to be , they are none of christs ; for although they should not all be capable of being wise as serpents , yet they are bound to be harmless as doves . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61614-e170 v 〈…〉 v. 7 v. 9 , 10 , 11. luk. 10. 17. v. 21 , 22. 17. 2 cor. 11. 3. ramirez de prado pentecont . c. 1. chrys. in loc . greg. nazian . orat . 19. 2 cor. 1. 12. psal. 12. 2. jam. 4. 8. isid. orig. l. 12. c. 4. gen. 6. 9. job 1. 1. 9. 22. psal. 37. 37. prov. 11. 5. 6. 13. 6. 10. 9. 15. 21. pro. 1● . 1● . clem. alex. str. 4. dle ch●rs . de regn . or . 1. p. 6. psal. 15. 2. prov. 4. 18. mat. 10. 23. tertul. de fug . c. 1. &c. c. 6. chrys. hom . 40. in iuv. & max. clem. alex. s●r. 4. p. 481. joh. 11. 54. orig. in job . tom. 31. c●pr . ●p . 14 athan. ac●●ga . aug cp . 1●0 1 pet. 3. 13. 14. a●t . 5. 41. 2 cor. 1. 12. mat. 5. 37. m 〈…〉 al 〈…〉 . m●… . 〈◊〉 12. s●ct . 〈◊〉 . p. 98. themist . orat . 3. euscb. l. 8. c. 3. rigalt . ad cypr. cp . 81. aug. d● mend. c. 1● cicer. de offic. l. 1. ●t 3. eutych . alex. to. 2. p. 119. p. 123. azor. ins●it . moral . par . 〈◊〉 . l. 13. c. 1. 〈◊〉 . 2. re●inald . prax . l. 24. sect . 5. n. 13. less . de just● pure , l. 2. c. ●7 . d●b . 6. n. 40. sayr . cl●… . reg. l. 11. c. 3. 〈◊〉 . 1● . n●va● . man●●●8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ●… soto de rat . tezendi ●e●r●r . memb . 2. qu. 〈◊〉 . nava● . 〈◊〉 supr . bassae . the●● . pract. 〈◊〉 . peccat . 1. 〈◊〉 . 3. 8. bell. de omiss . grat . & stat . peccati , l. 1. c. 13 cajet . in 2. 2. q. 110. a●● . 4. grot. de ju 〈◊〉 belli & pa 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 〈◊〉 n. 17. treatise tending to mitigation . c. 7. §. 2 , 3. c. 10 §. 1. genes . scpulveda de rat . d●●endi testim . c. 〈◊〉 . b●rns c. aeq●v . §. 28. n. 4. p. 255. hurtad● resolut . moral . p. 449. caram● . de restrict . mental . art . 13. p. 360. steph. à sancto paulo theol. 〈◊〉 tr . 5. disp . 5. aub . 7. §. 3. n. 232. navarr . in c. human . a●res , qu. 1. n. 2 , 3. quare omnes qui fatentur quod confessarius verè ●icere potest , ille hoc non est mihi confessus , subintelligendo ita ut tenear prodere ; cog●ntur profecto consiteri quod etiam alius quilibet qui non tenetur aliquid dicere , verè poterit respondere illud sibi non esse dictum , subintelligendo non esse ita ei dictum , ut teneatur id prod●●e . cum igitur omnes con●itcantur illud , nemo debet hoc negare . nav. ib. n. 8. si enim est mendacium inficiari quod noveris , non est in ecclesiae , imò neque in ipsius dei potestate , quocunque tandem ex sine efficere , ut sacerdos licitè inficietur quae novit , emoner . splendor verit . moral . c. barnes . c. 16. n. 3. a genes . sepulveda de nat . dicendi testimon . † emoncr . c. 13. p. 241. b barns c. aequivocat . c after fa. barns had written his book against equivocation , and otherways provoked the iesuites , by order of the pope and by means of albertus , he was seized on , and carried to rome , and there died mad in the inquisition . v. leodegar . q●intin . hoeduum advers . th. hurt●do p. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . where the iesuite relates the story . v. theophil . ra●… sive emoncrium adit . ad disput. n. 4 , 5 , 6. s●to de rat . reg . secret . memb . 3. qi● . 3. ●●ncl . 4. adrian . 6. quod l. 11. ad 2. princip . c. c. sylvest . v. iu●am . cos● . philiarchus de o●●●c . sacerd. 〈◊〉 . 1. p. 2. l. 3. c. 14. navar. ubi supra 〈◊〉 . 9. sayr . clav. reg. l. 12. c. 17. n. 24. sa●…z de juram . l. 3. c. 10. n. 3. * m●… de 〈◊〉 in 4. 〈◊〉 . disp . 2. testis ver● 〈◊〉 neseio quam verè sciat , quia testis non tenetur respondere iudici secundum suam iniquitatem , sed scundum id quod potest ut iudex , et secundum mentem quam debet habere , etiams● 〈◊〉 non habeat . mich. salon . 2. 2. q. 69. art 2. controv . 11. q●…o igitur 〈◊〉 negat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , id i● 〈◊〉 debet , ut neget se non co●…t tale crim●n de quo iudex interrogate debeat . et idem est dicere , non feci hoc-crimen , ac si diceret non 〈◊〉 feci , quod varum est . et cum haec responsio sit vera , nullum ●rit peccatum , 〈◊〉 intercedat 〈◊〉 . lud. carbo tr . de restit . q. 19. concl . 8. qua●…s regulariter ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 d●beat ●…ranti juxta mentem ejus , fallit tamen ca doctrina , quando alia mente quam debet adjuratur ; tunc enim sufficit ut respondeat verum secundum mentem & intentionem s●●n , licet falsum sit secundum mentem interrogantis , & a ●●uranti● . greg. sayr . c●…v . reg. l. 12. c. 17. n. 21. &c. parsons treatis . of ●i●●gat . c. 8. n. 20. 5● . 5● . c. 9. n. 2. m●… . de ab●… . c. mental . c. 10 §. 1. p. 64. e●●ner . splend●… e●i● mo●●l●● . c. 16. caramuel haplot●s sive de restrict . mental . art . 13. p. 360. qu●● 〈◊〉 plen● 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 , infectu●● civili●● 〈◊〉 virt●aliter est , hoc est prudentura judicio & estimtione ita s● 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 . at quae s●…ta non sunt negari possunt ; ergo 〈◊〉 qu● s 〈…〉 . c●… . p. 302. c 〈…〉 2. 2. 〈◊〉 . ●9 . art . 7. ad 4. i●…o 〈◊〉 ipsa sa● restrictione convincitur non praecipitanter fuisse mentitus , sed quod●● modo meditatus fuisse mendaciu● quod gravitatem peccati a●get . m●…der . de a●…su restr . ment . c. 10. §. 2. p. 70. ut quidvis li●●t falsissi , mum verum fieri po●●it restrictione sola mentali . id. p. 28. caram●●l . lb. art . 2. concl . 4. p. 28. th. ●●b . stat. morum tom. 1. p. 17● . 〈◊〉 . p. 24. a●… . i●… . p. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . c. 4. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . ●… . ●… . 〈◊〉 de r●● . to. 2. l. 3. c. 10. n. 4. 〈…〉 & ●ure l. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 4● . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4● . potest aliquis jurare simpliciter falsum addendo aliquid mente , ex quo jurame●●um sit verum , quoties intervenit justa causa . iu●…a causa esse potest necessitas , vel utilitas ad salutem corporis , honoris , rerum familiarium , vel etiam qua●●lo injusta interrogatio proponitur . dian. part . 3. tr . 6. resol . 30. sed juramentum cum deficit sola discretio , non est peccatum mortale . sanch. in sum . tom . 1. l. 3. c. 6. n. 22. aliique . soto de ration . tegend . secret . memb . 3. qu. 3. concl . 4. v. barns c. aequivocat . §. 20. n. 3. p. 174. §. 22. n. 7. iac. de graff●s decis . aur●c l. 1. c. 23. n. 3. quando quis iniquè interrogat excludendo omnem aequivocationem , posse interrogatum u●i aequivocatione apponendo aliquam particulam in mente , per quam ver●m essiciatur juramentum . bonacina to. 2. disp . 4. q. 1. punct . 12. n. 5. less . de justit . & jure , l. 2. c. 31. dub . 3. n. 8. filliuc . mor. quaest. tr . 40. c. 9. n. 266. sà aphorism judicial . actus , n. 3. navarr . man. c. 25. n. 38. dian. sum. v. reus n. 12. iac. de graffiis , l. 3. c. 7. n. 17. escobar tr . 6. ex . 6. n. 62. azor. p. 3. l. 13. c. 25. dub . 5. sayr . clav. reg. l. 12. c. 17. layman . l. 3. tr . 6. c. 5. n. 3. sà aphor. de reo . n. 5 , 6. bass. reus p. 5. n. 15. * imo pu●…llanines & si ul●i ●●bentur si ea fate●●ntur . dicast illo de jura●…ento d●sp . 2 dub . 12. n. 377. i●…go de iust●t . & jure tom. 2. desp. 〈◊〉 . s●… . 1. n. 19. g. abb●t de m●ndac . p. 41 , 42. & in p●●f . p. 9. &c. molan . de side haeret . serv. l. 4. c. 8. barns de aequivocat . §. 23. n. 2. p. 194. * a●ist . hist. anim. l. 1. c. 1. gen. 49. 17. rom. 16. 19. mat. 5. 44. rom. 12. 21. 1 cor. 13. 4 , 5 , 6. 7. luke 1. 17. 1 pet. 2. 1. 3. 9. 2. 20 , 21 , 22 , 23. 2. 11 12 13 , 14 , 15. rom. 13. 5. bell. de rom. pont. l. 5. c. 7. 〈…〉 epist. provinc . 3. not. 3. several weighty considerations humbly recommended to the serious perusal of all, but more especially to the roman catholicks of england to which is prefix'd, an epistle from one who was lately of that communion to dr. stillingfleet, dean of st. pauls, declaring the occasion of the following discourse. 1679 approx. 152 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 27 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a58738 wing s183 estc r16533 13620203 ocm 13620203 100831 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a58738) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100831) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 801:4) several weighty considerations humbly recommended to the serious perusal of all, but more especially to the roman catholicks of england to which is prefix'd, an epistle from one who was lately of that communion to dr. stillingfleet, dean of st. pauls, declaring the occasion of the following discourse. t. s. epistle from a late roman catholick to the very reverend dr. edward stillingfleet, dean of st. paul's. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [6], 46 p. printed for and to be sold by john holford ... and john harding ..., london : 1679. "an epistle from a late roman catholick to the very reverend dr. edward stillingfleet dean of st. pauls, &c." signed: t.s. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng catholic church -controversial literature. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-07 rachel losh sampled and proofread 2004-07 rachel losh text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion several weighty considerations humbly recommended to the serious perusal of all , but more especially to the roman catholicks of england . to which is prefix'd an epistle from one who was lately of that communion , to dr. stillingfleet , dean of st pauls ; declaring the occasion of the following discourse . he is not joyned to the church , who is departed from the gospel . s. cypr. de lapsis . am i therefore become your enemy because i tell you the truth ? galat. 4. 16. yet — i will very gladly spend and be spent for you : though the more abundantly i love you , the less i be loved , 2 cor. 12. 15. london , printed for , and to be sold by john holford , in the pall-mall , over against st. albans-street ; and john harding , at the bible and anchor in st. pauls church-yard . 1679. mart. 12. 1678 / 9. imprimatur , guil. sill , r. p. d. henr. episc. lond. à sacris dom. to the right reverend and honourable henry lord bishop of london , dean of his majesties chapel , and one of his most honourable privy council . my lord , i have some years since met with a prophecy ( and many talk of such things at this time ) which may yield a little comfort in this day of our visitation . the original it self i have not seen : but it is taken out of telesphorus de tribulat . and thus cited by dr. john white : antichristus non poterit subjugare venetias , nec parisios , nec civitatem regalem angliae . the memorable baffle that the venetians gave to paul the fifth ; the frequent picqueering of the sorbon with the same see , may in part justifie : but the wonderful preservations , both antient and modern , of this kingdom and metropolis , from the restless attempts of many of that faction , will , i hope , evince its probability . how instrumental your lordship hath been towards that security and happiness we yet enjoy , how indefatigable your pains , how undaunted your courage in the most critical conjunctures , is with gratitude and applause proclaimed to the world , not only by your own large and numerous flock , but by the loud acclamations of the whole nation . and though i never was so fortunate as to be an eye-witness of those heroick vertues which daily influence your charge , rendring you so amiable to the churches friends , and at the same time so formidable to her enemies : yet that universal character which is every where given of you , engages me to look on you as no less than a person in whom concentre those requisites , which some criticks in morality ( how justly i dispute not ) have exacted to make up a compleat christian. they are these : the orthodox faith and loyalty of a true english protestant ; the zeal and good works of a roman-catholick ; the gratious words and painful preaching of a puritan . and all these inculcated by your life , as well as injunctions on your most learned and religious clergy . but i must remember my self at the judges barr , and not at the heralds office ; and that this paper attends you as a petition , and not as a panegyrick . your most gracious approbation of my desires ( intimated to you by the reverend dean of st. pauls ) invites the one ; as your undoubted worth and honour extorts the other . vouchsafe then , my lord , to accept into the arms of your noble charity what is penn'd purely with a spirit of charity . they are such reflexions as reclaimed my self , and may , with gods blessing , contribute to the reducing of some others , as unwarily mis-led as i was . to which purpose , i endeavour brevity and perspicuity : designing this discourse for the vulgar , ( the learned have richer mines to recurr to ) and therefore waving that accurateness of method and expression , which your lordships judicious eye may expect ; but neither my intent , the present affliction i lye under , the unsettledness of my affairs , nor absence from my books ( all which afford not that tranquillum scribentis & otia ) will admit . however , when all athens was busie and in motion , the cynick for company would needs rowl about his tub. and , if so obscure a person as my self , intrude into the crowd of those many able contenders for the faith once delivered to the saints , which daily almost appear upon the stage ; i have st. augustines advice for my apology . de trinit . l. 3. c. 3. in places infected with heresie , all men should write , that have any faculty therein , though it were the same thing in other words : that all sorts of people , among many books , might light upon some ; and the enemy in all places might find one or other to encounter him . besides , i thought this the best expedient , publickly to testifie my sincere re-union to that church in which i received my baptism and education ; and how faithfully i am , and resolve by gods grace to continue , my lord , your lordships most humble and obedient servant t. s. an epistle from a late roman catholick to the very reverend dr. edward stillingfleet dean of st. pauls , &c. very reverend and honoured sir , though i am not altogether ignorant of your person , yet my chief acquaintance is with those learned works of yours , ( the best representative ) wherewith you have enriched this age , obliged the church of england , and ( i speak it experimentally ) given the greatest satisfaction to ingenious minds , that sober and unaffected reason ( i do not mean such stuff as mr. white 's and mr. serjeant's demonstrations ) can possibly perform . and thus , sir , i have been your most intimate friend and servant these seven or eight years . all which space i have been a very attentive spectator of your famous encounters , and to my comfort seen single truth and modest reason combate with whole troops of old , subtle , confident , cholerick , and i may add , malicious adversaries , and i hope i shall have cause to bless god to all eternity , and thank you for so glorious a sight . but before i return my full acknowledgments to you , i must crave leave to give you a short but true narrative : only be pleased not to believe it ( as you style mr. cressey's ) a legend of my self . i had my education in one of the chiefest free-schooles in london , under the care of a very able instructor , and by him was sitted for the university ▪ but about a year before my advancing thither , it happen'd that an ancient gentleman came frequently to divert himself in a walk that was near the school , and so took occasion to discourse with divers of the lads : i being the head of the school at that time , he pretended a particular complacency ( though i know not why ) in my self . he never conferred about any point in religion , but still entertained me with speaking latin , which he did very fluently and politely : and his constant discourse was about the rare method of education used beyond sea , the great number of their students , the diligence of their tutors , the exactness of their discipline , and much more to the like effect . what this conversation would have produced at last , i know not . but the chief master of the school perceiving me often with him , at last forbad me his company , and told me he shrewdly suspected the gentleman to be a jesuit . and i remember he instanced in some particular slie wayes those persons used to intice and spirit away youths , whom they judged fit for their employment . so this correspondence broke off , and i never had more to do with him . however i must confess that much of his discourse did recoil upon my childish fancy a long time after . and though within a short while i went to cambridge , viz. in the year 1658. yet my mind was not quiet : and those stupendous distractions both of church and state that immediately followed , did infinitely add to my perplexity . then happen'd his majesty's happy restauration : which being as it were a year of jubilee , no wonder if the younger sort of the university did take the benefit of the indulgence : i mean indulgere genio , and use some liberties , which at other times the strictness of an academical life would not have permitted . here likewise i acknowledge i swam with the stream , and did not so seriously mind those affairs i was designed for by my friends , and so fell into those inconveniencies , which , not long after my having proceeded batchelor of art , induced me to leave the university . coming up to london i light into the company of an ancient acquaintance , and among other discourses we at last fell upon religion . the gentlewoman adjured mee by no small considerations to advise well what i fix'd upon , and likewise to recurr to some able person of her perswasion , which was that of the roman-catholicks . hereupon i was introduced to one of the most grave , subtle , and acute fathers then in the nation ( one whose works i perceive you are not wholly a stranger to , ) i mean f. fran. à s. clara : with whose winning discourse i was extreamly taken , and to whose extraordinary civilities i must always account my self extraordinarily obliged . you cannot be long in suspense concerning the issue of this interview . he who had triumphed over so many persons of honour and quality , clergy and laity , ( witness among the rest , dr. g. bishop of gloucester ) might easily bassle such a young stripling as my self , and soon dazle my eyes with the glittering pretenses of infallibility , antiquity , unity , universality , succession , councils , fathers , saints , miracles , religious orders , &c. these , with the example of several learned men , converts of our own nation , as dr. baily , vane , carrier , cressey , walsingham , montague , crashaw , with many others yet living and therefore nameless , were , i then thought , too great a cloud of witnesses for my single wit either to oppose or so much as question . and now , sir , you may easily guess what became of me . for about nine or ten years i was wholly imuiured up , forced to comply with and swallow every thing , durst not propose any scruples for fear of being suspected heretically inclined . and thus i continued till the latter end of the year 1671. at which time , by gods great mercy i got some respite to reflect upon what i had done in revolting from the church of england , and engaging with one , the ignorance of whose proselytes is often made use of for something more than bare devotion . since that time , i take god to witness , i have most impartially survey'd all the several writers i could procure on both sides ; but especially your own books , dr. tillotson's , and dr. lloyd's . ( to both whom , i beseech you , in my name to tender my most humble thanks for that great satisfaction i have reaped by their writings , especially the rule of faith. ) and , i assure you , i found the infallible principles so shaken by those solid and learned treatises , and my self so intrigued by my own experience of the juggling practices of some persons most cryed up for perfection , that neither father bellarmine ( for as you well observe , amidst that great boast that is made of fathers , he is the great father with most of our neoterick controvertists ) nor dr. t. g. nor mr. cressey , nor mr. serjeant himself , who speaks nothing but scientifical oracles , could unblunder my thoughts : ( that i may not wholly forsake the rhetorick of my old friends . ) and this hath been the true state of my soul for several years , just like s. james's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , unconstant in his wayes . for , what with the terrour of that theological scare-crow , schism , on the one hand ; with the flattery of an acknowledged possibility of salvation in the roman church on the other ( though the dean of canterbury's sermon on that subject hath now perfectly cleared me ) i was still detained in a communion with that church , which i conceived to hold all the fundamentals of christianity . to which ( to acknowledge something of humane frailty ) i may add the advantages i enjoyed , and the damages i should unavoidably incurr , by quitting a party , whose inveterate and implacable malice towards a deserter , though upon the strongest convictions of conscience , is sufficiently known , and particularly taken notice of by the afore-mentioned reverend and learned author , in his discourse on that of the gospel , there is joy in heaven over one sinner , &c. and i my self have already begun to experiense from some , from whom i neither expected nor deserved it . to omit that innate reluctancy , well nigh in all , of recanting a committed errour . though these were but difficulties of the second rate . yet at last those desperate practices whereof many of that party stand suspected , and some indicted , made me resolve to break through all obstacles , and publickly declare my detestation of their actions , by renouncing their communion , and protesting against those principles and doctrines ( as is evident in the most general council of lateran , and others , seconded by the undeniable practice of many popes , in actual deposing of princes , and disposing of kingdoms ) which , it is to be feared , had but too much influence on such traiterous designs . this tenent of a foreign power , either direct in spirituals , or indirect in temporals , is most manifestly inconsistent with the peace and safety of our english nation ; and till it be renounced or disabled , we shall never be free from jealousies and fears . there is another point of as fatal consequence to common conversation , as the former to the publick government , and that is the trick of equivocation , or refined art of lying . i will not say it is a doctrine of the roman church ; but i know it to be both the doctrine and practice of a leading party in that church ; and never , as i ever yet heard of , was it yet censured by the church it self ; no more than the deposing doctrine , and other such like hellish maxims have been disowned . of this latter i had a famous instance not long since : a known jesuit being apprehended in a neighbouring town , upon the interrogatories put to him by the magistrate , he denied himself to be a priest , protested he was a married man , had wife and children . and all this was salved by that pittiful evasion ( you know the shift of the crucifix in the sleeve used at china ) that his breviary was his wife , and his penitents his spiritual children . this was a very great scandal to all that heard of it , both protestants and romanists ; and for my own part , i was so concerned in it , that i writ expresly to my old learned friend f. fran. à s. clara , to be satisfied . who , quite contrary to my expectation ( and which hath much diminished the esteem i had for him ) gave we this answer in writing ; that he had done nothing amiss , nor misbeseeming an honest man. nay then , thought i , the good lord open our eyes ! and , to deal plainly with you , from that very moment i have been very much unsatisfied , whether the roman principles be safe to dye in : much less to ruin estates , and dye for . thus , sir , being very timorous of diverting your many weighty employments , i have given you a cleer , faithful , and succinct account of my self . and so now , laqueus contritus est , &c. the snare is broken , and we are escaped . my remaining business is , as speedily as i can procure it , to be received into the bosome of my antient mother the church of england , whom with unfeigned contrition of heart , i acknowledge to have forsaken before i throughly understood : and purpose , by gods help , to evidence to the world , that i have far more considerable motives to return , than i had to wander . and though i shall not make such a noise as those who have published exomologeses , challenges , &c. yet i hope i shall make it appear , that the change i now make , is done upon the maturest deliberation , back'd by the most earnest imploring of the divine assistance . about five years since , it was my hap , at the instance of a person of quality who had considerable sums to dispose of , to publish a small tract entituled , the case of interest , or usury , as to the common practice , examined in a letter to the same person . it is the onely piece i ever yet penn'd : and i mention it , that if you please you may perceive , that i alwayes proceeded upon principles of honesty , conscience , and moderation ; and even then had an honourable regard for the church of england . but , good lord ! what outeries were then made against it by the jesuitical party , who look'd on it as purposely written to affront their trade ! what excommunications threaten'd by others ! so you may easily foresee what i am to expect , when i disingage my self of the promise i just now made you . but a good god , a good cause , and a good conscience , will , i question not , carry me through all . it is no small comfort to me , when i think how that vast wit , mr. chillingworth , could not escape those very snares that i have been entangled with . and i presume it may serve as an apology for the slips and failings of my weak intellectuals , when such a great master of reason as he , was for a time led captive . yet at last , he most happily discovered and proved the protestant religion a safe way to salvation . those whom i forsake have a tradition ( as indeed they have too many ) that none ever retire from their communion , but they presently become depraved in their morals . ( if they mean the jesuits morals , it is no great matter ) i have no wayes to confute them fully , but as diogenes did zeno , by walking : viz. with a conscience void of offence both towards god and man. and if they shall , after their charitable method , think to bespatter me for any thing past ; i have such publick , authentick and late testimonies under hand and seal from the chief among them , of my comportment ( though i will not disown the allayes of common frailties and imperfections ) that shall be able to silence the most impudent calumny . but i fear i have already trespassed upon your patience ; and i must referr what else i had to propose , till such time i am so happy ( and truly till then , i shall neither be happy nor satisfied ) as to see you . many doubts i have to object , fitter to be committed to a ghostly father's ear , than to paper : and many particulars there are , wherein i may perhaps gratifie your own curiosity ▪ but , having been so long a romanist , and being still a reputed one , i should he loth that disobedience to royal proclamations ( however they have been slighted by some ) should be the first fruits of my conversion . and therefore i must patiently attend that good hour , when i may satisfie both my obedience and my inclinations together . in your conference with sir p. t. and mr. coleman ( that wretched man , who , had he meddled with nothing but what he then pretended himself so desirous to be resolved in , had never come to that sad catastrophe ) you express so much candour , meekness , christian zeal and charity for satisfying those dissenters , who in reality did nothing but shuffle with you ; that it emboldens me to address a request to you ( besides my thanks , which most cordially i do by these presents . ) viz. that because i apprehend danger from some of those i relinquish , having already tasted a little of their kindness that ways , and because i would not long remain in an unfix'd , neutral posture ; you would be pleased to procure leave that i might come up to london , where i may attend you , and both give and receive all desired satisfaction possible . i know you so eminent , that you may procure a license . this would complete my felicity : and as for your own reward , besides the complacency you take in the very performance of such charitable offices , i can but referr you to that of st. james , cap. & v. ult . brethren , if any of you do err from the truth , and one convert him : let him know , that he who converteth a sinner from the error of his wayes , shall save a soul from death , and shall hide a multitude of sins . there is one cavil i must needs remove , and it is this : how chances this change just now ? why in this present conjuncture ? it is to be suspected you act more out of fear than conscience . this surmise i insinuated before , and partly adverted to it but more particularly i have these things to offer in reply : i might , ad hominem , put the objectors in mind how dr. vane , mr. cressey , and others forsook the church of england , when it was in a very low , persecuted condition : and were not ashamed in their writings to intimate as much . for one of the motives of their withdrawing was , that she never had been well grounded ; and therefore god seemed to forsake her , and lopt off her head : with much more to the same purpose ; as is particularly to be seen in dr. bailey's end to controversie . but i scorn such disingenuous , mean-spirited principles . and i desire that they would withal consider that the church of england was then reduced to those exigences for her constant and never blemished loyalty . whereas divers of themselves now stand charged with something else besides idolatry and phanaticisme . but to answer for once and all ; i confess i do it out of fear ; not of any temporal incommodity ; for that might several other wayes be avoided : but of having fellowship with any of those horrid works of darkness , whereof many of its professors , and the religion it self are accused . and this may serve for my old friends . now as for your self and all other candid disinterested persons , i know it will be satisfactory to put you in mind , that to impute my proceedings to the frowning of the times on that party , is fallacia non causae pro causa : a mistake of the adjunct or circumstance of time , for the principal motive . the conversion of a sinner is the work of omnipoteuce ; who as he is most free in all his actions ad extra ; so especially in the reclaiming of a strayed sheep . he is no wayes tied up to the circumstances of whom , how , where or when. nescit tarda molimina spiritûs sancti gratia , sayes s. bernard . and if he were graciously pleased more effectually to touch my heart now , than at any other time ( and times of affliction are his especial seasons . afflictio dat intellectum . cum occideret eos &c. ) i know no other account can be given of it than that of our b. saviour , even so father , for so it seemed good in thy sight . nay i have before demonstrated that these thoughts have been long hovering in my mind , though perhaps they had not been altogether so suddenly declared , but out of a deep resentment of the dangers of any further neglecting the divine call : and a seasonable desire to testifie to the world my perfect abhorrence of such desperate practices and principles , which i am convinced are pernicious both to publick polity and civil society . and i hope none can reasonably be angry , that i have gained more experience now i am thirty six years old , than i had when i was but twenty . these are the principal matters i thought worth your knowledge at present , wherein i protest before god and man , that i have no other design but the quiet of my conscience , and the salvation of my soul. and when i have given a publick tolerable account of this affair , i will take my leave of this noble science of controversie ( as mr. serjeant calls it ) having alwayes been more addicted to ascetick theology ; and sit down with divine anselm's resolution , quid restat per totam vitam meam , nisi ut defleam totam vitam meam ? crosses and afflictions are no more than i except and deserve , having hitherto been so little acquainted with them . the wise man hath read my doom to me , fili , accedens ad servitutem dei , praepara animum tuum ad tentationem . as for the sincerity of my resolutions , i can but appeal to that great searcher of hearts and tryer of reins . and though some folk talk of dispensations from rome for the taking all oaths , and complying with all externals : and no meaner a person than the author of the difference between the church and court of rome , out of arch-bishop spotswood's history , mentions some such like thing practised in scotland : yet , with submission to the learned author , i conceive there is no such matter : since the pope himself could never be induced to approve even the single oath of allegiance ; but expresly condemned it , and severely prohibited the taking of it , as containing , saith he , divers points contrary to salvation . and moreover , put case any thing of that nature were in being ; i here solemnly avow , that i disown all such pretended authority . one circumstance , not very material i confess ( but i would not too much swerve from the accurate exactness of writers of epistles apologetical : though mr. cressey observe it in the beginning , and i in the conclusion ) must not be forgotten ; and thus it is : to you above all persons living , i have an obligation to recurr in spiritual concerns ; for i am your parishioner : holborn having been the place of my nativity . i have nothing more , but with all respect and gratitude to assure you i am december 15. 1678. reverend and honoured sir , your most obliged and humble servant t. s. several weighty considerations humbly recommended to the serious perusal of all : especially the roman catholicks of england . it is a very good rule prescribed by some spiritual writers , that in converse , we should rather discourse of things , than persons . and i intend , as much as the matter will permit , to observe it in this subsequent treatise ; carefully avoiding all personal reflections , especially upon such as are living ; and shall only bring some doctrines and practices to the test , which , though they pass for currant with many , will yet be found adulterate and contrary to holy scripture , the best genuine antiquity , and right reason : highly scandalous to the christian religion in general , destructive of civil government , fatal to humane society , and very pernicious both to the spiritual and temporal concerns of the practisers even in their private capacity . in short , i shall very plainly and briefly endeavour to make good two assertions : 1. that there is no sufficient ground for any one to forsake the communion of the church of england , and incorporate with that of rome . 2. that there is all reason imaginable both for such as have been educated in the roman communion , to reform ; and for such as have unwarily ingaged with her , to return . this was the happy result of these following considerations upon my own heart : and it shall be my prayer that they may have the same blessed effect in the impartial perusers of them . the sacred oracles of the holy scriptures deservedly command our first inquiry . we have cardinal bellarmine's own concession , that in the grand question of the church , the scripture is better known than the church . consequently then , not only her authority but her very being must be subordinate to it . and therefore in the first place let us see what sentiments the church of england hath of these heavenly records , and whether hers , or those of the roman church be more consonant to pure antiquity , reason , and holy writ it self . all protestants , and particularly the church of england , artic. 6. look upon the holy scriptures to contain all things necessary to salvation ; so that whatever is not read in them , or cannot be proved from them , is not to be imposed on any , to be received as an article of faith , or a necessary requisite to salvation . whence it appears , that they take them to be the onely , complete , and adequate rule both of faith and life : sufficiently intelligible and easie in matters that concern what is simply necessary to make us good and happy . they consequently hold , that since holy scripture is the rule of our faith , it must have an exact proportion to that , whereof it is a rule . so that matters of faith are not to be extended beyond this rule , nor can any unwritten traditions any way be pretended to appertain to the substance of faith. moreover , the rule being the idea , model and great exemplar of what is regulated by it , it is in order of nature before the thing so regulated . and if the word of god be antecedent to faith it self , it must likewise precede the faithful themselves ; and if the faithful , then must it have preheminence before the church it self , which is nothing else but the congregation of the faithful . thus the church of rome will evidently fall short of that prerogative she so presumptuously arrogates , of being both before , and above the scripture . again , a rule consisting in indivisibili , as we say , i. e. being of that nature that it is not to be inlarged or diminished ; how guilty are they who either make additions to , or substractions from it ? both which the roman church practiseth , as de facio will be manifest in the sequele of this small tract . in fine they hold the word of god written , to be that one , infallible , entire rule , whereby all men , learned and unlearned , may in all necessary and fundamental points of faith and manners be sufficiently instructed what is to be embraced for true and good : that it is a rule most certain , plain , universal , impartial , not addicted to one side more than another : ( which neither pope , conclave nor councel can so much as pretend to ) of power and authority able to convince the consciences of such as use it , and from which there can be no appeal . and the only cause why any miss of the true faith , is , because they do not sincerely seek and find out this infallible rule ; or having found it , will not with an obedient mind captivate their understanding , but have access to it with pride , curiosity , prejudice , or some other unmortifyed lust or impediment . more especially the church of england , besides that high veneration that she her self hath for these sacred books , labours to confirm and root the same in the hearts of her obedient children , by her devout practice . for , to omit the frequent , laborious and judicious preaching and expounding of them in this church ; she hath so prudently disposed of her publick liturgy , that every day some part and portion of both testaments is appointed to be read : the whole book of psalms is gone through once a moneth , the old testament once , and the new thrice every year ; with other most excellent exercises of piety ; ( at which even the romanists themselves can take no just exception ; and a very great author affirms , that a modern pope would have approved the whole service-book , had his authority but been acknowledged ) which discreet course cannot but afford much heavenly instruction and consolation to the constant attenders on such blessed opportunities . but what saith the church of rome all this while in this business ? in her tridentine council , sess. 4. can. 1. she expresly decrees , that unwritten traditions are of equal authority with the written word ; that they are to be received with the same reverence and affection . and cardinal hosius , who was one who in the popes name presided at that council , defends that most blasphemous speech of wolfangus hermannus , that the scripture is of no more authority than esop's fables , but for the churches and popes approbation , lib. 3. de authorit . script . the council of basil would fain perswade us that the churches acts and customs must be to us instead of the scriptures , ( instar habeant sacrarum scripturarum ) for that the scripture and churches customs both require the same affection and respect . indeed i find the romish doctors in nothing more fluent than in degrading and vilifying the scriptures . our country man , dr. stapleton , positively affirms , that the church hath authority to put into the number of books of scripture , and to make canonical the writings of hermes and constitutions of clemens ( two famous counterfeits ) and that then they would have the same authority which other books have , canonized by the apostles themselves . some call them a nose of wax , to be wrested any way . cardinal cusanus blushes not to write that the scriptures are fitted to the time , and variously understood ; the sense thereof being one while this , and another while that , according as it pleases the church to change her judgment . some teach that the scripture is not simply necessary , that god gave it not to the people but to the doctors and pastors ; and that we must live more according to the dictates of the church , than the scripture . eckius , the great antagonist of luther , would make us believe that christ never gave any command to his apostles , to write any thing . which yet seems very odd , when such an express injunction was lay'd on s. john to write that mystical book of the apocalypse , which certainly is not more conducing to the churches edification than our b. saviour's sermon on the mount , and the many other practical discourses both of himself and his disciples . in a word , the most ingenuous and civil among their writers think they have pay'd all due respect to holy writ , when they term it a dumb judge , dead ink , or ink shaped into various forms and characters . notwithstanding which i humbly conceive , that let an indifferent person open the bible and the canons of the council of trent together , and he will receive at least as clear and full satisfaction from the bible , as from the other ; unless we will impiously deny almighty god the faculty of expressing his holy will and pleasure as intelligibly as frail men can theirs : or without any shew of reason affirm with a late divine , that religion it self was never fully setled till that upstart conventicle . conformable to the sentiments are the practices of that church , in keeping the bible lock'd up in an unknown tongue from the use of the vulgar . clement the eighth very strictly orders all vulgar translations to be put into the index of prohibited books . and in italy and spain , and wherever the inquisition hath the least jurisdiction , the very keeping of them is a crime no less than capital . it is true , where the reformation hath got any footing , faculties are sometimes granted to read a translation ; but clog'd with so many proviso's and various cautions , and their spiritual guides give so small encouragement to it , that it seems rather a trick to stop the mouthes of their adversaries , when they object the prohibition of reading scripture , than any real intention of promoting so pious an exercise among their devotes . besides , their other forms of devotion , rosaries , or saying over the beads after divers methods , our ladies office , prayers for the dead , manuals , the long litanies of saints , hearing of masses , reading of legends , &c. are in so great vogue , and take up so considerable a time , that i scarce see how any can be allotted for that contemned employment of studying gods word : which ought to be the meditation of every good christian day and night . indeed this neglect ( to say no worse ) of holy scripture is so notorious among , and so peculiar to those of that way , and the ignorance not only of the laity but of divers of the clergy in that kind of learning especially , is so gross , that it would be a work of supererogation to attempt the proof of it : their doctors generally pretending translations of scripture to be the cause of all heresies and phanaticism . nay , i have met with one so frantick , that he thinks it was the devils invention to permit the people to read the bible . martin . peres . de tradit . and i remember thyrraeus de daemoniac . c. 21. says , that thence he knew certain persons to be possess'd by the devil , because being but husbandmen they were able to discourse concerning scripture . we will now see what holy writ it self , untainted antiquity , and unprejudiced reason alleage in this case : and which side they patronize , the reformation or the church of rome . s. paul gives this encomium of his disciple timothy , 2 ep. c. 3. v. 15. that from a child he had been conversant in the holy scriptures , and tells him they were able to make him wise to salvation ( which i hope is knowledge enough , and i am sure is a more plain , compendious path , than the crooked labyrinths of uncertain traditions , forged decrees , canons and fathers . ) he further assures him , that the same divine scriptures were profitable for doctrine , for reproof , for correction , for instruction to righteousness ; that the man of god might be perfect , throughly furnished to every good work. for my part i know not what remains then for tradition and such like trash to perform , since the word of god alone can so compleat us . solomon , prov. 2. 9. assures us that gods law alone will make a man understand righteousness , and judgment , and equity , and every good work. the prophet esa. c. 8. 20. refers us to try all things by the law and testimony : and that we must conclude those to have no light , who speak not according to that word . our b. saviour luke 10. 26. when a lawyer inquired of him what he should do to inherit eternal life : bids him have recourse to what was written in the law , and asked him how he read there . s. luke writ his gospel to theophilus a lay person . luke 1. 4. to the end he might certainly know those things wherein he had been instructed . s. john writ his , as he himself testifies , c. 20. v. 31. that we might believe that jesus is the christ , the son of god , and that believing we might have life through him . abraham sends dives his brethren to moses and the prophets , rather than to visions , apparitions , and private revelations : which yet are so much pretended to and boasted of in the roman church . christ himself submitted the tryal both of his doctrine and miracles to the censure of the scriptures . john 5. 39. search the scriptures , for they are they which testifie of me . thoughts are free , and i am apt to think that some will take the liberty to judge it a little unreasonable , that our b. saviour should so readily stand to the verdict of moses and the prophets ; and yet his pretended vicar should scorn to submit to the censure of christ and his apostles ; but defie both their doctrines and practices with so many non obstante's , as appears by their new model'd creed at this day : wherein pius the fourth hath coined twelve new articles of faith , to shew his single power equivalent to that of all the apostles in general , who did but every one contribute his single article to that ancient symbole bearing their name . s. paul's auditors the bereans are highly commended for searching the scriptures daily , to examine whether the doctrine they heard were true or no. act. 17. 11. in sum , the old law was severely injoyned to the reading and meditation both of prince , priest and people ; men , women and children , as is obvious to observe all along the style thereof . and the jews were so versed in it , as to be able to reckon up the number of the words , nay letters contained therein . and the new law excludes none , either from that common salvation it holds forth , or the means to attain it , which is the doctrine of the gospel . the epistles are directed to persons of all sorts and both sexes . in fine , the whole oeconomy both of the old and new testament is so diametrically opposite to the practice of the roman church in this point , that it is but too too palpable that the three main pillars of popery , are to keep the prince in awe , the priest in honour , and the people in ignorance . antiquity is so luxuriant in this point , that it will be a greater difficulty to select than to accumulate . famous is that speech of constantine the great to the fathers in the niccne council , recorded by theodor. histor. l. 1. c. 7. and this saying among the rest is very remarkable : we have the teaching of the holy ghost written : for the evangelical and apostolical books and the old prophets do evidently teach us the things that are needful to be known concerning god. wherefore laying aside all contention let us out of the divinely inspired scripture , take the resolution of those things we seek for . tertullian contr . hermog . in plain terms calls the scripture the rule of faith. st. chrysostom hom. 13. in 2 ad cor. styles it , a most excellent rule and exact ballance to try all things by . st. august . in l. 2. de nupt. & concup . c. 33. speaks thus : this controversie depending between us requires a judge : let christ therefore judge , and let the apostle paul judge with him : because christ speaks in his apostle . but most memorable is that passage of optatus contr . parmen . l. 5. where he thus presses the donatist : we are ( saith he ) to enquire out some to be judges between us in these controversies : the christians cannot , because both sides cannot yield them : and by part-taking the truth will be hindred : the judge must be had from without our selves . if a pagan , he knows not the mysteries of christianity : if a jew , he is an enemy to baptisme : therefore on earth no judgment concerning this matter can be found . the judge must be had from heaven . but to what end should we knock at heaven , when here we have one in the gospel ? quotations might be infinite , but i supersede . nor did the antient fathers onely think this themselves , but by their frequent translations of the scripture , and vehement exhortations to the people to read them so translated , they endeavoured to beget the same awful respect to gods holy word in the minds of all . ulphilas , a bishop of the goths , turned the scripture into that barbarous language , as socrates witnesses . methodius into the sclavonian . s. chrysostom . hom . 1. in johan . makes mention of syrian , aegyptian , indian , persian and ethiopian translations . theodoret de curand . graec. affect . assures us the bible was turned into all languages used in the world , greek , latin , armenian , scythian , sarmatian , &c. and we have at this day divers fragments of them remaining . venerable bede shews the same of our own country . to speak plain : i know no topick the fathers are more copious upon , than in calling upon the people to get bibles , to read them , to examin what they hear by them , and severely inveighing against the negligence of such as did not : according to the apostles advice even to the laity , colos. 3. 16. let the word of christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom , teaching and admonishing one another . theodoret , before cited , gives this account of his times . you shall every where see these points of our faith to be known and understood , not only by such as are teachers in the church , but by smiths , weavers , and all kinds of arcificers : yea , all our women , not only such as are book-learned , but also by them who get their living by the needle , maid servants and waiting-women : and not citizens only , but husbandmen are very skilful in these things . you may hear among us ditchers and neat-herds discoursing of the trinity and the creation . and that the laity were thus familiar with the bible , may evidently be made out , in that nectarius , of a judge , was made bishop of constantinople ; st. ambrose , of a secular deputy , bishop of milan ; gregory the father of nazianzen , of a lay-man was made a bishop : origen from a child was learned in the scriptures ; and to the great joy of his father leonides , a holy martyr , often questioned with him concerning the meaning of difficult places . macrina , st. basil's nurse , taught him the scriptures when he was very young : and gorgonia , the sister of st. gregory nazianzen , was rarely well experienced in them . i will wind up this argument with declaring what was st. jerom's mind in so weighty a business . he , besides his writing to divers women , as eustochium , salvina , celantia , &c. commending their labours in the scriptures , and encouraging that study : speaking of the noble roman lady paula , in the epitaph he made upon her , he extolls her for imposing a daily task of reading the scriptures , on her companions and maids . but more signally in an epistle to l●t● , he gives her these directions for the education of her little daughter . let the child be deaf in hearing of light musical aires ; but cause her every day to render a task of the flowers of holy scripture . let her not be sought for in the press of secular people , but in the closet of the scriptures , asking counsel of the prophets and apostles concerning spiritual nuptials . let her first learn the psalter , and with those heavenly songs wean her self from light sonnets . then let her be taught to govern her life out of solomons proverbs , and repair to job for examples of vertue and patience , let her then come to the evangelists , and never lay those books out of her hands . with these she must joyn the acts of the apostles , &c , but let her be cautious in apocryphal books , and if she read them , let her understand , that they are not those author's , whose names they carry ; and that many things faulty are mix'd with them ; and it is no small wisdom to fund gold among dross . to which excellent advice , let me onely subjoyn what i find scattered up and down in s. augustin ; viz. to read plain passages first , and heartily to practice what we understand ; and as for obscure places , prophecies , genealogies and mysteries , whereof we shall never be demanded an account at the day of judgment , let us leave it to the divine pleasure , either to reveal them to us , or reserve them still concealed : since our saviour told his own disciples that it was not for them to know the times and seasons : but plainly informed them , that he who did his will should know of his doctrine , whether he spoke from god or from himself . the same father acquaints us with the admirable commixture of plainness and obscurity in the holy scripture : that hereby wanton wits are wholsomely curbed , weak wits cherished , and great wits delighted : and that nothing of highest importance is so perplexedly delivered in one place , but it is as plainly set down in another . i have inlarged a little more than i intended on this theme , because i am verily perswaded , that if the sober , judicious roman catholicks of this nation would be induced but for tryal sake a while to intermit some of those dry , insipid devotions , which take up so much of their time ; and exchange them for a pious , humble conversing with god's word ; they would soon be out of conceit with what they are now so fond of ; and discover the sandy foundation of many of their principles : and perhaps at last become of that good abbots mind who was unkle to arch-bishop whitgift , and was often heard to complain , that their religion must needs at last fail , because he found no ground for it in gods word . having considered hitherto the great rule of our faith and life , we will now descend to that article of our creed which makes such a noise in the world , i mean the holy catholick church : which , omitting the various acceptations of the word church , as to our present purpose , is nothing else but a company of people united in the profession of the true faith of christ , and due use of the sacraments . i am not ignorant that the papists would fain foist in another requisite , to wit , under the obedience of the bishop of rame , the only vicar of christ upon earth . but to omit many other absurdities , i shall only instance at present in two : that hereby they exclude universality , which they put down as an essential note of the true church ; and charity , which i am sure is a certain badg of christ's true disciples . for by this very clause , they very ridiculously obtrude less than a fourth part for the whole ; and by excommunicating all the rest from the pale of the church , as much as in them lies , very mercifully doome greater , more antient and better churches than themselves to everlasting flames . to make this good , we will take our measures by the judicious observation of sir edwyn sands , who in his survey of europe , assures us that the greek church in number exceeds any other : and the protestants in multitude and extent of territory fall very little short of those that are under the papal yoke . so that here we have two four parts . to which add all the oriental christians , and those in the vast empire of prester john , or the abyssines , who are all out of the roman communion ; and questionless we shall find another fourth part. and thus we have three to one , even in the point of universality . i will put this out of all dispute by a particular induction . in asia we have multitudes of christians who have nothing to do with the pope . those of palestine are subject to the patriarch of jerusalem : the syrians , under him of antioch : the armenians and georgians have their own patriarchs . the circassians , and those of the lesser asia , are under him of constantinople : the jacobites and the christians of st. thomas have also their peculiar patriarchs . in africa , where we find any steps of christianity , the egyptians and cophtes are under the patriarch of alexandria ; the ethiopians or abyssines , which are innumerable , are under their own governours ecclesiastical . in europe , the greeks submit to the patriarch of constantinople . the spatious empire of the russians hath a patriarch at mosco . the kingdoms of england , scotland and ireland , denmark , swedeland , and the far greatest part of the united netherlands , switzerland , germany and hungaria , are subject to bishops and church-officers of their own , without any dependance upon him at rome . even in bohemia , poland , france , transylvania , some countreys of italy there are multitudes of reformed churches , which have nothing to do with the popes jurisdiction . and thus that large universality of power that the old gentleman at rome brags of , is at last shrunk away into spain , part of france , italy and poland , some of the cantons of switzerland , some of the low countreys and germany . and here you have a map of the papal universality . they boast indeed much of their new acquisitions in the indies : but ( not to examine by what right they invaded those countreys ) after such a brutish manner were those conversions made , driving the poor natives to baptisme , like herds of beasts to watering , that their own writers blush at recording it . and when all comes to all , it will appear , that they butcher'd more than they baptiz'd . bartholomaeus casa , a bishop that lived in those countreys , and acosta the jesuit , are sufficient witnesses in this matter . and since we are entred upon this much cryed up universality of the roman church , it will not be amiss to glance a little at those other claims and pretensions whereby she would impose her self on the world , for the onely , immaculate spouse of our blessed saviour . antiquity is much talked of , and it is a kind of universality in regard of time , as that before mentioned , was of place and persons . but how groundlesly the roman church appropriates and ingrosses it to her self , is too apparent from the novel tridentine constitutions and articles . and besides , it can be no discriminating note , in as much as it is applicable to things prophane as well as sacred ; even to paganism it self ; and to heresies ( many of which are as antient as the first century ) as well as to orthodox doctrine . and if we come down to practice , we shall find it far more feasible to discover the true church here or there at present , than to discern where it was in the constant series of many ages . history being one of the most obscure , intricate , tedious and fallacious principles , in this case , whereon we can possibly proceed . nor could any particular church or the catholick church it self at the beginning lay any claim to the title of being ancient . besides , the characteristical of truth is not so much to be antiqua , old , as prima , from the beginning from christ and his apostles : and such antiquity the church of england is very willing to be tryed by in every one of her articles . so that here are two conditions deficient , soli & semper : antiquity belongs not only to the true church , nor is it alwayes competible to it . to this is reducible their duration or continuance , but this is rejected in the same manner as their antiquity is : to which it is so near allyed . and here by the way we have a most satisfactory reply to that thred-bare demand , where was your religion before luther ? i will not at present use his answer , though very good ; that it was in the bible , where their 's never was . nor will i demand where theirs was before the late assembly at trent , some years after luther ? but i say it was by wonderful providence preserved all along down from the apostles dayes to ours , and so will be to the consummation of the world. so we need not turn over all the immense volumes of antiquity to give in a catalogue of visible professors of the reformation , ( and yet this may and hath been sufficiently done ) but our only task is to prove our religion the same which was taught by the blessed jesus and his apostles ; which can only be done by appealing to the sacred records of the gospel : and as for the professors , we have his promise that he will preserve a select company ( though sometimes living in a corrupt visible church , as wheat among tares , or the seven thousand in elisha's time that had not bowed their knees to baal . 1 kings 19. 18. ) to his second coming ; though he hath not told us where to find them in every year . and therefore such as go about to demonstrate that such professors were not in being , do but attempt to enervate our saviours promise , and render themselves and christianity equally ridiculous . the multitude extent , and variety of their own professors is indeed matter of great ostentation ; and it hath in part been adverted to in the business of universality . but in truth it is so far from being a certain argument of the truth of their church , that it rather concludes the contrary . fear not little flock , sayes our saviour ; and strive to enter in at the straight gate . what shall we think of that time s. jerome speaks of , cum ingemuit orbis & mirabatur se factum arianum ? when , as vincentius lyrinensis speaks , in a manner all the latin bishops partly by force and partly by fraud , were deluded into arianisme ? it is indeed a note of anti-christ . revel . 17. that the whore shall sit upon many waters ; which waters are people , and nations and tongues . as for the name catholick , so often objected , we know that names have little weight with wise men ; that there were some hereticks who called themselves apostolical men ; that s. john in his apocalypse tells us there were such as had a name to live , but were dead ; and that bellarmine himself acknowledges , that if one only province should retain the true faith , yet might it be called catholick . the succession of bishops from the apostles times , is another very plausible topick , on which they much descant : and i confess it bore great sway with me for a long time , especially as to the validity of holy orders . yet upon mature deliberation i found more of pomp than real solidity in this pageant : though our ears are continually filled with clamour about it . for neither doth it agree only with the true church , since themselves acknowledge it among the greeks , ( as in the patriarchates of constantinople and alexandria : the former whereof derives from s. mark , the other down successively from s. andrew to this day : ) nor , if you will credit s. ambrese de paenit . l. 1. c. 6. is succession of persons so much to be heeded as succession of doctrin ; non habent haereditatem petri , qui fidem petri non habent . wherefore if the present roman church want the life and soul of true apostolical succession , to wit , apostolical doctrine , a meer local and titular succession is little worth . but the mischief is , that the visible succession of bishops in that sea , is not so glorious and uninterrupted as is pretended . and this is notorious in all monuments of history and antiquity , that it hath been fouly stained by simoniacal and violent entries upon the popedom ; by schismatical intrusions , and by a perfect alteration of the very form and substance of election appointed by the apostles , and practised in the primitive church . for either s. peter named his successor , or he was chosen by the clergy alone , or else by the clergy and people , and then confirmed by the emperour . but now he is chosen by a pack of cardinals , a sort of clergy altogether unheard of in primitive ages , all created by popes themselves , some in favour to their kindred , others in faction , and to curry kindness with some christian princes , especially those of france , and the house of austria , who alwayes have their creatures very busie in the conclave ; most of them as fit for clergy-men as s. peter was for a courtier , as my lord of hereford speaks in his legacy ; a spruce , delicate , effeminate clergy : ( and the world talks far worse things of them ) very fit persons for the choice of s. peters infallible successor . the truth is , this boasted succession is so weak a support to the roman cause , that their most confident champions could never so much as pretend the very shadow of divine authority for it . alphonsus à castro and others very frankly acknowledge it is not de fide , a matter of faith , that this or that , or the present pope is s. peter's successor . but of this more by and by . nor is there the least agreement in ecclesiastical history concerning the immediate successor of s. peter . some put linus next , some clemens , some cletus . and it is a most miserable shift that bellarmin is put to , and below his great wit , to affirm the business may be thus composed ; that s. peter left his episcopal seat to clement : but clement , when s. peter was dead , out of his humility would not ascend the chair , as long as linus and cletus were living , who had been the coadjuters of s. peter in his episcopal function : so linus succeeded s. peter , cletus to linus , and clemens to cletus . but if s. peter left his chair to clement , how comes this apostolical constitution to be abolished , and why do not the popes now design their successors , but leave a matter of so high consequence to the factious canvassing of the haughty ambitious cardinals ? how durst clement refuse the charge ; intrusted to him by so great an apostle , and that only out of a compliment ? a man that duly ponders this circumstance , might very well conclude it to be a most remarkable providence of god , and intended for the humbling of that proud church , that when they come to make good their claim to that exorbitant , unlimited authority they at this day exercise in the christian world , they should stumble at the very threshold , as we say , and fail in the very first name of their vaunted catalogue . in a word , all things here are dark and in a riddle , and afford not sufficient matter even to ground an implicit faith upon . but what shall we think of those long and frequent vacations in that see for some years together ? and schisms for 30 nay 70 years ? which was a long vacation indeed ; for it is bellarmin's rule , an uncertain pope is accounted for none at all . nay many and great authors have put a woman into the succession ; many of their bishops have been hereticks , and this makes another interruption : even occult heresie rendering the pope , ipso sacto , none . let cardinal baronius , a man of undoubted authority with them , serve instead of a thousand witnesses . he , treating of the year of our lord , 912 , thus represents the wretched , deformed face of that church . how filthy a time was it when whores bare all the sway at rome ? at their pleasure sees were changed , bishopricks disposed of , and which is most horrible and scarce to be uttered , their gallants were thrust into the seat of peter . we find no where any mention of clergy choosing or giving consent , all canons were put to silence , the pontifical decrees were choaked , antient traditions proscribed , and all sacred rites extinguished . thus had lust gotten every thing into its own hand . where did this uninterrupted succession sleep all this while ? well near 200 years together , saies the same annalist , did these monstrous abuses continue . certainly if discontinuance of time , or illegal entry can marr a succession , this of the romish church is sufficiently spoiled . benedict the 9th was a boy of 10 years old . john the 13th . a hectoring lad not above 18. john the 11th . was set up by that infamous strumpet theodora : and her daughter marozia by force of arms deposed him . john the 12th . was bastard to sergius by marozia , and was violently intruded into the popedome by his mother . it is not so much the wickedness of these popes lives , as the manner of their creation , that we urge to invalidate the succession . above 50 popes were thus installed successively for those 200 years : besides many other occasions , frequently occurring in history , wherein this applauded succession hath been very notably disturbed . to which if we adjoin the 30 schisms , wherein 2 and 3 popes have been set up in opposition to one another ; the matter will be out of all controversie . one of these schisms , viz. that between clement and urban lasted for 70 years , till the duke of savoy was elected pope by the council of basil , to put a period to that fatal tragedy . and many of these competitors had such learned advocates and patrons , that bellarmin cannot assign which was the true pope . — pudet haec opprobria vobis — et dici potuisse et non potuisse reselli . their unity is no less bragg'd of , than their universality and succession ; and with as little justice ; for unity without truth and sincere charity is but a conspiracy or confederation . i find revel . 17. 13. that in the kingdome of anti-christ , they are of one mind , and make war with the lamb. and the devils themselves in the possess'd person could unite into a legion . and if we a little better consider this pretended roman unity , it will soon be discovered to be purely slavish and enforced : an unity of fear more than of affection ; a product of the inquisition rather than of charity . bellarmin seems to intimate as much ; they cannot think otherwise , saith he , because they have subjugated their sence to the sence of another ; meaning the pope . nor yet is this their unity , let the quality of it be what it will , so compleat as they would make us believe . how do the jansenists and jesuits at this day hug one another ? the large order of the dominicans look upon the jesuits as no better then semi-pelagians in the doctrine of grace and free will : and the jesuits to requite them call them calvinists . the seculars and regulars how unanimous they are , appears by their continual clashing . and those who are throughly acquainted with their customs , may easily perceive that there are as many sects and factions in point of opinion , as there are religious orders in that church ; and in point of charity and affection as many parties as there are religious houses . but as for that real unity , which according to dominie . bannes , in 2. 2. q. 1. a. 10. consists in having one god and christ for our king , in being governed by the same holy law , in having the same faith , hope and charity , the same heavenly example , one worship in spirit and in truth , one communion or communication of the members ; which is the unity of that church which includes all the faithful from the beginning of the world to the end , &c. in short , such an unity as the holy scriptures require , in being derived from one beginning , which is the holy ghost , who as one soul quickens and moves all the parts : in having one head which is jesus christ : and in being but one body , partaking the same doctrine , sacraments and worship of god : this unity by god's grace all true protestants breath after , as may apparently be evinced by the harmony of their confessions ; although in points of smaller importance there may be some little differences : and most of their dissentions are rather verbal then real . as to the sanctity of that church , let but the lives of the roman bishops be perused , written by their own authors ( a noysomer sink and kennel of abomination can never be raked up in all antiquity : some atheists , some conjurers , some adulterers , murderers , incestuous , sodomites , sim●niacks , and what not ? ) the manners and conversation of their clergy , religious men and women , so heinously tax'd and inveigh'd against by those famous writers of their own side , s. bernard , nic. clemangis , alvar , pelagius , claud. espencaeus , &c. and at least they will have little cause so boldly to challenge , and appropriate it to themselves above all their neighbours . these things are sufficiently known to any that have viewed their doctors , or conversed even with their modern practices : ( though themselves are very much amended since the reformation . ) but i love not to tell stories out of the school , and i promised at first to refrain from personal reflections . there are books enough on this subject , and the world talks sufficiently loud of it . if all the precedent prerogatives signifie nothing , at last we must be over-born by whole legions of innumerable miracles that are obtruded upon our credit . but so spurious , so ridiculous , so impious many of them , that the more modest and discreet among themselves dare not own them . their best writers affirm , that miracles are not necessary for the being of a church , but onely for the begetting of a new faith , or an extraordinary mission . nay i may add not for an extraordinary mission neither ; as we may see in many of the prophets of the old testament , of whose miracles not one word is mentioned . nor are they at all to be expected from or by the protestants , who neither profess a new faith nor an extraordinary mission . the miracles of our saviour , his apostles and the first age of the church , are sufficient seals to the doctrine they own . and as for those so importunately urged by the romanists , they are but too often convinced to be meer juggles , contrivances for filthy lucre , sleights to uphold some gainful doctrine , or to advance the reputation of some particular place or religious order , done in a corner ; of a far different nature from those of our b. saviour , and rather of the same stamp with those the apostle speaks of . 2 thess. 2. 9. belonging to him , who comes with all power and signs and lying wonders : and revel . 13. 13. who doth great wonders , so that he makes fire come down from heaven on earth in the sight of men. a man that duly ponders the most palpable cheats and impostures of this kind daily practised in the church of rome for these by-respects , would almost be of mr. chillingworth's mind , that it cannot be sufficiently made out , that ever so much as a lame horse was cured by way of miracle in confirmation of any popish tenet . some insist much on the outward prosperity , pomp , splendour and magnificence of their church . to this the wise man hath given an answer , eccles. 9. 1. our works are in the hand of god , and no man knows either love or hatred by all that is before him . nay , our saviour puts it down as a mark of the false church . joh. 16. 20. verily i say unto you , that you shall weep and lament , but the world shall rejoyce . it remains then , that the onely certain and evident marks of a true apostolical church are , the sincere preaching of god's word , and a due administration of the sacraments . to which may be annexed ecclesiastical discipline ; but this is reducible to the other two . these are all that the holy scriptures afford us . matth. 28. 19. go and teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost ; teaching them to observe all things whatever i have commanded you . act. 2. 42. and they continued stedfastly in the apostles doctrin and fellowship , and in breaking of bread , and prayers . having thus survey'd the roman church in general , it will hardly be thought good manners , if we neglect his holiness the pope in particular , or as some are pleased to flatter him , the church virtual . for what ever stir● and bastle they make about the church their mother , the plain english of their meaning is nothing but the pope their father . it is the express doctrin of s. thomas aquinas ( and his doctrin in that church is little less than canonized ) 2. 2. q. 1. a. 10. that the making of a true creed belongs to the pope ; as all other things do which belong to the whole church : and that the whole authority of the universal church abides in him . 2. 2. q. 12. a. 2. thus as they take all authority and sufficiency from the scripture and give it to the church , so all the churche's authority they attribute to the pope . gregorius de valentia , one of the learnedst jesuits , tells us plainly , that by the church they mean its head ; that is to say , the roman bishop , in whom resides the full authority of the church , when he pleases to determin matters of faith , whether he d th it with a council or without . bellarmine teaches , that the pope himself without any council may decree matters of faith. bannes affirms , that the authority of the universal church , the authority of a council , and the authority of the pope , are one and the same thing . the canon law in sext. extrav . johan . 22. c. cum inter . in gloss. speaks thus , it is heresie to think our lord god the pope may not decree as he doth . and distinct. 19. in canon . his rescripts and decretal epistles are canonical scripture . all which passages clearly convince us what is the meaning of those perpetual braggs of the catholick church . his holyness must excuse me , if , being no courtier , i address not my self to him in the phrase of the roman inscription to paul the v. yet to be seen in that city , saluting him as a vice-god , and the stout assertor of the pontifical omnipotency : or as the gloss of the canon law in their last and best editions , viz. the roman , 1580 , and parisian , 1612. our lord god the pope . waving therefore these ceremonies , i shall summarily consider his authority , both what he pretends to , and what it really is . and here starts forth a material difficulty , even at our first setting out : namely , whether s. peter , whence all this power and soveraignty is pretended , were himself bishop of rome , or were indeed ever at rome ? i will not deny either , because i know many of the antients plead for both . but the point being onely grounded on humane authority ( for divine authority seems rather to contradict it ) i. e. ecclesiastical history ; and the differences among the reporters being so many and so considerable , both in chronology and divers other weighty circumstances ; and the probabilities that are produced against it being not altogether contemptible , i hope a man may be excused from being a damn'd hererick , if he do not believe it to be a fundamental article of faith ( the article of the standing or falling church , sayes a modern famous controvertist ) and consequently hath a meaner esteem for all that prodigious train of positions , which are thence deduced . these following inducements make it at least doubtful whether s. peter ever was bishop of rome , or was ever there . for his ever having been at rome , we do not much stand upon it . but the reasons and testimonies brought out of humane histories ( which onely mention it ) are so uncertain and involv'd with such difficulties , as may make any man deservedly question it . vellenus hath published several demonstrations that he was never there . and those authorities of the fathers that are alleged for it are so various , that the learned'st romanists cannot r. concile them . marsilius patavinus in his defens . pacis , part . 2. c. 16. sayes , by scripture it cannot be made out , either that s. peter was bishop of rome , or that he was ever there at all : and when he considers the ecclesiastical historians that affirm it , he doth it so , that it is evident he doth not believe them . it is true , s. peter in his 1. ep. c. 5. 13. writes as from babylon ; but that babylon was in assyria . for though in the apocalyptical visions , rome is designed by babylon ; yet in a plain epistolary salutation there was no reason at all for such a trope . nor doth s. paul or s. luke , who make frequent mention of rome , ever call it babylon . there is indeed an old chair at rome , pretended to be s. peter's , and on certain daies it is shewn to the people ; as likewise a sepulchre , and certain parts of his body as relicks . but the jugling and imposture with reliques and such like trumpery is so well known , that the world hath long since lessen'd her credit to such monuments . nor hath it been the lowest part of rome's policy for many ages with feigned miracles , counterfeit relicks , and forged records and legends to raise in the vulgar an opinion of her holiness , and so maintain her grandeur . but we have been too long on this impertinency . whether he was ever bishop of rome , deserves our stricter examination . holy writ seems not silent here , as in the former case , but fully opposite . s. peter and s. paul by the instinct of the holy ghost made an accord that s. peter should preach to the jews , and s. paul to the gentiles . whereupon in the sacred text s. peter's peculiar title is , the apostle of the circumcision : and consequent to his charge we see , that he wrote his epistles to the scatter'd jews : neither did he direct any to , or date any from rome . so that it is incredible he should be bishop or resident there for 25 years . whereas s. paul was the great doctor and apostle of the gentiles , and both writ to the romans , and taught and was imprisoned at rome for several years , as is evident from scripture . again , the authours of this story ( the first whereof were probably papias and dionysius , the one too credulous and erroneous , the other a counterfeit ) are wholly at a loss in declaring when s. peter came to rome , how long he sat there , when he dyed , and who were his successours . and the most tolerable account that is given by the best writers , how s. peter , the 5th year after christ's passion , went to antioch , and there fix'd his episcopal see for 7 years , thence removed to rome , and there continued 25 years ; is no waies coherent with what is related of s. peter , galat . 1. & 2. act. 12. & 15. from which places it is manifest , that s peter's most usual abode was at jerusalem , at least till the 18th year after christ's death , and the 17th of s. paul's conversion . nor is it likely that s. peter setled his chair at antioch so long , since galat. 2. we read only of his passing by there ; and that he was so far from behaving himself as their bishop , that he seems to have understood little of the affairs of that church , till s. paul had rightly informed him in the 16. to the romans st. paul salutes very many by name , yet takes not the least notice of s. peter , nor gives them the least account where he was , or how he did : which seems something odd , if s. peter had then been their soveraign pastor . and when s. paul was himself at rome , and writ diverse epistles in the reign of nero ( at which time bellarmin would have s. peter to have been at rome ) though he make mention of many others of inferior rank , yet not one syllable of s. peter . nay he generally denies that there was any such present with him . colos. 4. 11. and 2 tim. 4. 16. he grievously complains that at his first answer , when he appeared before nero , all men forsook him . and when s. paul came first to rome , the jews there , who were s. peter's peculiar charge , seemed to know nothing of the gospel . act. 28. thus s. peter must be bishop of rome 25 years , and yet never be at rome , when ever the scripture mentions the roman church : and s. paul could never find him there , though he is reported to be martyred there at the same time with him . we see then upon how tottering a foundation this mighty fabrick depends : i mean , how justly questionable the papal monarchy is , even in matter of fact , and to its very an sit . but perhaps it may plead better for it self in point of right and equity . we will briefly here inquire into two things . 1. what authority s. peter had . 2. what authority the pope pretends to derive from him , and how justly . that our lord and saviour never intended such an absolute , arbitrary , soveraign , monarchical government in his church , as the pope at this day exercises both over clergy and layity , is as evident in the gospel as any truth there contained . matth. 20. 25. you know , saith christ , that the princes of the gentiles exercise dominton over them , &c. but it shall not be so among you : whosoever will be great among you , let him be your servant . and the apostle , eph. 4. 11. reckoning up the whole sacred oeconomy , ministry and government of the church , le ts not fall one word concerning a visible monarch : he gave some apostles , some prophets , some evangelists , some pastors and teachers ; for the perfecting of the saints , for the edifying of the body of christ. and when he recommends unity , by reason of one body , one spirit , one hope , one faith , one baptism , one lord , there is no mention at all of any pontifical monarch . in all the new testament there is not any one called the head of the church , but only our blessed saviour . eph. 1. 22. god hath put all things under his feet , and given him to be head over all things to his church . and chap. 4. 15. grow up to him in all things , who is the head , even christ. colos. 1. 18. he is the head of the body , the church . wherefore they are highly injurious to our saviour who set up any other . nor do protestant princes take themselves to be heads of their own particular churches , in any other sence than the good kings of israel and juda were ; to defend the orthodox religion , and maintain good order and discipline in the church ; and take cognizance of abuses crept in among any persons ecclesiastical or civil , and reform what they find amiss , according to the canon of the scripture , by the advice of their chief clergy . and not as the papists impertinently object concerning q. elizabeth , that she had assumed power to preach , administer the sacraments &c. and all this , as i said before , is the undoubted right of soveraign princes in their own territories , and was practised by the good princes under the old law , with great commendation and reward . it was likewise promised to the new , that kings should be nursing fathers , and queens nursing mothers to the church . in fine , that paternal wisdom and providence of god , which so plentifully revealed to us all matters of importanee for our own private good , for the being or well-being of his church ; ( and certainly this great pretended jurisdiction most be of that nature ) that the most curious inquirer can desire nothing more ; and which did under the mosaical dispensation so exactly describe the condition and power of the high priest , even to the minute circumstances of his garments ; so that none could be so stupid among the jews , but if he read the books of moses , he might sufficiently understand that there was a high priest constituted , and what authority he had ; would certainly have left us some intimation of the like regiment under the gospel , had there been any such matter to be expected . whereas on the contrary we cannot there find so much as the name or title of any such dignity , nor of any seat appointed for his residence ; no singular office is assigned to him above others , no ensigns of soveraignty are recorded , whereby he might be distinguished from others , no manner of succession is provided for ; nor is there the least practice or exercise of such a singular absolute power so much as hinted at in the whole new testament . and therefore we may justly conclude it to be an upstart usurpation , and no authority of divine institution . there are but two passages in scripture that with any tollerable shew can be made use of , to countenance this supremacy that is so much urged to be conferred on s. peter , and intayled on his successors . the one , wherein it seems to be promised ; the other , wherein they say it was actually bestowed . the first is that famous place , the achilles of the roman cause . matth. 16. 17 , 18. thou art peter and upon this rock will i build my church , and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it . and i will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven , and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven . these words which they think so plain and obvious , do yet contain two metaphors of a rock and the keys ; and i cannot find in any other part of scripture that they are explained in the romanists sence , simply and without a metaphor . i am sure they were not so easie to the aposiles themselves , nor did they understand thereby any principality intended for s. peter ; as appears by sundry contentions among them , after these words were spoken , who should be the chiefest . nor can the antient fathers , good men , discover any such energy or prerogative in them for s peter , or the pope . for our saviour doth not plainly and literally affirm that he will build his church upon s. peter , but upon the rock which he confess'd : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , upon this rock : not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , upon this peter . non dictum est illi , tu es petra , sed tu es petrus : petra autem erat christus . it was not said to him , thou art the rock , but thou art peter : for the rock was christ : says s. augustin , retract . l. c. 21. the same father in his 124 tract . on s. joh. & ser. 13. dever . dom. thus paraphrases this text : upon this rock which thou hast confessed ; upon this rock which thou hast acknowledg'd , ( saying , thou art christ the son of the living god ) will i build my church : that is , upon my self , the son of the living god will i build my church : i will build thee upon me , not me upon thee . for the rock was christ , whereon peter himself was built . i am punctual in citing this great doctor and father of the church , because the romanists give out that they desire to stand to the alone judgment of this learned father . the holy martyr s. cyprian could not apprehend any such intrigue in these words . l. de unit. eccles. the rest of the apostles , saith he , were the same that peter was , being endowed with an equal share both of honour and power . nor s. ambrose , serm. 66. s. peter and paul were eminent among the apostles , and it is doubtful which is to he preferred before the other . s. hillary . l. 6. de trin. s. chrysost. hom . 55. in matth. euseb. emissen . greg. the great . v. beda . haymo , the gloss of gratian , lyra , and a multitude of others , understand the text of s. matthew , as s. augustin doth . cardinal cusanus l. 2. c. 13. concord . cath. is very positive , that nothing was here said to s. peter , but what was said to the rest of the apostles and the words of sixtus senensis , a very learned pontifician , biblioth . l. 6. are worth our notice . we believe and acknowledge with a sure faith , that christ is the first and chief foundation of the whole ecclesiastical edifice : but we also affirm that upon this foundation there are other rocks lay'd , namely peter and the rest of the apostles , whom john in the apocalypse names the twelve foundations of the heavenly jerusalem . in sum , i find three interpretations of these words among the antients : viz. that christ is the rock : that the confession , faith and doctrine of christ is the rock ; and that s. peter himself as an apostle , is metonymically a partial rock . all which meanings agree very well together , but nothing favour the supremacy that the romanists desire . nor do the protestants deny s. peter a primacy of authority and spiritual jurisdiction over the church as an apostle : or in respect of his fellow apostles a primacy of order , calling , graces , gifts , courage , &c. or that he was a ministerial rock . but since the rock and the keys signifie the same thing , to wit , the power of binding and loosing ; which matth. 18. 18. is expresly promised to all the apostles ; and the same words , of binding and loosing are there used , which were before to s. peter : and after the resurrection , john 20. 21. the same power was amply bestowed on all the apostles equally , and their successors : he breathed on his disciples , saying : as my father sent me , even so send i you ▪ receive you the holy ghost , whose sins you retain they are retained , and whose sins you remit they are remitted ; so that no mans jurisdiction came from peter to him , but every one had it alike and equally from our savióur , who sent him : and since s. paul assures us ephes. 2. 20. that we are built upon the foundation of the apostles ( in general ) and prophets : jesus christ himself being the chief corner-stone : and s. anselm well comments on s. m●th . 16. this power was not given alone to peter , but as peter answered o●●●●●● all , so in peter he gave this power to all : this text will not evince s. p●ter to have been constituted the universal monarch of christs church : nor in the whole series of divine history do we meet with any monarch-like action of his recorded . ●●t ●n the contrary , we read that he was sent as a messenger by the rest of the apostles , act. 8. 14. that he gave the right hand to s. paul and bar●●●● . galat. 2. 9. that he was accused to the other disciples , pleaded his ●●●● before them , and submitted to their judgment . acts. 11. 1. &c. and that s. paul withstood him to his face , finding that he walk'd not uprightly ●●●●rding to the truth of the gospel . galat. 2. 11 , 14. thus far they think this soveraignty was only promised . in s. joh. 21. 17. where christ said to peter , feed my sheep : they teach that this power was absolutely delivered and confirmed . but neither was this charge so lay'd on s. peter , that the rest were excluded . for they g●●nt that no more was here given , than what was promised , m●th . 16. where the keys are mentioned . now we have evidently proved that all the apostles were equal in the power of the keys ; and that those wor●s concern s peter no more than the other disciples . in scripture phrase the word , feed , when it is accommodated to ecclesiastical functions , is the same as to teach . they shall feed them with knowledge and understanding , saies the prophet jeremy . and then we shall find the same command and commission given to all the apostles . matth. 28. 19. go and teach all nations , &c. b●sid●s , since all the apostles had before been sent as shepherds to feed the flock . muth . 9. 36. & 10. 6. and were afterwards furnished with more full instructions , and abilities to the same end , muth . 28. john 20. which they executed most diligently and couragiously , as appears by their acts and epistles ; no man can reasonably deny but that pas●e oves , feed my sheep , belong'd to them as well as to s. peter : and they themselves gave the same duty in charge to other pastors . act. 20. 28. take heed to your selves and to all the flock , over which the holy ghost hath made you overseers , to feed the church of god which he hath purchased with his own blood . neither would s. peter ingross this privilege to himself , but communicated it to others . 1 pet. 5. 2. feed the flock of god that is among you . s. cyprian de unit. ecclis . speaks home they are all pasters , but the flock is one , which by one consent is fed by all the apostles . and s. chrysostom l. 2. de sacerdotio , our saviour at that time intended to teach both peter and us , how dear his church is to him , &c. this is a true , short and plain account of s. peter's authority ; both what was given him by our saviour , and what was exercised by himself . but , alas , this is too scant for his pretended successour , as we shall now manifest . and i shall be a little more exact in this seasonable argument because that i know many of our english roman catholicks will not believe that this vast , unlimited power is owned by their church ; but is onely the product of the flattery of private doctors , and the pope's particular parasites . i will onely mention how the usurpings , innovations and incroachments of the roman bishops have been constantly opposed by the greatest part of christendom in all ages . in the first general council of nice , he was consined to his own particular district ; as the patriarch of alexandria and others were to theirs . in the first general councils of constantinople and ephesus , the provinces of the world were distinguished , and the patriarchs restrained to their own circuits , and he of constantinople is by name made equal to him of rome in all ecclesiastical matters . he of rome had indeed the chief honour ; but that consisted not in jurisdiction , but in sitting in the first place , and such like ti●les . the council of chalcedon confirms the same decrees , and adds withal , our fathers gave the privileges to the seat of elder rome ; because that city had the empire : and the 150 bishops assembled at the council of constantinople moved with the same reason , gave the same privilege to the most sacred throne of new rome : thinking it reasonable , that the city which is honoured with the empire and senate , should also have equal privileges with elder rome , and in ecclesiastical matters be advanced alike with her . another council at constantinople enacted the same . but the council of carthage , anno 418. consisting of 217 bishops , is most worthy of our remark . in this council , when sozymus bishop of rome claimed a right to receive appeals from all parts of the world , and pretended a canon of the nicene council that should give it him : the bishops strongly debated the matter , and having searched the original copies of the nicene council , whereby the untruth of his claim was discovered , they wrote sharply to him , not to meddle any more with their provinces , nor admit into his fellowship such as they had excommunicated . telling him he had nothing to do in their causes , either to bring them to rome , or to send legats to hear them at home : and that this pretence of his was expresly against the nicene council . the evidence of this great testimony stands to this day unanswerable by the roman party . it is abundantly known how pope stephen was sleighted by s. cyprian ; and victor by the bishops of the east . but this is an infinite theme , and i must not forget my promised brevity . i shall onely request the gentlemen of the roman-catholick persuasion , seriously to lay to heart what trivial grounds this grand article of their church , the pope's supremacy , even in ecclesiastical affairs , is founded upon ; and to consider how many difficulties must be cleared to make it a probable tale. 1. that s. peter was bishop of rome . 2. that he dyed at rome by the special command of christ. 3. that he dyed invested with such a supremacy , as is now exercised in that church . 4. that his so dying there is sufficient ( without a new revelation from god ) to make the succession of the bishop of rome of divine authority . we shall now take a view of that grand machine of the pope's power over temporal princes , and make it most evident , that it is an article and doctrin of the roman church ; and being so , that this alone were a sufficient motive to forsake her communion , since she teaches justifies and strictly commands ( even under the penalty of being accounted no christians ) treason and rebellion . the present lord bishop of lincoln hath written a learned and satisfactory treatise on this subject , and i find his lordship very faithful in his citations . wherefore i may be the more sparing . however , because i heartily desire , that honoured , pious and loyal persons may not unwarily ingage their liberties , estates and lives for the maintainance of so extravagant and tyrannical a power , which hath in all ages caused so many disinal tragedies in the christian world , and is in it self fatal and destructive to all civil government , i shall briefly treat of this matter , to undeceive others : especially since i was herein miserably seduced my self , till i had maturely and exactly examined the whole business . i shall begin with general councils , whose decrees if they will not admit , i confess i as yet understand not what the doctrin of the roman church is , nor do i know where to find it . the third council of lateran , c. 27. after it had condemned and excommunicated many hereticks , ( and you must know that all protestants are both accounted so , and as such , are once every year solemnly accursed by his holyness in person on maundy thursday : ) it absolves all that had sworn fidelity or homage to them , from those oaths ( and we know who they are , to whom fidelity and homage , strictly speaking , is due : ) and they are required in order to the remission of their sins , to fight against them . and those who dye doing penance in that manner , may undoubtedly expect indulgence for their sins , with eternal rewards . then by the authority of s. peter and paul , the council remits to all who shall rise and fight against them , two years penance . here a general council uses all its industry to poyson people with rebellious doctrin , and calls treason , doing of penance . not long after , pope celestin , predecessor to innocent the third . with more than luciferian arrogance , sets the crown on the head of the emperour henry the 6th with his two feet , and then kicks it off again . and the fact is produced by no meaner a person than cardinal baronius , to shew that it is in the pope's power to give and take away empires . but to as much purpose as he produced that text , rise peter , kill and eat ; to incense paul the 5th against the venetians . the second evidence shall be the fourth great , and , as they call it , most general council of lateran , wherein were assembled 1200 of one sort or other . these , c. 3. make a decree , that the aid of secular princes should be required for the rooting out of hereticks ( i. e , all that are not of the roman communion ) and that when the temporal lord , required and admonished by the church , shall neglect to purge his territory from heretical wickedness , he shall be excommunicated by the metropolitan and his suffragans . and if he persist in neglecting to give satisfaction for the space of a year , let him be signified to the pope , that he from thenceforth may pronounce his subjects discharged from their obedience , and expose his territory to be seized on by catholicks , who having exterminated the hereticks , shall possess it without contradiction , and preserve it in the purity of the faith. so as no injury be done to the right of the supreme lord , where there is such ; provided he do not any ways oppose himself . and the law is to take place in them who have no superiour lord. — which last clause perfectly comprehends soveraign princes , and so anticipates that reply which some make , that the decree was only made for feudatory and subordinate princes . and whereas some few deny it to be a general council , and that it made any canons ; it is a most impudent cavil . for both the council and canons have been and are universally received by the roman church : the council as general , and approved so by innocent the iii. and the canons as authentick . all their writers concerning councils put this down among the general ones , ●●●● commonly call it the great general council of lateran : and joverius says , he cannot see with what face a man dare deny it . they always put it among those councils that are approved by the church : for you must know that some are reprobated , some are partly approbated and partly reprobated . their canon law so esteems of it . the council of constance puts it among those general councils , to the observation whereof the popes were to swear at their installment . the council of trent , which i hope none will boggle at , sess 24. c. 5. in express terms calls it a general council , and confirms one of its canons . to which i may add , because it concerns us , a synod at oxford , where this council was received for england . and though some princes that were deposed out of the pope's meer spite and malice , got some advocates to write for them , and synods of bishops to protest against the pope's proceedings : yet in the case of pretended heresie , ( which neerly touches protestant princes ) not one writer or bishop appears in vindication of the temporal power . a shrewd sign that this deposing heretical magistrates , is in general the romish doctrine . the general council of lions is next . it was summoned by innocent the 4th , against the emperour frederick the 2d . here the pope having consulted with the council , declares the emperour deprived by god of his dominions : and thereupon they actually depose him , and absolve all from their oaths of fidelity to him : strictly charging all persons to acknowledge him no more for emperour , and denouncing all that did otherwise , excommunicated ipso facto . so we have another whole general council concurring with the pope in asserting this deposing power , and with candles burning in their hands , thundering out sentence against the poor emperour . in the council of constance , sess. 19. we often meet with this clause , that all breakers of their privileges , whether emperours , kings , or any other degree , were thereby ipso facto subjected to the banns , punishments and censures in the council of lateran : and sess. 17. in the pass they gave to the king of arragon , they decree , that whatsoever person , either king , cardinal , &c. hinder him in his journey , he is ipso sacto deprived of all honour , dignity , office or benefice , whether ecclesiastical or secular . it is true , with much importunity and danger , gerson procured a decree in this council that no subject should murder his prince . but that practice was only condemned in such as did it , without waiting the sentence of any judge whatsoever . so that if sentence be past by the spiritual judge , notwithstanding this decree , a prince may be assassinated . but there is a further mystery in it . for a king once declared to be no more such , i. e. being deposed , he then becomes a rebel and an usurper , according to their principles , and then it is lawful to kill him . the council of siena confirms all the former decrees made against hereticks ; and the favourers of heresie are declared liable to all pains and censures of hereticks : and consequently to the greatest of them , viz. deposition . the council at basil rati●●s the decree of constance by which , emperours and kings , that presumed to hinder any from coming to the council , are subjected to excommunication , interdicts , and other punishments spiritual and temporal . finally , the council of trent ▪ though the world was then much changed , and they durst not trample on crowned heads as formerly , yet they would still be nibling at this sweet morsel , as near as they could , and still endeavoured , though covertly , to continue the claim to this deposing authority . for in the decree against d●els , sess. 25. c. 19. they declare , if any emperours and kings , &c. did assign a field for a combate , they did thereby lose their right to that place , and the city , castle , or other places about it . if councils then , as surely they are , be fit deliverers of the churches sence , we have here no less than seven general councils to prove this to be the churche's doctrine . for my own part , i can see no ways they can extricate themselves , but either by confessing their church hath erred , or by obstinately going on in a most wretched justification of such damnable tenents and practices . there is nothing more to do in this business , but by way of surplusage to give a general touch at these following particulars . by the book of the sacred ceremonies ( which is authentick and of great esteem with the church of rome ) the emperour as soon as he sees the pope , must bare-headed , bow , till his knee touch the ground , and worship the pope : coming nearer he must bow again , and when he comes to the pope he must bow a third time , and devoutly kiss the pope's toe . the same book informs us that the pope never gives any reverence to any mortal , either by rising up , or uncovering or bowing his head . that the emperour must hold the pope's stirrup till he gets on horseback and then lead the horse for some paces . and some mean spirited emperors have de facto performed these slavish offices . the emperour must swear fealty to the pope , and be his hector to maintain all his rights and honours . that horrid extravagant of boniface . viii . makes it absolutely necessary to salvation ; that all christians be subject to the pope ; who hath both the swords , and judgeth all men , and is judged of none . and the gloss upon that extravagant dares to say our saviour had not done discreetly , unless he had left such a vicar behind him . bz●vius an approved and applauded author in that communion , tells us the pope is monarch of all christians , supreme over all mortals , there lyes no appeal from him , he is the great arbitrator of the world. istodorus m●scomus , vicar general to the arch-bishop of bononia , and a great lawyer , terms the pope the universal judge , king of kings , lord of lords , and saies that god's tribunal and the pope's are one and the same , that they have the same consistory , and therefore all other powers are his subjects , that the pope is judged of none but god , not of the emperour , kings , clergy or laity . pope innocent the third , extra . de major . gives this description of the papal power , that it is as much greater than the imperial , as the sun is than the moon . and the gloss saies that is 47 times greater : but the note in the margin puts 57 times : nay there is an author that adds 7744 times . this decr●tal of innocent the iii. and the forecited extravagant of boniface viii . are both put into the body of the canon law. it would be endless to enumerate the romish authors that defend this prodigious power of deposing kings . bellarmin , suarez , sa mariana , maintain and prove this doctrine . nor do i know one jesuit that teaches the contrary . and it is very well worth our notice what an odd kind of answer mr. fisher gave to king james , who demanded of him what he thought subjects ought to do in the case of the pope's deposing a prince ? the jesuit gives this sly return : i will pray for peace and tranquillity between both parties ; i will exhort all to do good offices conducing thereto , and will rather dye than any wayes be accessory to your majestie 's death . and no more could be got from him but this compliment . but else where he told the king more plainly , that he disclaimed any singular opinion of his own , or more than the definitions of councils and consent of divines did force him to hold . and what those are , we have pretty well discovered . the canonists , casuists and schoolmen are generally , if not universally of this opinion , some teach that it is evident to all , that emperors are to be deprived and deposed by the pope , not onely for things pertaining to faith , but for manners , others , that the secular power is subject to the spiritual , and that it is no usurpation , if the spiritual judge the secular : and that the pope hath supreme power over christian kings and princes and may correct , depose and put others in their places : that he may deprive a king of royal dignity for heresie , schisme or any intolerable crime , negligence or lazyness ; if in great matters he break his oath , or oppress the church , and several other cases : and that the pope himself is sole judge both of the crime and of the condemnation . and bzovius de pontifice , rom. c. 46. p. 611. gives us a catalogue of above 30 kings and princes who have de facto been deposed , or by anathema's damn'd by the pope . they count them martyrs that dye for the maintaining this power ; which cannot be unless they esteem it an article of faith. and we have a late instance of f. paul magdalen , alias henry heath , a learned and in his way pious , franciscan , who was put to death by the long parliament about the year 1643. who just before his execution being desired to give his judgment of the oath of allegiance ( which chiefly concerns our present purpose ) declared it absolutely unlawful , and that he would as soon lay down his life for the refusal of it , as for any article of the roman belief . eman. sa is not ashamed to publish that if a clergy man rebell against his king it is no treason , because clergy men are not the kings subjects . aphorism . confess . verbo clericus . others , ( though i will not say this is so generally taught ) that faith is not to be kept with hereticks . and if my memory fail not , the famous navar hath written a whole tract in defence of equivocation and mental reservation , and takes upon him the defence of the noble society of jesus , as he calls them , for universally teaching it : and to my knowledge practising it . it were very easy to collect these corollaries out of the canon law , and the decretal of boniface the viii . that emperors and kings are the popes subjects ; that they may be deposed for heresie and any great sin : that the pope hath power over the whole world in spirituals and temporals , and that he hath this temporal power in a more worthy , superior and perfect manner than temporal princes : that statutes made by lay men do not bind the clergy : that it is necessary to salvation to be subject to the pope , and he who affirms the contrary is no christian ; without any hope or possibility of salvation . a most pious and charitable rhapsody of canonical theology ! now you must understand that this canon law is approved , received and obeyed in that church , as the rule of justice in all their courts and consistories . in this we further learn , that the holy church by her frequent authority , absolves subjects from their oaths to superiors ; and it exemplifies in pope zachary , who deposed the king of france , not so much for his iniquity as for his unprofitableness . and cardinal turrecremata in his comment on this canon proves that subjects , if they have the popes consent may depose their kings . the bulls os many popes against the princes both of our own and other nations , are too well known , and may at any time be seen in the roman bullary . to draw to a conclusion in this odious matter . our country man creswell the jesuite in his philopater . sect . 2. affirms , that it is the opinion of all catholicks , that subjects are bound to depose an heretical king : that they are obliged by the law of god , by the most strick bonds of conscience and utmost peril of their souls to do this . bellarmine de rom. pontif. l. 5. c. 7. assures us , it is the consent of all roman catholicks , that heretical princes , may and ought to be deprived of their dominions . and the english cardinal allen , speaking how s. thomas defended this position , and how cardinal tolet expounds him , adds these words of his own ( in his answer to the book of english justice ) thus doth this notable school-man write : neither do we know any catholick divine of any age to say the contrary . if now , the testimonies of their own most eminent writers , their established laws and canons , their authentick papal bulls and decretal constitutions , the decrees and canons of their own general councils ( the confess'd representatives of their whole church ) seconded by actual deposing of emperours &c. be not undeniable evidence that this seditious , desperate and pernicious doctrine , is the doctrine of the roman church ; i must humbly crave pardon for my ignorance in their faith , and must so far disown my self from ever having embraced , that i never understood their doctrine , and consequently never was a roman catholick . but how repugnant are these positions to the doctrine and example of our humble , meek jesus and his apostles ? learn of me for i am meek and lowly . the son of man came not to be ministred to , but to minister . my kingdom is not of this world. man , who made me a judge or divider over you ? luk. 12. 14. if i your lord and master have washed your feet , &c. render to caesar the things that are caesar's . and he himself paid tribute to caesar , and made s. peter do so too . he submitted to the power and jurisdiction of pilate , who was caesar's deputy . and this not quia deerant vires , because he wanted power to resist ( as bellarmine fondly affirms of the primitive christians : ) for he could have called for more than 12 legions of angels . nay so far was he from granting the two swords , so much boasted of , to s. peter , that he severely checks him for making use of one . and the two princes of the apostles , as they are styled , s. peter and paul , were perfectly of their master's temper in this point . the former would not permit a common centurion to fall down at his feet , act. 10. 25. and his doctrine was far different from his successors at rome , 1 pet. 2. 13. submit your selves to every ordinance of man for the lord's sake : whether it be to the king , as supreme . &c. fear god , honour the king. s. paul preaches the very same . rom. 13 1. &c. let every soul be subject to the higher powers , &c. for he bears not the sword in vain . wherefore you must needs be subject not only for wrath , but for conscience sake . and in matter of jurisdiction he expresly appeals to the judgment seat of nero the emperour . and till the mystery of iniquity had gained head , the roman popes themselves spake in a different dialect from what they now use . we were in hopes , says pope leo , ep. 44. to the emperour marcianus , that your clemency would have condescended so far as to have deferred the council ; but since you resolve it should be kept , i have sent thither paschasme . pope stephen speaks thus to another emperour , hath not the roman church sent her legats to the council when you commanded it ? we offer these things to your piety , says pope hadrian to the emperour basilius , with all humility , & veluti praesentes genibus adv l●●i , as if we were present before you on our knees . having thus as briefly as the matter would permit , dispatched what was chiefly in my design of penning this discourse , and what had the greatest insluence on the satisfying my own mind , i shall make much shorter work with what follows . general councils , when truly so , are highly venerated by protestants , and the four first , so much honoured by s. gregory the great , are better observ'd by the church of england , than by that of rome . nor are we so severe as s. gregory nazian . ep. 42. ad proc●p . who professes he had never seen any good or happy issue of any of them : but look'd on them as the increase rather than remedy of the churche's evils . which censure is certainly true of those conventions which have been for diverse ages last past . no , we desire nothing more than a free , general council to conclude differences in religion : and are most ready to submit to the determinations of it , and yield the same authority to it , which the antient church in the days of constantine the great , theodosius , &c. and which s. augustine did . and that we may not be slandered as being our own judges , we only desire it may be qualified according to cardinal c●sanus his doctrine . concord , cath. l. 2. where he declares that a compleat general council consists of all the patriarchs and principal governours of the universal church . that a council kept by the roman bishop , and those only who are subject to him , excluding others , is but a particular council . that a general council may be celebrated , though the pope refuse to concurr by his presence and consent . that all that meet in councils , ought to have free liberty , orderly to declare and determin maters in question . that whatever must oblige as divine , ought to be confirmed by the authority of holy scripture . that no councils are legitimate , where private respects are managed , under pretext of faith and religion . that the roman bishop hath not that power , which many flatterers attribute to him : viz. that he alone is to determine , and others only to consult and advise . that a general council is superiour to the rest of the patriarchs , and also to the roman bishop . that a general council may be deficient , and that de facto councils lawfully assembled have erred . and since they have failed , and have contradicted one another ; as appears in the second council of nice , and that of constance among many others ; the one decreeing the worship of images , the other prohibiting communion in both kinds ; against the express words of scripture ; the councils of lateran in deposing kings : the council of frankfort opposite to that of nice in the business of images : the council of florence against those of basil and constance , in the point of the pope's superiority over a council ; it is certain that councils are to be regulated and examined by god's word , and to be received or rejected as conformable to , or disagreeing from that . and for this we have the authority of the great s. augustin , contra maxim. arian . l. 3. c. 14. nec ego nicenum , &c. neither ought i to produce the nicen , nor thou the ariminum council , as having already prejudged or absolutely determined the cause , beyond all appeal . for i am not bound up by the authority of this , nor thou by the decree of that ; but let us regard the authority of the holy scripture ; witnesses not partial or appropriated to either party , but common to both . a speech worthy the gravity , learning , and piety of s. augustin . as for the councils of the later centuries , they neither have been general , nor hath either their assimbling or proceeding been lawful ; and they have most industriously thwarted the canons of the most pure and antient councils . their assembling hath not been legal , in that the modern popes have usurped the whole right and authority of convocating councils contrary to the primitive custom and practice of the church . the first nicene council was called by constantine the great ; the first constantinopolitan , which is the second general council , by theodosius ; that of ephesus , by theodosius junior ; that of chalcedon , by martianus ; the fifth , by justinian , &c. all which are such evident proofs , that the cardinals , cusanus , jacobatius , and zabarella confess , that in the first ages of the church , the right of calling councils belonged to the emperour . nor are their proceedings any better . for the popes admit no assessours or judges in councils , but their own faction , men beforehand enslaved by a solemn oath ( which all bishops of that communion take at their consecration ) to maintain the regalia petri , all the usurpations of that see. the pope is the only authentick judge in all matters , approving and refusing whatever he pleases . their own histories afford us examples enough to confirm this . i shall instance but in the sleights and wiles of the late so much cryed up trent-council . wherein , to make sure work , on the pope's side there were more italian bishops than of all the world beside . and most ridiculously to dazle the eyes of the people , some of these subscribe themselves eastern patriarchs , as of jerusalem , &c. and others as if they were greek prelates . some had the titles of archbishops , who had neither church nor diocess ; as upsalensis and armachanus , who were created on purpose to fill up the number . and when the pope on a certain occasion wanted voices to sway the cause , he sent a fresh supply of 40 bishops newly made . and this was part of that leigerdemain , which an eminent french bishop , claud , espenc . one of those vvho sat in the council , calls the great helena which of late ruled all at trent . in ep. ad tit. c. 1. all the oriental and greek patriarchs and bishops were excluded : none out of england , scotland , ireland , danemark , swedland ; few out of france and spain ; fewer out of germany it self , were admitted . when the protestants required , audience , they could not be hearken'd to , upon any tolerable terms . it was long before they could get a safe-conduct ; and when it was procured , it was clogg'd with this clause , that it should belong to none , but such as would repent and return to the bosom of the roman church . this partiality and jugling when the princes of europe saw , they sent their protestations against the council , as being insufficient to resorm religion . in trying and deciding controversies , they adhered more to tradition than scripture : and pass'd nothing till the pope with his consistory had seen it at home , and approved it ; and then he transmitted it to his legats . so that , as one said , the holy ghost was continually posted in cloakbags between rome and trent . ( though , by the way , their own doctors teach that the assistance of the holy ghost is a personal privilege and cannot be delegated . ) while the divines were formally disputing at trent , the pope was as busie in ingrossing canons at rome , and sending them to the council to be published . thus they proceeded , sometimes by a wrong rule , sometimes by none at all . in the 4th session they decree , that none should give any other exposition of scripture , than such as might agree with the doctrine of the church of rome . and yet this very doctrine was the thing questioned , and the scriptures were to have been the touchstone to try it by . take this whole affair in the words of andraeas dudithius , a bishop in the roman church , and an eminent member of this council . he thus writes in an epistle to the emperour maximilian the 2d , what good could be done in that council , where voices were taken by number , and not by weight ? the pope was able to set an 100 of his against every one of ours ; and if an 100 were not sufficient , he could on a sudden have created a thousand to succour those that were ready to faint . we might every day see hungry and needy bishops , and those for the most part beardless youngsters , come in flocks to trent , hired to give their voice according to the pope's humour : unlearned indeed and foolish but of good use to him for their audaciousness and impudency the holy ghost had nothing to do with that conventicle . all things were carried by humane policy , which was wholly employed in maintaining the immoderate , and indeed most shameless lordship and domineering of the pope . from thence were answers waited for , as from the oracles of delphos or dodona . from thence the holy ghost , who , as they brag , was president of their council , was sent shut up in carriers budgets , who ( a thing worthy to be laugh'd at ) when the waters were up , as it falls out many times , was fain to stay till they were down again , before he could repair to the council . by this means it came to pass , that the spirit was not carried on the waters , as in genesis , but along besides the waters , &c. nothing is more talk'd of than the infallibility of the church of rome : and this i know to be a most tempting bait to get proselytes ; especially amidst those many dissentions in the christian world at this day . but because this pretext hath been utterly destroyed by the lord falkland , mr. chillingworth , and other most learned pens , i will only recommend this single consideration to all judicious roman catholicks , who would not be chouced out of their wits , estates and liberties by a gang of ecclesiastical mountebanks , viz. that this huge , swelling prerogative of infallibility is so sensless a thing , so ungrounded , that no romanist according to his own principles , can have so much as a probable moral assurance of that wherein he thinks himself infallible . and unless every one in particular be infallible , it is to little purpose to boast of an infallible judge . for a man may as well mistake the meaning of his sentence , as the sentence of one who proceeds only upon prudent moral assurance : and we see that thousands do erre in the interpretation of those acknowledged infallible oracles , the holy scriptures . the consideration i recommend is this . that after all the stirr that is made about infallibility , the learnedest amongst them knows not where to meet with it ; nor in what cases it is annexed to that chair , in what it forsakes it . some , as the jesuits generally , will have it in the pope : but then whether with his cardinals , or by himself is controverted very briskly . others will have it in a general council : and this opinion is backt by no less authority than the councils of basil and constance . but then the church hath been very long without it , and possibly may never injoy it by means of a general council to the end of the world. that wherein they fix it with most plausibility is both the pope and a council together . but even here we are at a great many losses . for as to the pope , no man can be assured of his being a true pope ; considering the various defects that may render him otherwise ; as a fundamental error in his election , simoniacal induction , the female sex , want of true baptism and holy orders , both which depend upon the intention and validity of those , from whom he receives them ; and theirs upon the like qualifications in their predecessor &c. occult heresie and many others . and then as to a council , which consists chiefly of bishops ( tho the popes , for some ends best known to themselves have now pack'd in cardinals , abbots , generals of orders , &c. besides that , the validity of a council depends upon the uncertainty of the pope's being truly qualified ; the very same difficulties occur in every particular member , as did in respect of the pope himself . the like uncertainty appears in every sacrament administred in that church , some whereof are absolutely necessary , both necessitate medii & praecepti . v. g. in baptism , absolution , consecration of the host , which if it be not duly performed , idolatry is committed by the people in adoring it , even by their own concessions . azorius the jesuit , enchirid. c. 8. openly proclaims , that it is a more tolerable error in them who worship golden and silver statues , as the gentiles did their gods ; nay , a piece of red cloth on the top of a spear , as the laplanders are reported to do , than in those who adore a piece of bread. and now i would fain know of a lay-roman-catholick , what is become of his infallibility , where it is , and to what purpose it serves him ? no where is it to be found , as i know of , but in the bold assertion of every pragmatical confessor , who bids you be sure to look to your faith ; ( who are the solifidians now ? ) to believe as the church believes , and then all is safe ; for the breach of the ten commandments , there are merits and indulgences enough in the church , which being mixt with a little attrition and confession will do the work . though in the mean while he himself can neither tell where this infallible church is , nor what she certainly believes . methinks s. paul spoke as much like a prophet as an apostle : as if he foresaw the haughtiness of the members of that church to which he wrote . and therefore to curb them and banish from their minds all such vain conceits of infallibility , he tells the church of rome she stood on no firmer grounds than her neighbours . his words are these , worthy to be had in everlasting remembrance by all roman-catholicks . rom. 11. 18 , 19 , boast not against the branches , &c. well : because of unbelief they were broken off ; and thou standest by faith. be not high-minded , but fear . for if god spared not the natural branches , take heed lest he also spare not thee . behold therefore the goodness and severity of god : on them which seli , severity , but towards thee goodness ; if thou continue in his goodness : otherwise thou also shalt be cut off . which words need rather your practice than my paraphrase . how much safer and more satisfactory is it to rely on the holy scriptures themselves ; which by all sides are acknowledged infallible ? for as much as they were divinely inspired by that great infallible truth , which neither can be deceived , nor deceive his creatures ; which can make you wise enough to salvation and who hath promised to every humble petitioner , and devout practiser , a sufficient competency of knowledge , in what is necessary for his present condition and eternal happiness . now all this you will find abundantly provided for in the doctrine and constitutions of the church of england . here is the word of god faithfully translated , and exactly , as far as the idiomes of languages will permit , compared with the originals : and all those books received , of whose authority there was never any doubt made in the church . some others called apocryphal , are read indeed ; but as ruffinus in exposit. symboli , speaks , non ad fidem firmandam sed ad mores instruendos : not for confirming faith , but for direction of manners . and they are excluded from the canon upon very weighty reasons . for that they were never committed as of divine authority to the jews : to whom the oracles of god were intrusted , rom. 3. 2. nor are they to be found in the hebrew canon . they are never found cited by christ or his apostles : and in some places they contain things manifestly false , contradictory both to themselves & the other genuine prophetical writers . you have here the three creeds , the apostles , that of the nicene council , and that of s. athanasius : together with the four first general councils , which represent to us the sincere scheme of apostolical , primitive doctrine and discipline . you have here good works recommended , preach'd and practiced , as the fruits of faith and evidences of our justification : and though not as expiatory for our sins , yet as in obedience to the divine commands , and as a sacrifice acceptable to god. and even in this degenerate age of christianity it might be made to appear , that as many acts and monuments of real charity have been exhibited since the reformation , as were in many ages before . but for those works of suprerecogation , as they are called , whereby we are presumed to perform more than is our duty , this church worthily disowns them , as savouring of too much pride and self conceitedness in us , who at the best are but unprofitable servants . you have here a just and competent authority allowed to the church , of appointing decent rites and ceremonies , and of determining controversies in religion : provided she decide nothing repugnant to the holy scripture . and the apostles themselves challenged no more , witness s. paul : be ye followers of me as i am of christ. you have here a lawful call to and succession in the ministerial function ( and this succession , if need were , may be shewn to be more sincere and less interrupted than that in the roman church . ) as likewise those three most antient degrees of bishops , priests and deacons : and the manner of their ordination most conformable to god's word and primitive constitutions and practice . you have here all the divine services and administration of the sacraments , performed in the known vulgar tongue of the country , to the edification of the people , and according to divine precept . on which subject s. paul hath written a whole chapter , 1 cor. 14. no ways reconcilable to the practice of the roman church : which herein is confessed to disagree with antiquity , by the most learned of our adversaries , and many of them wish that the custome were abolished . nor doth their common plea avail ; that god understands any language : for many parts of their service are addressed to the people , and not to god : as the instructions out of the epistles and gospels , orate fratres , &c. and many occurrencies in the administration of the sacraments . here you will find the two great sacraments of the new law , baptism and the sacred eucharist . the first never so much as questioned by our adversaries as to its validity . and the other administred in the due matter and form of divine institution ; and that intirely , without committing that grand sacrilege of taking away the cup from the layity . and if the church of england embrace all that is really conveyed to us in those high mysteries , viz. the application of those ineffable benefits and advantages of the sacred body and blood of christ ; it is as much as every good christian can desire , and enough , if duly received , to make him happy . and as for that wonderful doctrin of transubstantiation , we have the romanists own acknowledgment , that it was not believed in that church till the councel of lateran , which likewise decreed the deposing of kings : and i am sure the church of england hath scripture , antiquity , reason , and the concurring testimony of all our senses , when she acknowledges a real presence to the true believer , without annihilating the substance of the elements . i am sure our blessed saviour at the institution calls the whole action a commemoration : and in the consecration of the cup he most apparently uses a double figure ; both in the cup , used for what is in it , and the testament , for what is conveyed by it . he himself calls it the fruit of the vine . and s. paul , 1 cor. 11. 26. 27 , 28. in 3 verses together expresly calls it bread even after the consecration ; whoever shall eat this bread , &c. as often as ye eat this bread , &c. let a man examine himself and so let him eat of this bread. and whereas our saviour saies this is my body : to omit the multitude of authorities that might be produced , let the great s. augustin speak the sence of all antiquity : christ did not stick to say this is my body , when he gave the sign of his body , in psalm . 98. and de doctrin . christian. l. 3 c. 10. he lays down this notable rule ; if you find a commandment that forbids a crime , or injoins any good action , then its sense is not figurative : but it is otherwise when it seems to command a crime and prohibit a good action . except you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood , you have no life in you , saies christ. that word seems to command a crime : it is therefore a figure ; which bids us communicate in the passion of our lord , and call into our memories with sweetness and benefit , that his flesh hath been wounded and nailed on the cross for us . thus doth s. augustin teach . and indeed nothing is more frequent in holy writ , than such manner of speech : this is the lord 's passover . i am the true vine , &c. but to examine this business fully , would require a just volume , and it is already done by very able pens . the 5 other sacraments in use in the roman church , are solemnly used by the church of england , though not under that notion : excepting the ceremony of anoynting , which was a miraculous guift of healing peculiar to the apostles . in the church of england you may injoy the true use and advantage of confession and absolution , in a far more serious and less suspicious manner than in the roman church . and as for absolution , even the form of it is as full and compleat as theirs . i will set it down here , as it is found in the service for the visitation of the sick. — our lord jesus christ , who hath left power to his church , to absolve all sinners , who truly repent and believe in him , of his great mercy forgive thee thy offences : and by his authority committed to me , i absolve thee from all thy sins ; in the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost . her churches are decently kept and adorned , ( at least it is her desire they should be so ) though not crowded with images : the historical use of which she rejects not : but the adoration of them she worthily esteems most dangerous and detestable . and truly for my own part , i think that dr. stillingfleet , now the reverend dean of s. pauls , hath little less than demonstrated it to be idolatry . let any but impartially examin the general practice of the church of rome , especially on good-friday in creeping to the cross : and he will find an undeniable proof of their adoring images . the priest by degrees uncovers the crucifix , lists it upto be adored with these words , ecce lignum crucis , &c. behold the wood of the cross , come let us adore it . then first he himself , then all that are present , with three prostrations of the body , even to the kissing of the very earth , approach to it , and with all reverence imaginable adore it . the worship and invocation of saints and angels , is here looked upon as at least very dangerous , and not having any president in the old or new testament , s. paul hath imparted his mind to us in this matter ▪ coloss. 2. 18. let no man beguile you of your reward , in a voluntary humility , and worshipping of angels , intruding into those things which he hath not seen . the doctrines of merit , indulgences , purgatory , &c. are presumptuous at best , and full of abuses , contrived more for the priests profit than the penitents comfort . all which considered , together with the small grounds for the belief of them , they are worthily disowned by the church of england . nor was bellarmin , when out of the heat of school disputes , of a different judgment , l. 5. de justif. c. 7. propter incertitudinem , &c. by reason of the uncertainty of our own justice and the danger of vain glory ; tutissimum est , &c. it is the safest course to repose all our confidence in the alone mercy and benignity of god. in short , you will find that the church of england in her reformation , which was most regular , and by the supreme authority of the whole nation , retains all the essentials of christianity , and onely rectified such things as she found , and the whole world complained , were some ridiculous , some impious ; others sensual and cruel . such are the innumerable crossings , repetitions of names , kissings of the pax and images , offering up of incense and candles , impertinent pilgrimages , &c. and a thousand the like absurdities . such as teach men to put their confidence in bless'd beads and medals , counterfeit relicks , confraternities , sodalities ; to trust to mundayes prayers for the dead , and our ladie 's litanies : and ascribe to pieces of wax called agnus dei's , divine power and efficacy , even as much as is due only to the pretious blood of the son of god. nor is this the belief and practice onely of a few old wives : but the authentick book of the sacred ceremonies of the roman church , tells us how urban v. sent three agnus dei's to the greek emperor , with most blasphemous rythmes annexed concerning their virtue . amongst others this is verbatim set down , — peccatum frangit ut christi sanguis et angit — that it destroys sin as the blood of christ doth . and this was not the practice of one phantastical pope alone , but according to the foresaid book , l. 1. every pope in blessing these agnus dei's uses this prayer . that it would please thee , o god , to bless these things , which we purpose to pour into this vessel of water prepared for thy name : so as by the worship and honour of them , we thy servants may have our heinous offences done away , the blemishes of our sins wiped off , and thereby we may obtain pardon , &c. no meaner a person than the angelical doctor s. thomas aquinas , attributes the same virtue of taking away venial sins , to holy water . and likewise 3. qu. 25. a. 3. in c. most orthodoxly defends , that stocks and stones , i mean images , are to be worshipped with latria , the same honour that is due to the creator . suarez and vasquez teach the same . to conclude this discourse . in the church of england you will meet with all that is good and warrantable in the church of rome ; what ever is necessary to salvation : and that by the confession of the learnedest romans . let bellarmin speak for all . l. 4. de verbo dei. c. 11. the apostles themselves never used to preach openly to the people ( much less propounded as articles of faith ) other things than the articles of the apostles creed , the ten commandments , and some few of the sacraments : because , saies he , these are simply necessary and profitable for all men : the rest besides are such , as that a man may be saved without them . this made antonius de dominis , archbishop of spalatto , even at his return to rome , to acknowledg the english church to be a true apostolical church . and father fulgentio the venetian , companion to father paul , the famous compiler of the history of the council of trent , had a most high value and tender respect for this church , as having in it all the requisites for faith , manners and discipline . and that incomparable man , hugo grotius , had so venerable an affection for her , above all other reformed churches , that he told our embassador in france , that he intended after his return from swedland , whither he was designed embassador from the states general , to transport himself with his whole family hither , on purpose to dye in the bosome of the english church . in such repute is she even with foreigners . and to speak one word to the roman catholicks of england even in their own language . by their own concessions , the church of england is safer to communicate with than that of rome . for , to believe onely what is in the scripture , is as much as is necessary , as bellarmin confesses . to worship god without an image , is acknowledged by all both safe and acceptable . to pray immediately to god , and use the lord's prayer , without repeating so many ave maria's ; to perform the best works we can , and not stand on the point of merit , &c. and so of the other matters in controversie , is by both sides granted secure : whereas the other things in debate , are strongly disputed by very learned and pious men. now what would a man require more than what all acknowledge to be in the church of england : viz. means effectually conducing and sufficient to believe well , to pray well , to live well , and to dye well . it remains onely , that the truly devout and loyal persons in our nation that are of the roman persuasion , will but vouchsafe to take the courage and pains following our blessed saviour's advice , john 5. 39. search the scriptures ; and s. paul's , 1 thess. 5. 21. prove all things ▪ 2 cor. 13. 5. and examine your selves whether you be in the faith. a post-script to the roman catholicks of my acquaintance . ever honoured and still respected friends , having thus fairly and ingènuously unbosomed to you the very thoughts of my heart , i beseech you not to take with the left hand what i offer with the right . many of you i know to be truly vertuous , noble and loyal : to many i have most endearing obligations ; and i think none can contradict me if i affirm , that my converse among you was repay'd with love and esteem : and i take heaven and earth to witness , that i still value you as tenderly as i do my own soul. god onely knowes how many throes and struglings i had to part with those , whom i so earnestly affected . but truth ( at least as it seems to me ) is great , and will prevail . my request to you all is , that you would not let us break in point of charity , though our opinions are not altogether coincident : that you would , for the removing any scruples that may arise , believe me , as i shall answer at the last tribunal , that i was not onely sincere but zealous , while i remained among you : and that whatever i performed , was with the perfect intention of , and compliance with the roman church ; and as validly done as any actions of that nature are capable of admitting . lastly , i desire for god's , religion's , and your own sake , that we may refrain from all contumelious reflexions on one another . in that long converse and great familiarity i had with you , it is impossible , but failings and imperfections must be discovered on both sides . let all be concealed under the mantle of that charity , which hides a multitude of sins : still think of me as you ever found , one that sought not yours , but you : an honest , plain down-right meaning person . and as for my present proceedings leave me to stand or fall to that great judge , to whose , and his churche's censure , i with the most profound obedience submit , whatever i write or do. and once more i recommend to your most impartial and serious consideration this important quaery : whether it be not sufficient ground to withdraw from the communion of a church , when she is convinced publickly to teach , practise and command treason and rebellion to its members ? sicut reputari cupiunt & haberi fideles , ( as the lateran council thunders it out ) as they desire to be accounted and treated as christians . as to the traiterous and monstrous plot now in question ; what mr. oats and mr. bedlow , with the rest of the informers evidences are , i know not , nor am i much inquisitive . his sacred majesty , and his great council are judges of that . but of this i am as sure as i can be of any humane transaction , that the roman church teaches and commands such practices ; that they have been frequently put in execution abroad and especially at home ; and that consequece to such doctrines , mr. colem●● by his own confession and letters which he did not deny , was very busie in attempting to dissolve the parliament , and in procuring assistance from the french king , by the interposition of monsieur le chese the jesuit , who was that king's confessor ( to use his own words ) to carry on the mighty work in their hands , no less than the conversion of three kingdoms , and the utter subduing of a pestilential heresie , which hath domineer'd over a great part of this northern world a long time ; and that there never was such hopes of success since the days of their q. mury , as now in these days , — and i am sure , that a most worthy justice of peace was barbarously murder'd , who took the examinations upon that occasion ; and that many other insolent actions were committed by that party . nor can it be any satisfaction to the nation for well-minded persons to say they disclaim and detest such actions ; unless they kenounce the principles , and disown the authority which have promoted and still are ready to prompt men to such desperate practices . god almighty grant us all his grace to consider in this our day the things that belong to our peace , before they be hid from our eyes . amen . finis a sermon preached before the king, january 30, 1668/9, being the day of the execrable murther of king charles i by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1669 approx. 60 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 23 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61604 wing s5642 estc r8100 13725707 ocm 13725707 101596 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61604) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101596) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 852:4) a sermon preached before the king, january 30, 1668/9, being the day of the execrable murther of king charles i by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 42 p. printed by robert white for henry mortlock ad are to he sold at his shop ..., london : 1669. "printed by his majesties special command." reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng charles -i, -king of england, 1600-1649 -sermons. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-04 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a sermon preached before the king , january 30. 1668 / 9 being the day of the execrable murther of king charles i. by edward stillingfleet d. d. rector of st. andrews holborn , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . printed by his majesties special command . london , printed by robert white , for henry mortlock , and are to be sold at his shop at the sign of the white-hart in westminster hall. 1669. jude v. ii. and perished in the gainsaying of corah . among all the dismal consequences of that fatal day wherein the honour of our nation suffered together with our martyr'd soveraign , there is none which in this place we ought to be more concerned for , than the dishonour which was done to religion by it . for if those things which were then acted among us , had been done among the most rude and barbarous nations , though that had been enough to have made them for ever thought so ; yet they might have been imputed to their ignorance in matters of civility and religion : but when they were committed not only by men who were called christians , but under a pretence of a mighty zeal for their religion too , men will either think that religion bad which did give encouragement to such actions , or those persons extremely wicked , who could make use of a pretence of it for things so contrary to its nature and design . and on which of these two the blame will fall , may be soon discovered , when we consider that the christian religion , above all others , hath taken care to preserve the rights of soveraignty , by giving unto caesar the things that are caesars , and to make resistance unlawful by declaring that those who are guilty of it shall receive to themselves damnation . but as though bare resistance had been too mean and low a thing for them ( notwithstanding what christ and his apostles had said ) to shew themselves to be christians of a higher rank than others ; they imbrue their hands in the blood of their soveraign for a demonstration of their piety , by the same figure by which they had destroyed mens rights to defend their liberties , and fought against the king for preservation of his person . but the actions of such men could not have been so bad as they were ; unless their pretences had been so great , for there can be no higher aggravation of a wicked action , than for men to seem to be religious in the doing of it . if the devil himself were to preach sedition to the world , he would never appear otherwise than as an angel of light : his pretence would be unity , when he designed the greatest divisions ; and the preservation of authority , when he laid the seeds of rebellion . but we might as well imagine that the god of this world ( as the devil is sometime called ) should advance nothing but peace and holiness in it , as that christianity should give the least countenance to what is contrary to either of them . yet the wickedness of men hath been so great upon earth , as to call down heaven it self to justifie their impieties ; and when they have found themselves unable to bear the burden of them , they would fain make religion do it . such as these we have a description of in this short , but smart epistle , viz. men who pretended inspirations and impulses for the greatest villanies ; who believed it a part of their saintship to despise dominions , and speak evil of dignities ; who thought the grace of god signified very little , unless it served to justifie their most wicked actions . these in all probability were the followers of simon magus the leviathan of the primitive church , a who destroyed all the natural differences of good and evil , b and made it lawful for men in case of persecution , to forswear their religion . c the great part of his doctrine being that his disciples need not be afraid of the terrours of the law , for they were free to do what they pleased themselves , because salvation was not to be expected by good works , but only by the grace of god : no wonder then , that such as these did turn the grace of god into lasciviousness : and when it proved dangerous not to do it , would deny their religion to save themselves . for they had so high opinions of themselves , that they were the only saints , that as d epiphanius tells us , they thought it the casting pearls before swine , to expose themselves to danger before the heathen governours ; by which they not only discovered what a mighty value they set upon themselves , but what mean and contemptible thoughts they had of that authority which god had established in the world . but this they would by no means allow , for they thought all the governments of the world to be nothing else e but the contrivance of some evil spirits to abridge men of that liberty which god and nature had given them : and this is that speaking evil of dignities which they are charged with , not only by our apostle here , but by s. peter before him . although the phrase used by s. peter , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken ( by the use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the first of maceabees ) not for the bare contempt of authority , expressed by reviling language , but for an open resistance of it ; which the other is so natural an introduction to , that those who think and speak contemptibly of government , do but want an occasion to manifest that their actions would be as bad as their thoughts and expressions are . and from hence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here in the words of the text is made use of to express one of the most remarkable seditions we ever read of , viz. that of corah and his company against moses and aaron ; whose punishment for it did not deter these persons who went under the name of christians , from joyning in seditious practices to the great dishonour of christianity , and their own ruine . for therefore the apostle denounces a woe against them in the beginning of the verse , and speaks of their ruine as certain as if they had been consumed by fire , or swallowed up by the earth , as corah and his accomplices were ; and they perished in the gainsaying of corah . in the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the aorist , saith crotius , is taken for the future , or present , and so implying that these courses did tend to their misery and ruine , and would unavoidably bring it upon them . if the evidence in history had been clear of the carpocratians joyning with the jews in the famous rebellion of barchochebas , wherein such multitudes of christians as well as heathens were destroyed in africa , aegypt , and other places , and the time of it had agreed with the time of writing this epistle , i should then have thought that this had been the rebellion here spoken of ; for all the actors in it were destroyed by the roman power , and some of the chief of them made publick examples of justice for the deterring of others from the like practices . but however this be , we find these persons here charged with a sin of the same nature , with the gainsaying of core , and a judgement of the same nature , as the consequent of the sin ; for they perished in the gainsaying , &c. and therefore we shall consider the words , 1. as relating to the fact of corah and his company . 2. as implying as great displeasure of god under the gospel against the same kind of sin , as he discovered in the immediate destruction of those persons who were then guilty of it . 1. as relating to the fact of corah and his company ; and so the words lead us to the handling , 1. the nature of the faction which was raised by them . 2. the judgement that was inflicted upon them for it . 1. for understanding the nature of the faction , we must enquire into the design that was laid , the persons who were engaged in it , the pretences that were made use of for it . 1. the design that was laid for that , and all other circumstances of the story , we must have resort to the account that is given of it , numb . 16. where we shall find that the bottom of the design was the sharing of the government among themselves , which it was impossible for them to hope for , as long as moses continued as a king in jesurun , for so he is called , deut. 33. 5. him therefore they intend to lay aside , but this they knew to be a very difficult task , considering what wonders god had wrought by him in their deliverance out of egypt , what wisdom he had hitherto shewed in the conduct of them , what care for their preservation , what integrity in the management of his power , what reverence the people did bear towards him , and what solemn vows and promises they had made of obedience to him . but ambitious and factious men are never discouraged by such an appearance of difficulties ; for they know they must address themselves to the people , and in the first place perswade them that they manage their interest against the usurpation of their governours . for by that means they gain upon the peoples affections , who are ready to cry them up presently as the true patriots and defenders of their liberties against the encroachment of princes : and when they have thus insinuated themselves into the good opinion of the people ; groundless suspicions , and unreasonable fears and jealousies will pass for arguments and demonstrations . then they who can invent the most popular lyes against the government are accounted the men of integrity , and they who most diligently spread the most infamous reports , are the men of honesty , because they are farthest from being flatterers of the court. the people take a strange pride , as well as pleasure , in hearing and telling all the faults of their governours for in doing so they flatter themselves in thinking they deserve to rule much better than those which do it . and the willingness they have to think so of themselves , makes them misconstrue all the actions of their superiours to the worse sense , and then they find out plots in every thing , upon the people . what ever is done for the necessary maintenance of government , is suspected to be a design meerly to exhaust the people to make them more unable to resist . if good laws be made , these are said by factious men to be only intended for snares for the good people , but others may break them and go unpunished . if government be strict and severe , then it is cruel and tyrannical , if mild and indulgent , then it is remiss and negligent . if laws be executed , then the peoples liberties be oppressed ; if not , then it were better not to make laws , than not to see them executed . if there be wars , the people are undone by taxes ; if there be peace , they are undone by plenty . if extraordinary judgements befall them , then they lament the sins of their governours , and of the times , and scarce think of their own . if miscarriages happen ( as it is impossible alwaies to prevent them ) they charge the form of government with them , which all sorts are subject to . nay , it is seldom that governours escape with their own faults , the peoples are often laid upon them too . so here , numb . 16. 14. moses is charged with not carrying them into canaan , when it was their own sins which kept them thence . yea , so partial have the people generally been against their rulers , when swayed by the power of faction , that this hath made government very difficult and unpleasing ; for what ever the actions of princes are , they are liable to the censures of the people . their bad actions being more publick , and their good therefore suspected of design ; and the wiser governours are , the more jealous the people are of them . for alwaies the weakest part of mankind are the most suspicious ; the less they understand things , the more designs they imagine are laid for them , and the best counsels are the soonest rejected by them . so that the wisest government can never be secure from the jealousies of the people , and they that will raise a faction against it will never want a party to side with them . for when could we ever have imagined a government more likely to be free from this , than that which moses had over the people of israel ? he being an extraordinary person for all the abilities of government ; one bred up in the egyptian court , and in no mean degree of honour , being called the son of pharaohs daughter , one of great experience in the management of affairs , of great zeal for the good of his countrey , as appeared by the tenderness of his peoples interest in their deliverance out of egypt ; one of great temper and meekness above all the men of the earth ; one who took all imaginable care for the good establishment of laws among them ; but above all these , one particularly chosen by god for this end , and therefore furnished with all the requisites of a good man , and an excellent prince : yet for all these things a dangerous sedition is here raised against him , and that upon the common grounds of such things , viz. usurpation upon the peoples rights , arbitrary government , and ill management of affairs ; usurpation upon the peoples rights , v. 4. the faction makes a remonstrance asserting the priviledges of the people against moses and aaron , ye take too much upon you , seeing all the congregation are holy every one of them , and the lord is among them ; wherefore then lift you up your selves above the congregation of the lord : as though they had said , we appear only in behalf of the fundamental liberties of the people both civil and spiritual ; we only seek to retrench the exorbitances of power , and some late innovations which have been among us ; if you are content to lay aside your power which is so dangerous and offensive to gods holy people , we shall then sit down in quietness ; for alas it is not for our selves that we seek these things ( what are we ? ) but the cause of gods people is dearer to us than our lives , and we shall willingly sacrifice them in so good a cause . and when moses afterwards sends for the sons of eliab to come to him , they peremptorily refuse all messages of peace , and with their men of the sword mentioned , v. 2. they make votes of non-addresses , and break off all treaties with him , and declare these for their reasons , that he did dominando dominari , as some render it , exercise an arbitrary and tyrannical power over the people , that he was guilty of breach of the trust committed to him , for he promised to bring them into a land flowing with milk and honey , or give them inheritance of fields and vineyards , but he had not done it , and instead of that only , deceives the people still with fair promises , and so puts out their eyes that they cannot see into the depth of his designs . so that now by the ill management of his trust , the power was again devolved into the hands of the people , and they ought to take account of his actions . by which we see the design was under very fair and popular pretences to devest moses of his government , and then they doubted not but such zealous patriots as they had shewed themselves , should come to have the greatest share in it ; but this which they most aimed at , must appear least in view , and only necessity and providence must seem to cast that upon them , which was the first true motive they had to rebel against moses and aaron . 2. the persons who were engaged in it . at first they were only some discontented levites who murmured against moses and aaron , because they were not preferred to the priesthood , and of these corah was the chief . r. solomon observes , that the reason of corahs discontent , was , that elizaphan the son of vzziel , of the younger house to izhar from whom corah descended , was preferred before him by moses to be prince over the sons of kohath . corah being active and busie in his discontents , had the opportunity of drawing in some of the sons of reuben , for they pitched their tents near each other , both on the south-side of the tabernacle of the congregation ; and these were discontented on the account of their tribe having lost the priviledge of primogeniture . thus what ever the pretences are , how fair and popular soever in the opposition men make to authority , ambition and private discontents are the true beginners of them : but these must be covered over with the deepest dissimulation , with most vehement protestations to the contrary , nothing must be talked of but a mighty zeal for religion , and the publick interest . so josephus tells us concerning corah , that while he carried on his own ambitious designs , with all the arts of sedition and a popular eloquence , insinuating into the peoples minds strange suggestions against moses his government , as being a meer politick design of his to enslave the people of god , and advance his own family and interest , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he would seem to regard nothing but the publick good . if fair pretences , and glorious titles will serve to cheat the people into their own miseries , and the sad effects of rebellion ; they shall never want those who will enslave them for the sake of liberty , undo them for the publick good , and destroy them with designs of reformation . for nothing is more popular than rebellion in the beginning ; nothing less in the issue of it . and the only true reason that it is ever so , is from the want of wisdom and judgement in the generality of mankind , who seldom see to the end of things , and hardly distinguish between the names and nature of them , till their own dear bought experience hath taught them the difference . sedition is of the nature , and hath the inseparable properties of sin ; for it is conceived with pleasure , brought forth with pain , and ends in death and misery . nothing enters upon the stage with a braver shew and appearance , but however prosperous for a time it may continue , it commonly meets with a fatal end . but it is with this sin as to this world , as it is with others as to the next ; men when they are betrayed into them , are carried away and transported with the pleasing temptations , not considering the unspeakable misery that follows after them . so that what the devils advantage is in order to the ruine of mens souls , is the advantage of seditious persons over the less understanding people ; they both tempt with an appearance of good , and equally deceive them which hearken to them . but as we still find , that notwithstanding all the grave admonitions , the sober counsels , the rational discourses , the perswasive arguments which are used to deter men from the practice of sin , they will still be such fools to yield to the devils temptations against their own welfare : so , neither the blessings of a continued peace , nor the miseries of an intestine war , neither the security of a settled government , nor the constant danger of innovations will hinder men of fiery and restless spirits from raising combustions in a nation , though themselves perish in the flames of them . this we find here was the case of corah and his company ; they had forgotten the groans of their captivity in egypt , and the miracles of their deliverance out of it , and all the faithful services of moses , and aaron ; they considered not the difficulties of government , nor the impossibility of satisfying the ambitious desires of all pretenders ; they regarded not that god from whom their power was derived , nor the account they must give to him for their resistance of it : nothing but a full revenge upon the government can satisfie them , by leaving no means unattempted for its overthrow , though themselves be consumed by the fall of it . it were happy for government if these turbulent spirits could be singled out from the rest in their first attempts ; but that is the usual subtilty of such men , when they find themselves aimed at , they run into the common herd , and perswade the people that they are equally concerned with themfelves in the present danger , that though the pretence be only against faction and sedition , the design is the slavery and oppression of the people . this they manage at first by grave nods , and secret whispers , by deep sighs , and extatick motions , by far fetched discourses , and tragical stories , till they find the people capable of receiving their impressions , and then seem most unwilling to mention that which it was at first their design to discover . by such arts as these corah had prepared , as josephus tells us , almost the whole camp of israel for a popular tumult , so that they were like to have stoned moses before he was aware of it ; and it seems the faction had gained a mighty interest among the people , when although god so severely and remarkably punished the heads of it , yet the very next day all the congregation of the children of israel murmured against moses and aaron , saying , ye have killed the people of the lord. what a mark of gods people was sedition grown among them ! when these men were accounted saints in spight of heaven , and martyrs , though god himself destroyed them . they were men who were only sanctified by rebellion : and shewed no other fruits of their piety but disobedience to authority . but the danger had not been so great , how loud soever the complaints had been , if only the ruder multitude had been gained to the favour of corah and his party : for these wanted heads to manage them , and some countenance of authority to appear under ; and for this purpose they had drawn to their faction 250 princes of the assembly , famous in the congregation , men of renown , i. e. members ofthe of the great council of the nation . whom moses was wont to call and advise with about the publick affairs of it ; such who sate in comitiis senatorum , as paul. fagius tells us , therefore said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as were called to the great assembly which sate in parliament at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation , which was the place where they met together . these were the heads of the tribes , and the captains of thousands , and the men of the greatest fame and authority among the people whom moses assembled together for advice and counsel , as often as he saw just occasion for it . and as far as i can find were distinct from the great sanhedrin , which seemed to be rather a constant court of judicature which sate to receive appeals from inferiour courts , and to determine such difficult causes which were reserved peculiarly for it , as about the apostasy of a whole tribe , the case of false prophets , and the like . but these 250 men did far exceed the whole number of the sanhedrin ; and the heads of the tribes , and the elders of israel were summoned together upon any very weighty occasion , by moses both before and after the institution of the sanhedrin . and now since the faction had gained so great strength by the accession of so great a number of the most leading men among the people , we may expect they should soon declare their intentions , and publish the grounds of their entring into such a combination against moses . 3. which is the next thing to be spoken to ; viz. the colours and pretences under which these persons sought to justifie the proceedings of the faction . which were these two , 1. the asserting the rights and liberties of the people in opposition to the government of moses . 2. the freeing themselves from the encroachments upon their spiritual priviledges , which were made by the vsurpations of aaron and the priesthood . 1. the asserting the rights and liberties of the people in opposition to the government of moses . is it a small thing , say they , that thou hast brought us up out of a land that floweth with milk and honey , to kill us in the wilderness , except thou make thy self altogether a prince over us ? and before , their charge was , that moses and aaron took too much upon them , in lifting up themselves above the congregation of the lord. which josephus more at large explains , telling us that the great accusation of moses was , that out of his ambition and affectation of power , he had taken upon himself the government of the people without their consent , that he made use of his pretence of familiarity with god only for a politick end , that by this means he debarred the people of that liberty which god had given them , and no man ought to take from them , that they were all a free-born people , and equally the children of abraham , and therefore there was no reason they should depend upon the will of a single person , who by his politick arts had brought them to the greatest necessities , that he might rule them the better ; wherefore corah , as though he had been already president of a high-court of justice upon moses their king , determines , that it was necessary for the common-wealth , that such enemies to the publick interest should be discovered and punished ; lest if they be let alone in their usurpations of power , they declare themselves open enemies when it will be too late to oppose them . there were then two great principles among them by which they thought to defend themselves . 1. that liberty and a right to power is so inherent in the people , that it cannot be taken from them . 2. that in case of usurpation upon that liberty of the people , they may resume the exercise of power , by punishing those who are guilty of it . 1. that liberty , and a right to power , is inseparable from the people ; libertatis patrocinium suscipiunt , saith calvin , upon corah and his company ; and i believe they will be found to be the first assertors of this kind of liberty that ever were in the world . and happy had it been for us in this nation , if corah had never found any disciples in it . for what a blessed liberty was this which corah aimed at , viz. to change one excellent prince , as moses was , for 250 tyrants , besides corah and the sons of reuben ? what just and equal liberty was it which moses did deprive them of ? it was only the liberty of destroying themselves , which all the power he had could hardly keep them from . could there be any greater liberty than delivering them out of the house of bondage ? and was not moses the great instrument in effecting it ? could there be greater liberty than for their whole nation to be preserved from all the designs of their enemies , to enjoy their own laws , and matters of justice to be duly administred among them ? and had they not all these under the government of moses ? what means then this out-cry for liberty ? is it that they would have had no government at all among them , but that every one might have done what he pleased himself ? this indeed were a desirable liberty , if a man could have it alone : but when every one thinks that he is but one , though he be free ; and every one else is as free as he , but though their freedom be equal to his , his power is not equal to theirs ; and therefore to bring things to a more just proportion , every one must part with some power for a great deal of security . if any man can imagine himself in such a state of confusion , which some improperly call a state of nature ; let him consider , whether the contentment he could take in his own liberty and power to defend himself , would ballance the fears he would have of the injury which others in the same state might be able to do him . not that i think meer fear made men at first enter into societies , for there is a natural inclination in mankind to it , and one of the greatest pleasures of humane life lyes in the enjoyment of it . but what other considerations incline men to , fear makes reasonable , though men part with some supposed liberty for the enjoyment of it . so that the utmost liberty is destroyed by the very nature of govermment , and nothing can be more unreasonable than for men to quarrel with government for that , which they cannot enjoy and the preservation of themselves together . which alone makes the desire of power reasonable , and if the preservation of our selves in our rights and properties may be had without it , all that the want of liberty signifies , is , that men have all the conveniences of power without the trouble and the cares of it . and if this be not a more desirable liberty than the other , let any rational man judge . the pretence of liberty then in this sense against government , is , that men are fools in taking the best care to preserve themselves , that laws are but instruments of slavery , and every single man is better able to defend himself , than the united strength of a people in society is to defend him . and this kind of liberty we may justly think will be desired by none but mad-men , and beasts of prey . it follows then , that what liberty is inconsistent with all government , must never be pleaded against any one sort of it . but is there then so great a degree of liberty in one mode of government more than another , that it should be thought reasonable to disturb government , meerly to alter the form of it ? would it have been so much better for the people of israel to have been governed by the 250 men here mentioned , than by moses ? would not they have required the same subjection and obedience to themselves , though their commands had been much more unreasonable than his ? what security can there be that every one of these shall not be worse in all respects than him whom they were so wiling to lay aside ; and if one be thought troublesome , what liberty and ease is there when their name is legion ? so that the folly of these popular pretences is as great as the sin in being perswaded by them . and it may be they have not thought amiss who have attributed a great part of that disturbance of the peace of kingdoms , under a pretence of popular government , to an unjust admiration of those greek and roman writers , who have unreasonably set up liberty in opposition to monarchy . but some of the wisest of them have given us a truer account of these things , and have told us , that it was impossible the roman state could have been preserved longer , unless it had submitted to an imperial power ; for the popular heats and factions were so great , that the annual election of magistrates , was but another name for a tumult ; and as dio goes on , the name of popular government is far more plausible , but the benefits of monarchy are far greater ; it being much easier to find one good than many ; and though one be accounted difficult , the other is almost impossible . and as he elsewhere well observes , the flourishing of a common-wealth depends upon its poverty ; that being alone able to unite the minds of the governours , who in a plentiful state , not set about with enemies , will be grasping at their own private interests , and fall naturally from thence into divisions and animosities ; but the flourishing of the monarchy lyes in the riches of it , the prince and the people having the same interest , and being rich or poor together . so that we see the notion of liberty , and exercise of power in government , is so far from being an inseparable property of the people , that the proper notion of it is inconsistent with government and that which lyes in the enjoyments of our rights and properties , is so far from being inconsistent with monarchy , that they are more advanced by that , than by any other way of government . 2. another principle which tends to the subverting government under a pretence of liberty , is , that in case of usurpation upon the rights of the people , they may resume the exercise of power , and punish the supreme magistrate himself , if he be guilty of it . then which there can be no principle imagined more destructive to civil societies , and repugnant to the very nature of government . for it destroys all the obligations of oaths and compacts , it makes the solemnest bonds of obedience signifie nothing , when the people shall think fit to declare it : it makes every prosperous rebellion just ; for no doubt when the power is in the rebels hands , they will justifie themselves , and condemn their soveraign . ( and if corah , dathan and abiram had succeeded in their rebellion against moses , no doubt they would have been called the keepers of the liherties of israel . ) it makes all government dangerous to the persons in whom it is , considering the unavoidable infirmities of it , and the readiness of people to misconstrue the actions of their princes , and their incapacity to judge of them ; it not being fit that the reasons of all counsels of princes should be divulged by proclamations . so that there can be nothing wanting to make princes miserable , but that the people want power to make them so . and the supposition of this principle will unavoidably keep up a constant jealousie between the prince and his people : for if he knows their minds , he will think it reasonable to secure himself by all means against their power , and endeavour to keep them as unable to resist as may be : whereby all mutual confidence between a prince and his people will be destroyed : and there can be no such way to bring in an arbitrary government into a nation , as that which such men pretend , to be the only means to keep it out . besides , this must necessarily engage a nation in endless disputes about the forfeiture of power into whose hands it falls : whether into the people in common , or some persons particularly chosen by the people for that purpose : for in an established government according to their principles , the king himself is the true representative of the people ; others may be chosen for some particular purposes , as proposing laws , &c. but these cannot pretend by vertue of that choice , to have the full power of the people ; and withall , whatever they do against the consent of the people is unlawful ; and their power is forfeited by attempting it . but on the other side , what mighty danger can there be in supposing the persons of princes to be so sacred , that no sons of violence ought to come near to hurt them ? have not all the ancient kingdoms and empires of the world flourished under the supposition of an unaccountable power in princes ? that hath been thought by those who did not own a derivation of their power from god , but a just security to their persons , considering the hazards , and the care of government which they undergo ? have not the people who have been most jealous of their liberties , been fain to have recourse to an unaccountable power , as their last refuge in case of their greatest necessities ? i mean the romans in their dictators . and if it were thought not only reasonable , but necessary then , ought it not to be preserved inviolable , where the same laws do give it by which men have any right to challenge any power at all ? neither doth this give princes the liberty to do what they list ; for the laws by which they govern , do fence in the rights and properties of men ; and princes do find so great conveniency ease and security in their government by law , that the sense of that will keep them far better within the compass of laws , than the peoples holding a rod over them , which the best princes are like to suffer the most by , and bad will but grow desperate by it . good princes will never need such a curb , because their oaths and promises , their love and tenderness towards their people , the sense they have of a power infinitely greater than theirs , to which they must give an account of all their actions , will make them govern as the fathers of their countrey ; and bad princes will never value it , but will endeavour by all possible means to secure themselves against it . so that no inconveniency can be possibly so great on the supposition of this unaccountable power in soveraign princes , taking it in the general , and meerly on the account of reason , as the unavoidable mischiefs of that hypothesis , which places all power originally in the people , and notwithstanding all oaths and bonds whatsoever to obedience gives them the liberty to resume it when they please : which will alwaies be when that spirit of faction and sedition shall prevail among them , which ruled here in corah and his company . 2. another pretence for this rebellion of corah , was , the freeing themselves from the encroachments upon their spiritual priviledges which were made by the usurpations of aaron and the priesthood . this served for a very popular pretence , for they knew no reason that one tribe should engross so much of the wealth of the nation to themselves , and have nothing to do but to attend the service of god for it . what , say they , are not all the lords people holy ? why may not then all they offer up incense to the lord , as well as the sons of aaron ? how many publick uses might those revenues serve for , which are now to maintain aaron , and all the sons of levi ? but if there must be some to attend the service of god , why may not the meanest of the people serve for that purpose , those who can be serviceable for nothing else ? why must there be an order of priesthood distinct from that of levites ? why a high-priest above all the priests ? what is there in all their office which one of the common people may not do as well as they ? cannot they slay the sacrifices , and offer incense , and do all other parts of the priestly office ? so that at last they make all this to be a politick design of moses only to advance his own family by making his brother high-priest , and to have all the priests and levites at his devotion , to keep the people the better in awe . this hath alwaies been the quarrel at religion , by those who seldom pretend to it , but with a design to destroy it . for who would ever have minded the constant attendance at the temple , if no encouragements had been given to those who were imployed in it ? or is not religion apt enough to be despised of it self , by men of prophane minds , unless it be rendred more mean and contemptible by the poverty of those who are devoted to it ? shall not god be allowed the priviledge of every master of a family , to appoint the ranks and orders of his own servants , and to take care they be provided for , as becomes those who wait upon him ? what a dishonour had this been to the true god , when those who worshipped false gods thought nothing too great for those who were imployed in the service of them ? but never any yet cryed , but he that had a mind to betray his master , to what purpose is all this waste ? let god be honoured as he ought to be , let religion come in for its share among all the things which deserve encouragement , and those who are imployed in the offices of it , enjoy but what god , and reason , and the laws of their countrey give them , and then we shall see it was nothing , but the discontent and saction of corah and his company which made any encroachment of aaron and the priesthood any pretence for rebellion . but all these pretences would not serve to make them escape the severe hand of divine justice ; for in an extraordinary and remarkable manner he made them suffer the just desert of their sin , for they perished in their contradiction , which is the next thing to be considered , viz. 2. the judgement which was inflicted upon them for it . they had provoked heaven by their sin , and disturbed the earth by their faction ; and the earth , as if it were moved with indignation against them , trembled and shook , as josephus saith , like waves that are tossed with a mighty wind , and then with a horrid noise it rends asunder , and opens its mouth to swallow those in its bowels who were unfit to live upon the face of it . they had been dividing the people , and the earth to their amazement and ruine divides it self under their feet , as though it had been designed on purpose , that in their punishment themselves might feel , and others see the mischief of their sin . their seditious principles seemed to have infected the ground they stood upon ; the earth of a sudden proves as unquiet and troublesome as they ; but to rebuke their madness , it was only in obedience to him who made it the executioner of his wrath against them ; and when it had done its office , it is said , that the earth closed upon them ; and they perished from among the congregation . thus the earth haveing revenged it self against the disturbers of its peace , heaven presently appears with a flaming fire , taking vengeance upon the 250 men , who in opposition to aaron , had usurped the priestly office , in offering incense before the lord. such a fire , if we believe the same historian , which far outwent the most dreadful eruptions of aetna or vesuvins , which neither the art of man , nor the power of the wind could raise , which neither the burning of woods nor cities could parallel ; but such a fire which the wrath of god alone could kindle , whose light could be outdone by nothing but the heat of it . thus heaven and earth agree in the punishment of such disturbers of government , and god by this remarkable judgement upon them hath left it upon record to all ages , that all the world may be convinced how displeasing to him the sin of saction and sedition is . for god , takes all this that was done against moses and aaron , as done against himself . for they are said to be gathered together against the lord , v. 11. to provoke the lord , v. 30. and the fire is said to come out from the lord : v. 35. and afterwards it is said of them ; this is that dathan and abiram , who strove against moses and against aaron in the company of corah , when they strove against the lord. by which we see god interprets striving against the authority appointed by him , to be a striving against himself . god looks upon himself as immediately concerned in the government of the world ; for by him princes raign , and they are his vicegerents upon earth ; and they who resist , resist not a meer appointment of the people , but an ordinance of god ; and they who do so shall in the mildest sense receive a severe punishment from him . let the pretences be never so popular , the persons never so great and famous ; nay , though they were of the great council of the nation , yet we see god doth not abate of his severity upon any of these considerations . this was the first formed sedition that we read of against moses , the people had been murmuring before , but they wanted heads to manage them : now all things concur to a most dangerous rebellion upon the most popular pretences of religion and liberty ; and now god takes the first opportunity of declaring his hatred of such actions ; that others might hear , and fear , and do no more so presumptuously . this hath been the usual method of divine judgements ; the first of the kind hath been most remarkably punished in this life , that by it they may see how hateful such things are to god ; but if men will venture upon them not withstanding , god doth not alwaies punish them so much in this world , ( though he sometimes doth ) but reserves them , without repentance , to his justice in the world to come . the first man that sinned was made an example of gods justice ; the first world ; the first publick attempt against heaven at babel after the plantation of the world again ; the first cities which were so generally corrupted after the flood ; the first breaker of the sabbath after the law ; the first offerers with strange fire ; the first lookers into the ark , and here the first popular rebellion and usurpers of the office of priesthood . god doth hereby intend to preserve the honour of his laws ; he gives men warning enough by one exemplary punishment , and if not withstanding that , they will commit the same sin , they may thank themselves if they suffer for it , if not in this life , yet in that to come . and that good effect this judgement had upon that people , that although the next day 14000 suffered for murmuring at the destruction of these men , yet we do not find that any rebellion was raised among them afterwards upon these popular pretences of religion , and the power of the people . while their judges continued ( who were kings , without the state and title of kings ) they were observed with reverence , and obeyed with diligence . when afterwards they desired a king , with all the pomp and grandeur which other nations had ( which samuel acquaints them with , viz , the officers and souldiers , the large revenues he must have ) though their king was disowned by god , yet the people held firm in their obedience to him , and david himself , though anointed to be king , persecuted by saul , and though he might have pleaded necessity and providence as much as any ever could , ( when saul was strangely delivered into his hands , ) yet we see what an opinion he had of the person of a bad king , the lord forbid that i should do this thing against my master the lords anointed , to stretch forth my hand against him , seeing he is the anointed of the lord. and lest we should think it was only his modesty or his policy which kept him from doing it , he afterwards , upon a like occasion declares , it was only the sin of doing it , which kept him from it . for who can stretch forth his hand against the lords anointed and be guiltless ? not as though david could not do it without the power of the sanhedrin , as it hath been pretended by the sons of corah in our age ; for he excepts none ; he never seizes upon him to carry him prisoner to be tryed by the sanhedrin , nor is there any foundation for any such power in the sanhedrin over the persons of their soveraigns . it neither being contained in the grounds of its institution , nor any precedent occurring in the whole story of the bible , which gives the least countenance to it : nay , several passages of scripture utterly overthrew it , for how could solomon have said , where the word of a king is , there is power ; and who may say unto him , what dost thou ? if by the constitution of their government , the sanhedrin might have controlled him in what he said or did . but have not several of the modern jews said so ? granting that some have ; yet so they have spoken many unreasonable and foolish things besides ; but yet none of these have said , that it was in the power of the sanhedrin to depose their kings , or put them to death ; all that they say is , that in the cases expressed by the law , if the kings do transgress , the sanhedrin had the power of inflicting the penalty of scourging , which yet they deny to have had any infamy in it among them . but did not david transgress the law in his murder and adultery ? did not solomon in the multitude of his wives & idolatry , yet where do we read that the sanhedrin ever took cognisance of these things ? and the more ancient jews do say , that the king was not to be judged , as is plain in the text of the misna , however the expositors have taken a liberty to contradict it ; but as far as we can find , without any foundation of reason : and r. jeremiah in nachmanides , saith expresly , that no creature may judge the king , but the holy and blessed god alone . but we have an authority far greater than his , viz. of davids in this case , who after he hath denied that any man can stretch forth his hand against the lords anointed , and be guiltless : in the very next words he submits the judgement of him only to god himself , saying , as the lord liveth , the lord shall smite him , or his day shall come to die , or he shall descend into battel and perish . he thought it sufficient to leave the judgement of those things to god , whose power over princes he knew was enough , if well considered by them , to keep them in awe . we have now dispatched the first consideration of the words of the text , as they relate to the fact of corah and his company . 2. we ought now to enquire , whether the christian doctrine hath made any alteration in these things ; or whether that gives any greater encouragement to faction and sedition than the law did , when it is masked under a pretence of zeal for religion and liberty . but it is so far from it , that what god then declared to be displeasing to him by such remarkable judgements , hath been now more fully manifested by frequent precepts , and vehement exhortations , by the most weighty arguments , and the constant practice of the first and the best of christians , and by the black character which is set upon those who under a pretence of christian liberty did despise dominion , and speak evil of dignities , and follow corah in his rebellion , however they may please themselves with greater light , than former ages had in this matter , they are said to be such for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever . it would take up too much time to examine the frivolous evasions , and ridiculous distinctions by which they would make the case of the primitive christians in not resisting authority , so much different from theirs who have not only done it , but in spight of christianity have pleaded for it . either they said they wanted strength , or courage , or the countenance of the senate , or did not understand their own liberty ; when all their obedience was only due to those precepts of the gospel , which make it so great a part of christianity to be subject to principalities and powers , and which the teachers of the gospel had particularly given them in charge to put the people in mind of . and happy had it been for us if this doctrine had been more sincerely preached , and duly practised in this nation ; for we should then never have seen those sad times , which we can now no otherwise think of , than of the devouring fire , and raging pestilence , i. e. of such dreadfull judgements which we have smarted so much by , that we heartily pray we may never feel them again : for then fears and jealousies began our miseries , and the curse so often denounced against meroz , fell upon the whole nation ; when the sons of corah managed their own ambitious designs against moses and aaron ( the king and the church ) under the same pretences of religion and liberty . and when the pretence of religion was broken into schisms , and liberty into oppression of the people , it pleased god out of his secret and unsearchable judgements to suffer the sons of violence to prevail against the lords anointed ; and then they would know no difference between his being conquered and guilty . they could find no way to justifie their former wickedness , but by adding more : the consciousness of their own guilt , and the fears of the punishment due to it , made them unquiet and thoughtfull ; as long as his life and presence did upbraid them with the one , and made them fearfull of the other . and when they found the greatness and constancy of his mind , the firmness of his piety , the zeal he had for the true interest of the people , would not suffer him to betray his trust for the saving of his life ; they charge him with their own guilt , and make him suffer because they had deserved to do it . and as if it had not been enough to have abused the names of religion and liberty before , they resolve to make the very name of justice to suffer together with their king : by calling that infamous company who condemned their soveraign , a high court of justice which trampled under foot the laws both of god and men . but lest the world should imagine they had any shame left in their sins , they make the people witnesses of his murther ; and pretend the power of the people for doing that , which they did detest and abhor . thus fell our royal martyr a sacrifice to the fury of unreasonable men ; who either were so blind as not to see his worth , or rather so bad as to hate him for it . and as god gave once to the people of the jews a king in his anger , being provoked to it by their sins , we have cause to say , that upon the same account he took away one of the best of kings from us in his wrath . but blessed be that god , who in the midst of judgement was pleased to remember mercy , in the miraculous preservation , and glorious restauration of our gracious soveraign ; let us have a care then of abusing the mercies of so great a deliverance to quite other ends than god intended it for , lest he be provoked to say to us , as he did of old to the jews , but if ye shall still do wickedly , ye shall be consumed , both ye and your king. and if we look on this as a dreadful judgement , let us endeavour to prevent it by a timely and sincere reformation of our lives , and by our hearty supplications to god that he would preserve the person of our soveraign from all the attempts of violence , that he would so direct his counsels , and prosper his affairs , that his government may be a long and publick blessing to these nations . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61604-e140 mat. 22. 21. rom. 13. 2. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . epiphan . haeres . 27. p. 105. ed. petav. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 24. §. 5 p. 72. c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . theodoret. haeret . f●b . l. ● . p. 193. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . epiph. har . 24. §. 5. e 〈…〉 diabolo , qui nunquam omni●o quietus est , immo 〈…〉 advers . haeres . l. 5. c. 24. 2 pet. 2. 10. 1 mac. 2. 6. v. david ga●● . chronol . p. 101. ☜ v. 12 , 13. v. 14. numb . 3. 3● . num● . 10. 3 ●● . joseph . antiq . jud. l. 4. c. 2. joseph . antiq . l. 4. c. 2. numb 16. 41 v. ● . num. 10. 2. numb . 16. 13. v. 3. joseph . l. 4. 1 , 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . joseph . ant. l 4. c. 2. p. ●04 . di● rom. hist. l. 54. l. 44. 〈◊〉 . numb . 16. 35. v. 3● . numb . 26. 9. rom 13. 1. 2● 〈…〉 1 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 1 ●●●m 26. 10. jude v. 13. tit. 3. 1. 1 sam. 12. 25. a vindication of their majesties authority to fill the sees of the deprived bishops in a letter out of the country occasioned by dr. b---'s refusal of the bishoprick of bath and wells. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1691 approx. 28 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 20 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61636 wing s5679 estc r9468 11809038 ocm 11809038 49491 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61636) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 49491) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 550:8) a vindication of their majesties authority to fill the sees of the deprived bishops in a letter out of the country occasioned by dr. b---'s refusal of the bishoprick of bath and wells. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [4], 27 p. printed for ric. chiswell ..., london : 1691. attributed to edward stillingfleet. cf. nuc pre-1956. dr. b--is william beveridge. cf. dnb. reproduction of original in bristol public library, bristol, england. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng beveridge, william, 1637-1708. church of england -government. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 mona logarbo sampled and proofread 2004-04 mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a vindication of their majesties authority to fill the sees of the deprived bishops ; in a letter out of the country . occasioned by dr. b — 's refusal of the bishoprick of bath and wells . london : printed for ric. chiswell , at the rose and crown in st. paul's church-yard . mdcxci . a vindication of their majesties authority to fill the sees of the deprived bishops . licensed , may 29. 1691. a vindication of their majesties authority to fill the sees of the deprived bishops . sir , the account we have received here of dr. b — 's refusal of the bishoprick of bath and wells , hath occasioned great talk , and different censures , as men are divided in their interests and opinions . i know not what to think of it , because i know not the reasons for which he did it ; but it is an unhappy amusement at such a time as this , to which a wise man , who had well considered consequences , would not have given the occasion . i hope it may end all in noise , without any mischievous effects ; but considering how many there are , who are very watchful to improve every accident to the disturbance of the government , and to unsettle mens minds , i cannot forbear giving you my thoughts about it ; tho my tender regard for the person concerned , would have made me silent at any other time . i can easily apprehend several reasons which might move wise and good men , where there are no greater and more pressing obligations to the contrary , rather to chuse an ecclesiastical preferment void by death or cession , than by deprivation ; but our present circumstances are such , as ought to over-rule all niceties ; the mischiefs of such a refusal being so intolerable , as nothing can excuse , much less justifie it , but the absolute unlawfulness of succeeding in such preferments , while the deprived bishop lives ; which would be very odd for them to pretend , who have submitted to the present government . to satisfie you in this matter , i shall briefly consider the first sort of reasons , and shew that they are no reasons in our circumstances ; and then examine the lawfulness of the thing it self . as for the first , it may so happen , that the person deprived , and the person to be promoted , have been old and intimate friends ; and this may grate hard upon the person to be promoted , to succed in the chair of one whom he loves , whose misfortune he pities ; whom he greatly values for his other many good qualities : now if to refuse such a preferment , would keep my friend possessed of it , there were some sense in this ; but i know no other case , wherein t is thought a breach of friendship to succeed a friend in a preferment which he has lost , and which the law says is not , and shall not be his ; when there is no suspicion of foul play in supplanting him , any more than to succeed a dead friend : friendship is so far from being any reason against it , that it should make it desirable to both ; to one , that his friend may get what he has lost ; to the other , that he may have opportunity , if there be occasion for it , to make his friend's misfortune more easie , than a stranger would do . and if friendship be no objection , what should hinder any man from taking a preferment , which another is legally deprived of ? for i must take the legality of it for granted now and argue upon that supposition . we must not take away what is another's ; but surely what is not his , we may accept from those who have power to give it . if one may give , the other may receive ; for let the objection be what it will , it lies as much against the giver as the receiver . they who have lost it , want it ; and what then ? so do a great many men want what is not theirs , what they never had , as well as what they have lost : and must no man take a preferment in church or state , which another wants ? must the good order and government of church and state be sacrificed to the wants and misfortunes of private men ? but there is a more material consideration , which may influence prudent and cautious men , who are well preferred already . the experience of the revolution in 1660 hath taught them , how dangerous it may be in case such a revolution should happen , to change their old preferments for new ones , which may be challenged again by their old proprietors . but in our case there is the least to be said for this caution , that can possibly be in any revolution : for it is as vain a thing to hope to secure our selves in such a revolution , by prudence and caution , as it is for a man to fortify his house against the breaking in of the sea : if he take care of the banks , and keep out the sea , his house will escape ; but if the sea break in upon him , he must perish with his neighbours . if there ever be such a revolution as can unsettle what this hath done , god be merciful to this miserable nation ; the prudent and the cautious sinner , and the zealous defenders of the present government , will fare much alike : nay , however they may flatter themselves , the deprived bishops will not long triumph over their new successors . thus in some cases it may be a good reason not to do a very lawful and innocent thing , if it be greatly mistaken and misrepresented , and give a general offence and scandal : but when it appears , that there is nothing but mistake and passion , and private interest , or ill designs on one side ; and a real scandal , and great and publick mischief on the other , no wise man will deliberate long which side to take : none but the enemies of the government can take offence at any man 's succeeding the deprived bishops ; and i think those who have submitted to the government , and sworn allegiance to their present majesties , ought not to be concerned at that : they have offended these men already , and are no better in their opinion than perjured rebels ; and all that they can now gain by humouring them , is to be flattered , and to be laugh'd at . they may for a while give them some good words , as our dissenters did those honest men , who , as they thought , conformed against their consciences ; but they will either secretly abhor them as knaves ; for swearing against their consciences , or despise them as fools for refusing bishopricks . and this is no very good reason for a wise man to court their favour . but on the other hand , what an unpardonable scandal does such a refusal give , both to the enemies , and to the friends of the government , and to the government it self ? whatever may be pretended , the world will not believe that doctor b — refused a bishoprick , but either out of fear or conscience : the first calls in question the stability or continuance of the present government ; the second the authority of it . now this confirms the enemies of the government in their opinion of the unlawfulness to submit to it , and encourages them to attempt its overthrow ; it weakens the hands of friends , and makes them cautious of embarking in a sinking interest , and fills them with new jealousies of the lawfulness of it ; and what just offence this must give to the government , i need not say . the truth is , were i not better perswaded of the good inclinations of their majesties to the church of england , and the general inclination of the nation to support the government , i should dread what might be the fatal consequence of such a miscarriage as this both to church and state. there are always too many , who are glad of such an opportunity to reproach the church , and to possess their majesties with an ill opinion of the clergy , notwithstanding their oaths of allegiance ; and i confess this gives too great an advantage to such misrepresentations , were not the zeal and good affection of wiser men too well known , to be suspected ; and then i hope a single instance of folly can do no great hurt ; for that is the softest name i can give it , on which side soever i view it . this plainly proves , that supposing it lawful to have taken the bishoprick , no other consideration whatsoever can justify the refusal in our circumstances ; and i know not how to suppose that dr. b — could think it unlawful . he submitted to the government , and took the oath of allegiance as early as any man ; and never , that i heard , had the least scruple about it ; and yet this was the time to have been scrupulous , if he would have been so ; for it seems a little of the latest , when he is become a sworn subject to king william and queen mary , to question their authority to make a bishop . and if the former bishops were deprived , and new bishops made , by such an authority as he can swear allegiance to , i cannot understand , that it can be unlawful to accept a bishoprick from the hands of those whom he owns , by his swearing allegiance to them , to have authority to give it ; for this is an authority which belongs to the imperial crown of england . besides this , dr. b — was one of those , who by commission from the dean and chapter of canterbury , hath exercised archi-episcopal authority , during the vacancy of the see , by the deprivation of the a. b. as it is expressed in the commission ; and i take this to be altogether as unlawful ( if either of them were unlawful ) to seise upon the authority of the a. b. upon the account of his deprivation , as to take the character , and exercise the authority of a bishop in the see of a deprived bishop . to receive the consecration on of a bishop , i suppose , is not the thing he accounts unlawful , nor to exercise the authority of a bishop ; and then there is nothing he can think unlawful , but to exercise the authority of a bishop in the see of a deprived bishop ; and then it seems to me as unlawful for a presbyter to do this , as for a bishop to do it , unless a presbyter may do it without the revenues of the bishoprick ; but a bishop must not do it with them ; but this can be no ecclesiastical scruple , as so great a canonist must needs know ; for if the civil power cannot dispose of such temporal matters , it can do nothing . but whatever he thought , his refusing a bishoprick upon great deliberation , after an appearing forwardness to take it , hath tempted people to think , that he judges it unlawful ; and to let him see , how inconsistent this is with his owning the present government , and his exercising the archiepiscopal authority , i shall explain the meaning of it to him , which , i believe he never thought of . if it be unlawful to succeed a deprived bishop , then he is the bishop of the diocess still ; and then the law that deprives him is no law , and consequently the king and parliament , that made that law , no king nor parliament ; and how can this be reconciled with the oath of allegiance , unless the doctor can swear allegiance to him , who is no king , and hath no authority to govern ? if the deprived bishop be the only lawful bishop , then the people and clergy of his diocess are bound to own him and no other ; then all bishops , who own the authority of a new arch-bishop , and live in communion with him , are schismaticks ; and the clergy , who live in communion with schismatical bishops , are schismaticks themselves ; and the whole church of england now established by law is schismatical , and doctor b — himself a schismatick , if he communicate with it . and thus we have no church , or only a schismatical church , as well as no king ; and all that dr. b — has got by refusing a bishoprick , is to prove himself a schismatick , if he live in communion ; or to make a schism , if he separate from it . now will the doctor say this ? or if he dare not say it , will he dare to think it ? and yet if the deprived bishops , though they retain their episcopal character , have no authority or jurisdiction in the church of england , then it must be lawful for other bishops to exercise that authority , which they have lost ; and to succeed in the government of such vacant sees , unless such churches must be deprived of the episcopal authority , while their deprived bishops live . and this brings me to consider the lawfulness of the thing it self , which is so evident when set in a clear light , that it will admit of no dispute with men of sense . in a late letter said to be sent to doctor b — and now printed on the backside of a scandalous rhyming libel upon his sermon of restitution , he is threatned in case he should accept the bishoprick , with the fate of those ecclesiastical schismatical vsurpers , gregory and george of cappadocia , who unjustly invaded the see of alexandria upon the deposing of athanasius the orthodox bishop there . what effect this might have on doctor b — i know not ; but those who have used themselves to good sense , as well as to ancient canons , easily perceive a vast difference between these two cases , as will presently appear . but to represent this matter plainly and easily , i shall briefly state the case , and that i believe will satisfie understanding men , without disputing . 1. first then in a christian nation and government , the church is incorporated into the state , and the soveraign power has a supremacy in all ecclesiastical causes . to deny this , is either popery or fanaticism : it is plain , the reformation of this , church was founded on this principle ; and it is the constant doctrine of our articles , homilies , and canons , and they are our rule considered as members of the church of england . 2. this supremacy , though it do not extend to the administration of holy offices or church censures , yet it reaches the persons and external jurisdiction of bishops , and the other clergy , and the regulating and ordering the externals of religion : as the making and deposing bishops , when there is just cause for it , belongs to the supremacy ; which authority was exercised by the iewish kings over the high priest himself : and to resolve all this into a meer ecclesiastical authority , is to set up a pope , or a presbytery , or a national synod , above the supream power ; and we may as well say at this day , that the supream power has no authority to make a bishop , because by the ancient canons and practice of the church , a bishop ought to be freely and canonically elected by the other bishops of the province , or by the clergy and people of the diocess ; as that it cannot depose a bishop from the exercise of his episcopal authority within their dominions , without a synod or council . 3. when a church is incorporated into the state , an offence against the state is a just reason to depose a bishop from the exercise of his episcopal authority in such a state : especially if such bishop or bishops wholly disown the authority and government of the state , and refuse to submit to it : the denial of the king's supremacy in ecclesiastical causes , was thought a good reason to depose bishops ; and to deny their civil authority , is somewhat more than that . this is as certain and evident , as that the church is and must be incorporated into the state ; for if bishops , who oppose and disown the authority of the state , must not be deposed from the exercise of their authority in such a state , then the church must be divided from the state , and be independent on it ; such men may be bishops of the church who are no subjects of the state ; which is a contradiction to the very notion of a church incorporated with the state. 4. and therefore we must distinguish between an ecclesiastical and canonical deposition of a bishop for heresie , or other ecclesiastical crimes ; and a state deprivation . the first concerns the character , and ecclesiastical communion ; it is the censure of the church , which concerns him as a bishop ; and when it is ratified and confirmed not only by a provincial or national synod , but by a general council , such a deposed bishop is no longer a bishop of the catholick church , and no christian must communicate with him as a bishop : but a state-deprivation does not concern the character ; such a man may be a bishop of the catholick church still , if he do not fall under church-censures , for heresie or other crimes ; but it only concerns the exercise of his episcopal authority in any diocess within the dominions of that state , or enjoying any ecclesiastical benefice in it . and if we will not allow the supreme power of a nation to judge , who shall be bishops in their dominions , and enjoy the revenues of the church , which are the gift of the state ; you leave the supream power no authority or jurisdiction over ecclesiastical persons . 5. and this makes a great difference between succeeding an orthodox bishop uncanonically deposed , and succeeding an orthodox bishop deprived by an act of state. if a bishop be deposed by an heretical synod upon false suggestions , and publickly known to be false and malicious , and be own'd and acquitted by a council of orthodox bishops , it is usurpation to invade his see , a breach of catholick communion , and a schism in the catholick church , which was the case of athanasius and george of cappadocia , who succeeded him : but if a bishop otherwise orthodox , is guilty of such an offence against the state , that he is deprived of the exercise of his episcopal office , neither the faith nor the communion of the church is concerned in it , but only the authority of the state , which obliges both the clergy and the laity in such cases ; and when neither the catholick faith nor catholick communion are concern'd , it can be no ecclesiastical offence to succeed in such a bishoprick , but a due submission and compliance with that authority , to which the church in a christian nation ought to be subject . the reason why these matters are not so acurately distinguished by some men , is because they were not at first distinguished when the empire became christian , and the church was at first incorporated into the state. the zeal of the christian emperors for the service of the church , and that great opinion which at that time they deservedly had of the piety and prudence of the governours of the church , made them leave the government of the church in the same state they found it in , when the church was a distinct society from the state ; and in consequence of this , they reserved all causes relating to bishops to the cognizance of their own synods , without distinguishing between offences against the state , which properly belong to a civil cognizance , and those which were of a pure ecclesiastical nature . this soon created great trouble to princes , and by degrees grew into the omnipotent power of the bishop of rome , which domineered over emperors themselves , and set the church above the state. the reformation of our church began with the reformation of this abuse and church-usurpation , and restored our princes to that supremacy , which both the laws of god , and the reason and nature of sovereign power gives them over all persons , in all causes , as well ecclesiastical as civil : and now an offence against the state , is as just a reason for a state-deprivation by the sole authority of the state , without the authority of synods or councils ; as heresie and schism , and other crimes are of ecclesiastical censures . this authority , as i observed before , the jewish kings exercised even over their high-priests , as solomon deposed abiathar for following adonijah to make him king , and placed zadock in his stead ; which was a pure state-quarrel , and done by his sole authority , without consulting the sanhedrim in it . thus when iudea was under the government of the romans , they changed the high-priests every year ; tho by the institution of god it was for life ; and this in our saviour's days , who never reproved them for it , nor separated himself or his disciples from the communion of such schismatical vsurping high-priests , who succeeded in the places of their living predecessors without a canonical deposition . the grand signior at this day makes and unmakes the patriarch of constantinople at pleasure , and no man blames the patriarch who succeeds . dr. sherlock in his preface to the case of allegiance , took notice of this as matter of fact , without enquiring into the reasons . his answerer had nothing to return to it , but by denying the legal authority of this government ; which is just nothing to the purpose : for if a legal government , by their authority and supremacy , can depose bishops , and promote new ones ; then all their arguments against succeeding in the sees of such bishops as are not canonically deposed by an ecclesiastical authority , are utterly lost ; and besides that , if this answer be good , no man ought to question these new promotions , who owns the authority of the present government . the truth is , the same objections which are now made against the promotion of these new bishops , are equally strong , and as eagerly urg'd at this day by the papists against our first reformers : for they were promoted to bishopricks , while the former popish bishops were living , and not canonically deposed by any act of the church , but only by the authority of the state ; and there denying the supremacy of the king , was one , and none of the least of those doctrines , which they were deposed for ; and yet that only rejects the king's ecclesiastical authority ; and therefore as it is only an offence against the state , so it is a much less offence , than utterly to renounce their authority in civil and ecclesiastical causes , as our deprived bishops now do . i shall not need to enlarge on these things , which are plain and obvious at the first proposal : if you have any opportunity of seeing dr. b — , desire him to consider again of it ; and though he may repent too late to do himself any good ; yet if he discover his mistake , common justice to the government , under whose protection he lives , and to their majesties , to whom he has sworn allegiance , and who had placed such a mark of favour and honour on him , had he known how to value it , obliges him publickly to own his mistake , which is the only recompence he can now make . i am sir , your humble servant . finis . books lately printed for richard chiswell . a new history of the succession of the crown of england , and more particularly from the time of king egbert , till king henry the viii . collected from those historians who wrote of their own times . a discourse concerning the unreasonableness of a new separation on account of the oaths ; with an answer to the history of passive obedience , so far as relates to them. a vindication of the said discourse , concerning the unreasonableness of a new separation , from the exceptions made against it , in a tract called , a brief answer to the said discourse , &c. an account of the ceremony of investing his electoral highness of brandenburgh with the order of the garrer at berlin , iune 6. 1690. by iames iohnston esq and gregory king esq his majesties commissioners . dr. freeman's sermon at the assizes at northampton , before the lord chief justice pollexfen , august 26. 1690. — his thanksgiving sermon before he house of commons , november 5. 1690. dr. tenison's sermon before the queen , concerning the wandring of the mind in god's service , feb. 15. 1690. — his sermon before the queen , of the folly of atheism , feb. 22. 1690. dr. fowler 's sermon before the queen , march 22. 1690. the bishop of sarum's sermon , at the funeral of the lady brook , feb. 19. 1690. — his fast sermon before the king and queen , april 29. 1691. mr. fleetwood's sermon at christ church on st. stephen's day . a true and impartial history of the most material occurrences in the kingdom of ireland during the two last years . with the present state of both armies . published to prevent mistakes , and to give the world a prospect of the future success of their majesties arms in that nation . written by an eye-witness to the most remarkable passages . a full and impartial account of the secret consults , negotiations , stratagems , and intregues of the romish party in ireland , from 1660. to 1889. for the settlement of popery in that kingdom . a ground plot of the strong fort of charlemont in ireland , with the town , river , marshes , boggs , and places adjacent . drawn by captain hobson , price 6 pence . an exact ground plot of london-derry , with the river , woods , ways and places adjacent , by the same captain hobson , price 6 d. there is preparing , and will shortly be published , a prospect of limerick , bearing due west , exactly shewing the approaches of the english army , with the batteries and breach . anglia sacra : sive collectio historiarum , partim antiquitus , partem recenter scriptarum de archiepiscopis & episcopis angliae à prima fidei christianae susceptione ad ann. 1540. nunc primum in lucem editum . pars prima de archiepiscopis & episcopis ecclesiarum cathedralium quas monachi possederunt . opera henrici whartoni . this book will be ready for publication by the fourth of iune next : subscriptions will be taken till the first of iuly . proposals for the same may be had of richard chiswell , and most other booksellers in london and the country . a sermon preached on the fast-day, november 13, 1678, at st. margarets westminster, before the honourable house of commons by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1678 approx. 86 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 29 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61609 wing s5649 estc r8213 13729924 ocm 13729924 101602 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61609) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101602) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 852:5) a sermon preached on the fast-day, november 13, 1678, at st. margarets westminster, before the honourable house of commons by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [4], 52 p. printed by margaret white for henry mortlock ..., london : 1678. running title: a fast-sermon preached nov. 13, before the house of commons. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng bible. -o.t. -samuel, 1st, xii, 24-25 -sermons. fast-day sermons. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-04 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion jovis 14. die novembris , 1678. ordered , that the thanks of this house be returned to dr. stillingfleet , dean of st. pauls , for his sermon yesterday preached before this house at st. margarets westminster : and that he be desired to print his sermon . and coll. titus is desired to give him the thanks of the house , and to acquaint him with the desire of this house to print his sermon . will goldesbrough , cler. dom. com. a sermon preached on the fast-day november 13. 1678. at s t margarets westminster before the honourable house of commons by edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean● st. paul's , and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . london , printed by margaret white , for henry mortlock at the ph●●● st. paul's church-yard , and at the white hart in westminster hall. 1678. 1 sam 12. 24 , 25. only fear the lord , and serve him in truth with all your heart : for consider how great things he hath done for you . but if ye shall still do wickedly , ye shall be consumed both ye and your king. it hath been well observed by some , that those who look at a distance upon humane asfairs are apt to think that the good or bad success of them depends wholly upon the wisdom and conduct of those who manage them ; others who look nearer into them and discern the many intervening and unforeseen accidents which often alter and disappoint the counsels of men , are ready to attribute the events of things rather to chance than wisdom : but those who have made the deepest search and the strictest enquiry , have most firmly believed a divine providence which over-rules all the counsels and affairs of men ; and sometimes blasts the most probable designs , sometimes prospers the most unlikely attempts , to let us see that though there be many devices in mens hearts , yet the counsel of the lord that sh●●l stand . we live in an age not over prone to admire and take notice of any remarkable instances of divine providence either in our preservation from dangers or deliverances out of them ; for so great is the security of some men that they are unwilling to apprehend any danger till they fall into it , and if they escape will hardly believe they were ever in it ; and such is the concernment of others to baffle all evidences of truth wherein their own guilt is involved , that they all agree in robbing god of the honour of his mercy , and our selves of the comfort of his protection . but blessed be that god who hath hitherto defeated all the secret , and subtile , and cruel designs of his and our churches enemies ; and hath given us the liberty and opportunity of this day to meet together to implore the continuance of his favour and mercy towards us in the preservation of his majesties person ; for in praying for him we pray for our selves , since our own welfare doth so much depend upon his. when we look back upon the history of this church ever since the reformation of it , we may observe such a wonderful series of divine providence going along with it , that we have the less reason to be discouraged with present difficulties or disheartned with the fears of future dangers . what struglings did it meet with in the birth ? and although it were therein like jacob who took hold of the heel of his brother and at last obtained the blessing ; yet the romish party got the start like esau , and came forth all red and hairy , full of blood and cruelty ; and the old dragon cast out of his mouth a flood of fire to destroy our church before it could attain to its full growth and maturity . but after it not only survived these flames , but enjoyed a firm establishment under the care and conduct of a wise and cautious government , what restless endeavours , what secret plots , what horrid conspiracies , what foreign attempts , what domestick treasons were carried on during the reign of queen elizabeth ? and yet , which is very considerable , while she openly and heartily owned the protestant cause , it pleased god to deliver her out of all her dangers , and to give her a long and a prosperous reign , when two of her neighbour princes were assasinated for not being zealous enough in the popish cause though they professed to own and maintain it . and it is but a very little time since you met together in this place to celebrate the memory of a mighty deliverance which both king and kingdom , and together with them our church received from that never to be forgotten conspiracy of the gunpowder treason in her successors reign . may we not then take up st. pauls argument , and say , who hath delivered us from so great death , and doth deliver , in whom we trust that he will yet deliver us ? especially if we do not fail in the performance of that duty which god expects from us in order to our own preservation , which is delivered by samuel to the people of israel , in the words of the text , only fear the lord and serve him in truth with all your heart , for consider how great things he hath done for you . but if they would not hearken to this wise counsel , but go on in their sins , he tells them what the fatal consequence would be , not to themselves only , but to their king too , but if ye shall still do wickedly , ye shall be destroyed both ye and your king. which advice will appear to deserve our serious consideration this day , if we either regard ( 1. ) the person who gave it . ( 2. ) the occasion of giving it . ( 3. ) the matter contained in it . 1. the person who gave this counsel to the people , samuel ; a person of great wisdom , and long experience in government ; and therefore very able to judge concerning the proper causes of a nations prosperity and ruine . the people had enjoyed a long and uninterrupted tranquillity while they followed his directions . they had before been miserably harassed by the inroads of the philistins , discomfited in several battels , and at last the ark of god it self taken by their enemies and their leaders destroyed , at which sad news eli who had judged israel forty years fell backwards and so ended his dayes : while they were under the sense of their present miseries , samuel puts them into the most hopeful way for their deliverance , which was by a reformation of religion among them , by returning to the lord with all their hearts , and putting away their strange gods , and preparing their hearts unto the lord and serving him only ; and then , saith he , he will deliver you out of the hands of the philistins . the miseries they felt and the dangers they feared made them own the true religion with more than usual courage : then the children of israel did put away baalim and astaroth , and served the lord only . but besides this , samuel appoints a publick and solemn fast of all israel at mizpeh ; and samuel said , gather all israel to mizpeh , and i will pray for you unto the lord. and they gathered together to mizpeh and drew water and poured it out before the lord , and fasted on that day , and said there we have sinned against the lord. mizpeh , a city in the confines of judah and benjamin , as masius and others observe , was the place where the states of israel were wont to be assembled together upon any great and important occasion ; where there was a place on purpose for them to meet in , and an altar , and house of prayer for the publick worship of god : and therefore it is said , judg. 20. 1. the children of israel gathered together from one end of the land to the other , unto the lord in mizpeh ; and there the chief of all the tribes of israel presented themselves in the assembly of the people of god. and therefore samuel chooseth this as the fittest place for them to fast and pray , and confess their sins in , and to implore the mercy of god to the nation . we do not read in scripture of any more publick and solemn fast of the people of israel kept with greater signs of true humiliation than this at mizpeh was ; for the pouring out of water was used among them either to represent their own desperate condition without gods help , that they were as water spilt upon the ground ; or the greatness of their sorrow for their sins , and the floods of tears , which they shed for them . and to let mankind see what influence a general and serious fasting and humiliation hath upon the welfare of a nation , we find from the day of this fast at mizpeh the affairs of israel began to turn for the better . for the philistines thought they had an advantage against the israelites by this general meeting , and hoped to surprize them while they kept their fast in mizpeh ; and made such an incursion upon them , as put them into a great consternation ; and they came trembling to samuel , praying him that he would not cease to cry unto the lord their god for them , that he would save them out of the hand of the philistins . samuel prays , the lord hears , israel marches out of mizpeh , pursues the philistins and smites them ; and samuel sets up a stone of remembrance , and calls it eben-ezer , saying hitherto hath the lord helped us . yea from hence forward did god help them , for it follows , so the philistines were subdued , and they came no more into the coast of israel ; and the hand of the lord was against the philistins all the dayes of samuel . never any people had greater reason to be pleased with a governour than they had with samuel ; who managed their affairs with so much wisdom and piety , with so much faithfulness and integrity , with so much courage and constancy , with so much care and industry , with so much success and prosperity . but people are apt to surfeit upon too much ease and plenty , and to grow wanton with abundance of peace ; they began to be weary of samuels government , and secretly to wish for a change . and when mens discontents grow ripe , there seldom wants a plausible occasion to vent them : samuel was grown old and could not go about from year to year in circuit to bethel , and gilgal , and mizpeh , as he was wont to do , but he fixed at his house in ramah , and placed his sons in beersheba ; these not following their fathers steps , were soon . accused of male-administration ; and nothing would now satisfie the discontented elders of israel , but samuel himself must be discharged of his government ; for they gathered themselves together and came to samuel in ramah ; and said to him , behold thou art old , and thy sons walk not in thy wayes ; this was their pretence , but their design was to alter the government . their plenty and prosperity had made them fond of the pomp and grandeur of their neighbour nations , and whatever it cost them , they were resolved to have a king to judge them like all the nations . samuel tells them , what inconveniencies that more absolute form of government of the neighbour nations would bring among them , as josephus shews ; all which signified nothing to them ; for it is said , nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of samuel and said , nay , but we will have a king over us , that we also may be like all the nations . it was not the monarchical way of government that was so displeasing to god or samuel ; for their government was of that form already , god himself being their king , and appointing such vicegerents as he thought fit to manage their affairs under him . so god answered samuel , they have not rejected thee , but they have rejected me , that i should not reign over them . not , as though kingly government were inconsistent with gods sovereignty over his people ; for by him kings reign ; and they are his ministers to us for good , and that government is the most agreeable to his own ; and to the primitive institution of government among men . but wherein then lay this great sin of the israelites in asking a king , when god himself had provided by his law that they should have a king when they were setled in their own land ? and yet we find the israelites at last confess , we have added unto all our sins this evil to ask us a king. their great fault was , that they were so impetuous and violent in their desires , that they would not wait for samuels decease whom god had raised up among them , and whose government had been so great a blessing to them ; and therefore god looked on it as a rejecting him more than samuel , since he had appointed him ; and they had no reason to lay him aside for his sons faults , but they made use of that only as a colour for their own self-willed humour and affectation of being like to other nations . however god commands samuel to yield to them ; and he appoints another meeting at mizpeh for this purpose ; where the person was chosen by lot ; and at his solemn inauguration at gilgal , samuel makes that speech unto all israel contained in this 12th chapter ; where of the words of the text are the conclusion ; which make these words the more considerable , 2. in regard of the occasion of them ; being delivered by samuel at so great a solemnity in which he delivers up the government into the hands of their king , ( 1. ) with a great protestation of his own integrity , with an appeal to their own consciences concerning it , and they freely give a large testimony of it . ( 2 ) he upbraids them with their ingratitude towards god time after time ; that they were never contented or pleased with his laws or the governours he raised up amongst them ; and now at last upon a sudden fright concerning nahash the king of ammon , they were resolved they would have a king ; and behold , saith he , the lord hath set a king over you . ( 3. ) notwithstanding their sin in so unseasonable a demand , yet he tells them they might be happy under his government if they did sincerely keep to their established religion and obey the laws of god. this he delivers , ( 1. ) more generally , vers . 14 , 15. if ye will fear the lord and serve him , and obey his voice , and not rebel against the commandment of the lord , then shall both ye and also the king that reigneth over you , continue following the lord your god ; i. e. god will protect and defend you . but if you will not obey the voyce of the lord , but rebel against the commandment of the lord , then shall the hand of the lord be against you , as it was against your fathers . but this being a matter of the greatest consequence to them , whereon the welfare of the nation did depend , he delivers it ( 2. ) more emphatically ; after the thunder and rain had affrightned and softned their hearts ; and they came praying to samuel and confessing their sin to him ; then he counsels them not to fear , if they did not forsake god ; and for his part , however they had disobliged him , he would not only continue to pray for them , but give them the best advice and directions he could : but i will teach you the good and the right way . and then these words immediately follow , only fear the lord and serve him in truth with all your heart , &c. 3. these words are most considerable for the matter contained in them ; which lies in these three particulars , ( 1. ) the influence which continuance in sin hath upon a kingdoms ruine : but if ye shall still do wickedly , ye shall be consumed , both ye and your king. ( 2. ) the best means for the welfare and preservation of it , viz maintaining and practising the true religion ; only fear the lord and serve him in truth with all your heart . ( 3. ) the great argument and encouragement here given for the doing it ; for consider how great things he hath done for you . the first of these will be the main subject of my present discourse , viz. the influence which continuance in sin hath upon a kingdoms ruine , if we believe moses and the prophets , we cannot question the truth of this concerning the people of israel ; for this is the main scope and design of their doctrine . moses assured them , that all the strength , and force , and combination of their enemies should do them no prejudice as long as they obeyed the laws of god ; but if they would not do his commandments , but despise his statutes and abhor his judgements , all the care and policy they could use would not be able to keep off the most dismal judgements which ever befel a nation , i will even appoint over you terror , consumption and the burning ague ; that shall consume the eyes and cause sorrow of heart ; and ye shall sow your seed in vain , for your enemies shall eat it . and i will set my face against you , and you shall be slain before your enemies : they that hate you shall reign over you , and ye shall flee when none pursueth you . and if you will not for all this hearken unto me , then will i punish you seven times more for your sins , so he proceeds to the end of the chapter , still rising higher and higher according to the greatness of their provocations . and to the same purpose he speaks throughout deut. 28. promising great blessings to their nation upon obedience , and horrible curses , such as would make ones ears tingle to hear them , upon their refractoriness and disobedience , the lord shall send thee cursing , vexation and rebuke , in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do ; until thou be destroyed , and untill thou perish quickly , because of the wickedness of thy doings , whereby thou hast forsaken me . to the same purpose all the prophets speak , only applying this general doctrine to the circumstances of their own times . if ye be willing and obedient , saith isaiah , ye shall eat the good of the land ; but if ye refuse and rebel , ye shall be destroyed with the sword , the mouth of the lord hath spoken it . when the prophet jeremiah saw dreadful calamities coming upon his people , he cries out , thy way and thy doings have procured these things unto thee , this is thy wickedness because it is bitter , because it reacheth unto thine heart . ezekiel tells them there was no hope to escape being destroyed , but by speedy and sincere repentance , repent and turn your selves from all your transgressions , so iniquity shall not be your ruine . but here a material question may be asked , whether this connexion between their doing wickedly and being consumed were not by vertue of that political covenant between god and the people of israel which was peculiar to themselves ? and how far it may be just and reasonable to argue concerning the case of other nations , with whom god hath entred into no such covenant , as he did with them ? to make this clear , and to bring it nearer to our own case , i shall proceed in this method . 1. to shew , that god doth exercise a particular providence with respect to the state and condition of kingdoms and nations . 2. that according to the usual method of providence their condition is better or worse as the people are . 3. that there are some circumstances of sinning , which do very much portend and hasten a peoples ruine . 1. that god doth exercise a particular providence with a respect to the state and condition of nations , i. e. as they are united into several and distinct bodies , which are capable as such of being happy or miserable . for since mankinds entring into society is both necessary and advantageous to them ; and god doth not barely permit and approve , but dispose and incline men to it ; and hath given them laws to govern themselves by , with respect to society ; it is but reasonable to suppose that god should call men to an account in that capacity ; and to distribute rewards and punishments according to the nature of their actions : which must either be done in this world , or it cannot be done at all ; for all those bonds are dissolved by death , and men shall not answer for their sins by kingdoms and nations in another world , but every man shall give account of himself unto god. either therefore those societies as such shall go wholly unpunished , or they must suffer according to them in this world ; and therefore here the case is very different from that of particular persons . we say , and with a great deal of reason , that it is no disparagement to the justice of gods providence for good men to suffer , or for wicked men to escape punishment in this life , because the great day of recompence is to come , wherein there will be a revelation of the righteous judgement of god : but that will not hold as to nations , who shall not suffer in communities then as they have sinned here : and therefore it is more reasonable to suppose the rewards and punishments of such shall be in this life according to the measure and proportion of their sins . and of this we have suffient evidence in scripture , upon these accounts . ( 1. ) because it charges guilt upon nations as well as upon particular persons . as in the case of uncertain murder , if one be found slain in the land , which the lord thy god giveth thee to possess it , lying in the field , and it be not known who hath slain him : the elders of the next city were not only to protest their own innocency ; but to use this prayer , be merciful o lord , unto thy people israel , whom thou hast redeemed , and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of israels charge . and the blood shall be forgiven them , so shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you . here we see the guilt of innocent blood goes farther than the bare shedders of it , it lyes upon the nation till it be expiated ; and the jews say , the soul of a person innocently murdered hovers up and down the earth crying for vengeance , till the guilty persons be found out and punished , and then it ascends above to its place of rest . the guilt of innocent blood is indeed a crying sin ; it cryes loud unto heaven for vengeance , and nothing stops its voice but the execution of it . and where that is not done , it leaves a guilt upon the land ; for god himself hath said it , blood defileth the land ; and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein , but by the blood of him that shed it . this sin we see , is of such a malignant nature that it infects the land where it is committed , and lyes upon it till it be expiated . but there are other sins which contract a national guilt , when the authority of a nation , either gives too much countenance and encouragement to the practice of them , or does not take that care it ought to do to suppress and punish them . when men daily and insolently break the laws of god , and bid as it were defiance both to them and to the laws of men ; when wickedness spreads like a leprosie , and infects the whole body ; when vices become so notorious that they are a reproach and a by-word to neighbour nations ; these are the signs and tokens of national guilt . ( 2. ) because the scripture tells us of a certain measure to which the sins of a nation do rise before they are ripe for punishment . this was the reason given why abrahams children must stay to the fourth generation before they come to the possession of the promised land , for the iniquity of the amorites is not yet full . where it is plain that god doth consider nations as distinct bodies , the measure of whose sins is taken after another manner than that of particular persons ; but when once that measure is compleated , ruine and destruction is unavoidable ; or at least , some signal and extraordinary judgements falling upon them as the punishment of their iniquities . men may ask why the canaanites in joshua's time were dealt with so severely , that nothing but utter extirpation would satisfie the justice of god against them ? but god prevents that objection , by letting abraham know how much patience and long-suffering he used towards them ; waiting till the fourth generation ; and when their iniquities still increased , and every age added to the guilt of the foregoing , the burden grew too heavy for them to bear it any longer , and therefore they must sink under the weight of it . so our saviour saith to the jews in his time , fill ye up then the measure of your fathers . not as though god did punish any age beyond the desert of its own sins ; but when the measure of their sins is filled up , god doth no longer forbear to punish them ; and that seldom happens , but when the sins of that time do exceed those of the foregoing generations ; as it was in the case of the jews when their city and temple were destroyed . ( 3. ) because it attributes the great revolutions of government to a particular providence of god , god is the judge , or the supreme arbitratour of the affairs of the world , he pulleth down one and setteth up another . which holds with respect to nations as well as particular persons . which doth not found any right of dominion , ( as some fancied till the argument from providence was returned with greater force upon themselves ) but it shews that when god pleases to makes use of persons or nations as the scourges in his hand to punish a people with , he gives them success above their hopes or expectations , but that success gives them no right . and of this the psalmist speaks when he adds , for in the hand of the lord there is a cup and the wine is red ; it is full of mixture , and he poureth out of the same ; but the dregs thereof all the wicked of the earth shall wring them out and drink them . it is called by isaiah , the cup of fury , and the cup of trembling , which god gives to nations destined to ruine : which makes them like people intoxicated and deprived of that apprehension of danger , of that judgement and consideration to prevent it , which at other times they have . when a nation is near some dreadful calamity , as a just punishment of its sins , god takes away the wisdom of the wise , and the understanding of the prudent , and the resolution of the men of courage , that they all stand amazed and confounded , not knowing how to give or take advice ; but they are full of fears , and rather apt to quarrel with one another than to consult the general good . this was just the state of egypt when god did purpose to execute his justice upon it . ( 1. ) first , their courage failed them , and the heart of egypt shall melt in the midst of it ; and the spirit of egypt shall fail in the midst thereof . in that day shall egypt be like unto women ; and it shall be afraid and fear , because of the shaking of the hand of the lord of hosts , which he shaketh over it . it is a very ill sign when men want the spirit and vigour they were wont to have ; when they are daunted at the apprehension of every danger , and rather meanly seek to save themselves by base arts and sordid compliances , than to promote the common welfare . it is folly and stupidity not to apprehend danger when there is cause for it , and to take the best care to prevent it ; but it is a fatal symptom upon a nation when their hearts fail them for fear , that they dare not do the duty which they owe to god , to their king , and to their countrey . god forbid that any should exceed the bounds of their duty to prevent their fears , but when men want resolution to do that , they are in a lost condition . ( 2 ) their counsels were divided and infatuated : and i will set the egyptians against the egyptians . the princes of zoan are fools , the counsel of the wise counsellors of pharaoh is become bruitish ; they have also seduced egypt , even they that are the stay of the tribes thereof . the lord hath mingled a perverse spirit in the midst thereof , and they have caused egypt to err in every work thereof , as a reeling man staggereth in his vomit , i. e. they know not what to fix upon , all their counsels being so uncertain , and the best taking no effect . but after all their consultations , they advance not one step forward , but fall back just to the same case they were in before ; every one blaming another for want of success in their designs . this is the deplorable state of a people when ruine and desolation is near them . but on the other side , when god raises up a nation to be a scourge to other nations , he inspires them with a new spirit and courage , unites their counsels , removes their difficulties or carries them easily through them , and by a concurrence of some happy circumstances gives them strange success beyond all their hopes and expectations . look over all the mighty revolutions which have hapned in the kingdoms and empires of the world , and the more ye search and consider and compare things together , the greater truth you will find in this observation . when god designed to punish the eastern nations for their transgressions , then the babylonian monarchy rose so fast and spread so far , that nothing was able to stand before it . the combinations of the kings of judah , and edom , and moab , and syre , and sidon , and egypt were but like the withes which the philistins bound sampson with , which he brake in sunder as a thred of tow is broken when it toucheth the fire . judah drinks first of the cup , and she trembles and falls , and is carried into captivity ; then follow , as god had foretold by his prophets , the desolations of tyre , of egypt , of put and lud , i. e. of libya and aethiopia ; and at last the cup passes round , and ninivehs turn comes to drink deep of this cup of fury , and she was laid waste for returning to her sins after repentance . and when the sins of babylon called for vengeance , god raised up cyrus , and called him by his name , long before he was born , and brought the fierce nations of the east to submit themselves to him : and when babylon was most secure , full of wine and jollity at an anniversary feast , he led cyrus into the city by a way they dreamed not of , and all the plagues which the prophets had foretold , came upon that people when they least expected them . it was not the courage and spirit of alexander with his macedonian army could have made such sudden and easie conquests of the east ; if god by his providence had not strangely made way for his success by infatuating the counsels of darius , so as to give him those advantages against himself he could never have hoped for . there is no such mighty difference in the wits and contrivances of men ; no such great advantages in military power and conduct ; no such wonderful disproportion in the courage , or wisdom , or educations of men ; but when god hath pleased to let loose the most rude , and barbarous , and unexperienced nations in matters of war , upon the most flourishing kingdoms , the most disciplin'd armies , the most fortified cities , they have in spite of all opposition over-run , overcome , and overthrown them . who could have thought that the cowardly goths ( as they were then esteemed ) the barbarous vandals , and the despicable hunns , could have made such havock and devastations in the roman empire , that in fifty years time , more of it was lost and destroyed by their means , than had been gained in a thousand ? it would make ones heart bleed to read the miseries which all the parts of the roman empire suffered , where these barbarians prevailed ; and yet they were despised and reproached by the grave and wise romans at the same time when they were conquered and destroyed by them ; as salvian who lived then , at large relates . but the best and wisest men could not but see an extraordinary hand of god going along with them ; and one of their greatest generals found himself carryed on by such a mighty impulse , and met with such an unaccountable success in all his undertakings , that he called himself flagellum dei , the scourge in gods hand to chastise the wickedness and follies of men that called themselves christians , and did not live like such . machiavel himself takes notice of so strange a difference in the conduct and success of the romans at different times , that he saith , they could hardly be imagined to be the same people ; and after all his attempts to find out other causes , he at last is forced to conclude that there is a superiour cause to the counsels of men which governs the affairs of mankind , which he calls fate , and we much better , the providence of god. some learned physicians are of opinion that when diseases are not curable by common remedies , there is in them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , something divine , and therefore in such cases divine remedies are the most proper and effectual : thus in the alterations of states and kingdoms , there is often a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a more than ordinary hand of god , in which cases the best means we can use to prevent danger is by fasting and prayer , by true repentance and speedy reformation of our evil wayes . ( 4. ) because the scripture still leaves hopes of mercy to a people where they have a heart to repent . i do not find by any declaration of gods will in scripture , that he hath made any such peremptory decree concerning the ruine of a nation , but upon their repentance there is a way left to escape it ; but rather the contrary in those words of jeremiah , at what instant i shall speak concerning a nation , and concerning a kingdom , to pluck up and to pull down and to destroy it : if that nation against whom i have pronounced , turn from their evil , i will repent of the evil which i thought to do unto them . and therefore all threatnings of that kind are conditional as this in the text is , but if ye shall still do wickedly : which implyes that if they did cease to do so , they might be preserved , both they and their king. and where repentance hath intervened between the threatning and execution of judgement , god hath shewed wonderful kindness either in stopping , removing , or deferring the severity of judgements . 1. in stopping his hand when it hath been lifted up , and just ready to strike . we can desire no clearer instance in that case than that of niniveh ; a vast city ( or rather a countrey inclosed in walls ) full of all the delights of asia , and of the sins which usually attend them ; to this city god sends a prophet to let them know how near they were to destruction , that they had but forty dayes time to turn themselves in . this was a strange and unexpected alarm to them , given by a strange prophet after a peremptory manner to a people unacquainted with such messages . how many objections would the infidels and scepticks of our age have made against such a message as this ? they would rather have concluded the prophet mad , than have been perswaded to repent by him . yet so great was the apprehension they had of the just desert of their sins , that the people of nineveh believed god and proclaimed a fast , and put on sackcloth , from the greatest of them even to the least : and they cryed mightily to god , and turned from their evil wayes : and what then ? would god disparage the reputation of his prophet , and alter the sentence he had sent him so far to denounce against them ? what hopes had he given them of mercy if they repented ? it appears they had nothing but general presumptions , who can tell , if god will turn and repent , and turn away from his fierce anger that we perish not ? yet sincere repentance being performed upon no greater assurance than this , prevailed so with god , that he repented of the evil that he said he would do unto them , and he did it not . o the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and goodness of god! his wisdom in leading them to repentance ; his goodness in for bearing to punish after so great provocations . what encouragement doth god hereby give to others to repent , when niniveh was rescued from the very brink of destruction by it ? 2. in removing his hand when it hath struck . when davids vanity transported him so far , that without any necessity he would know the number of his people ; his heart did misgive him as soon as he had done it , and he confessed he had sinned greatly in it ; notwithstanding this god sends a plague among the people , which touched david to the quick , as a tender father is most sensibly punished in the loss of his children ; and then he cryed , lo i have sinned , and i have done wickedly ; but these sheep what have they done ? and when the angel had stretched out his hand upon jerusalem to destroy it , the lord repented him of the evil , and said to the angel it is enough , stay now thy hand . behold therefore the goodness and severity of god ; on them which fell severity ; but towards jerusalem goodness . his severity was intended to make people avoid a vain confidence in their own strength and numbers ; his goodness to let them see how ready he is to draw back his hand when men truly repent . 3. in putting by the stroke for the present , or deferring the execution of his wrath . no king of israel provoked god more than ahab ; for it is said of him , that he did evil in the sight of the lord above all that were before him ; and that he sold himself to work wickedness in the sight of the lord. at last the prophet elijah meets him in naboths vineyard which he had just taken possession of by fraud and violence ; when ahab saw such an unwelcome guest in that place , his guilt made him ready to start back , and to say , hast thou found me , o mine enemy ? the prophet having this fair opportunity followed the blow he had given him so home , that ahab was not able to stand before him : for it is said , that when ahab heard the terrible judgements god denounced against him for his sins , he rent his clothes , and put sackcloth upon his flesh and fasted , and in good earnest humbled himself before god ; for so god himself owns that he did . i do not say he continued good after this ; but he now heartily repented for the time ; and for the time of repentance god inlarged his time of forbearance . because he humbleth himself before me , i will not bring the evil in his days . even a short repentance , when sincere , gains time , by a reprieve from punishment . when the sins of a nation are grown to a great height , and become ripe for vengeance , the best princes can obtain no more than not seeing the evil in their own days , as in the case of josiah who was an excellent prince , and a true lover of god and his law , yet the people continued so hardned in their sins , though under some shew of reformation ; that the prophetess told him ; behold i will bring evil upon this place , and upon the inhabitants thereof , &c. but because his heart was tender , and he humbled himself before the lord , he obtained that favour , that his eyes should not see the evil which he would bring upon them . if the people had been as good as josiah was , there is no question , but even then god would have repented of the evil ; but where there was such an obstinate impenitency , that neither gods laws , nor the prophets threatnings , nor the princes example could prevail upon them ; all that his humiliation could obtain , was only a putting it off for his own time ; and we have reason to think that their sins did hasten his end too ; as sometimes the sins of a people make the best of princes to be taken away from them : and when the ten tribes were carried captive , their king hoshea is said , not to have done evil as the kings of israel that were before him . and to judah after josias his death , god punctually made good this threatning in the text , but if ye shall still do wickedly , ye shall be consumed both ye and your king. ii. the second particular is , that according to the usual method of providence the state or condition of a people is better or worse according to the general nature of their actions . if they be good and vertuous , careful to please god , just , sober , chast , merciful , diligent observers of gods laws , and their own , and dealing with other nations according to the laws of nations , they will live in a much more flourishing and happy condition ; than a nation can do where atheism , profaneness , and all sorts of wickedness abound : which i shall prove two ways , ( 1. ) absolutely , from the tendency of religion and vertue to promote the honour , the peace , the courage and safety of a people . ( 2. ) comparatively , that nations are more or less happy according to their vertues and vices . ( 1. ) absolutely , and that will appear , ( 1. ) from the tendency of true goodness and piety to promote a nations honour and interest abroad . and no man is ignorant how much reputation brings of real advantage to a nation ; and that a people despised are next to a people enslaved ; and that it is impossible to hold up honour and esteem in the world , where the reputation of vertue is lost . ( 2. ) from its tendency to maintain peace and tranquillity at home ; preventing private quarrels , by justice , and honesty , and temperance , and chastity ; and publick disturbances by avoiding idleness , and debauchery , and bad principles , which are the great nurseries of rebellion ; and teaching men quietness , patience , due government of themselves , and obedience not only for wrath , but also for conscience sake . whereas loose principles , and bad practises , and extravagant desires naturally dispose men to endeavour changes and alterations , in hopes of bettering themselves by them ; and the prevalency of vice doth unhinge government , and weaken the strength and sinews of it . ( 3. ) from the keeping up the spirits , and securing the safety of men . a good conscience makes a man dare to do his duty ; but the sinners in zion are afraid , fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites . these were men , saith grotius , who carried a fair shew for the present , but were inwardly prepared , if the king of babylon got the better , to be of his religion , whatever it was . such men who are false to god , and really of no religion at all , are full of thoughts and fears , not knowing what may happen ; they dare not own what they would be , for fear it ruine them at present ; and they dare not appear too much for what they seem to own , for fear of what may come hereafter . if the lord be god , saith elijah , then follow him ; but if baal , then follow him : no , say such men , if they durst speak their thoughts , we desire to be excused at present , we find there is a contest between them , and we do not yet know which will get the better , when we see that , you shall know our minds . as asinius pollio told augustus in his wars with antony he was resolved to be praeda victoris , he would be of the conquerors side . but men that are sincere in any religion , do hate and abhor such hypocritical dissemblers , and despise and spue them out for their nauseous lukewarmness ; and as men indeed of no religion or conscience , but for what serves to their present ends . but observe in what a lofty strain the prophet sets forth the security and confidence which follows integrity . he that walketh righteously and speaketh uprightly , he that despiseth the gain of oppressions , that shaketh his hands from holding bribes , that stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood , and stoppeth his eyes from seeing evil . he shall dwell on high , his place of defence shall be the munition of rocks , bread shall be given him , his waters shall be sure . these were very critical and doubtful times which the prophet speaks of , and many were secretly for complying with the king of assyria , as believing it as impossible to withstand his force , as to dwell with everlasting burnings ; the prophet is so far from granting this , that he tells them all their security lay in being just and honest , and doing their duty , and then they would be as safe , as if they had constant provision among the most inaccessible rocks . it is observable concerning the israelites , that when they went about to secure themselves by subtile devices and contrivances of their own , making leagues and confederacies with the king of egypt and other neighbour princes , so often they were foiled , and baffled , and overcome by their enemies ; but when they put their trust in god , and committed themselves to his protection , he preserved and delivered them from the greatest dangers . i will not deny that there was something peculiar in their case , having the prophets directions ; and to trust mans wisdom against gods was madness and folly in them . but setting that aside , as there is no security like to gods protection , so there is no reason to think that will be wanting to them who do their duty sincerely and put their trust in him . ( 2. ) comparatively ; if we do compare several nations together , we shall find those to flourish most , and to be the most happy where men do most fear god and work righteousness ; where piety and vertue have the greatest countenance and incouragement ; and where vice and wickedness are the most discouraged and punished . this may seem a paradox at first hearing to those who consider by what ways of fraud and violence , of injustice and cruelty , of rapine and oppression , the great and mighty empires of the world have been raised and maintained ; and how little regard is shewed to any rules of honesty , justice , or the laws of nations in those kingdoms and states which resolve to be great , and in spight of other nations to maintain their greatness . yet notwithstanding this plausible objection , the truth of my assertion will appear , if we understand it as we ought to do with these following cautions . 1. that it is not to be understood of the largeness of dominion , or superfluity of riches , but of the true happiness of living in society together ; which is by promoting the real good of all . to which the vastness of empire , and immensity of riches is by no means necessary , but a sufficiency both of strength and treasure to defend it self in case of foreign enemies , and to provide for the necessities and conveniencies of all the members of it . those who have best considered these things , suppose that to be the most exact and perfect idea of government , where all things are in a certain measure , and have a proportion to each other so as most conduces to the true end of living ; not to riot and luxury , not to softness and effeminacy , not to pride and ambition , not to the heaping up of riches without use and respect to a general good ; but so as all men may according to their conditions and circumstances enjoy what they have , or can get , with the greatest comfort to themselves and their friends , and do the most generous and vertuous actions . 2. that this is not to be understood of the private benefit of any particular persons , but of the general good of all sorts and conditions of men . the eastern monarchies have seemed to be the most happy and flourishing to those who look at a distance upon them , and only observe the pomp and grandeur of their princes , without looking into the state and condition of the people . aristotle observes , that the eastern people had more wit and slavery with it , the northern had less quickness and more liberty , the greeks lying between both had their share in both . but the eastern slavery hath brought barbarism into greece it self ; and the northern liberty hath so improved the wits , and given such encouragement to the industry of men , that our people at this day enjoy more benefit by the riches of the east , than those do among whom they grow . can we call them a happy people that see much riches and enjoy none ; having nothing which they can call their own , unless it be their slavery ? that is certainly the happiest condition of a people , where the prince sits upon the throne of majesty and power , doing righteousness and shewing kindness ; and the people sit every man under his vine , and under his fig-tree , enjoying the fruits of his own labours , or his ancestors bounty : where the people think it their interest to support and obey their prince ; and the prince thinks it his interest to protect and defend his people . happy is the people that is in such a case ; but above all , happy is that people whose god is the lord. for without his blessing , the best government , the best laws , the best ministers can never preserve a nations happiness ; and there is no reason to expect his blessing , but in the wayes of piety and vertue . 3. that it is not to be understood of sudden and surprizing events , but of a lasting and continued state . for when god hath been highly provoked to punish several nations for their sins ; he may give unexpected success to that nation by whom he designs to punish the rest ; and when they have done that work , they may then suffer more smartly for their own iniquities . of this we have a remarkable instance in scripture ; god designed to punish the kingdoms of the earth for their sins ; to this purpose he raiseth up nebuchadnezar king of babylon , whom he therefore calls his servant ; and the first example of his severity was his own people ; when this was done , then follow the desolations of egypt , of phoenicia , arabia , and other countries in so strange a manner , that some have called it the age of the destruction of cities . but doth the king of babylon think to escape himself ? no , saith the prophet , the king of shesbach shall drink after them ; his turn would come at last , when he had accomplished the design god sent him upon in the punishment of others . thus for a time , a nation may seem to flourish exceedingly , and be victorious over others while they are as scourges in gods hand for the punishment of others , and when that work is over may suffer most severely for their own sins . 4. it is to be understood of persons under equal circumstances , when we compare the condition of people with each other : not the nobles of one nation with the peasants of another , nor the princes with the people ; but every rank and order of men with those of the same rank and condition . and upon these terms , we need no other proof of the truth of this assertion , than the instance in the text of the people of israel ; which will best appear by comparing the state of both kingdoms after the body of the people was broken into the kingdoms of israel and judah . the kingdom of israel by jeroboams policy , and for reason of state , fell off from the worship of the true god , and worshipped the calves of dan and bethel . but did they prosper or succeed more than the kingdom of judah ? the ten tribes had a much larger territory , yet the kingdom of judah was stronger and flourished more , and continued longer , by 135 years , than the kingdom of israel did ; and when they were carried into captivity , the ten tribes were lost as to their name and interest among the people of assyria ; but the two tribes were restored after 70 years captivity under the princes of the line of david . if we compare the kings of israel and judah together ; the posterity of david was kept up among the kings of judah ; but there were nine families in the kingdom of israel ; and but one of them lasted to the fourth generation , and that was of jehu , who did something towards the reformation of religion . of the eighteen kings of israel , but eight escaped dying by the sword : and it is easie to judge how miserable the state of that people must be , under so many violent changes of government . among the kings of judah those who were firmest to the true religion prospered most , and the nation under them enjoyed the greatest peace , or received the greatest deliverances , as in the dayes of asa , jehoshaphat and hezekiah . if we compare the times of the same kings together , we shall find that while they adhered firmly to god and religion the nation prospered exceedingly , as for a long time under the reigns of solomon and asa ; but when in their old age they began to warp in their religion and to decline in their piety , nothing but trouble and confusion followed . so true did they find the saying of hanani to asa , the eyes of the lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth , to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect towards him . but because he said , he had done foolishly in not relying on the lord , but on the king of syria , therefore , saith he , from henceforth thou shalt have wars . and from that time his government was uneasie both to himself and his people ; when he had imprisoned the prophet for reproving him . iii. that there are some circumstances in the sins of a nation , which do very much portend and hasten its ruine . as , 1. when they are committed after more than ordinary mercies received ; such as in reason ought to keep men most from the commission of them ; as greater knowledge of the will of god than other people enjoy ; more frequent warnings of their danger than others have had ; many and great deliverances which god hath vouchfafed ; when none of these things , nor all of them together do move a people to repent , they shew an obstinate and incorrigible temper , and therefore god may sooner proceed to punish them . god did not forbear to punish other nations for their transgressions , but he began with his own people . for lo i begin to bring evil on the city which is called by my name , and should ye be utterly unpunished ? the destroying angels in ezekiel , were to begin at the sanctuary ; judgement , saith st. peter , must begin at the house of god. he draws the line of his justice parallel to that of his mercy ; and when every mercy is put to the account , and heightens the guilt , the fumm will soon rise so high to call for execution . the prophet amos tells damascus , and gaza , and tyre , and edom , and ammon , and moab , that none of them shall escape being punished for their transgressions ; they need not doubt , the rod would come time enough upon them ; but yet god would begin with his own children : you only have i known of all the families of the earth , therefore i will punish you for all your iniquities . where god hath given wonderful marks of his kindness , and many deliverances time after time , and yet they continue to do wickedly , there is the greater reason to expect sharper and severer punishments . 2. when they are committed with more than ordinary contempt of god and religion . all ages are bad enough ; and every age is apt to complain of it self , as the worst of any ; because it knows more ill of it self , than of the foregoing . but yet there is a difference in the manner of sinning ; sometimes the stream of wickedness hides its head , and runs under ground , and makes little noise , although it holds on the same course ; at other times it seems to break forth like a mighty torrent as though it would bear down all before it , as though the fountains of the great deep were broken up , and hell were let loose , and the prisoners there had shaken off their chains and come up upon the earth ; when atheism , prophaneness and all manner of wickedness grow impudent and bare-faced ; when men do not only neglect religion , but reproach and contemn it . shall i not visit for these things , saith the lord , shall not my soul be avenged on such a nation as this ? god did forbear his people of judah beyond what they could have expected , waiting for their amendment ; but when they added impudence to their obstinacy , when they made sport with the prophets , and turned their threatnings into songs of mirth and drollery , then the peremptory decree came forth , and there was no hopes to escape . but they mocked the messengers of god and despised his words , and misused his prophets , untill the wrath of the lord arose against his people , till there was no remedy . there still seemed to be some hopes left till they came to this temper . but when they burlesqued the prophet jeremiahs words , and turned the expressions he used into ridicule , crying in contempt , the burden of the lord , which is called perverting the words of the living god : when they turned ezekiels words into pleasant songs , and made sport with gods judgements , no wonder he was so highly provoked . for there can be no worse symptom to a people , than to laugh at the only means to cure them ; and if this once grow common , it must needs make their condition desperate . for then it comes to gods turn to mock and laugh too ; because i have called and ye have refused , i have stretched out my hand and no man regarded ; but ye have set at nought all my counsel , and would have none of my reproof ; i also will laugh at your calamity , and mock when your fear cometh . wo be unto that people whom the almighty takes pleasure in punishing . 3. when there is an universal degeneracy of all ranks and conditions of men . i do not mean such as is common to humane nature , but from the particular vertues of their ancestors , or a common practice of those vices which do most frequently draw down the judgements of god , and make him to have a controversie with a land. by swearing , and lying , and killing , and stealing , and committing adultery , they braak out , and blood toucheth blood , therefore shall the land mourn . it was a strange degree of corruption the people of jerusalem were fallen to before god led them into captivity ; when the prophet jeremiah used those expressions to them , run ye to and fro in the streets of jerusalem , and see now and know , and seek in the broad places there of , if ye can find a man , if there be any that executeth judgement , that seeketh the truth , and i will pardon it . could there ever be a fairer or kinder offer than this ? but as isaiah expresseth it , the whole head was sick , and the heart faint ; from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it , but wounds , and bruises , and putrifying sores . it seems a very strange passage in the law of leprosie , that if the leprosie covered all the flesh , the person was to be pronounced clean ; but if any raw flesh appeared , he was unclean : which it is very hard to understand , unless it were that the power of infection was then gone . such a state the people of jerusalem seemed to have been in , there was no room for infection left , the plague of leprosie had so over run them , that there was no sound part left in the whole body . thus i have considered the influence which doing wickedly hath upon the ruine of a nation , it remains now that i make application of this to our own case . we have been a people that have received wonderful mercies and many signal deliverances from gods hand . he hath placed us in a rich and fruitful land ; and hath furnished us with so great plenty , that even that hath been thought our burden ; hath blessed us with such an increase of trade , that our merchants far exceed those of tyre both in riches and number . our ships of trade are like a valley of cedars when they lie at home ; and when they are abroad , they compass the earth , and make the riches of the east and west-indies to meet in our streets . and since like the prince of tyre , our seat is in the midst of the seas , god hath thereby secured us from such sudden inroads and invasions of foreign enemies as many of our neighbour countries do groan under at this day : where the miseries of war are felt before they are seen ; and those who thought themselves at ease and quiet , may be surprised in their beds , and before they are aware of it may themselves , and families , and goods , and houses and country be all burnt and consumed together . but god hath compassed us about with a deep sea and a large channel , and given us such a powerful navy as may be both a defence at home and a terror abroad . as to our civil constitution , if we consider the admirable temper of our government , the justice and wisdom of our laws , and the greatness of our liberties , we have no reason to envy the condition of any people upon earth . and after all our intestine broils and confusions which our sins had brought upon us , god was pleased in a most surprising manner , without war or bloodshed , to our great satisfaction and the amazement of the world , to restore our soveraign to his throne , our church and people to their just rights and liberties . and while our neighbour nations have lamentably suffered under all the dismal effects of a lasting war , he hath enlarged our trade , continued our peace , and thereby increased our prosperity , after we had smarted under a dreadful fire and a raging pestilence . thus far all things tend still to make us a happy nation , if we did know and value our own happiness . but that which above all other things should make us so , hath been the great occasion of our trouble , and is still of our fears , and that is religion . and yet in this respect we have advantages above any other nation in the christian world , having a church reformed with so much wisdom and moderation as to avoid the dangerous extreams on both sides . but even this hath enraged our adversaries of the roman church , and made them the more restless to destroy it ; and to stick at no means which they thought might tend to its ruine . o blessed jesus ! that ever thy holy name should be assumed by traytors and murderers . or that the promoting thy true religion should be made the colour for the most wicked practises ! not that the pure and peaceable religion of jesus christ doth sowre and imbitter the spirits of men towards each other , or dispose them to malice , hatred , revenge and cruelty ( some of the worst passions of humane nature ) or to the accomplishing their own ends by secret conspiracies and open violence , by treachery and falshood , by murthers and assasinations , either on the ministers of justice , or on the most merciful and best natured of kings . but be astonished o ye heavens , and tremble o earth , that hast brought forth such a generation of vipers who are continually making their way through the bowels of their mother , and as we have reason to believe have designed to destroy the father of their country . if these be the kind embraces of one that pretends to be the mother-church , if this be the paternal affection of the holy father at rome , if this indeed be zeal for the catholick cause , if this be the way to reconcile us to their communion , have we not great reason to be fond of returning into the bosom of such a church which may strangle us as soon as it gets us within her arms ? but there are some whose concernment it is , to make men believe there was no such dangerous plot intended ; i meddle not with that evidence which lies before you , but there is one notorious circumstance obvious to all persons , and sufficient to convince any , which is the horrid murther actually committed on one of his majesties justices of peace , in cold blood , with great contrivance and deliberation . do men imbrue their hands in blood for nothing ? why no other person , why at such a time , why in such a manner ? there was a reason for all this ; he had taken the examinations ; he knew too much to be suffered to live , and they hoped by his death to stifle his evidence , and to affrighten others from searching too far ; and they managed that matter so , as though they had a mind to convince the world , they had no other end in taking away his life , but to prevent a further discovery . and they whom his death doth not convince , neither would they be convinced , though he should rise again from the dead . god forbid that we should charge such barbarous cruelties , such wicked conspiracies , such horrid designs on all who live in the communion of that church ; but we must distinguish between the seduced party who are not thought fit to be trusted with such things , for fear their consciences check at them , and their good nature disclose them ; and the busie active faction , who are always restless and designing , and act by such maxims of morality as the more sober and modest heathens would abhor . what hath this party of men been doing among us this last hundred of years and more , but plotting conspiracies , inflaming our differences , betraying our liberties , heightning our discontents , and in short , undermining the foundatior s both of our government and religion ? and shall such men alwayes triumph that they are too hard for our laws ? and that like the canaanites and jebusites to the children of israel , they will still be as scourges in ●●r sides , and thorns in our eyes ? if these things must be , i hope god designs it not to destroy us at last by them , but i am sure it doth prove and try us , whether we will hearken to the commandments of the lord , or to the vain traditions of men. god knows , i speak not these things out of any malice or ill will to the persons of any , for , that i may use st. paul's words , my hearts desire and prayer to god for them all is , that they might be saved . and although i cannot bear them witness , yet my hopes are some even of these may think they have a zeal for god in all this ; but we are sure it is not according to knowledge . such a blind zeal as the jews had , who when they killed the apostles , thought they did god good service . but it is so furious , so inhumane , so unchristian a zeal , that it is charity to them , as well as necessary care of our own safety , to keep them from a capacity of doing themselves and others mischief . but before i conclude , the text suggests to us three things , very pertinent to the duty of this day ; which i shall briefly recommend to your consideration . 1. matter of humiliation for our sins , as they have an influence upon the nations suffering . 2. matter of advice , only fear the lord , and serve him in truth , and with all your heart . 3. matter of encouragement , for , consider , what great things he hath done for you . 1. matter of humiliation for our sins . which have been many and great , and aggravated by all the mercies and deliverances which god hath vouchsafed to us ; and therefore he may be justly provoked to punish us proportionably to the measures of our ingratitude and disobedience . let us lay our hands upon our hearts this day , and seriously consider what requital we have made to the lord for all the benefits he hath bestowed upon us ? for the light of his truth , the purity of his worship , the power of his grace , the frequency of his sacraments , the influences of his spirit , and the continuance hitherto of our established religion , in spite of all opposition whatsoever . but have we not been guilty of too much slighting that truth , neglecting that worship , resisting that grace , contemning those sacraments , quenching that spirit ; and of too great coldness and indifferency about matters of religion ? i do not fear that ever the church of rome should prevail among us by strength of reason , or force of argument , with all its specious colours and pretences , unless it be among those who understand neither one , nor the other religion ; but if men be loose in their principles , and unconcerned about religion in general , there will not be courage and constancy enough to keep it out . i do much more fear popery coming in at the back-door of atheism and prophaneness ; than under all its false and deceitful pretences of universality and infallibility . and this those have been aware of , who have been so industriously sowing among us the seeds of irreligion ; knowing , that if men be unconcerned as to all religion , they will never have the courage to oppose any ; but will be sure to close with the prevailing side . next to this , i know no greater advantage that they take against us , than from the unnatural heats and unchristian divisions which have been among us . if men were wise they would consider , at least in this our day , the things which do belong to our peace . how can men answer it at the great day , if in such a critical time as this is , they stand upon little niceties and punctilios of honour rather than conscience , or upon keep up the interests of their several parties , and do not those things which themselves think they lawfully may do towards an union with us ? i pray god , the continuance of these breaches may not look like an argument of divine infatuation upon us . but what can we say to that looseness and debauchery of manners , to that riot and luxury , to that wantonness and prophaneness , to that fashion of customary swearing , and atheistick drollery , which have been so much and so justly complained of among us ? i hope there are many thousands at this day , in england , whose souls abhor the abominations that are committed , and who mourn in secret for them , and therefore our case may not be so desperate as that of jerusalem was . may we all this day so heartily repent of all these follies and impieties , that the cause of our fears which our sins give us being removed , we may hearken ( 2. ) to the matter of advice here given , only to fear the lord and to serve him in truth , and with all our heart . as though samuel had said , your hearts stand trembling still at the fear of gods judgements , when he doth but lift up his voyce in the thunder , and shew his power in the rain ; i will tell you , how your hearts may be at ease and quiet from the fear of evil : be faithful to god , maintain and practise the true religion , sincerely , diligently , constantly , universally , and never doubt his protection of you , let your enemies be never so many , or your dangers never so great . nothing exposes men more to the wrath and vengeance of god , nor provokes him more to leave a people to their own counsels , than false-heartedness in religion and hypocrisie do . for the hypocrite thinks to put a trick upon god almighty ; and while he seems to carry it fair towards him , he is dealing underhand for his own security another way : and god is then concerned in honour to let the world see he will not be mocked ; for he knows how to take the crafty in their own devices ; and very often brings to nought the most politick fetches of self-designing men . for when men seek themselves and not the honour of god or religion , but are ready to betray what ought to be dearer than their lives , for some mean and private interests of their own , they are oft-times so far from compassing their ends , that they become the scorn and reproach of men . but if men preserve their integrity , and hold fast to the thing that is right , they preserve their honour , even among their enemies , and either escape troubles , or have the comfort of a good conscience under them , and however things happen to them for a while , they are sure to have peace at the last 3. lastly , here is matter of incouragement . for consider what great things he hath done for you . when jacob was sent into egypt , and your fathers cryed unto the lord , then the lord sent moses and aaron which brought our fathers out of egypt , and made them dwell in this place . when their sins had brought them into great distresses afterwards , and they cryed unto the lord and confessed their sins , then the lord raised up jerubbaal and bedan , and jephthah , and samuel , and delivered you out of the hand of your enemies ●n every side , and you dwelled safe . now consider , the same god who did those things , can do as great for you still ; for his power , and wisdom , and goodness are the same , and therefore you have the greatest reason to put your trust in him at all times , since he never for sakes them that seek him . blessed be god that we have this day a farther argument for us to fear and serve him in truth , and with all our heart , by considering what great things he hath done for us . many deliverances hath he wrought for us time after time , for which we ought still to be thankful , since we yet enjoy the benefit of them . but the memory of former deliverances was almost worn out with many , and some began to question whether such holy and innocent men as the fathers of the society could be guilty of such horrid conspiracies ; some were so perswaded of their loyalty , that the vipers seemed to have changed their natures and to have lost their teeth , and to be a very soft and innocent kind of creatures . in somuch , that they were hardly brought to believe there could be a plot among them , especially of so horrid a nature as this appears more and more to have been , when such a viperous brood were suffered not only to lye quiet in the shade , but to sport themselves in the sun , and to enjoy the freedom of their own retreats . but god doth bring to light the hidden things of darkness by such wayes as shew his providence , more than our prudence and foresight , that while we have the comfort , he alone may have the glory of our deliverance . but yet methinks we stand as it were upon the brink of a mighty precipice , which is so full of horror , that we tremble to look down from it ; we are at present held up by a strong hand , but as by one single thread , and can we then think our selves secure from so great a danger ? blessed be god for that unanimity , that zeal , that courage , that constancy you have hitherto shewed in the maintenance of our church and religion ; but there is so much yet to be done for a firm establishment of it to all generations ( which now by his majesties gracious favour is put into your hands ) as calls for all our prayers , and your particular care , lest if this opportunity be let slip , you never have such another . this seems to be an honour reserved for this parliament , as the crown and glory of all your endeavours for the publick good. go on then , to raise up this monument to your eternal fame . this will not only make you beloved and esteemed by the present age , but this will endear your memories to posterity , and make ages to come rise up and call this a happy session . but lest our sins should yet hinder us from so great a blessing , we have great reason to humble our selves before god this day , to bewail those sins which may yet provoke him to punish us , and by fasting and prayer to implore his mercy ; that he would go on to preserve his majesties person from all violent attempts , our church and religion from all the designs of its enemies , and deliver us all from unreasonable and wicked men. finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61609-e330 psal ●● 17 , 22. prov. 19. 21. gen. 25. 25. 2 cor. 1. 10. 1 sam. 4. 11. v. 18. 7. 3. v. 4. v. 5. v. 6. mas. in jof . 18. 21. drus. in jud. 20. 1. 1 sam. 7. 7. v. 8. v. 9. v. 11. v. 12. v. 13. v. 16. 1 sam. 8. 2. v. 3. v. 4. v. 5. from v. 10. to v. 19. jose . an. l. 6. c. 4. v. 19 , 2c . ch . 12. 13. 8. 7. deut. 17. 14. 12. 19. 8. 7. 10. 17. 11. 15. 12. 3. 4. from v. 6 , to 14. v. 18 , 19. v. 20 , 21. v. 23. lev. 26. from v. 3 , to 14. v. 15. v. 16. v. 17. v. 18. deut. 28. 20. isa. 1. 39. 20. jer. 4. 18. ezek. 18. 30. deut. 21. 1. v. 7. v. 8. v. 9. numb . 35. 33. gen. 15. 16. matth. 23. 32. psalm 75. 7. v. 8. is. 51. 17. is. 19. 1 , 3. 16. v. 2. 11. 13. 14. je. 27. 3. ju. 16. 9. jer. 25. from 18. to 26. eze. 24. 2 , &c. 30. 5. nah. 3. 8 , 9. zeph. 2. 13. is. 45. 2 , 3. salvian . de cub . dei , l. 7. disput. in liv. l. 2. c. 29. h. jordanus de eo quod in morbis est divinum . conring . epist. 29. jer. 18. 7 , 8. jonah 3. 3. v. 5. v. 8. v. 10. v. 9. 2 sam. 24. 10. v. 17. 1 king. 16. 30. 33. 21. 25. 20. v. 29. 2 king. 22. 16. 19. 20. 2 king. 17. 2. is. 33. 14. 1 king. 18. 21. v. 15. v. 16. arist. pol. l. 4. c. 11. polit. l. 3. c. 14. psa. 144. 15. jer. 25. 26. v. 9. 11. marsh. chr. can. p. 556. jer. 25. 15. v. 26. 2 chro. 16. 9. v. 10. jer. 25. 29 eze 9. 6 1 pet. 4 17 amos ●● . 5. 9 , 29. hro . 16. jer. 23. 34 , 36. ezek. 33. 31. in canticum oris sui vertunt illos . vul. lat. pro. 1. 24. 25. 26. hos. 4. 2 , 3. jer. 5. 1. is. 1. 5 , 6. lev. 13. 12 , 13 , 14. jos. 23. 13. v. 8. 9. 10. 11. ps. 9. 10. a discourse concerning the illegality of the late ecclesiastical commission in answer to the vindication and defence of it : wherein the true notion of the legal supremacy is cleared, and an account is given of the nature, original, and mischief of the dispensing power. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1689 approx. 223 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 39 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61544 wing s5581 estc r24628 08255928 ocm 08255928 41236 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61544) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 41236) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1241:17) a discourse concerning the illegality of the late ecclesiastical commission in answer to the vindication and defence of it : wherein the true notion of the legal supremacy is cleared, and an account is given of the nature, original, and mischief of the dispensing power. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [5], 65 p. printed for henry mortlock, london : 1689. reproduction of original in the huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng england and wales. -ecclesiastical commission (1686) great britain -church history -17th century. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-05 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a discourse concerning the illegality of the late ecclesiastical commission , in answer to the vindication and defence of it : wherein the true notion of the legal supremacy is cleared ; and an account is given of the nature , original , and mischief of the dispensing power . london , printed for henny mortlock , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , and at the white hart in westminster-hall , m d c lxxxix . an advertisement . this discourse concerning the illegality of the late ecclesiastical commission , was written when the author of it was summoned to appear before it ; and was in continual expectation of undergoing its censure , for not complying with the orders of it . this put him upon an enquiry into the grounds on which it stood . from whence he proceeded to search into the true notion of the legal supremacy ; and finding it very imperfectly set down in the famous fifth report , de jure regis ecclesiastico , he took the pains to examin it through every reign , there mentioned ; and upon the whole matter he finds him and his adversary f. p. equally mistaken . but in the management of it he hath rather endeavoured to give light to the thing , than to discover any mans errors . and it is hardly possible to settle the notion of it aright , without considering the practice of other countries , as well as our own : of both which the reader will find a short but impartial account ; which i believe the author could more easily have inlarged , than have brought it into so narrow a compass . by this , i hope , the world will see , that it was not humor or faction , but a real and well-grounded dissatisfaction , which made those of the church of england oppose the proceedings of that time ; and that such have as great and real a zeal for the ancient and legal constitution of our government , as those who make a greater noise and clamor about it ; and that , not upon any new notions or phrases , but upon the very same grounds which our ancestors made use of ; and carry in them the true basis of our english government . it is possible some worthy men may have carried some notions beyond our legal constitution ; but the more they search into it , the better opinion they will have of it . which , i think , is so well setled , that every deviation from it tends to our ruin. as to the dispensing power , the author hath inlarged that part , since some late discourses have been published , both for and against it . he hath neglected nothing which hath been most plausibly pleaded for it ; but hath given a full answer to the most material instances which have been insisted on , in behalf of it . and after all , i cannot but conclude , that the dispensing power is a kind of mental reservation , which quite alters the meaning and design of a law. when the late ecclesiastical commission was superseded ( if not dissolved ) the author laid by these papers as useless ; but having communicated them to one particular friend , ( whose judgment and authority he had a great regard to ) he hath been prevailed with by him , to make them publick at this time : it being still necessary to shew , with what justice and reason , we refused to own the jurisdiction of it . and it seems to me as hard to reconcile it to our laws , as liberty of conscience to the principles of popery , or the worship of images to the second commandment . the contents . chap. i. the state of the question concerning the court of the late ecclesiastical commission . pag. 1 chap. ii. the king's supremacy by common-law enquired into ; coke's fifth report , de jure regis ecclesiastico , examined . p. 8 chap. iii. whether the king's supremacy by law extends to the dispensing with laws : of the nature and original of that power ; the inconsistency of such a dispensing power with the frame of our government . p. 25 chap. iv. of the alterations made in the supremacy , by the statutes of henry the eighth ; with an answer to the objections . p. 49 the legality of the court of ecclesiastical commission stated and argued ; in answer to the vindication and defence of it . chap. i. the state of the question concerning the court of the late ecclesiastical commission . the case stands thus ; by the act of 1 eliz. 1. it was established and enacted , that such jurisdictions , priviledges , superiorities and preheminencies spiritual and ecclesiastical , as by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power or authority , have heretofore been or may lawfully be exercised or used for the visitation of the ecclesiastical state and persons , and for reformation , order and correction of the same , and of all manner of errors , heresies , schisms , abuses , offences , contempts and enormities , shall for ever by this present parliament be united and annexed to the imperial crown of this realm . and that the kings and queens of this realm shall have ful power and authority by virtue of this act by letters patents under the great seal of england , to assign , name and authorize , when and as often as they shall think meet and convenient , and for such and so long time as they shall think meet to exercise , use , occupy and execute all manner of jurisdictions , priviledges and preheminences in any wise , touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction within these realms ; and to visit , reform , redress , order , correct and amend all such errors , heresies , schisms , abuses , offences , contempts and enormities what soever , which by any manner of spiritual or ecclesiastical power , authority or jurisdiction can or may lawfully be reformed , ordered , redressed , corrected , restrained or amended to the pleasure of almighty god , the increase of virtue , and the conservation of the peace and unity of this realm : and that such person and persons so to be named , authorized and appointed after the said letters patents to him or them made and delivered , shall have full power and authority , by virtue of this act , and of the said letters patents to exercise , use and execute all the premises , according to the tenour and effect of the said letters patents , any matter or cause to the contrary , in any wise , notwithstanding . but in the act 17 car. 1. c. 11. after the recital of this latter clause , these words follow , and whereas by colour of some words in the aforesaid branch of the said act , whereby commissioners areauthorized to execute their commission , according to the tenor and effect of the king's letters patents , and by letters patents grounded thereupon , the said commissioners have to the great and unsufferable wrong and oppression of the king's subjects , used to fine and imprison them , and to exercise authority not belonging to ecclesiastical jurisdiction restored by that act ; and divers other great mischiefs and inconveniences have also ensued to the king's subjects by occasion of the said branch and commissions issued thereupon , and the executions thereof ; therefore for the repressing and preventing of the aforesaid abuses , mischiefs and inconveniences in time to come , be it enacted by the king 's most excellent majesty and the lords and commons in this present parliament assembled , and by the authority of the same , that the aforesaid branch , clause , article or sentence shall from henceforth be repealed , annulled , revoked , annihilated and made void for ever , any thing in the said act to the contrary , in any wise , notwithstanding . then after a clause relating to ordinary jurisdiction , repealed 13 car. 2. c. 12. the act concludes thus , and be it further enacted , that from and after the said first day of august , no new court shall be erected , ordained or appointed within this realm of england or dominion of wales , which shall or may have the live power , jurisdiction or authority as the said high-commission-court now hath or pretendeth to have , but that all and every such letters patents , commissions and grants made or to be made by his majesty , his heirs and successors ; and all powers and authorities granted or pretended , or mentioned to be granted thereby , and all acts , sentences and decrees to be made by virtue or colour thereof , shall be utterly void and of none effect . by the act , 13 car. 2. c. 12. this repeal stands good in the first proviso ; and in the second clause , where that which concerns ordinary jurisdictions , is repealed , an exception is put in , in these words , excepting what concerns the high-commission-court , or the new erecting some such like court by commission . the case which arises from hence , is , whether these acts of parliament only take away the power of fining and imprisoning , from any ecclesiastical commission , granted by the king ; so that notwithstanding these repeals , the king may still constitute a commission proceeding by ecclesiastical censures : and for the same ends which are expresly mentioned in the statu te repealed , viz. to exercise , use , occupy and execute all manner of jurisdictions , privileges and preheminences in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction within this realm of england , and dominion of wales , and to visit , reform , order , correct and amend all abuses , offences , contempts and enormities whatsoever , which by the spiritual and ecclesiastical laws of this realm , can or may lawfully be reformed , ordered , redressed , corrected , restrained , or amended , to the pleasure of almighty god , the increase of vertue , and the conservation of the peace and unity of this realm . these are the powers of the present commission , and are the same which are mentioned in the act of repeal , 17 car. 1. c. 11. only errors , heresies and schisms , being left out . it cannot be denied , that the power of fining and imprisoning , is most expresly taken away , and that is assigned as one reason and occasion of repealing the clause of 1 eliz. 1. which establishes the court ; but i cannot be satisfied , that this was all that was intended by the act 17 car. 1. c. 11. and that for these reasons : 1. if no more had been intended , then it had been sufficient to have destroyed the letters patents by which the power of fining and imprisoning was granted , without mentioning the act of parliament , which gives no such power . but the act of repeal , 17 car. 1. c. 12. begins with the act of parliament : whereas in the parliament holden in the first year of queen eliz. there was an act made and established , &c. in which act , among other things , there is contained one clause , branch , article or sentence , whereby it was enacted to this effect , &c. then follows all the enactin ; clause ; and after it , the abuses of the power , by the letters patents are reckoned up , viz. fining and imprisoning , and other great mischiefs and inconveniences : therefore , for the repressing and preventing of them , not meerly the power to fine and imprison ; but the whole clause , and all things contained in it , are from thenceforth repealed , annulled , revoked , annihilated , and utterly made void for ever . what need all this , if no more were designed than to take away the power of fining and imprisoning ? it is plausibly argued by the lord coke , that the power to fine and imprison , was not agreeable to the design of the act. 1. because the title of it is , an act restoring to the crown the ancient jurisdiction ; but the ancient jurisdiction ecclesiastical had not a power to fine and imprison , but proceeded only by ecclesiastical censures . 2. because the power to reform , order and correct all errors , heresies , &c. was to be such as may be lawfully reformed , corrected , restrained , or amended by any manner of spiritual , ecclesiastical power , authority or jurisdiction , which did not extend to fine and imprisonment . 3. the tenor of the letters patents was to exercise , use and execute all the premises . since therefore the premises go no further than ecclesiastical jurisdiction , the letters patents could give no such power , being in pursuance of the act. but it is agreed , saith he , that before this act no man could be punished by fine and imprisonment by any ecclesiastical power , unless it were by force of some act of parliament . but because the act saith , they are to use and execute all the premises according to the tenor and effect of the letters patents ; others have thought , that the power to fine and imprison , being within the letters patents , the act of parliament did bear them out in pursuing what was in the tenor of them . but in my opinion , this matter ought to be a little further cleared ; and therefore we must distinguish between the original commission , and the supplemental power , added to enforce it . the original commission extended no farther than ecclesiastical jurisdiction , as is plain from tho reading of the statute ; and that of it self could go no further than ecclesiastical censure . but because of the circumstance of that time , when ( as the lord hobart , in a m. s. discourse of the high commission observes ) the persons most concerned did slight the ecclesiastical censures ; therefore it was thought necessary in the letters patents to grant them a new commission to enforce the former , and that extended to fine and imprisonment : for in the high commission for the province of york , ( which is preserved ) distinct powers are granted , which are not in the act. for , whereas the act goes no further than the ecclesiastical jurisdiction , the commission gives them power to proceed after another manner than by ecclesiastical censures ; for the words are , contumaces autem & rebelles , si quos invenerint , tam per censuras ecclesiasticas , quam personarum apprehensionem , & incarcerationem , &c. ac quaecunque alia juris regni nostri remedia compescendum , &c. here we see plainly a conjunction of the power of common law , added to that of the high commission , by virtue of the act of parliament , and so in all probability it was in the letters patents for the high commission in this province , which bore equal date with the former . and although the date of the high commission was before the depriving of the bishops , i eliz. yet i see no ground for my lord coke 's assertion , which the defendant takes for granted , p. 13. that this commission was first granted for depriving the popish bishops , and that about twenty were deprived by it ; whereas in fact , there were but fourteen deprived , and that for not doing what they had done before in henry the 8th's time , viz. for refusing to take the oath of supremacy , which they had all taken in the time of h. 8. and as far as i can learn , they were not deprived by the high commission , but by a particular commission for that purpose ; as appears by the best account we have of it in the historians who lived nearest the time . in the month of july , says stow , the old bishops of england , then living , were called and examined by certain of the queens majesties council , where the bishops of york , ely and london , with others , to the number of thirteen or fourteen for refusing to take the oath touching the queens supremacy and other articles , were deprived from their bishopricks . what he means by the other articles , i know not ; for there seem to be no other at that time , for which they could be deprived by law , but refusing the oath of supremacy ( and so much saunders himself owns ) for the other faults were not punishable with deprivation . the bishops being deprived by a special commission of the council , then saith stow , commissioners were appointed for all england ; for london sir richard sackvile , dr. horn , dr. huick and mr. savage , who called before them divers persons of every parish , and swore them to enquire and present upon certain injunctions . with him hollingshead agrees , only adding that these commissioners were sent according to an act passed and confirmed last parliament . this was the act for the high-commission , which then extended to particular parishes , with such such powers of the common law as are already mentioned , but are not of the essence of the commission according to the act of parliament , and therefore the taking away those additional powers doth not destroy the high commission ; but the repealing the act of parliament , on which it was built , takes away any such court-proceeding by ecclesiastical censures . to make this more plain by a parallel instance ; the court of star-chamber was taken away at the same time the high-commission was , and both determined the same day , 17 car. 1. aug. 1. this court was erected for extraordinary civil jurisdiction , as the high commission was for spiritual ; but by the act , 17 car. 1. c. 10. it was taken away much in the same manner with the court of high-commission : for there is a recital of the statutes on which it was grounded , 3 hen. 7. c. 1. 21 hen. 8. c. 20. and then it is alledged , that they had exceeded the bounds which the law had given them , in these words ; but the said judges have not kept themselves to the points limited by the said statute , but have undertaken to punish where no law doth warrant , and to make decrees for things having no such authority , and to inflict heavier punishments , than by any law is warranted . and so , by this very same way of reasoning which the vindicator uses , another court of star-chamber may be set up , if it keeps it self within the bounds of the statutes . but we are not to judge of the force of a law by the particular reason assigned , but by the enacting clause : be it ordained and enacted by the authority of this present parliament , that the said court , commonly called the star-chamber , , and all jurisdictions , power and authority belonging unto , or exercised in the same court , &c. be from the first of august 1641. clearly and absolutely dissolved , taken away and determined . if another star-chamber cannot be set up with some limitations for extraordinary civil jurisdictions , how can another ecclesiastical court for extraordinary spiritual jurisdiction , which is taken away after the same manner ? only the act against the high commission , is more express in the conclusion , against setting up any other court with like power , jurisdiction or authority ; for it was then foreseen , that some other court might be set up , with some alterations ; and to prevent any thing of that nature , the last clause was annexed . 2. the prohibiting clause , 17 car. 1. c. 11. is very considerable to the purpose . for the force of the former act was taken away by the repealing clause ; but that was not thought sufficient to prevent another court rising up , which might be like to it . a court may be like , although not altogether the same : it may be like in jurisdiction , although not in a power to fine and imprison . but the act saith , that no new court shall be erected which shall or may have the like power , jurisdiction , or authority , as the said high-commission now hath , or pretendeth to have ; but that all and every such letters patents made or to be made by his majesty or successors , and all powers and authorities granted , or pretended , or mentioned to be granted thereby , ana all asts , sentences and decrees to be made by vertue or colour thereof , shall be utterly void and of none effect . was all this meant only of such a court as should proceed to fine and imprison ? why was not this set down in as plain a manner as such a law required ? but we are to observe , 1. it not only voids the letters patents , but declares the constitution of the court it self to be illegal ; but that doth not depend upon the power to fine and imprison . if it had been said , no new court shall be erected with a power to fine and imprison , the matter had been clear ; for a new court might have been erected proceeding by ecclesiastical censures , without a power to fine and imprison . but the act takes no notice here of any such power , but absolutely forbids any court with the like power , jurisdiction or authority . had the high-commission no power , jurisdiction or authority , but only to fine and imprison ? their power and authority by act of parliament was general , to reform abuses , &c. in case there had been no such clause as fining and imprisoning in the letters patents , had there been no court , no power , jurisdiction or authority belonging to it ? if then there be a power , jurisdiction or authority of a high commission court , without a power to fine and imprison , then all such power and authority is taken away by the prohibiting clause . 2. it forbids the jurisdiction of such a court : but jurisdiction is quite another thing from a power to fine and imprison . jurisdictio , saith bracton , is authoritas judicandi , sive juris dicendi inter partes ; and to the same purpose fleta : they both distinguish two kinds of jurisdiction , ecclesiastical and civil . ecclesiastical , saith bracton , is that which belongs to ecclesiastical causes : which shews , that they looked on ecclesiastical proceedings by censures as part of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction . the first general exception , saith fleta , is against the jurisdiction of a court , which is allowed to be made to those quibus deficit autoritas judicandi . from hence it appears , that the power and authority of medling in ecclesiastical causes , is that which is implied in the jurisdiction of the court ; if it hath no jurisdiction it is no court ; if it have jurisdiction , it is void in law ; for the act of parliament takes away all power , jurisdiction and authority from any such court. 3. the explanatory act 13 car. 2. c. 12. makes this more evident ; for there being a clause inserted 17 car. 1. c. 11. which seemed to take away the ordinary jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts , it was thought fit to make that act on purpose to clear that matter , by repealing that clause . but that clause being part of the act which took away the high-commission court , lest by such a repeal the act it self should be thought repealed , therefore there is only an exception put in , not barely as to the old high-commission , but as to the new erecting some such like court by commission : and a particular proviso is added , that neither this act , nor any thing herein contained shall extend or be construed to revive or give force to the said branch of the said statute , made in the said first year of the reign of the said late queen elizabeth , mentioned in the said act of parliament , made in the seventeenth year of the reign of the said king charles ; but that the said branch of the said statute made in the said first year of the reign of the said late queen elizabeth , shall stand and be repealed in such sort , as if this act had never been made . now it ought to be considered , that even this parliament doth not fix upon the power to fine and imprison , to take that away ; but upon the original clause in the act , which gave power to erect such a court. and this parliament was zealous to assert the ordinary jurisdiction , and as zealous to prevent any such extraordinary jurisdictions , as was in the high-commission ; which it shewed by continuing the repeal of that power by which it was established . chap. ii. the king's supremacy by common-law enquired into ; coke 's fifth report , de jure regis ecclesiastico , examined . but against this it is pleaded with some appearance of reason , that in caudry 's case the judges resolved , that the act of the first year of the late queen was not introductory of a new law , but declaratory of the old ; and that the king by the ancient law might make such an ecclesiastical commission . and since the act 13 car. 2. c. 12. saith , that we are not to abridg or diminish the king's supremacy in ecclesiastical matters and affairs ; therefore we are still to suppose , that the king hath a power by law to appoint such a commission for ecclesiastical matters . this is the substance of what is pleaded for the legality of the court : and since the argument is confined to matter of law , to clear this matter , it will be necessary to give an account of these two things , i. what the ancient law was as to this matter . ii. how far the legal supremacy is abridged by these statutes . i. as to the ancient law in this matter , it 's true that the lord coke , in caudry's case hath endeavoured to prove , that the statute 1 eliz. was not introductory of a new law , but declaratory of the old ; but the instances he produces fall very short of being demonstrative proofs , as he calls them : for the true case is not , ( 1. ) whether the king ought not to interpose in ecclesiastical matters , so far as the peace and good government of his realm was concerned . nor , ( 2. ) whether he might not order things which concerned the right of ecclesiastical possessions ; as in bishopricks , commendams , right of patronage , pleas of tiths , &c. nor , ( 3. ) whether the king , by his supreme authority might not limit the proceedings of ordinary ecclesiastical courts in matters concerning his crown and dignity , by granting prohibitions . nor , ( 4. ) whether the king by common law cannot grant a commission of review , after the proceedings of the ecclesiastical courts ; which judge hutton affirmed , was all that was determined in caudry 's case . nor , ( 5. ) whether the king in parliament may not make law ; for reformation of religion and establishing good order therein . nor , ( 6. ) whether the supreme coactive jurisdiction were not always a right of the crown , however it were in a great measure usurped by the pope after king john 's resignation . but , whether our ancient law doth give the king a power , by virtue of his ecclesiastical jurisdiction , to appoint commissioners by an extraordinary way of jurisdiction to proceed in prima instantia , against persons by ecclesiastical censures ? and to prove this i cannot find one sufficient example , as i shall make appear by a short account of the instances he produces , and the ecclesiastical jurisdiction exercised at that time . in the time of the saxons . in the saxon times he brings first an instance of kenulphus , king of mercia , granting an exemption to the abbot of abingdon : but what does this signifie to ecclesiastical jurisdiction , to prove , that the king gave the abbot an exemption from the temporal jurisdiction of the bishops ? for , in those days there were great disputes between the bishops and abbots about the temporal jurisdiction over the lands of their abbies ; which the bishops claimed , and the abbots refused , and put themselves under the protection of princes and great men , as appears by the councils of cloveshoo and becanceld , in the time of kenulphus . but stamford puts this matter out of dispute in the confirmation of the charter of kenulphus , by edwin , for the words are , quod praefatum monastrium omnis terrenae servitatis esset liberum : and what is this now to ecclesiastical jurisdiction ? but we have manifest proof in the saxon times , that the ecclesiastical jurisdiction was never exercised by such a commission , but that all extraordinary cases were dispatched in parliamentary assemblies , and the ordinary jurisdiction was exercised by the archbishop of canterbury , in chief , and by the rest of the bishops . the first extraordinary instance of proceeding against an ecclesiastical person , in the saxon times , was that of wilfred archbishop of york , who because he would not consent to the making three bishopricks in his province , was deposed by theodore archbishop of canterbury , the king himself being present , and the great council of the nation : for so king alfrith saith , that he was bis à toto anglorum concilio damnatus , as the words are in malmsbury ; and eddius , who lived at that time , saith , that king alfrith gave this reason against restoring him , because he had been condemned by the kings his predecessors , with their council , the archbishop assisting , and himself had judged him , cum omnibus pene britanniae vestrae praesulibus , all the bishops , almost , being present . in the council of nester field , in his case , it is said , the king was present and berthwaldus , archbishop of canterbury , cum totius pene britanniae episcopis . in the council at nid , it is said , sedentibus rege & episcopis , cum principibus eorum in loco synodali ; which was a parliamentary assembly . not long after tunbert was deposed from his bishoprick , but it was , saith florentius wigorniensis , congregata synodo sub praesentia regis egfridi . the archbishop theodore likewise deposed winfred bishop of the mercians , saith the same author , after bede , for some disobedience , and consecrated saxulphus , the first abbot of peterborough , in his place . this winfred had been present at the council at herudford , and there consented to the canons then first received in the english church ; and there they submitted to ecclesiastical censures , upon the violation of them . at this council , saith matt. westminster , were present not only all the bishops , but all the kings and great men of the nation ; so that the first canons were received in a full parliament . one of these canons was for increasing the number of bishopricks , as the number of believers increased : and upon this canon theodore proceeded against both wilfred and winfred : for not long after theodore divided his bishoprick into five ; but it was done , saith florentius , consensu ejusdem regis & principum illius , as ina divided the western province into two bishopricks , synodali decreto , saith mat. westminster , which then was the same , as by act of parliament . and the opposing such a division seems to have been the crime of disobedience , for which he was deprived by the archbishop : for as bede observes of him , he first exercised ecclesiastical jurisdiction over all england . in the great council at be●anceld , where king withred was present , a. d. 694. with his nobles ( ducibus & satrapis in unum glomeratis ) together with the clergy : he there disowrs any ecclesiastical jurisdiction , and leaves it to the archbishop of canterbury ; metropolitani episcopi est ecclesias dei regere , gubernare , &c. and then follows , presbyteros , diaconos eligere , statuere , sanctificare , firmare & amovere . and he makes this an inviolable law , as far as his words could make it , si quis autem rex post nos levatus in regnum , aut episcopus , aut abbas vel comes , vel ulla potestas hominum contradicat huic chartuae , aut infringere tentaverit , sciat se sequestratum à corpore & sanguine domini , &c. and after it follows , haec lex inviolabilis usque ad consummationem saeculi permaneat , &c. mr. prynn , out of his old kindness to the archbishops of canterbury , in his vast heap of collections , would have this rejected as spurious ; but sir h. spelman , whose judgment was far beyond the others , saith , he had perused five mss. of i● , whereof one was with a mixture of saxon letters , and he had ●o mistrust of its sincerity . and the learned and judicious editors of the decem scriptores , sir roger twisden and mr. selden have thought fit to insert it after them , out of a ms. in ccc . but mr. p. thinks , it is contradicted by the council of berghamstead , about ecclesiastical affairs , under king withred : but i can find nothing like it . it is true , there are laws made concerning ecclesiastical matters , by common consent of the king , the nobles and bishops ; but the very first is ecclesia libera sit fruaturque suis judiciis , &c. but besides , in the great council at clovesho , where aethelbaldus , king of mercia , was present , and cutbert , arch-bishop of canterbury , with the other bishops , this charter of withred's , was read , and approved , and consirmed ; with the like sanction annexed to it . in the council at clovesho , a. c. 787. the extent of the jurisdiction of the archbishop of canterbury was very much lessened by the means of king offa , who caused another archbishoprick to be set up in mercia , and the archbishop of canterbury gave his consent , saith matt. paris : but his former jurisdiction was restored in the council of clovesho , a. d. 803. by a general consent . but in the former council the ecclesiastical jurisdiction was strenuously asserted , in these words ; sicut reges omnibus dignitatibus praesunt , ita & episcopi in his quae ad deum attinent . and in the latter , there is a severe denunciation against all that should lessen the honour , or take away the jurisdiction of that see. from henceforward i find no diminution of the archbishop's ordinary jurisdiction through the saxon times . the king had the political supremacy in him , by which he erected and divided bishopricks , and nominated bishops , and summoned councils , and confirmed their proceedings as he saw cause ; but the immediate ecclesiastical jurisdiction was left to the archbishop of canterbury in the first place , and to the rest of the bishops as to any publick acts which related to ecclesiastical affairs , they were not dispatched by particular commissions , but in the parliamentary assemblies ; in which , the custom was , to begin with what related to the church , and then to proceed to other business . of this ingulphus gives us an instance in ceolnothus archbishop of canterbury ; for in the parliament assembled at kingsbury , a. c. 851. in hebdomada pasch. ( which was chiefly assembled pro regni negotiis ) yet even then , he proposed , that church affairs might be first dispatched ; divina negotia debere primitus proponi ; to which they all assented . and so bertulphus his charter of crowland then passed ; as withlasius his did before , at a time when the bishops and nobles attended the king at london , to consult about the danish pyrates , which very much infested our coasts . thus aethelwolfus passed his famous grant of the tenth of all the lands to the church , in a council at winchester ; himself , and the king● of mercia and east-angles , being present , and all the nobility and bishops giving their free consent ; as ingulphus relates it . several others might be produced ; but these are sufficient . and the saxon laws are a plain evidence , that church-matters were in those times determined in the same assemblies , wherein the other laws of the kingdom were passed . in the reign of king edward the confessor . the next instance is of edward the confessor , who saith in his laws , that he is vicar of the highest king , and he is ordained to this end , that he should govern and rule the people of the land , and above all things , the holy church , and that he defend the same from wrong-doers , and root out workers of mischief . f. parsons saith , all this was by commission from the pope , such as the kings of sicily had . but in my opinion , this is a very bad answer : for it supposes persons otherwise uncapable , to be made capable of the same jurisdiction , which follows orders ; provided they have a delegation from the pope : which is in effect , to confound all ecclesiastical jurisdiction in any , but the pope himself , and those to whom he commits it . but those who assert the right of jurisdiction to follow the power of order , must first suppose a person duly qualified , before he can receive from the pope himself the power of ecclesiastical jurisdiction . if therefore a prince hath not an inherent right to it , he cannot receive it by commission from the pope . and the powers which the king of sicily challenges , relating to ecclesiastical jurisdiction , are either such as other princes have an equal right to ; or else they must imply such proper eclesiastical jurisdiction as follows the power of order ; and then , how can the pope give the one without the other ? such a gift is like an appropriation of a benefice with a cure to a nunnery , which the lord hobart saith is void in law , by reason of the incapacity of the persons . but the supremacy which our law gives , is not any proper immediate spiritual jurisdiction , like that of bishops , but an authoritative and legislative supremacy without any foreign appeals , as will appear afterwards . but the rights which the kings of sicily challenge , are these . 1. that they have the same powers which legates a latere have , and may judge of the same causes , and proceed in the same manner with ecclesiastical censures . 2. that no appeal lies from the king's commissioner , even to rome it self ; and it is common to appeal from the censure of the bishop to him . the former is a power , which our kings never pretended to , by vertue of their supremacy ; for it is a delegation of the power of the keys ; which the legates à latere exercise by vertue of their function , as well as their commission : but the legal supremacy with us , is a right to govern all sorts of men by our own laws , without any foreign jurisdiction , and that with respect to ecclesiastical matters as well as temporal . but to prevent mistakes and cavils about this matter , it will be necessary to clear the notion of supremacy ; as it hath been owned and received in the church of england . and for this we have two authentic declarations of it to rely upon . the first is mentioned , 5 eliz. c. 1. § . 14. where the supremacy is declared to be taken and expounded in such form as is set forth in the admonition annexed to the queens injunctions published in the first year of her reign . and the words there are , that the queen neither doth nor will challenge any authority , but such as was of ancient time due to the imperial crown of this realm , that is , under god to have the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons , born within these her realms , dominions and countries , of what estates , either ecclesiastical or temporal soever they be , so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them . the second is in the 37th article , wherein it is declared , that by the supremacy is meant , that only prerogative which we see to have been always given to all godly princes in holy scriptures by god himself , that is , that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by god , whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal , and restrain with the civil sword , the stubborn and evil doers . so that granting a commission for proceeding by ecclesiastical censures , is no part of that supremacy which our church owns . and thus the divines of our church have understood it . by the supremacy , saith bishop andrews , we do not attribute to the king the power of the keys , or ecclesiastical censures . r. thompson , in his desence against becanus , saith , the supremacy is not to be defined by ecclesiastical jurisdiction , but by supream government . becanus urged this as an argument against the kings supremacy , that he had no ecclesiastical jurisdiction . dr. burrhil answered , that the supremacy implied many other things ; as , the power of calling convocations , of confirming canons , of giving commissions of delegates , of taking cognizance of the misdemeanors of church-men ( as well as others ; ) but for proper ecclesiastical jurisdiction , he denies it to belong to supremacy . and after , asserts , that the king's supremacy is preserved , if he takes care that those who have the power of ecclesiastical censures , do exercise them ; and not as though it belonged to the supremacy to give an immediate power to proceed by ecclesiastical censures ; which was not supposed to belong to it , but a supreme right of governing all sorts of persons by our laws . the king's supremacy in ecclesiastical matters , doth not , saith , mason , imply the power of the keys , which the king hath not ; but he may command those who have them , to use them rightly . all these wrote in king james i. his reign , when the point of supremacy was throughly sifted on both sides . and the king himself , who very well understood these matters , saith , that the oath of supremacy only extended to the king's power of judicature , over all persons as well civil as ecclesiastical ; excluding all foreign powers and potentates to be judges within his dominions . not as though the king hereby challenged to himself a power of inflicting ecclesiastical censures on persons ; but leaving the spiritual jurisdiction to those who have the power of the keys , it belonged to him to exercise his supreme authority over ecclesiastical persons and causes , as he did over temporal . for , saith archbishop bramhal , our laws never invested the king with any spiritual power or jurisdiction , witness the injunctions of q. eliz. witness the publick articles of our church ; witness the professions of king james ; witness all our statutes themselves . the king of england , saith he , by the fundamental constitution of the monarchy , hath plenary power , without the licence or help , or concurrence of any foreign prelate or potentate , to render final justice , that is , to receive the last appeals of his own subjects , without any fear of any review from rome , or at rome , for all matters ecclesiastical and temporal ; ecclesiastical by his bishops , temporal by his judges . and thus our laws were in the right , when they called the act of supremacy , restoring the rights of the crown ; for if we take away all the papal usurpations as to appeals , exemptions of persons , dispensations , provisions , making canons , sending legates to hold courts , to call convocations , &c. we may easily understand what the supremacy is , viz. a power of governing all sorts of men , according to the laws ecclesiastical and temporal , without any foreign jurisdiction . but as in temporal matters the king 's supreme authority is exercised in his ordinary courts . so likewise in ecclesiastical : which deriving their jurisdiction from the king as supreme , his supremacy is preserved in the ordinary ecclesiastical courts ; but as to extraordinary jurisdiction that deper ds on the legislative power ; and whether that be not now taken away by it , is the thing in question . having endeavoured to set this matter in as clear a light as i could , i now return to the instance of edward the confessor . and those words of his , as they are in hoveden , signifie no more than a general right of protecting and defending the church , which is not denied to belong to kings , where the pope's authority is the most owned . i cannot but take notice of a different reading in the lord cokes copy , from all that i have seen ; for where he hath it , sanctam ecclesiam regat & defendat ; lambard , veneretur & reg●t ; but hoveden , revereatur & ab injuriatoribus defendat : which is that right of protection which is allowed by all . the spanish lawyers hold , that there lies an appeal to the kings courts , by his right of protection , in case of any violent proceedings in the ecclesiastical courts . which violences are so many , as make such appeals so frequent and necessary , that whole volumes have been written about them . and this they say , is not introductory of a new law , but only declaratory of a natural right . the french lawyers allow appeals from the ecclesiastical courts , tanquam ab abusu ; which must be founded on an original right in the king , to defend the church both from injuries and abuses . and as to the church it self , it is fully expressed in the writ de excommunicato capiendo , in these words , quia vero potestas regia sacrosanctae ecclesiae in querelis suis deesse non debet . but such a right of protection and assistance is different from that of jurisdiction ; unless it be that which is only coactive ; which is not the jurisdiction we now enquire into . but it is most considerable that king edward saith , he is god's vicar , and therefore could not look on himself as acting by commission from the pope . it is true , that in the third charter of westminster there is a bull of nicholas the second , wherein he gives to the king and his successors the protection and defence of that place , and of all the churches of england , and a power , in his stead to make good laws , with the advice of the bishops and abbots : but i do not find that king edward owned that he acted in these matters by any commission from the pope , but from god himself : and this law , in hoveden and others overthrows any such pretended commission ; and yet the pope himself doth not give him a power to delegate his authority to others , but to act in it himself , and that only with the advice of bishops and abbots . the point then which was to be proved , was not that the king had a right to protect the church from injuries ; but such an inherent right of ecclesiastical jurisdiction , which he might delegate to others , whether bishops or not , and impower them to proceed by ecclesiastical censures against offenders , summoned to appear before them . and the question now is not , whether by the supreme legislative power of the nation such an authority might not in an extraordinary case be committed to particular persons by act of parliament ; but whether such an act of parliament being granted to be taken away , the king by the ancient law of the realm may appoint such commissioners , as he thinks fit , laymen or bishops , to proceed against the king's subjects by ecclesiastical censures ? and this very stating of the case , as it ought to be , shews how impertinent the remainder of his examples are . but to proceed . in the reign of king william the first . in the time of william the conqueror , he only mentions a case out of fitz-herbert , that he made an appropriation of churches with cure to ecclesiastical persons , viz. to a prebend of the church of york ; now this , saith he , was agreed by all could not be done without ecclesiastical jurisdiction . it is too common a fault in some great lawyers , that what they find once setled for law in their books , they imagine was never otherwise . thus appropriations after diocesses were setled , being looked on , as chiefly the act of the ordinary , who is to take care of the whole diocess ; from hence they infer , that in all times an appropriation must argue ecclesiastical jurisdiction . but before the parochial rights were established , there were many volantary appropriations made by particular persons , who thought there was no more ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the appropriation of churches , than in the endowments of them , and in the right of patronage ; only the one is setled on a spiritual corporation , as perpetual incumbent ; and the other on particular persons in succession . it s true , since the acts for restoring jurisdiction to the crown , the power of making appropriations in the king , is said to be from his supreme ecclesiastical authority , grindon's case , in pl. f. 448. but then we are told , it was because the pope , as supreme ordinary , had such a power without the bishops ; which reason will not hold as to such times when the pope was not owned to be supreme ordinary , as he was not in the conqueror's time , the canon-law not being then received in england . but what a mean proof is this in such a busie time as that of william the frst , when so many great churchmen were deprived of their bishopricks , being english , and the normans put in their places ? was this done by any commission from william to his great lords and others , to proceed against them by ecclesiastical censures ? nothing like it . stigand , archbishop of canterbury , ( if spot's story be true ) was too great a friend to the english liberties to be endured by him : but he was too great a dissembler to seem to have any thing to do in it himself ; and therefore knowing he was of the opposite party to the prevailing pope , he privatly sends to him , to send a legate for that purpose ( wherein the pope and he had their several ends ) ; and then in parliament time , the king keeping his easter at winchester , stigand was deposed , and agilmarus , bishop of the east angles , and several others , without any evident reason , saith hoveden , but only to make way for the normans : this was in concilio magno , saith he and the rest , for easter was one of the three seasons , for the parliamentary meeting , in the year ; which william kept up , in imitation of the saxons , who at christmas , easter and pentecost held their publick courts , and did wear their crowns till the times of h. 2. and then they did dispatch publick affairs : thus far he complied with the saxon customs ; but he had a new work to do : the archbishop he could not rely upon , and therefore was put to find out a new way , by sending for a legate from the pope to serve his turn . and thus william , for his own ends , having so hard a game to play here , called in the pope's assistance ; who knew well enough how to draw his own advantage out of it . but william would go no further than his interest carried him ; for afterwards he declared , that he would maintain his own rights , which he enjoyed in normandy , viz. that nothing should be done without him in convocation ; no legate come but as he pleased , &c. but still he seemed to let them enjoy their saxon liberties in matters of ecclesiastical proceedings , so far as to have them debated in parliament . thus the controversie between the two archbishops was referred to parliament , the king and the great men , as well as the bishops being present . the controversie between lanfrank , archbishop of canterbury and odo , bishop of baieux was referred , saith eadmerus , to a conventus principum at pinnedenen ; and when the king heard their resolution , cum consensu omnium principum suorum confirmavit , saith the textus roffensis . he likewise confirmed charters as the saxons had done ; that to battel abby was consilio episcoporum & baronum meorum . but the most considerable thing he did , as to ecclesiastical jurisdiction , was separating the courts ecclesiastical from the hundred courts , by his charter to remigius and others ; which , he saith , was granted in a great council , and by the advice of the archbishops , bishops and all the great men of his kingdom : so that still extraordinary acts relating to church matters were passed in parliament by general consent . and what now doth the appropriation of a church with a cure of souls signifie to prove his ecclesiastical jurisdiction ? when those things in his time were not brought under such strict rules as they were afterwards ; but appropriation might have been made by any lay person , that never pretended to the least ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; and he might as well have brought his demolishing so many churches in the new forest , for an instance of his ecclesiastical jurisdiction . in the reign of william the second . in william rufus his time , a great heat arose between him and anselm archbishop of canterbury , about owning the pope , whether the archbishop could do it without the king's consent ? the business was referred to parliament , which the king called on purpose at rockingham , saith eadmerus , who was there present ; the bishops declared they could not deprive him ( as the king would have had them ) to whom they had promised obedience . after which it was again referred to parliament ; but anselm not yielding , he went out of the land. in the reign of king henry the first . in the reign of henry the first a new controversie arose between the king and the same archbishop , about the ancient right of the crown as to investiture of bishops ; the king calls a parliament about it , wherein the bishops and lords joyned with the king ; afterwards anselm desired , the advice of the bishops and nobles might be heard at easter ; which shews that both sides referred it to the parliament . in his time a council was called , and several canons passed , and the archbishop desired of the king , that the primates regni might sit with them ; that all things might pass utriusque ordinis concordi cura , with the consent of both estates . the king afterwards takes the advantage of these canons , and prosecutes the breakers of them , and raises money upon pretence of forfeitures , to the great grievance of the clergy . anselm although then in disfavour , writes to the king about it ; and tells him , this was a new method of proceeding , because it belonged to the bishops in their diocesses to call the clergy to an account ; or if they neglected , to the archbishop and primate . the king answers , that his barons were to meet him on ascension-day , and by their advice he would give an answer ; but upon anselms return this prosecution ceased . other affairs of the church were then referred to the parliament at easter , from thence to pentecost , and by reason of anselm's sickness to august ; and then the bishops , abbots and lords of the kingdom , met in the king's palace at london , and by consent of parliament , investiture was turned into homage . in his time the bishoprick of ely was erected by the king's consent in parliament , regi , archiepiscopo , caeterisque principibus regni visum fuit , saith eadmerus . the consecration of an elect archbishop of york , was transacted in parliament , the king advising with the bishops and nobles about it ; for anselm , before his death had sent an inhibition to the bishops , not to consecrate him unless he made the profession of obedience to the archbishop of canterbury : the bishops resolved to adhere to anselm's inhibition , and the king yielded . after anselm's death , the king advised with his parliament , at windsor , about a successor to him ; and the bishop of rochester , at the request of the bishops , was agreed upon : and the king filled the abbies before he went into normandy , consisto principum & episcoporum suorum . in the latter end of henry the first many disputes hapned about ecclesiastical jurisdiction , as between the bishops of s. davids and glamorgan which were debated in magno placito apud london , saith henry of huntingdon : and for such causes , saith he , another assembly was held in the beginning of lent , and again in rogation week . in all this time , when the norman kings asserted all the rights of sovereignty with great zeal , yet they never pretended to appoint any commissioners for ecclesiastical causes , but still referred them to parliaments . in the reign of king henry the third . the next instance the lord coke brings , falls as low as the time of henry the third . the first whereof is , the king 's granting a writ of prohibition , if any man sued in the ecclesiastical court for any thing of which by allowance and custom , it had not lawful cognizance . but how doth the king's power of granting prohibitions , prove his ecclesiastical jurisdiction ? it effectually proves the king 's right to preserve his crown and dignity , as the prohibition implies ; but how doth it hence appear that the ecclesiastical jurisdiction comes from his crown and dignity ? the contrary seems rather to follow , viz. that the ecclesiastical courts were held from another power ; but all matters of temporal cognizance did belong to the crown . there is no question but since the acts for restoring jurisdiction to the crown , the supream jurisdsction both in the ecclesiastical and civil courts , is derived from the crown . and in whose-soever names the courts are kept , the authority of keeping them is from the king. for it is declared by act of parliament , 1 eliz. 1. 17. that all ecclesiastical power is united and annexed to the imperial crown of this realm ; which all bishops do own , in taking the oath of supremacy ; and therefore the old form continuing , can signifie nothing against the law of this realm and their own oaths . but as long as the main points were secured by the laws , there was no necessity apprehended of altering the forms ; for , on the other side , it was objected , that since the laws had placed all jurisdiction in the crown , it seemed as unreasonable to continue the old form of prohibitions in laesionem coronae & dignitatis regiae ; how can this be , say they , when the jurisdiction ecclesiastical as well as civil , is owned to be from the crown ? it is said in answer , that , a prohibition implies that the thing is drawn into aliud examen than it ought to be , and this is contra coronam & dignitatem regiam . why not then as well when an ecclesiastical original cause , is brought into a temporal court ? for that is aliud examen then , by confession on that side ; and if ecclesiastical jurisdiction be derived from the crown , the aliud examen must relate only to the court , and not to the crown . all that i infer from hence is , that the old forms were thought fit to be continued ; & both parties reconciled them as well as they could to the laws in force . but the judges confessed , that although de jure both the jurisdictions were ever in the crown , yet the one was sometimes usurped by the see of rome , which is a plain acknowledgment , that by the matters of fact in those times , the right could not be proved ; and especially in the times of h. 3. when the popes usurpations here , were at so great a height , that the king upon writs of enquiry sent into the several counties , found , that the revenues of the roman court , by provisions , extortions , &c. exceeded the kings . and the king had so little authority left , that the pope put bishops upon him rege penitus irrequisito , saith matt. westm. so that he was so far from ecclesiastical jurisdiction , that he had not the nomination of his bishops , nor so much as a consent to their election , unless the pope thought fit sometimes to gratifie him in it . for the pope pretended to the right of disposal of church preferments , by vertue of his ordinary jurisdiction , which was said to be twofold . 1. voluntary , in the collation of benefices . 2. judicial , in the hearing of causes ; the former might be done at rome , but the other in the ordinary ecclesiastical courts . and bracton , who was a judge in his time , owns the pope as much to have the ecclesiastical jurisdiction , as the king had the temporal ; but yet he adds , that , if an ecclesiastical judge did meddle with matters out of their cognizance , the king's prohibition did lye against him , and he ought to supersede his proceedings till it were tryed in the king's court , to whom the jurisdiction belonged . but it is still harder to prove the king's ecclesiastical jurisdiction , because the spiritual courts were to certifie the kings courts , in case of bigamy , bastardy , and such like . for the question is not about their temporal subjection to the king in signifying the sentence of the court , but whence they derived their authority of holding the ecclesi astical courts ; over which , bracton saith the pope had the ordinary jurisdiction , & the power to delegate others to execute it . what doth it signifie to the kings ecclesiastical jurisdiction , that the barons of england would not receive that part of the canon law which concerned the legitimation of children born before wedlock ? for it depended upon the barons consent , whether a canon of the church should be made the law of the land concerning the rights of inheritance . in the reign of king edward i. in the time of ed. i. we may expect some brisker sallies towards the kingdoms deliverance from the popes usurpations , which were thought so intolerable even by the monkish historians , in his fathers reign . what that bull was , the bringing whereof the law-books say , was then adjudged treason , it would have been worth our while to have known . for it is hard to imagine that at that time , the meer bringing a bull , should be so capital a crime , when so many were brought without danger both before and after . but it seems by the certificate of the judges concerning it ( still in the tower ) the matter of it was very prejudicial to the crown . and it argues no spiritual jurisdiction for princes to examine and refuse ( when they see cause ) bulls that come from rome . for this is practised in those countries which profess obedience to the popes jurisdiction . covarruvias affirms it of spain . in portugal , when john the second would have given up that right to the pope , the estates of the kingdom would not permit him . peter the second , duke of britain forbad receiving any bull before examination by his council , under pain of corporal punishments and confiscation of goods . ant. faber saith , in savoy , no bulls have authority there , till they are approved by the senate , and an appeal lies from them tanquam ab abusu . even in naples it self , ferdinand the catholick king , gave a severe reprimand to his vice-roy , for not hanging up a person who would have executed a bull without his authority . the letter it self is published in the jus belgarum ; where many other things may be seen to the same purpose . the right of patronage is a civil right in princes as well as others ; and therefore e. 1. without pretending to ecclesiastical jurisdiction , might justly punish the archbishop of york for his obstinate refusing to admit the kings clerk because of a papal provision . the statute of bigamy might very well be interpreted in parliament , and yet the king have no ecclesiastical jurisdiction . for it was no more than declaring in what sense a law should be taken , i. e. whether it should extend to bigamy before the constitution of the council of lyons , or after . the act of parliament made at carlisle , 35 e. 1. against aliens possessing benefices , is no more than hath been done in countries where the popes jurisdiction is the most owned . as in spain , covarruvias saith , they have prescription and pragmatical sanctions against aliens possessing benefices . the laws of poland , and many edicts in france exclude strangers . but i shall now produce some considerable precedents in the time of ed. 1. to shew that the proceedings against the arch-bishops and bishops for misdemeanors or contempts , was in parliament , and not by commissioners ( the inferior clergy being left to the jurisdiction of their ordinaries . ) 3 ed. 1. e. warren complained to the king , that the archbishop of canterbury had contemned his orders in not taking off excommunication from some of his servants : the king sends to him to proceed no further against the earl or his servants usque ad parliamentum , where the matter of contempt might be debated . but in the mean time the archbishop sends to the king a true account of the matter , and how far he was from contempt ; which is still extant in the records of the tower. 7 e. 1. john peckam , archbishop of canterbury , was summoned to parliament , to answer to a charge of misdemeanors against him , for some passages in the council at reading ; which he was fain to revoke , and to declare that no articles there passed , should create any prejudice to the crown or kingdom . 8 e. 1. the archbishop went about to visit the kings free chappels : the king hearing of it , sent a writ to him , to forbear usque ad proximum parliamentum ; ut tunc ex unamini & mutuo consensu provideamus quid fieri debeat in praemissis . 21 e. 1. john roman , archbishop of york , was attached upon a contempt for excommunicating the bishop of durham , while he was in the king's service . and after a full hearing in pleno parliamento , he was condemned , and upon submission , was fined to the king sour thousand marks . 28 e. 1. a controversie arose between the king and the bishop of chichester , about his refusing to admit a person presented to a prebend in the free chappel of hastings ; the king sends his writ to the warden of cinque-ports ( extant in the tower among the writs of that time ) to enquire into this matter , and to bring an account next parliament , ad quod praedictum episcopum adjornavimus , are the words of the writ : and that the business was heard in parliament , appears by the records . 31 e 1. the king seized on the temporalities of the bishop of durham , upon a judgment given against him in parliament , for extending his spiritual jurisdiction too far ; as appears by the record of the concord made between the king and him . in the reign of king edward the second . in the reign of k. e. 2. nothing is produced but the statute 9 e. 2. for regulating the proceedings between the civil and ecclesiastical courts . but how the kings ecclesiastical jurisdiction is proved hereby , is hard to understand . it appears indeed that the ecclesiastical jurisdiction is allowed and limited by parliament . but from hence , saith he , it follows that these laws may be called the kings eccclesiastical laws , or the ecclesiastical laws of england . there is no question but they may : but there is a difference between laws , so called by acceptation and allowance ; and such as have their whole force and authority from the king. for otherwise , where the popes jurisdiction is owned and received , the pope must receive his authority from the king. but a liberty to exercise authority , and deriving authority are two things . in the reign of king edward the third . in the time of e. 3. many things are alledged , and to more purpose ; but yet a short answer will serve . if the first instance doth hold , viz. that the sentence of excommunication by the archbishop , holds against the sentence of the pope or his legate , it only proves that the eccesiastical jurisdiction here by law is in the archbishop , and not in the pope or his legate . but there may be another reason , mentioned by fitz herbert , viz. that the certificate of the archbishop might be more authentick than the seal of a legate . the second , sixth and eighth only prove the king supreme patron ; and a right of patronage is distinct from a right of ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; and so it was resolved in grendon's case , pl. f. 498. that the king presents by lapse , as supreme patron , and not as supreme ordinary ; for this belongs to him as king , the land on which churches are built being originally held of him : and this right the king enjoyed when the pope was owned to be supreme ordinary : but in the case of his own free chapels fitz-herbert saith right , that in case of lapse by the dean , the king presents as ordinary , the archbishop and bishop having no authority there as ordinaries . the third , fourth and fifth are about exemptions from episcopal jurisdictions granted by the king , especially in his own free chapels , which are only visitable by commission from the king. but this very pretence of exemptions from episcopal jurisdiction was founded upon the belief of the pope's being supreme ordinary ; for exempt places were not supposed to be free from all ordinary jurisdiction , but from that of inferior ordinaries , being immediately subject to the pope . a bishop , by the canon law , may grant an exemption from his right of jurisdiction , but not from his right of visitation , but the pope from both . and in the grant of exemption the immediate subjection to the roman see is expressed . as to the king 's free chapels , their exemption was by an express bull of innocent iii , to king john ; and in the case of the free chapels of s. martins , henry iii granted a prohibition , wherein it is inserted , that it was a free chapel , & ab omni jurisdictione episcopali per sedem apostolicam exempta . and 45 hen. 3. in a prohibition concerning the free chapel of wolverhampton , the grant of innocent iii , is repeated . the right to extra-parochial tithes is provisional , and not by way of inheritance , and so it may belong to the king , although he have no ecclesiastical jurisdiction . as to the severe proceeding about bulls from rome , i have given an account of that already in e. 1. the anointing of kings proves no more their capacity of spiritual jurisdiction , than it proves the kings of israel to have been high priests . there is no doubt the ecclesiastical courts may be limited by the laws of the land ; and there are some causes which belong to them not originally of a spiritual nature ; but they have been a long time possessed of them by custom , and are allowed by law ; which is well expressed in 24 hen. 8. c. 12. where it is said , that all causes testamentary , causes of matrimony and divorces , rights of tithes , oblations and obventions ( the knowledge whereof , by the goodness of princes of this realm , and by the laws and customs of the same , appertaineth to the spiritual jurisdiction of this realm ) shall be determined within the kings jurisdiction and authority . it doth not seem probable , that the king by his own authority would remove secular canons , and put in regular ; when hoveden saith , in the same case , h. 2. did it by the pope's authority , and with the free consent of the parties . the statutes of provisors were excellent statutes ; but are said to be enacted for the good and tranquility of the realm , which no doubt the king and his parliament were bound to take care of . but they prove no more ecclesiastical jurisdiction than the pragmatick sanctions of lewis ix , and charles vii , in france did ; which were of the same nature . the following instances in other reigns , are many of them of the same kind with those already answered ; but what seems to have any new force shall be considered . in the reign of king henry the fourth . 2 h. 4. c. 15. is urged to prove , that the king , by consent of his parliament , did direct the proceedings of the spiritual courts in cases of heresie and other matters more spiritual ; but it is evident by the act it self , that the spiritual jurisdiction was left wholly to the ordinaries , and only an inforcement of it by the civil power was added by the law then made , for the words are , whereas the diocesans of the said realm , cannot by their jurisdiction spiritual , without aid of the said royal majesty sufficiently correct , &c. therefore a power to imprison and fine was given to the ordinaries ; who might before have proceeded by ecclesiastical censures ; but these being contemned by them , the ordinaries called in the assistance of the civil power . if there had been a power before to have proceeded against hereticks by common law , when convict by their ordinaries , i cannot see any reason why that law should be made . in case of apostacy , i. e. renouncing christianity , bracton saith , the person convict is to be burned , and he instanceth in the deacon who turned jew , in the council of oxford : and fleta speaks only of apostates , whether clerks or others , and those are the miscreants in briton ; and in horn , heresie was then the same with renouncing baptism , or turning jew or turk , or using sorcery ; but after wickliff's time the ordinaries inlarged the notion of heresie , and took upon themselves to be sole judges in it ; and for all that i can see , the act 2 h. 4. owns this to be part of their spiritual jurisdiction . and this is one reason alledged for the repeal of this act , 25 h. 8. c. 14. because there is no declaration of heresie made in it , but it is left to the judgment of the ordinary : and therefore this act was ill thought upon , to prove the king 's ecclesiastical jurisdiction . in henry the seventh's time the king is said to be persona mixta , because he hath both ecclesiastical and temporal jurisdiction . but this argument is drawn only from some occasional talk , mentioned in the year books , 10 hen. 8. 18. brian said , that a sage doctor of law said one time to him , that priests might be tried at common law , car il dit quod rex est persona mixta , car est persona unita cum sacerdotibus saint eglyse : if all this be granted , it proves no more than that the king hath jurisdiction by his law over ecclesiastical persons ; which is not disputed . chap. iii. whether the king's supremacy by law extends to the dispensing with laws : of the nature and original of the power ; the inconsistency of such a dispensing power with the frame of our government . having thus far proceeded in clearing the ancient legal supremacy , i am now come to an instance of greater weight and difficulty ; and which will therefore require more pains and care in the examination of it , viz. 11 h. 7. 12. by the ecclesiastical laws allowed with in this realm , a priest cannot have two benefices , nor a bastard can be a priest ; but the king may by his ecclesiastical power and jurisdiction dispense with both these , because they be mala prohibita , and not mala per se. here we are to enquire into these things , ( 1. ) how far the king's power and jurisdiction did extend in the cases mentioned . ( 2. ) how far the reason here given will justifie a power of dispensing with laws . ( 1. ) as to the cases here mentioned ; there is no doubt but the canonists made the power of dispensing in these to be an argument of the pope's supremacy , or the plenitude of his power : but doth it hence follow , that what princes did to their own subjects , as to the qualifying them for a legal possession of benefices , must argue a supremacy in them over ecclesiastical persons and causes ? and there is a difference to be made between not receiving the pope's canons in particular cases ; and a power of dispensing with ecclesiastical laws . if the law were so then , as is noted by fineax , in 11 h. 7. 12. the plain consequence is , that the contrary were no part of the ecclesiastical laws , allowed within this realm . as in the famous case about the canon law concerning bastardy , when the barons said , noluleges angliae mutari ; no man can say , that the barons dispensed with the pope's ecclesiastical laws ; but that they refused to execute them ; for , as it is well observed in standish's case , in kelway's reports , 7 h. 8. ecclesiastical laws have no force , where the general practice hath been contrary . if this were no more than a private opinion of fineux , of what he thought the king might do , although there were no precedent for it , then it signifies little ; but if from hence it appears , what the common law of england was ; then it follows , that this was not received at that time for the ecclesiastical law of this kingdom . and so hobart , in colt and glover's case understands it , f. 147. for he produces this as an instance , that the crown always kept a possession of its natural power : and to this he adds a power of commendam or retaining a benefice with a bishoprick , 11 h. 4. 60. this he calls a power of dispensation in spiritualibus : but with submission to two such great men in the law , if the crown always kept a possession of these rights , there could be no dispensation with the ecclesiastical law in these matters , but an exclusion of it . as for instance , the kings of france do challenge many priviledges to themselves in their kingdoms , in plain derogation to the canon law ; and for these priviledges they plead an ancient right of the crown , or an immemorial custom : as in the great controversic of late years , about the regale , the canon law is express , that upon pain of excommunication , no lay person what soever shall presume to meddle with the profits of vacant bishopricks ; which was decreed by two popes in several councils , urban ii , in a council at awergn , mxcv , and innocent ii , in . lateran council mc xxxix ; both entred in the body of the canon law : and yet the kings of france insist to this day on the rights of vacant sees , as belonging to them . but can this be pleaded as a dispensing with the ecclesiastical laws allowed in that realm ? no , but that this part of the ecclesiastical law was not received there ; for that , partly by the feudal right , partly by the right of the crown , partly by immemortal custom , the profits of vacant bishopricks accrue to the king. it is a harder point to defend the regale , where the custom hath gone along with the canon ; but if the rights of the crown be defended in france against custom and canon too , our kings cannot be blamed for resuming other rights after so long usurpation by the popes . but where the canon law was not received in any part of it , there it hath no force to oblige ; and where there is no ecclesiastical law in force , there can be no dispensing with it ; for although the later canon law , doth void all customs against the liberties and priviledges of the church , non debet in hac parte canonibus , ex aliqua consuetudine praejudi●ium generari : yet when these canonists come to explain it , they tell us , that an immemorial custom hath force against a canon ; but how ? not as a custom , but as it is a proof of an ancient priviledge granted by the pope ; although there be not the least ●ootsteps of it : and so this instance of h. 7. will prove , according to this way , only some ancient priviledge our kings had , and no ecclesiastical jurisdiction by the right of the crown . but whether the king could dispense with the ecclesiastical laws in these cases , or not , it is certain the pope challenged to himself the power of doing it . for , after that the third council of lateran liad strictly forhidden pluralities ( which were then so common and scandalous ) upon pain of forfeiture , innocent the third complained in the fourth lateran , that he saw little or no benesit come by that severe canon ; and therefore he seems to make one more severe : that whosoever takes another benefice , shall be deprived of the former ipso jure ; and if he seeks to keep it , to lose the other . yet after all , this ends only in the popes power to dispense as he saw cause , with persons of greater rank or merit , and greater preferments . the words are , circa sublimes tamen & literatas personas , quae majoribus beneficiis sunt honorandae , cum ratio pustulaverit , per sedem apostolicam poterit dispensari . here the dispensing power is fairly owned in the canon it self . and in the other case , of the incapacity of priesthood by illegitimation ; the same stout pope declares , that it was in his power to dispense with that too . the case was this ; the church of worcester , upon the vacancy of the see , had chosen the arch-deacon of york for their bishop ; he comes to the arch-bishop of canterbury for confirmation ; but secretly confesses to him his illegitimacy ; ( which came to the popes ear. ) upon application to the pope for his confirmation , he demurs upon it . he could not deny that he had all other qualifications : but there was a canon of the former lateran council , which voided the election of all persons illegitimate . so then the business is at an end . not so neither . his predecessor could not hinder him from dispensing in this case ; who had equal power with himself . and there were many reasons to induce him to grant him a dispensation . why then did he not give one ? there was something else to be done first . the dispensing power must be owned by the church of worcester : and therefore they must first intreat the pope to dispense with him , by a humble supplication ; and then expect his favour by postulation . and so , for the present he voids his election . matt. paris takes particular notice , that in the publication of the decretals by gregory 9. this power of dispensing in these two cases , was looked on as a great innovation ; but such as brought great advantages to the court of rome . and the same pope , saith matt. westminster , voided the election of john bloud to the see of canterbury , because he had enjoyed two benefices with cure of souls , without a dispensation . and stephanus de segrave obtained , he saith , of that popes nuncio here , a dispensation of tot quot ; but it came to nothing by his sons death . here we see a power of dispensing with ecclesiastical laws , publickly owned and entred in the body of the canon-law ; and that by virtue of the plenitude of the popes power , which could not be bounded by the canons of the church , nor by the laws of his predecessors ; nor by the solemn profession every pope makes at his entrance , to preserve inviolably the canons and constitutions of his predecessors . this made so great an alteration in the state of the church , that it is no wonder great complaints were made of it ; considering that the consequence of such a power , could be nothing less than a subversion of all orders , and canons , and privileges ; for there could be no security of any of them any longer than it consisted with the popes pleasure . hence came all the complaints of non-obstante's , by the whole english nation in parliament , that by their means oaths , customs , charters , grants , privileges signified nothing ; for the pope could dispense with his own oaths and promises , as well as other mens ; and so there could be no trust in any thing he said or promised in never so solemn a manner . which is an effectual course to overthrow any government in the world . and it is a wonder , that after such gross and avowed violations of the most solemn engagements , mankind did not renounce all kind of society with him : for that is founded upon trust in compacts and promises ; and if those may be dissolved at pleasure , there is no foundation of mutual society left ; there being no reason to expect the performance of that from others , which they do not think them selves obliged to do . and so such a power of dispensing with obligations , naturally tends to a dissolution of government . for it is sinking the main pillars on which the whole fabrick stands ; which will tumble down sooner or later upon the heads of those who do it . but the great argument then was , that supreme power cannot be bound ; and therefore the popes pleaded , whatsoever canons or laws their predecessors made , they could not tie up them ; because par in parem non habet imperium : so we find innocent 3. argued in the canon-law . and to the same purpose matt. paris saith , that his successor inneocnt 4. did . but they did not attend to their own professions , still extant in the liber diurnus , wherein they did declare in the most solemn manner , that they would maintain the canons and constitutions of their predecessors . which was an absolute bar to all non-obstante's , if they acted upon principles of common honesty among men. but besides this , in privileges granted to others upon valuable considerations ( which the popes took care of ) the persons to whom they are granted , become parties , and have a real interest in them ; so that they become of the nature of contracts ; which cannot be broken without plain injustice , and dissolving that obligation between them . it is agreed by the most learned and judicious lawyers , that when grants or promises do pass into the nature of contracts , they are irrevocable by the parties that made them . and this the best french canonists do plead against the popes power of revoking the gallican liberties , supposing them at first to have come from the popes condescensions to them . and the same reason will hold as to other liberties . but here lies the main difficulty , to shew , when the grants that are made by superiors , do pass into the nature of contracts ; so that they cannot be revoked or dispensed with . the short of it is , when they are rather capitulations than laws . for laws are properly the commands of those who have authority to oblige ; and the reason of the obligation is drawn from the authority of the persons : but capitulations proceed upon consent of parties having differing interests ; and these among private persons , are called contracts ; and no one questions , but that such all men are by natural justice bound to perform . but the popes insisted on the plenitude of their power ; and a question is put among the canonists , and variously debated : whether if the pope swear to some things in the conclave , as that he will hold a general council within such a time , he can dispense with himself , or not ? some say , he is guilty of perjury , and cannot absolve himself , although he should apprehend that a greater good would come by not keeping it . for that both pope and emperor are bound by their own contracts ; the keeping of them being a part of natural justice : which no plenitude of power can dispense with ; since all contracts giva a right to the persons with whom they are made ; insomuch that baldus his authority is cited by them for these words , contractus qui fiunt cum principe , habent naturam bonae fidei contra dominum ; and he goes so far as to say , that the sovereign power is so obliged by the contracts made by princes with their own subjects , that they are not revocable by themselves or their successors : and if they were not obliged by their own contracts , no man could trust them ; and consequently all society with them , would be dissolved . and whatever supreme power may do as to such acts as are properly its own , yet where there is jus quaesitum alteri ( as in all contracts there is ) that cannot be taken away by it . but all this was answered on the other side , by the plenitude of the popes power ; for it was a contradiction , they said , to own that , and to say , that there was any engagement by oath , or otherwise , which he could not dispense with . for , as hank . 11 h. 4. 37. says , papa omnia potest . and therefore all such oaths and promises as limit the popes dispensing power , are void in themselves . and as to ecclesiastical laws or constitutions , they easily resolved all difficulties about them , upon such principles as these . 1. that the popes have the supreme power in the church . 2. that the ecclesiastical laws were the popes laws . 3. that it is an inseparable prerogative in the pope to dispense with ecclesiastical laws upon necessity and urgent occasions . 4. that the pope is the sole judge of that necessity . 5. that this was not a trust given to the pope by councils or conclaves , but by god and st. peter , and therefore cannot be taken away from her . but i shall endeavour to give a clearer light into this matter , by shewing the several steps and degrees how this dispensing power came into the world , and how it passed from the ecclesiastical to other laws , when princes assumed such a plenitude of power in civils , which the popes practised in ecclesiasticals . the first time we read of dispensations was with respect to the ancient canons of the church ; and it implied a relaxation of the rigour of them ; not with respect to their force or binding power , but as to the penance which persons were to undergo for the violation of them . and herein the notion of dispensing was very different from what the canonists made it afterwards , when they declared it to be a relaxation of the law it self ; so that it should not have that force upon the conscience which it otherwise had : for , a dispensation with them , is a licence to do that which they cannot lawfully do without it ; and that with a non-obstante to that which otherwise makes it unlawful . de jure illicitum fit ex dispensatione licitum , & hic est proprie effectus dispensationis , saith pyrrhus corradus ; who gives a large account of the practice of dispensations in the court of rome , which conclude with a non-obstante to any former constitutions or canons of councils : but no such thing can be found in the ancient practice of the church , because the popes themselves were then believed to be under the canons . but when it was supposed , that the severe execution of the canons would rather hinder than advance the good of the church , the governours of it thought they had sufficient authority to abate the rigorous execution of them : as about the times of penance , the translation of bishops from one see to another , the intervals of orders , and such like . but the popes then pretended to be strict observers of the canons , when the particular bishops took upon them to dispense with the execution of them ; as appears by ivo's preface to his collection of canons , where he distinguisheth the immoveable or moral precepts from the canonical ; which he calls , moveable . in the former , saith he , no dispensation is to be allowed ; but in those things which only concern discipline , the bishops may dispense , provided there be a compensation , i. e. that the church's interest may be better secured or advanced thereby , as he there discourses at large ; and his rule is , ibi dispensatio admittenda est , ubi rigor periculosus est : but by this means the severity of the primitive discipline was quite lost . the bishops of rome observing this , thought it a proper time for them to appear zealous for the ancient canons , which gained them a great reputation in the world ; and by this means the custody of the canons was looked on as their particular province : which they improved so well , that at last they turned the guardianship of the canons into a power over them ; and then they found fault with the bishops dispensing with them , for another reason , viz. because the dispensing power was a prerogative of the roman see , and inferior bishops could act no farther in it than they had authority from it . we find that in s. bernard's time , the pope did take upon him to dispense too far , to his great dissatisfaction ; for by his dispensing power , he saith , he overthrew the order of the church ; murmur loquor , saith he , & querimoniam ecclesiarum . the pope dispensed with the ecclesiastical laws , in exemptions of abbots and others from that subordination , they stood in to their proper superiors : he saith , he could not see how this dispensing power could be justified : you do indeed shew a plenitude of power , but it may be not of justice ; you shew what you can do , but it is a question whether you ought or not ; and you ought to consider , first , whether it be lawful ; then whether it be decent ; and lastly , whether it be expedient . at last , he allows a dispensing power in two cases , urgent necessity , and common good ; otherwise he saith , it is not fidelis dispensatio , sed crudelis dissipatio , an overthrow of all order and government . in one of his epistles he speaks sharply against getting a dispensation to do that which it was not lawful to do without one : and he thinks he hath disproved it by invincible reason , for a licence from the pope can never make that lawful , which without it were unlawful . when the practice of the dispensing power grew more common , there were two great questions raised concerning it ; whether if a dispensation were granted without just cause , it were lawful or not ? and , whether if it were not lawful , yet it was valid ? there were some who flattered the dispensing power so much , that they allowed it in all cases , whether there were a just cause or not : these were the high-flown canonists , who resolved all laws into will and pleasure : but others , who allowed a dispensing power upon a just cause , yet thought it repugnant to the original design of government , for those who are entrusted with care of the laws , to dispense with them , without such a cause as answers the end of government : and some went so far , as to deny any validity in a dispensation granted upon pleasure ; for as an unjust law hath no force , so , said they , an unjust dispensation of a good law hath none . upon this point two great schoolmen differ . suarez , whom the lord chief justice vaughan commends for his learning in this matter , goes upon these grounds , 1. that a prince is not dominus , sed dispensator legum ; although the force of a law depends upon his authority ; and therefore in dispensing with a law he doth not act by absolute power , but by administration : for he is not lord over the community , but governour . 2. that for him to dispense in a law made for the community , without a just cause , is not only malum quia prohibitum , sed ex se , & ex natura rei & semper malum : therefore suarez was far from thinking a prince might dispense with any thing that was not malum in se ; for he makes it to be so , for him to dispense with a malum quia prohibitum , if it be prohibited by a law made for a publick good , and there be no just cause for it . 3. that although a prince sins in dispensing with such a law ; yet his dispensation holds as to the force of the law ; which he supposes to depend on the will of the prince , and therefore his will being altered , the obligation ceaseth as to the persons dispensed with . 4. that although such a dispensation holds as to the law , yet he thinks a prince bound in conscience to revoke such a dispensation , because it is unlawful for him to persist in such a will , it being repugnant to the common good , and the obligation of his duty . 5. that if such a dispensation be to the injury of a third person , then it is void in it self , as being repugnant to justice . vasquez saith , they are all agreed , that no prince hath a power to dispense with his laws according to his pleasure ; or because they are his laws : but he saith , there is a dispute , whether an unlawful dispensation be valid or not ? and he thinks not , and that a man's action after the dispensation , is as faulty as if there had been none ; his reason is , because a prince is bound by his own laws , so that he cannot dispense with himself as to the obligation of them ; for , if he could at pleasure dispense with himself , he could never be bound ; for how can a man be bound to keep a law , in which he can dispense with himself when he pleases ? and if he cannot dispense with himself , much less with any under him . having thus endeavoured to clear the nature and original of the dispensing power ; i now come ( 2. ) to the reason assigned by sir e. coke , from the year books , why the king may dispense with laws , because they be mala prohibita and not mala per se. my lord vaughan said right concerning it , that this rule hath more confounded men's judgments on this subject than rectified them : which i shall make appear by shewing , i. that it alters the frame of our government . ii. that it takes away all security by law. iii. that it contradicts the sense of our nation in former ages . iv. that the rule is contrary to the precedents in law. i. that it alters the frame of our government . for it goes upon a very false ground , viz. that the king may dispense with any thing which is not evil in its own nature , or antecedently to any human laws ; which is to suppose the whole legislative power to be lodged in the person of the king : for , all who understand these matters , do agree , that a power to dispense with laws , is the same with a power to make them . dispensare , hoc est , lege solvere is solus potest , qui ferendae abrogandaeque leg is potestatem habet ; saith h. grotius . suarez saith , he hath the power of dispensing , qui legem tulit , quia ab ejus voluntate & potentia pendet . vasquez , that the dispensing power lies in him , qui habet potestatem condendi & abrogandi legem . pufendorf , that none can dispense with a law , but such as have the power of making it . but we need no authorities in this matter : for to dispense ( in the sense it is here taken ) is to take away the obligation of a law ; and whoever takes it away must have the power of laying it on : and there is no difference between the dispensation with a law , and the abrogation of it ; but that a dispensation is an abrogation of it to particular persons , while others are under the force of it ; and an abrogation is a general dispensation , that being no more than a relaxation of the whole law , to those persons who were bound by it before : but if a part of the law be taken away , as to the whole community , then it is called a derogation of it ; but if the law be relaxed only for a limited time and under certain conditions , then it is not an abrogation , but an indulgence or suspension of the law. to dispense with a law is more than to give an equitable sense or a favourable interpretation of a law ; for he that inteprets a law , supposes his interpretation to agree with the sense and design of the law ; he that dispenses , owns that which he dispenses with , to be against the intention of the law , but that he hath power to take away the force of it , so far as he thinks fit . he that saith , thou shalt not kill , doth not reach to legal executioners of justice , interprets the law according to reason and equity : but when god said to abraham , go and sacrifice thy son , he must be supposed , by virtue of his supreme authority , to dispense with the law in his case , so as to make that lawful upon his command , which would not have been so without it . some will not allow this to be called a dispensation , but an alteration of the matter of the law ; but when that alteration comes from the authority of the law makers , it is the same ; so that to interpret a law is an act of discretion and judgment ; but to dispense with it , of authority and jurisdiction . and none can therefore dispense in the law of god , but he that made it ; all that the wisest and greatest men can justly pretend to , is no more than to give the true sense of it ; and it is intolerable prsumption for any creature to pretend to more . an equitable sense , as to human law , is not always that which seems to be most favourable to those who go against the letter of it ; but that which most enforces the end and design of the law , although it be not comprehended in the words of it . if a law mentions a crime of a lesser nature , in regard of circumstances , and in regard of those circumstances , promises some favour , ( as benefit of the clergy ) it can be no equitable sense to extend it to such acts which have worse circumstances , because the ground of the favour was the extenuation of the fact by the circumstances ; so that the chief rule of equity in the interpretation of a law , is to attend to the intention and design of it , more than to the bare words . the intention and design of the law is not to be measured by particular and accidental cases , wherein some inconveniencies are to be born , but by the publick and general good , which more than makes amends for them ; which is the reason of that maxim , better a mischief than an inconvenience ; which is false , unless taken in such an equitable sense . there are certain ways of reason , which mankind do allow in the equitable interpretation of laws , as that no positive law must be interpreted against natural and divine laws : that if laws contradict each other , one or the other must lose its force : that no case which overthrows a law by necessary consequence , was ever intended to be allowed by it ; for that were to make a law , and to give a liberty to break it at the same time. if a law be designed for a publick good , and an exception be afterwards made against it , as to the incapacity of some persons , by it , for publick service , which could not but be foreseen and considered at the time of making the law , there is no reason that should be alledged as a reason for dispensing with the law , which was intended at first by the law : for however the case may be put , as to such things which could not be foreseen , at the making of a law , yet what was intended to be prevented by the making it , cannot in reason be alledged against it : because if there had not been other things to have over-ballanced that inconvenience the law had never been passed . there is no doubt but the same power which makes a law , may dispense with it , if it sees cause ; for if it can abrogate a law , as to the whole community , it may as well dispense with it , as to particular persons , and leave it in force to all others . the question then is , whether a prince assuming to himself a dispensing power , doth not thereby assume the legislative too ? since it appears , that there can be no power to take off the obligation of a law , but that which causes it ; although it be with respect to particular persons ; but if it amount to a general suspension of a law , there can be no question to those who understand what these things mean. our present business was to shew , that if the king can dispense with mala prohibita , as such , the legislative power must be resolved into him ; because a dispensing power can be refer'd to no other : and if the king may dispense with all mala prohibita , he may dispense with all just human laws . for no law can be just , which requires malum in se ; and therefore such a law being void of it self , there can be no exercise of a dispensing power , but concerning mala prohibita . and if the king can therefore dispense , because they are only prohibited , then from a parity of reason he may dispense with all laws that concern only such things ; and we cannot be secure of any laws , but such as forbid things that are evil in themselves . ii. and this is my second reason against it , that it takes away all security by our laws , both as to our religion and liberties . 1. as to our religion : i grant , that , to take away all religion , is malum in se ; to take away the true religion , is malum in se ; but in a nation divided about the true religion , and where the prince is of one opinion , and the main body of the nation of another concerning it , what security can the people by this rule have as to the enjoying that which they account the true religion , but the prince doth not ? the utmost we can suppose in this case , is , for such laws to be made , as they apprehend to be most effectual for this purpose . but what security can these laws afford , if the prince assume a power of dispensing with ecclesiastical laws ? it is not possible they can have any , unless they can be secure he shall never exercise this dispensing power ; for by it , he may equally suspend all laws which relate to it ; he may give a dispensation to such as are unqualified by our laws , and put them not only into places of authority and trust , but into all ecclesiastical preferments , as soon as he thinks fit ; and that without any check upon his conscience ; because those whose office it is to interpret the laws , tell him , he hath such a power by law to dispense with ecclesiastical laws , although passed in the solemnest manner , and with a design to give security to the people concerning the preserving their religion . and the higher this point is carried , still the less security for , if it be thought such a prerogative of the crown , as voids all that is made against it , then laws signifie just nothing : for , every law is a limitation of unbounded will and power ; and therefore laws afford no manner of security ; for either they are void of themselves , or may be made void when a sovereign prince pleases . and i think ( as men are ) meer will and pleasure will never be taken for an infallible security . but it may be said , that taking away the true religion , is malum in se ; and therefore by this rule such laws cannot be dispensed with . very true ; we think so : but suppose a king of another opinion ; and that he should think it good service to destroy heresie and schism , and those are mala in se ; what security can there be then from this rule ? for the same persons who assert the dispensing power , make the king to be judge , not meerly of the necessity and urgent occasions , but of what is malum in se , and what not ? suppose then , he should look on our religion as heresie and schism , what possible security can this distinction afford us ? 2. as to our civil liberties ; which are founded upon our laws , made by the consent of king and people . but if there be such an inseparable prerogative in the crown , as enables the king to dispense with all mala prohibita , what becomes of all the ancient charters of liberties ? for , no one can pretend that the contrary to them all are mala in se. and if there be no farther security , than what this distinction affords , we are in a very precaridus condition , as to all our liberties . i confess the case is different , as to the ecclesiastical laws , mentioned in 11 h. 7. 12. and as to our civil liberties : because these ecclesiastical laws had their force as such from a foreign power ; and as far as they were the laws of the kingdom , it was by a tacit consent and acceptation ; and not by any solemn enacting of them . and as to such as these , where the laws were not received , and the things were no farther evil , than as they were prohibited by such a foregin power , there is nothing but what is reasonable in the case of 11 h. 7. 12. as it is in the books . but when this hath been extended to laws which have passed in the most solemn manner by the king in parliament ; it is time not only to take notice of , but to set forth the mischievous consequences of this distinction , as it is so applied ; for it leaves us under no manner of security by our laws . 3. it contradicts the sense of our own nation in former ages . which i shall shew in a remarkable instance , about the statutes of provisors , 35 e. 1. 25 e. 3. 13 r. 2. which were prohibitory statutes . and it cannot be supposed that at that time , when the pope was allowed to be head of the church , and consequently supreme patron of the benefices of it , that the acceptance of a title to an ecclesiastical benefice from him , should be thought malum in se. but these statutes being in force , i shall make it appear that the king did own he had no power to dispense with them , but as the parliament thought fit to allow it . i begin with 15 r. 2 at a time , when the kingdom was in quiet ; and however , could not be in any disturbance on the account of the statute of provisors , which the nation desired and only those who depended on the court of rome opposed . but the court-bishops suggested that it was for the kings interest in dealing with the court of rome , to have a power to relax and to dispense with these statutes as he saw cause . therefore the arch-bishop of york , then chancellor , proposed it in the opening of the parliament , as one of the things for which it was called , viz. to find out a temperament in that matter , so as the pope might not lose his right , nor the king his . after this matter was debated , the commons declare their assent en plein parliament , that without prejudice to the rights of those who were in possession by virtue of the statute , the king by the advice and consent of the lords , might dispense with the said statute , so as should seem reasonable and useful till the next parliament , but so as the said statute be repealed in no article of it . and they reserve to themselves the liberty of disagreeing the next parliament . and they conclude with a solemn protestation , that this was a novelty not practised before , and ought not to be drawn into an example and precedent for the future ; and they desire this protestation might be entred and recorded in the rolls of parliament ; which the king commanded to be done . doth this now look like a declaratory act , and made in affirmance of the kings dispensing power ? it might as well be said , that an act for restraining the prerogative , is made in affirmance of it . it is true , there is a dispensing power granted , but with such restrictions and limitations as shew , that such a power was not then thought to be inherent in the crown . for , 1. why should it be proposed to the parliament to grant it , if the king had it before ? did the king ever put it to the parliament to grant him a power to pardon malefactors ? but in the case of dispensing with a law , it was not only proposed but assigned , as one reason of calling the parliament . 2. why till the next parliament , if it were owned to be an inherent right of the crown ? would the parliament go about to bound and limit an inseparable prerogative in such a manner ? 3. why is it called a novelty , and a thing not to be drawn into example ? was ever any thing like this said of a declaratory act ? the natural consequence whereof is just contrary ; that whereas some just right of the crown hath been contested and denied , for the future it ought to be owned and submitted to by all persons . it is hard to think of words more inconsistent with a meer declaratory act than those , ne soit trait en ensample nen consequence en temps avenir . 4. if this were a declaratory act , what need it be repeated so often in parliament afterwards ? were the commons so forgetful of the kings prerogative , as to need making so many declaratory acts about the same thing ? yet thus we find it about this dispensing power , as to the statutes of provisors . for 16 r. 2. the archbishop of york again declared in the opening of the parliament , that one cause of calling it , was to settle this matter about provisors . and the commons again yielded , the king should have such a power to moderate it , as he should with his council judge expedient ; but so as it be all laid open before the next parliament , that they might upon good advice agree to it . 17 r. 2. tydeman , abbot of beauley , was by the popes provision , made bishop of landaff . but the king , notwithstanding the former proceedings , did not take upon him to dispense with the statute , but left it to the parliament ; and his dispensation was passed by act of parliament , the king , lords and commons assenting thereto . 20 r. 2. the commons in parliament do again assert de bon gre de leur parte en plein parlement , that the king with his council may dispense with the statute of provisors , as shall seem fit , so as the same be heard and examined the next parliament , and so corrected as shall be thought convenient by the king , with the advice of his council in parliament . 1 h. 4. the commons in like manner give their assent , that the king should have the same power of dispensing with the statute , which his predecessors had , and to repeal and annul it , as should seem expedient to him . which was no more than a general dispensation . yet notwithstanding this was recorded in parliament . 2 h. 4. the commons appearing before the king and the lords , it was declared , that the dispensation should not extend to cardinals or other strangers . at the same parliament a petition was presented to the king , that if any one did accept a benefice by papal provision , against the statute , and had his pardon from the king for it ; yet if he went about to disturb the present possessor , by virtue of his provision , then his pardon should be void , and he should incur the penalty of the statute . to which the king gave his assent . 3 h. 4. the king having granted particular licenses for dispensations as to this statute , and finding the great inconveniences which came by them , he generally and universally revovoked them , and promised in parliament to find out some proper remedy in this matter . 7 h. 4. the king was moved in parliament to confirm that revocation ; but he then took time to consider . but 9 h. 4. c. 8. the king reinforced in parliament all the statutes against provisors ; as it is in print . 1 h. 5. the commons pray , that the statutes may stand in full force against provisors ; and that no protection or grant made by the king to hinder the execution of the said statutes , shall be allowable , or of any force ; and whatever is done contrary to them , shall be null . the answer is , let the statutes be observed and kept . but if the statutes were to be strictly observed , what saving can there be to the king's prerogative ? since the statutes were universal , and the king 's particular grants in this case were the great motive of the commons desire to have them reinforced , in the beginning of this king's reign : and these statutes continued in full force to the time of h. 8. insomuch that cardinal woolsey was prosecuted by the king's attorney , for offending against them by his legatine power , although he had the king's assent to it , and he exercised it several years by his permission . stephen gardiner , in his letter to the protector , saith , that he obtained his legatine power by the king's assent : from whence he observes , what danger they may fall in , who break the law with the king's consent ; for in the cardinal's case , he saith , that because his legatine power was against the laws of the realm , the judges conclude the offence to be such as incurred the praemunire : and this he asserts was the sense of the lawyers of that time ; and for confirmation of it , he brought the case of the lord tiptoft , who sufferd on tower-hill , because in execution of the king's commission , he had offended against the laws of the realm : and of many judges who had fines set on their heads in like case , for acting against the law of the realm by the king's commandment . but it is pleaded on the other side , that the commons , 1 h. 5. n. 22. put in the saving the king's prerogative into their petition concerning the statute of provisors , that it may stand in full force : and this was an owning the king's dispensing power by all the commons in parliament , when they were in a high debate with the crown . this seems to have a good shew of reason to any one that doth not consider the practice of those times , in acts of parliament ; for the petitions of the commons , before 2 h. 5. were not taken entire and just as they delivered them ; but several clauses were inserted by the court , especially such as seemed to preserve the king's prerogative ; which the commons found so inconvenient , that the next year , as serjeant glanvil observed , ( and probably on the occasion of these savings , 1 h. 5. n. 15 , and n. 22. ) the course was altered , and hath so continued . therefore methinks so great weight should not be laid on these savings , as if they implied the owning the dispensing power , when the design of the law was against it . and the king's answer is , let the statutes be held and kept . i appeal to any man's understanding , whether the saving the king's prerogative can be any other than a general clause put in , without respect to the dispensing power ; since the petition is against the exercise of it , and the answer , that the statutes should be observed ? if they were observed , what use of the dispensing power ; for that lay in giving leave not to observe them ? what strange sense is this , the king promises , the statutes shall be kept , saving his prerogative , that they may not be kept ? for , they feared the not keeping them from such a prerogative : and when the king therefore yields they shall be kept , he doth give up any such prerogative , or else he doth not answer their petition . the truth is , when the kings had got this power into their hands , though it were with such limitations at first , yet they found arts from time to time to keep it , till at last they were unwilling to part with it ; as appears by h. 4. but upon the restless importunity of the commons it was laid down by him . and now in the beginning of h. 5. the commons took care to prevent its rising in a new reign ; but he being a prince not ready to part with any thing which looked like power , was in probability , not easie to be brought to confirm the statute : of provisors , without some general words of saving his prerogative , which the commons might yield to , that they might gain the main point ; since those words could signifie nothing against the very intention and design of the law. iv. the precedents in law do contradict this rule ; as will appear by those which are produced by the lord chief justice vaughan , in the case of thomas and sorrel . 1. the king cannot dispense with a common nusance , for the king , he saith , cannot pardon continuing nusances ; but the penalty he may . the king cannot dispense with a nusance to the high ways , by 11 h. 7. he cannot pardon or discharge the nusance , or the suit for the same , the high-ways being necessary for such as trawel ; but common nusances are not mala in se , which are not evils at common law ( as some understand them ) but things so intrinsecally evil , that no circumstances can make them lawful . malum in se is a moral evil , in its own nature ; and therefore can never be dispensed with ; but a nusance at common law is but a natural evil , and all the moral evil of it lies in the prohibition by law : and yet in these , it is granted , that the king cannot dispense : and the year-book saith , that a licence to make a nusance in the high way were void : for what reason ? is it a thing forbidden by the natural or divine law ? cannot the king , for his will and pleasure , license the making a nusance ? and yet is it possible for men of sense to imagin , that he can by his dispensing power give leave to do such things , as in consequence overthrow our laws and religion ? doth the law take greater care of the high-way than of our liberties and religion ? this would seem strange doctrine to people of another country , viz. that by the law of england the king hath no power over the high-way , to dispense with a common nusance therein , but he hath over the laws made for the most publick good and security of the nation . and truly this cannot but seem strange to as many among our selves , as allow themselves the liberty of thinking ; doth the law only take care of oxen and high-ways ? but it is well observed by the learned chief justice vaughan , that publick nusances , are not mala in se , but mala politica & introducta ; and when a thing is said to be prohibited by the common law , the meaning is no more but that the ancient record of such a prohibition is not to be found 2. the king cannot pardon the damage done to particular persons , saith the same chief justice , where the suit is only the kings , but for the benefit and safety of a third person , the king cannot dispense with the suit , but by consent and agreement of the party concerned . and again , penal laws , the breach whereof are to men's particular damage , cannot be dispensed with . and the chief justice herbert owns , that the king cannot dispense with laws which vest the least right or property in any of his subjects . here we see , the prerogative bounded , where the interest of particular persons is concerned ; but doth the law take more care of them than of the publick interest , and the concernment of the whole nation ? but i find another distinction in this case , viz. there is bonum publicum ; and laws made for that may be dispensed with : and there is bonum singulorum populi ; and with laws that concern that the king cannot dispense . this is admirable learning , if it be brought out of these terms : and the meaning is , the king can do nothing to the prejudice of the people in their private capacities , but he can do what he will with the publick . i had thought , a prince had been , in the first place , bound to regard the good of the publick , and to take care of the salus populi complicati , ( as it is called ) i. e. as they are imbodied together , and not of the private interests of particular men , which can never be preserved , when the publick safety is not secured . 3. it is granted , that in penal laws , by act of parliament , where the offenders are punishable at the king's suit , but where the offence is to the immediate wrong of particular persons , and for which the law gives them special actions , the king cannot dispense . never was law more tender of the interest of particular persons than ours : but suppose a penal law by act of parliament , relates immediately to the publick , and gives no particular persons any special actions ; is such a law therefore dispensable , because only the publick good , and the safety of the nation are concerned ? which are not ( it seems ) to be valued with the private interests of particular men. they who affirm such things , may be very learned in book cases ; but they do not seem to have studied the jus publicum , as bracton calls it , which concerns statum reipub. or the political law of this nation ; which shews the great respect which the good of the community ought to have above private interests : but when persons take up their notions and maxims , from laws relating to meum and tuum , they are very apt to judge of publick laws , according to those measures . 4. it is granted , that the king cannot license a baker , brewer , or victualler to break the assize of bread or ale , nor a miller to take more toll than the law appoints ( therefore these are mala prohibita ) ; nor a taverner to break the assize of wine ; nor a butcher to sell measled swines-flesh or murrain flesh ; nor any man to forestal the market , by a non obstante of the statute de pistoribus ; which prohibits all these under several penalties . nor can he licence butchers , fishmongers , poulterers , or other sellers of victuals ; nor hostlers to sell hay and oats at what price they please , by a non obstante of the statute of 23 e. 3. c. 6. and 13 r. 2. c. 8. still the law is extreamly tender of us , as to meat and drink , and not only for our selves , but for our horses too ; so that the king cannot dispense with the laws about them : and yet can we think so meanly of the wisdom of our ancestors , that they would take such care of bread , and wine , and horse-meat , that the king himself could not inhance the price of them ; but that as to their laws , which relate to the publick , they were content to leave them to the will and pleasure of their prince ? no one that reads the history of our ancestors , and the contests they had with kings to obtain their publick liberties , could ever entertain such a thought concerning them . 5. if foreign manufactures or foreign corn be prohibited for support of the natives , a licence to one or more , to bring them in , if general , is void by the case of monopolies , notwithstanding a non obstante . this is certainly malum prohibitum ; and yet the king cannot dispense with it . and it is really a very hard case , if the king cannot dispense with a monopoly in trade , and may dispense with a monopoly in religion , i. e. that notwithstanding all the laws for setling our religion at home , he may grant a licence to foreigners to introduce another , although never so repugnant to our laws ; for none who understood our affairs , could imagine , that this dispensing power was set up for any other end. but what shall we say to the precedents on the other side ? i shall pass by others , which have been sufficiently answered already , and only speak to that which above all others hath been declared to be the foundation of the dispensing power ; and therefore deserves to be farther cleared ; and that is , the case of dispensing with the statutes about men's continuing sheriffs more than a year ; which is urged as plain and concluding , because it was for a publick good , and preventing great mischiefs ; yet the king's power of dispensing in this case was allowed by all the judges of england , 2 h. 7. and this hath been cited as adjudged in several books of great authority , fitz-herbert , plowden , coke , &c. and the practice hath ever since been accordingly . this is the whole strength of the argument . and i shall not repeat what others have already said , to shew that this was not the reason of the judicial sentence then given ; but the particular ground of one of the judges , after they had declared the patent to be good . but however that were , it cannot be denied , that great lawyers since that time , have taken it to have been the sense of the judges then . for coke's words are express in calvin's case ; it is enacted by the parliament of 23. h. 6. that no man should serve the king as sheriff of any county above one year , and that notwithstanding of any clause of non-obstante to the contrary , that is to say , notwithstanding that the king should expresly dispense with the said statute ; howbeit , it is agreed in 2 h. 7. that against the express purview of that act , the king may by a special non-obstante dispense with that act. here it is plain , that in coke's opinion , at least , the judges did agree , that although king and parliament had made an act which made void any grant with a non obstante , yet that such a grant made afterwards , with a special non obstante , was good . i am not much concerned , whether it were their opinion or not ; because i think there is much greater reason , and stronger authority on the other side . 1. as to reason : if a non-obstante from the king , be good , when by act of parliament a non-obstante is declared void , what doth an act of parliament signifie in such a case ? must we say , it is a void clause ? but then to what purpose was it put in ? did they who made the act , understand it to be a void clause when they put it in ? certainly , it was then thought otherwise ; and if it were so , we have the authority of the parliament against the opinion of the judges . if it were not a void clause then , how came it to be so afterwards ? what alteration was made in the law of england in that interval , and by whom ? how comes a clause that had force in 23 h. 6. to have none , 2 h. 7 ? could radcliff or the rest , by their opinions , destroy the force of an act of parliament ? no ; but coke saith , no act can bind the king from any prerogative which is sole and inseparable from his person ; but he may dispense with it by a non-obstante , as a sovereign power to command any of his subjects to serve him for the publick weal , and this solely and inseparably is annexed to his person ; and this royal power cannot be restrained by any act of parliament , neither in thesi nor in hypothesi ; but that the king by his royal power may dispense with it ; for upon the commandment of the king and obedience of the subject , does his government consist ; as it is provided by the statute of 23 h. 6. c. 8. that all patents made or to be made of any office of a sheriff , &c. for term of years , or for life , in fee-simple or in tail , are void and of none effect , any clause or parol of non-obstante put or to be put into such patents to be made notwithstanding . and further , whosoever shall take upon him or them to accept or occupy such office of sheriff , by vertue of such grants or patents , shall stand perpetually disabled to be or bear the office of sheriff within any county of england , by the same authority . and notwithstanding that by this act , 1. the patent is made void . 2. the king is restrained to grant a non-obstante . 3. the grantee disabled to take the office , yet the king by his royal sovereign power of commanding , may command by his patent ( for such causes as he in his wisdom doth think meet and profitable for himself and the commonwealth , of which he himself is sole judge ) to serve him and the weal publick , as sheriff for such a county , for years or for life , &c. and so was it resolved by all the justices of england in the exchequer chamber ' 2 h. 7. here the point is resolved into an inseparable prerogative in the king ; which no act of parliament can restrain , although made with his own consent . is there no act of parliament then , which this great lawyer will allow to restrain the king's prerogative , so as he cannot disperse with it ? what saith he to the case of buying offices at court ? cannot the king by vertue of his prerogative , order his houshold as he pleases , to dispose of offices about him , as he thinks fit ; no. the same lawyer saith , that no non obstante could dispense with the act against buying of offices . and yet one would think that the king had as great a prerogative in the court , as over the kingdom . but how comes he to say , that the king can dispense notwithstanding the disability , when elsewhere he saith , the king cannot dispense in the case of a disability by law ? for the reason he gives why the king cannot present a man to a living who is convict of simony , is , because the law hath disabled him . very well . and yet in this case , although the law hath disabled him , the king may dispense . where are we now ? the king can dispense with a disability , and he cannot dispense with it . this is indeed a very dark learning of dispensations , as c. justice vaughan well called it ; for we cannot yet find the way through it . can the king dispense with a disability in law or not ? if not , the case of sheriffs is gone . if he can , then why not in the case of symony ? why not , as to sitting in parliament without taking the oaths ? no , here is a disability in law. what then ? cannot the k. dispense with a disability in one case , as well as the other ? bu : the same person saith , that in that case , because the words amount to a disability , the king cannot dispense , and here , where the disability is expressed , he may . but we are lately told , there are two sorts of disabilities : one is actually incurred , as that upon the members who sit without taking the oaths ; and the other is a disability annexed to the breach of a law , as a penalty , and that penalty not to be incurred before a legal conviction ; and in this case the king's dispensation coming before the conviction doth prevent it , by making that lawful which would not have been so without it . but when a disability is actually-incurred , it cannot be taken off but by act of parliament . i answer , that if the law which makes the disability , doth allow of a dispensation antecedent to the conviction , then i grant that the dispensation before conviction , prevents the disability . as in digby's case ; if the dispensation had come before institution , the disability , as to holding the former living , had been prevented ; because the law doth expresly allow of a dispensation in the case . but here is no such thing . the act of parliament , supposes no dispensation , but makes an utter disability , as to the holding the office , in sir edward hales his case ; but a dispensing power is set up against the act of parliament , and such a dispensation neither before nor after conviction , can prevent a disability if it could , i can by no means see why it might not as well hold as to members of parliament , ( at least as to the oath of supremacy ) if they take their dispensation before sitting in the house . for the disability doth not take place till they enter the parliament , 5 eliz. c. 1. and he that entreth the parliament without taking the said oath , shall be deemed no knight , citizen , burgess , or baron , nor shall have any voice , but shall be as if he had been never returned or elected . the intention of the law for the test , was a disability to hold the office ; but it allows time for persons to qualifie themselves , as appears by the act for the test. is not this plain overthrowing the design of the law , for persons instead of doing what the law requires , to take out a dispensation for not doing it , and so prevent the disability ? and what doth a law signifie , when the very design of it is overthrown ? and what is the power of making laws by common consent in parliament , if without such consent , the whole force of the law may be taken away by a dispensing power ? so that this doth not meerly make laws to signifie nothing but according to will and pleasure ; but it makes our very constitution insignificant ; which requires to every law the consent of the people in parliament . as for instance , by the first constitution of the roman government , the king had the custody of the laws , but no laws were to be made but by the consent of the roman people in the curiae , ( thence called leges curiatae ) would any one have thought this any privilege , if after these laws were passed , the king should claim an inseparable prerogative of dispensing with them as he sees cause ? for it is implied in such a fundamental contract as this , that laws when made , should not lose their force without their consent who made them . else it is not contractus bonae fidei . i will not dispute whether this were the original contract of our nation or not ; but this i may say , that when our government came to a settlement , after long struglings , this was one of the fundamental articles of it , that no laws should pass , or burdens should be laid upon the people but by their own consent in arliament . bracton saith , that a law among us , supposes the authority of the prince and the council , and consent of the great men , and agreement of the common-wealth . and he adds further , that our laws being thus made and established , mutari non poterunt , nec destrui sine communi consensu & consilio eorum omnium quorum consilio & consensu fuerunt promulgatae : which are very remarkable words against a dispensing power . for that doth imply a power to change the law , and in effect , to destroy it , without the advice or consent of those that made it . he saith indeed , the law may be improved without their consent , i. e. by the judges interpretation as to parallel cases not expressed . but if any new or hard case happens , it ought , he saith , to be respited usque ad magnam curiam , i. e. to the parliament , ut ibi per concilium curiae terminentur ; that being the supreme judicature of the nation . fortescue , who very well understood our constitution , saith , that the king , although he be the head of the political body , can neither change our laws , nor take away property without consent . and that our laws are made , not by the princes will , but by general consent ; totius regni assensu : he saith , they may be changed , but it must be , non sine communitatis & procerum regni assensu , quali ipsae primitus emanarunt . he takes notice , that several of our kings did not like our constitution , but affected a more arbitrary , and therefore approved the civil law , for that maxim , quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem . but he shews our constitution to be better for king and people . for here he saith , the king levies no taxes , nor alters laws , or makes new ones , sine concessione vel assensu totius regni sui in parliamento suo expresso .. but certainly dispensing with laws , is altering them ; not as to their words , but as to the intention and design of them , which is the main thing in a law ; and he that alters the law , as to any one , whose case is common with others , may alter it as to all others in equal circumstances . and what doth such a law then signifie ? in the charter of king john , the commune consilium regni , was to pass all aids ; and besides particular summons to the great men , general summons were to be given to others , to appear within forty days ; and if they did not , matters were to go on however . this very charter , as appears by matt. paris , was renewed , 9 h. 3. but he had learned the trick of a non obstante from his good friend the pope ; and when he was urged with his own grants , he said , doth not the pope void his grants with a non-obstante ? why may not i do the same by the grants of my self and my predecessors ? to whom a sharp reply was made . as long as he observed justice in his actings , he would be king , and no longer . which i only mention to shew , that the use of a non obstante was then looked on as a violation of justice . and so it must needs be , if our laws , as bracton saith , be communis reipub. sponsio ; for then they are of the nature of contracts , and when laws are so , it is agreed by those who write of these matters , although otherwise no enemies to a dispensing power , that they are not to be dispensed with by a non obstante . if a prince makes a grant of any thing wherein he hath power to oblige himself in justice , it becomes , saith baselius pontius , of the nature of a contract , which gives a right to those to whom it is made , and lays an obligation of justice upon him . where a grant is made for the benefit of others , and is ac cepted by them , it is not in the granter's power to revoke it , as sanchez shews from many authorities . and the lawyers are of the same mind , as appears by what is already produced out of baldus and others ; but i shall mention some who declare the opinion of others . explorati juris est eas constitutiones quae in contractum transeunt ita ligare principes ut iis derogare nequeant , saith gerl. buxtorffius . gail saith , that princes are bound by all grants made per modum contractus de jure communi ; and that is the general opinion . one of the latest writers de jure gentium , saith , that princes are more strongly bound by laws , which pass by way of contracts , than by any positive laws made by absolute power , although they relate to the weightiest points of government . that a prince cannot grant a non obstante to such laws as he hath sworn to observe ; is not only the opinion of other lawyers , but of some of the highest canonists : and it is a rule among them , that no clause of non obstante can take away constitutionem juratam . where there is therefore not only a contract with others in the passing of a law , but an oath to observe the laws , i do not see how a non obstante or a dispensing power can take place . 2. we have the advantage in point of authority as well as reason , as to this very case of dispensing with the statute of 23 h. 6. for i take it for granted , that the authority of parliament is more to be regarded than the opinion of judges : and i think we have good reason to believe , that the parliament did not think this act could be voided by a non obstante . ( 1. ) the parliament that declared , any non obstante against the act to be void , was certainly of that opinion ; or else they did a ridiculous thing , to put in a clause which was void of it self . ( 2. ) the parliament , 28 h. 6. c. 3. was of that mind ; for what need an indemnity by act of parliament , if the king could by his dispensing power have made it lawful for the sheriffs to continue ? ( 3. ) the parliament , 8 e. 4. 4. continued in the same mind , for , whereas in the beginning of his reign sheriffs were continued more than a year , by reason of the troubles , it was not then thought , ( though in a case of such necessity ) that the king could dispense with this law ; but they were indemnified by act of parliament , and the act declared to stand in full force . ( 4. ) the parliament , 6 h. 8. c. 18. after the supposed judgment , 2 h. 7. and in the time of a prince who would lose none of his prerogatives , was still of the same judgment ; for it not only recites the statute , but particularly takes notice of the voiding all pardons and non obstante's ; and by act of parliament indemnisies the under-sheriffs of bristow , and gives them the same priviledge which those of london had . what need all this , if it had been thought good law at that time , that the king might by his dispensing power have given sheriffs leave to have acted against that statute ? and now i leave any man of reason to judge , whether this famous case be a sufficient foundation for the seting up a dispensing power , either as to a particular statute made for the security of our religion , or for a suspension of our ecclesiastical laws . chap. iv. of the alterations made in the supremacy , by the statutes of henry the eighth ; with an answer to the objections . i now come to the alterations made in our laws , about the king's supremacy in the time of henry the eighth . 24 hen. 8. c. 12. an act passed for taking away all appeals to rome , which is founded on the king 's natural and independent right of governing , and doing justice to all his people ; and the sufficiency of his own clergy , for hearing and determining such matters as belonged to their function ; and therefore all causes are to be heard , discussed , examined , finally and definitively adjudged and determined within the king's jurisdiction and authority , and not elswhere in the courts spiritual and temporal : but if the king be concerned , then it is referred to the upper-house of convocation . the preamble of this act against appeals to rome , is considerable : whereas by divers authentick histories and chronicles , it is manifestly declared and expressed , that this realm of england is an empire governed by one supreme head and king , &c. with plenary , whole and entire power , preheminence , authority , prerogative and jurisdiction &c. for final determination of causes , &c. so that here is an appeal to ancient history in this matter , and we have still sufficient evidence of it before the popes encroachments prevailed . the bishops and barons told anselm , in william rufus his time , it was a thing unheard of , and contrary to the custom of his realm for any one to go to rome without the king 's leave ; which is after explained by way of appeal : anselm made but a shuffling answer to this , although he had sworn to observe the customs of the realm , and he could not deny this to be one , but he pretended , it was against s. peter 's authority , and therefore could not observe it ; for this were , saith he , to abjure s. peter . from whence i infer , that the custom of the realm , was then thought by anselm to be inconsistent with the pope's authority : for whatever they talk of s. peter , it is the pope they mean. in the reign of h. 1. the pope complains grievously , that the king would suffer no appeals to be made to him ; and that due reverence was not shewed to s. peter in his kingdom ; and that they ended ecclesiastical causes at home , even where bishops were concerned ; and very learnedly quotes the de●retal epistles against them . afterwards , the pope sent his legate , and the king denied him entrance , and the whole parliament rejected it , as contrary to the ancient custom and liberty of england . that passage in the laws of h. 1. c. 5. which seems to allow of appeals , is a mere forgery , the whole chapter being a rapsody taken out of the canonists . h. huntingdon saith , that appeals were brought in in king stephen 's time , by henry bishop of winchester , his brother being the pope's legate . by the constitutions of clarendon , c. 8. the appeal lay from the archbishop to the king , which is well expressed by robert of gloucester . and the k. amend solde the ercbishops deed , and be as in the pope's sted , and s. thomas it withsteed . and although h. 2. in his purgation for the death of the archbishop , did swear , that he would hinder no appeals to rome in ecclesiastical causes ; and that he would quit the ancient customs of the realm : yet hoveden saith , the constitutions of clarendon were renewed in the parliament at northampton , and the justices in eyre were sworn to observe them , and to make others observe them inviolably : and for those who went out of the kingdom ( in case of appeals ) the justices were to enquire per consuetudinem terrae , according to the ancient custom ; and if they did not return and stand to the king's court , they were to be outlawed . in the time of r. 1. the popes complained much of geofry , archbishop of york , for slighting appeals made to rome , and imprisoning those that made them . celestine doth it twice , and in the same words : and innocent the third , in king john's time , renews the same complaint of him , that he shewed no regard to appeals made to the apostolick see. but when the rights of the crown were given up by king john to the pope , no wonder if the liberties of appeals were granted by him : but yet , in the succeeding reigns , we have several instances upon record of persons imprisoned by the king , for making appeals to rome . john of ibstock , in the time of e. 1. the abbot of walden , and a prebendary of banbury , in the reign of e. 2. the parson of leighe , harwoden , and the prior of barnwel , in the time of e. 3. so that this right was still owned by our princes , when the matter came into contest , and therefore the act of h. 8. against appeals was but a just resuming of the ancient rights of the crown . 25 h. 8. c. 19. a commission is appointed for reviewing the canons : and it is observable , that because it could not be done in parliament time , the king hath power given him by act of parliament to nominate the thirty two persons to act in this matter , in these words ; be it therefore enacted by the authority aforesaid , that the king's highness shall have power and authority to nominate and assign at his pleasure the said thirty two persons of his subjects ; whereof sixteen to be of the clergy , and sixteen to be of the temporality of the upper and nether house of parliament . and because the last resort was to the arch-bishop in the former act of appeals ; therefore to prevent any inconveniences thereby , a new power is granted by this act , i. e. upon an appeal to the king in chancery , a commission is to be directed to such persons as the king shall appoint , who are to hear and determine such appeals , and the causes concerning the same . 25 h. 8. c. 21. after the submission of the clergy , and the king being owned supreme head , yet the power of dispensing with the canons in particular cases , did not pass by commission from the king , but by act of parliament . the words are , it standeth therefore with natural equity and good reason , that all and every such laws human , made without this realm , or induced into this realm by the said sufferance , consents and custom , your royal majesty , your lords spiritual and temporal , and commons representing the whole state of your realm , in this your high court of parliament , have full power and authority not only to dispense , but also to authorize some elect person or persons , to dispense , &c. so that the power of granting faculties at a time when the prerogative was highest , was not executed by commission from the king by vertue of his supremacy and prerogative royal , but was granted to the arch-bishop of canterbury , in the manner expressed in that act. a late author has stretched this statute to a power of dispensing in other cases , besides those which depended on the canon-law . for , saith he , the pope usurped such a power in derogation of the authority royal , and then that power must be originally in the king ; otherwise , in the construction of the act , it could be no usurpation . but this is a very false way of reasoning ; the pope usurped such a power on the crown ; therefore the crown hath it of right : for the popes usurpations were many of them unreasonable ( his primacy , according to canons , being allowed ) and our law did restore to the king the ancient right and jurisdiction of the crown , and not put him into the possession of all the extravagant power which the pope usurped . for this law charges the pope with intolerable exactions of great sums of money , in pensions , censes , peter-pence , procurations , fruits , suits for provisions and expeditions of bulls , for arch-bishopricks and bishopricks , and for delegates and rescripts in causes of contentions and appeals , jurisdictions legantine , as well as dispensations , licenses , faculties , grants , relaxations , writs , called perinde valere , rehabilitations , absolutions , &c. now all these were usurpations in derogation of the crown ; but doth it therefore follow that the crown hath a right to them all ? but to go no further than the business of dispensations ; hath the king a right by this statute to dispense as far as the pope ? the pope usurped a power of dispensing in matrimonial contracts , in oaths , in vows , in some positive divine laws , which i suppose h. 8. by vertue of the supremacy , never pretended to . so that it is a very mistaken notion of some men , that the king had all the power , which the pope usurped . and as to the act , it is plain by the words of it , that the original power of dispensing , was lodged in the king , lords and commons , and the ministerial execution of it with the arch bishop of canterbury , even with respect to the king himself . but if the king had pretended to all the power which the pope usurped , he must have dispensed with himself . but this author offers to prove , that there is a power in the crown to dispense with acts of parliament , even such as concern the consecration of bishops ; because it is said , 8 eliz. that the queen by her supreme authority had dispensed with all causes or doubts of any imperfection or disability in the persons , &c. to give a clear answer to this , we must consider these things ; 1. that , 1 eliz. 1. the act of 25 h. 8. for the order and form of electing and making arch-bishops and bishops , was revived ; as appears by the same act , 8. eliz. 1. 7. 2. that by another act , 1 eliz. 2. the book of common-prayer and administration of sacraments and other rites and ceremonies of the church of england , which were in use in the time of 6 e. and repealed by queen mary , were re-inforced , 1 eliz. 2. 2. and the repeal annulled . but by the act 5 and 6 e. 6. c. 1. § . 5. the form and manner of making arch-bishops , bishops , priests , and deacons , was added to the book of prayer , as of like force and authority with it . 3. that the act of e. 6. being revived with the express mention of the alterations and additions made to it ; there was ro necessity apprehended , 1 eliz. to make a distinct act for that which was in force already by the name of additions therein added and appointed by that statute . and this , i conceive , was the true reason why a bill did not pass , 1 eliz. to that purpose : for , i find by the journals of the house , a bill was prepared and read the third time in the house of lords ; but upon consideration , it was laid a side , as superfluous . 4. that the popish party took advantage of this , and pretended , that the book of consecration , &c. was not established by law , being not expresly mentioned , and therefore the bishops made by it , were not legal bishops . and upon this bonner resolved to stand the trial against horn , bishop of winchester , as may be seen in dyer , r. f. 234. , so that the papists then stood upon it , that the crown could not dispense with laws ; otherwise bonner's plea signified nothing . for if there were such an inherent right in the crown to dispense with laws in ecclesiastical matters ▪ then these were legal bishops , having all the queen 's dispensing power for them . 5. the clause in the queen's letters patents for dispensing with imperfections and disability , was put in out of abundant caution , and not for any necessity that we can find : but it was customary in the popes bulls to put in such kind of clauses ; and therefore they would omit no power in that case , which the pope did pretend to ; which the act faith , was for avoiding all ambiguities and questions . 6. but after all , lest there should be any colour for disputing this matter left , according to the express letter of the law , therefore it was declared , 8 eliz. 1. 3. that not only the book of common-prayer , but the form of consecrating archbishops , bishops , &c. which was set sorth in edward the sixth's time , and added to the common prayer , shall stand and be in full force and effect : and all acts done by it , are declared to be good and perfect to all intents and purposes : so that this act of parliament doth rather overthrow a dispensing power ; for if there were then such a supreme and absolute power in the crown , as to ecclesiastical matters , what need such an act of parliament to confirm and ratifie what our author supposes done by virtue of it ? but to return to the 25th of h. 8. in the same act of parliament , care is taken for the visiting exempt places , as monasteries , colledges and hospitals , by a particular commission under the great seal . but that which comes nearest to our business is , that 26 h. 8. c. 1. another act passed , wherein the king's supremacy is acknowledged , and a power given by act of parliament for him to visit , redress and amend all errors , heresies , abuses , contempts and enormities whatsoever , which by any manner of spiritual authority or jurisdiction ought or may lawfully be reformed in any usage , custom , foreign laws , foreign authority , prescription , or any thing or things to the contrary hereof notwithstanding . if the king had this power by virtue of his supremacy and prerogative royal , can we imagin h. 8. so weak a prince , and so little a valuer of his own prerogative , as to have that given him by act of parliament , which was acknowledged to be in him before ? but the words are express , and that our sovereign lord , &c. shall have full power and authority from time to time to visit , &c. from whence it follows , that in the judgment of h. 8. and the parliament , such a power was not personally inherent in him , but that it did belong to the legislative power ; and therefore an act of parliament was required for it ; so that the supremacy , as then setled by law , lay in a total rejecting any foreign jurisdiction , and governing this church and kingdom by our own laws : which is well expressed in the preamble to the act against appeals , viz. that this realm of england is an empire governed by one supreme head and king , having the dignity and royal estate of the imperial crown of the same , unto whom a body politick , compact of all sorts and degrees of people , divided in terms and by names of spiritualty and temporalty , been bounden , and ought to bear , next to god , a natural and humble obedience . by virtue of this act cromwel was made vicegerent and vicar general , ( for both are in the same commission ) and the king gave to him omnem & omnimodam jurisdictionem , authoritatem sive potestatem ecclesiasticam , quae nobis tanquam supremo capiti hujusmodi competit , &c. which are the words of his commission . it 's true , that the power of granting a commission to exercise this power , is not expressed in the act of parliament ; but it being vested in the king by the act , he might appoint one or more commissioners to do it in his name ; but the case is very different where that very power of delegation is taken away by act of parliament , for that is the present case . to make this clear , we must consider the words of this act , and compare them with 1 eliz. 1. the 17 car. 1. 12. and the present commission . the words , 26 h. 8. 1. are the same in effect with those 1 eliz. 1. but with this observable difference , that whereas the statute of h. 8. gives the king his heirs and successors full power and authority from time to time to visit , &c. that of 1 eliz. 1. unites the jurisdiction to the imperial crown of this realm ; but then it doth not proceed as the other did , to give full power and authority to her , her heirs and successors , to visit , &c. but the words are , and that your highness , your heirs and successors kings or queens of this realm shall have full power and authority by this act , by letters patents under the great seal of england to assign , name and authorise , when and as often as your highness , your heirs and successors shall think meet to exercise , use , occupy and execute under your highness , your . heirs and successors , all manner of jurisdictions , priviledges and preheminences , in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction , &c. so that the administration of this extraordinary jurisdiction is by this act limited to such who are nominated and appointed by the letters patents . the fountain of all jurisdiction is acknowledged to be in the imperial crown of this realm , but the administration is twofold ; ordinary , in the archbishops , bishops and ecclesiastical courts ; and to secure their dependance on the crown , the oath of supremacy is required by this act to be taken by every archbishop , bishop , and all ecclesiastical persons and officers . but besides this , it was then thought fit , that there should be an extraordinary administration of it , which is limited by this act to such as should be nominated and appointed in letters patents , &c. and no other reason can be given of the change from what it was in the time of henry the eighth , for it is not now placed absolutely , as then , in the queen , her heirs and successors , but the jurisdiction is annexed to the crown , and the extraordinary administration to be by commission under the broad seal . now since this power of nominating commissioners for extraordinary jurisdictions is taken away by act of parliament , the only question is , whether notwithstanding the right of jurisdiction being still in the crown , a new commission may not be granted for extraordinary jurisdiction ? there had been no question in this case , if the administration of extraordinary jurisdiction had not been setled 1 eliz. 1. to be by commission , and that very power of granting such a commission had not been taken away by act of parliament . but as the matter now stands , the only pretence left for it is , that the same act which confirms the repeal , hath a salvo for the king's supremay , in these words ; provided always , that this act shall not extend , or be construed to extend to abridg or diminish the king's supremacy in ecclesiastical matters or affairs . if these words be taken strictly , with respect to the same matter , they make the act inconsistent with it self : for then the meaning would be , the king's supremacy shall not extend to the setting up such a court , always provided , that his supremacy , notwithstanding this act , may extend to the setting up such another court. is it consistent with the wisdom of a parliament to make such delusory acts ? therefore we must understand the king's supremacy in other matters . and there was this reason for it , all the acts of parliament touching the supremacy in henry the eighth's time were repealed by queen mary , and the restoring the supremacy to the crown was by the same act which set up the high commission ; and therefore when part of that act was repealed , and that repeal confirmed , it was fitting to add a clause , that there was no intention to abridg or diminish the supremacy setled by law , especially , since by that act the ordinary jurisdiction of the bishops in their courts was revived : and it is very well known , what clamors had been made , as though the bishops courts being held in their own names were inconsistent with the king's supremacy ; and although the judges had declared , july the first 1637. that there was no necessity that processes ecclesiastical should be in the king's name ; and the king , august the eighteenth , in 13 car. 1. published a proclamation to that purpose : yet all this did not satisfie some , but the bishops were still thought by them , in their ordinary jurisdiction , to usurp upon the king's supremacy and to abridg and diminish it ; therefore when this act passed to revive their jurisdiction , it was no more than reasonable to add such a clause to prevent misconstruction , viz. that this act , nor any thing in it , be construed to extend to abridg or diminish the king's supremacy in ecclesiastical matters ; as the ordinary jurisdiction of the bishops had been thought to do . and the vindicator of the ecclesiastical commission , could not forbear a marginal note to that purpose . the court held by his majesties ecclesiastical commissioners , is more legal than the bishops courts ; this is in the kings name , theirs in their own name only : as though the new setting up a court , forbidden by law , did not make it illegal , in whose name soever it were ; and as though courts expresly owned and allowed by law , were illegal , meerly because the forms of their proceedings do not run in the kings name . but i desire him to take an answer from his own oracle the l. ch. j. coke , now albeit the proceedings and process in the ecclesiastical courts , be in the name of the bishops , &c. it followeth not therefore , that either the court is not the kings , or the law , whereby they proceed , is not the kings law. for taking one example for many , every leet or view of frank pledge holden by a subject , is kept in the lords name , and yet it is the kings court , and all the proceedings therein are directed by the kings laws ; and many subjects in england have and hold courts of record , and other courts , and all their proceedings be according to the kings laws and customs of the realm . but there is a material objection or two yet to be answered . 1. it is objected , that 2 jac. the judges declared in the star-chamber , that the deprivation of non-conformists , was lawful , because the king had supreme ecclesiastical power , which he hath delegated to the commissioners , whereby they had power of deprivation by the canon law of this realm ; and the statute of 1 eliz. doth not confer any new power , but explain and declare the ancient power : and therefore they held it clear , that the king without a parliament might make orders and constitutions for the government of the clergy , and might deprive them , if they obeyed not . to which i answer , 1. our question is not , whether the king , without a parliament , may not require the observation of canons passed the convocation , so as to deprive the obstinate , by vertue of his supreme power in ecclesiastical matters ; but whether he may appoint a commission with power to deprive against an act of parliament ; which hath taken away the legal power of any such commission . 2. in matters of this nature , it is safer trusting the supreme judicature of the nation in parliament , than the extrajudicial opinion of the judges . and in this case the parliament hath declared it self another way ; as appears by the canons , 1640. which were not only condemned in parliament afterwards ( which then might be imputed to the heat of the times ) but in the most loyal parliament after the king's return , particular care was taken , that neither the canons of 1640. should be confirmed , nor any other ecclesiastical laws or canons , not formerly confirmed , allowed , or enacted by parliament , or by the established laws of the land as they stood in the year of the lord , 1639. which implies , that the sense of the parliament then was , that we are not to own any canons but such as were confirmed , allowed , or enacted by parliament , or by the established laws of the land before 1639. and therefore no new injunctions without a parliament or convocation , can make the clergy liable to a legal deprivation . no , not that which the defender is so pleased with the thoughts of , viz. to give their assent and consent to the king's declaration , on pain of deprivation . 3. the temporalties of the clergy , especially the bishops , are secured by several acts of parliament without a tryal at law. which , because i see none of our great lawyers take notice of , i shall here set down . 14 edward the third , c. 3. we will and grant for us , and for our heirs , that from henceforth we nor our heirs shall not take nor cause to be taken into our hands , the temporalties of archbishops , bishops , &c. or other people of holy church of what estate or condition they be , without a true and just cause , according to the law of the land and judgment thereupon given . 25 edward the third , c. 6. the title of the statute is , a bishops temporalties shall not be seized for a contempt . and this was received for good law , 9 e. 4. 28. br. ord. 12. reg. f. 32. but a very late writer tells the world , that the possessions of ecclesiastical persons are but conditional freeholds ; and although absolute freeholds require a due course of law , yet conditional do not ; so that if a man chance to be deprived of his office , his freehold is gone . this is touching clergymen's freeholds to purpose ; and no doubt out of pure zeal to the church of england : but see the equity and impartiality of this man ! he had undertaken before to give publick assurance of abby-lands to the present possessors : and for what reason ? because the pope granted a dispensation with a non obstante to the canon law : and yet in this book he proves , that a non obstante is no ways binding to the supreme power ; so that no man could more effectually overthrow his own assurance than he hath done himself : for , saith he , present sovereigns , whether king or pope cannot bind their successors . and again , acts of graces and favours are alterable and suspendible at the pleasure of the succeeding sovereign : why then should any be so weak as to think the plenitude of the pope's power as to abby-lands , can be bound up by the act of any former pope ? i confess the comparing these two books together hath extreamly lessened his assurance of abby lands with me . and his answers to the power of revocation are so weak , that they come at last to no more than this , it is a thing which cannot well be done at present , therefore there is no fear it ever should be done . here is some security at least , till it can be done . but as to the possessions of the ecclesiastical persons of the church of england , he endeavours to prove , that they can have no security at all of their present possessions , notwithstanding any promise or a legal title : for if , as he saith , the king by his paramount jurisdiction can make any exceptions null ; and so void a solemn oath ▪ not to accept a dispensation from that oath ; why should he not as well make void any promise of his own ; when it hinders ( as he thinks ) a greater good , especially if the prerogative cannot be bound ? but then , as to a legal title , that is the vainest thing imaginable , as to such conditional freeholds which clergymen have ; for if the commissioners deprive them by their power ab officio & beneficio , their attendent frehold , saith he , is gone , without any course of law. and the defender saith , the commissioners may deprive if clergymen should not assent and consent to all contained in the king's declaration , if he required it . but it is to be hoped , that princes will not take the measures of justice , and wisdom , and honour from such men : we will therefore set aside the omnipotent engine of a non obstante , which doth not batter so much as it undermines , and consider the legal security of these conditional freeholds . i. all freeholds are in some sense conditional , or else they could never be forfeited : which shews , that there are none absolute , with respect to the law. and as to their original among us , it is agreed , that by the ancient right of tenures , all fees are conditional ; for they suppose fealty , the non-performance whereof is felony : which is not that which is done felleo animo , as sir edward coke trifles , but it is the same with falshood or treachery . the laws of h. 1. c. 5. si dominus de felonia vel fide mentitus compellat hominem suum : and in another law , the punishment of felony is forfeiture of the land , c. 43. and therefore the feudists say , that felony is delictum vasalli adversus dominum ; from the gothick fell or fehl , which signifies in general , a fault ; and in this case , the breach of trust towards his lord : of which sort of felonies the feudists reckon up some twenty , some thirty , any one of which makes a forfeifeiture : so that here is no such mighty difference , that the poor clergymen must only have conditional and attendant freeholds , as though other men's were absolute , whereas sir thomas smith affirms , all in england are fiduciary , i. e. conditional freeholders , beside the king. it is easie enough for any one to frame such a distinction of freeholds ; and to say , that these who have but such a freehold may be ejected , without any trial at common law : but he ought to have shewed , that magna charta or the ancient laws made such a difference between ecclesiastical freeholds and others ; which he hath not preended to do ; and therefore such a distinction ought not to be allowed , especially since i have produced an act of parliament 14 edward 3. c. 3. which saith , that clergymen shall not be ejected out of their temporalties without a true and just cause , according to the law of the land : this was none of those statutes which are in print , but never enrolled , for sir robert cotton owns the enrolment of it , and that it was made into a statute ; and mr. pryn himself had nothing to object against it : but now it seems their conditional freholds may be taken from them without any due course of law. ii. there is more to be said concerning the rights of ecclesiastical persons in colledges , because they are lay corporations . for in appleford's case it was declared to be the opinion of all the judges in pattrick 's case , that a colledge was a temporal corporation : and therefore some notable difference in point of law must be shewed , why men may be deprived of some freeholds without due course of law , and not of others ; for i cannot imagine , that colledges being founded for the encouragement of learning , should lay men more open to arbitrary proceedings , than any other legal societies are : however , deprivation , in coveney's case , was agreed to be a temporal thing ; and for that reason his appeal was rejected , as not relating to a matter of ecclesiastical jurisdiction , which was only provided for 24. and 25. henr. 8. but it was allowed , that he might bring an action at common law. our author several times mentions this case ; but puts it off till he comes to treat of appeals , i. e. to the place he knew it to be improper in . for the question is not , whether an appeal doth lie to the king in chancery in a case of deprivation ? but , whether there be not a remedy at common law , if a person be deprived of a free-hold without due form of law ? and after a great deal of impertinency , about the manner of appeals , he at last concludes , the remedy had been at common law only ; which is clear giving up the point . for then , in case a person be deprived without due course of law , of his free-hold , he grants , that he is to have his remedy at law ; and consequently that a deprivation of such a free-hold without due course of law , is not sufficient . for the law provides no remedy where there is no injury done , nor just cause to seek for redress . and so i come to the second objection ; which is this ; 2. that to deny the jurisdiction of this court , is to deny the king's supremacy ; and that is a dangerous thing by the law. the case was this ; dr. f. of magdalen college in oxford , being summoned before the commissioners , denied the authority of the court , and persisted in so doing ; which our author saith , in another kings reign perhaps might have been interpreted a questioning the very supremacy it self ; which , how fatal it was to john fisher , bishop of rochester , and sir thomas moor , is worthy to be considered , both as a demonstration of our kings clemency , and that the doctor hath not so much reason to complain of his hard usage . the meaning whereof is this , that if they had proceeded in justice against him , he ought to have suffered as bishop fisher and sir thomas moor did . this is more than a bare insinuation , that to deny the jurisdiction of this court , is to deny the kings supremacy ; and that it is meer clemency not to deal by them who do it , as h. 8. did by bishop fisher and sir thomas moor. but , 1. it is by no means evident , that those two persons suffered meerly on that account . for their attainder in parliament , was for refusing the oath of succession ; and king james i. mentions the words of sir thomas moor to that purpose , which he spake to the lords when he was condemned . and their attainder , if i mistake not , was in the same parliament which made it treason to deprive the king of his dignity , title or name of his royal estate , and therefore could not be by an act not then passed . but , 2. suppose that they were at last proceeded against on the act then passed , what is this to the present case ? when coke saith , this act was twice repealed . and it is no extraordinary clemency , not to be proceeded against by a law that hath no force . 3. the statute in force , 5 eliz. c. 1. is against those who defend or maintain the authority , jurisdiction , or power of the bishop of rome , or of his see , heretofore claimed , used , or usurped within this realm , or by any speech , open deed , or act , advisedly , wittingly attribute any such manner of jurisdiction , authority , or preheminence to the said see of rome , or any bishop of the same , for the time being , within this realm . so that it cannot be denied , that there is occasion for his majesties clemency ; but it is to another sort of men. 4. it is very hard straining to make the denying the jurisdiction of this court , to be denying the kings supremacy , when a person hath done all which the law requires him to do towards owning the supremacy . if he had said dr. f. had taken possession of his fellowship there , without taking the oath of supremacy , which the law requires , he had then indeed given ground to suspect him for denying the kings supremacy ; but to take no notice of those who refused to do as the law requires , and to talk thus of what severity might be used to one that hath done it , looks in him neither like clemency nor justice . 5. it was always looked on , as a legal right to make exception to the jurisdiction of a court , especially when newly established , without act of parliament , and to any ordinary understanding , in flat contradiction to it . it is very new doctrine that in a legal government exceptio fori shall be interpreted a denial of supreme authority , which was not only allowed by the canon and civil laws , but by the most ancient common lawyers we have . bracton observes several things , which are material to this purpose . 1. the first general exception which is allowed , he saith , is contra jurisdictionem . exceptions are either dilatory or peremptory . some that are only dilatory , as to the action , may be peremptory as to the jurisdicton . and these are to be put in ante litem contestatam , ad perimendum judicium , ne procedat . and the first of this sort , are the exceptions contra jurisdictionem , & contra personas judicantium , quibus deficit autoritas judicandi . so that he supposes , that such who do not deny the kings supreme authority , may have a legal and just exception against the authority of a court. 2. it was an allowable exceptio fori then , if any lay-persons did take upon them to proceed by ecclesiastical censures . in ecclesiastical causes , saith he , a secular judge hath no cognizance , because he hath not the power of coercion proper to them , viz. by ecclesiastical censures ; therefore , he saith , in his causis pertinet cognitio ad judices ecclesiasticos . his reason is , because those only are the competent judges , who have the power of coercion proper to the court. and for the same cause , ecclesiastical judges are not to interpose in secular causes , cum jura sint separata & limitata . and although the exemption of ecclesiastical persons from the civil courts , be certainly taken away by the acts of supremacy ; yet it hath been still alledged by our divines , that the ecclesiastical censures were still reserved to the ecclesiastical functions ; either in the way of ordinary or delegate jurisdiction . if the high commission did seem to go further , then that power being taken away by act of parliament , it must return to the ancient course . 3. there must be a legal authority to constitute a legal jurisdiction . ad hoc quod rata sint judicia , videre oportet a● justic. warrantum habeat à rege quod judicare possit . si warrantum non habuerit , non valebit quod coram eo actum fuerit , quasi coram non suo judice , quia primo legi debet breve originale , & postmodum breve per quod justiciar . constitutus est , & si nullum omnino habuerit , aut si habuerit non tamen ad manum , non erit ei parendum nisi it a forte sit , quod breve originale de justiciaria sua faciat mentionem , bracton , l. 5. de except . c. 14. 1. there must be a commission from the king , which must be read ; and if either they have it not , or it be not at hand , the jurisdiction is not to be owned , unless it be mentioned in the original writ . for commissions in those days were most commonly granted by writ , saith the lord coke . but by bracton's words , it appears , that commonly there was an original writ and a commission besides ; but sometime the commission was in the original writ , and then the reading of that was sufficient . the mirror saith , that the jurisdiction may be denied , if the seeing or hearing the commission be denied . 2. the bounds of the jurisdiction must be expressed ; and if those be exceeded , he saith an exception lies . which signifies nothing unless the commission be known . 3. the commission must be according to law ; for that is bracton's standing rule : nihil aliud potest rex in terris , cum sit dei minister & vicarius , nisi id solum quod jure potest . so that a commission against law is void in law. he mentions the common saying in the civil law , quod principi placet , legis habet vigorem ; and answers it thus , quod principi placet is not to be understood of his presumptive , but his legislative will ( animo condendi jura ) and with the advice of his magistrates , the king himself giving authority ; which is the description of an act of parliament , as we now call it . which he more fully expresses elsewhere , legis vigorem habet , quicquid de consilio & de consensu magnatum , & reipublicae communi sponsione , authoritate regis , sive principis praecedente , juste fuerit definitum & approbatum . if this were the ancient law of england , how comes the exception against a court to be a denial of the king's supremacy ; unless it be supposed impossible , that there should be an illegal court with the king's commission ? but we may suppose it possible for a new kind of star-chamber , or court of wards to be set up ; must no man question the legality of such a court , without denying the king's authority ? for this is a question in point of law. and the king's authority always goes with the law : and therefore to suppose it to be in any thing against law , is to suppose it to be contradictory to it self . but our author saith , it is necessary for every court to assert its own jurisdiction . very true , and to clear it too ; if it be liable to a just exception . i am very far from denying the king's supremacy ; yet i may be as far from thinking such a court to be legal , if an act of parliament can make a court illegal ; and to say no more for it , but that every court must assert its own jurisdiction , is to level it with the infamous high court of justice ; which when king charles the first , of blessed memory , denied their authority , all the reply was , that the court was satisfied of its own authority ; which could give satisfaction to no body else . and if this be all can be said for the legality of it , for all that i can see , there is just reason to deny it . finis . a catalogue of books published by the reverend edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. paul 's and sold by henry mortlack , at the phoenix in st. paul 's church-yard . a rational account of the grounds of the protestant religion , being a vindication of the lord archbishop of canterbury's relation of a conference , &c. from the pretended answer of t. c. wherein the true grounds of faith are cleared , and the false discovered ; the church of england vindicated from the imputation of schism ; of the most important particular controversies between us and those of the church of rome throughly examined : the second edition : folio . sermons preached upon several occasions , with a discourse annexed concerning the true reasons of the sufferings of christ , wherein crellius his answer to grotius , is considered : folio . origines britannicae : or the antiquities of the british churches ; with a preface concerning some pretended antiquities relating to britain , in vindication of the bishop of st. asaph . by edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. pauls , folio . irenicum , a weapon-salve for the churches wounds : quarto origines sacrae , or , a rational account of the grounds of christian faith , as to the truth and divine authority of the scriptures , and matters therein contained : quarto . the unreasonableness of separation , or an impartial account of the history , nature and pleas of the present separation from the communion of the church of england ; to which several late letters are annexed of eminent protestant divines abroad concerning the nature of our differences , and the way to compose them : quarto . a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it , in answer to some papers of a revolted protestant ; wherein a particular account is given of the fanaticism and divisions of that church : octavo . an answer to several late treatises occasioned by a book entituled , a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it ; the first part : octavo . a second discourse in vindication of the protestant grounds of faith , against the pretence of infallibility in the roman church , in answer to the guide in controversie , by r. h. protestancy without principles , and reason , and religion ; or the certain rule of faith , by e. w. with a particular enquiry into the miracles of the roman church : octavo . an answer to mr. cressy's epistle apologetical to a person of honour , touching his vindication of dr. stillingfleet : octavo . a defence of the discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , in answer to a book entituled , catholicks no idolaters : octavo . several conferences between a romish priest , a fanatick chaplain , and a divine of the church of england ; being a full answer to the late dialogues of t. g. octavo . the grand question concerning the bishops right to vote in parliament in cases capital , stated and argued , from the parliament rolls and the history of former times ; with an enquiry into their peerage , and the three estates in parliament : octavo . a letter to mr. g , giving a true account of a late conference at the d. of pauls . a second letter to mr. g. in answer to two letters lately published concerning the conference at the d. of pauls . a discourse concerning the nature and grounds of the certainty of faith , in answer to j. s. his catholick letters . by edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. pauls . the council of trent examined and disproved by catholick tradition in the main points in controversie between us and the church of rome ; with a particular account of the times and occasions of introducing them . part i. to which a preface is prefixed concerning the true sense of the council of trent , and the notion of transubstantiation . by ed. stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. pauls . the rule of faith : or an answer to the treatise of mr. j. s. entituled , sure footing , &c. by john tillotson d. d. to which is adjoyned , a reply to mr. j. s.'s third appendix , &c. by edward stillingfleet , d. d. octavo . sermons preached upon several occasions , by edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. paul's , not yet collected into a volume . the reformation justified in a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel , sept. 21. 1673. before the lord mayor , &c. upon acts xxiv . 14. a sermon preached nov. 5. 1673. at st. margarets westminster , upon matt. vii . 15 , 16. a sermon preached before the king at whitehall , feb. 24 ▪ 1674 / 5. upon heb. iii. 13. a sermon preached on the fast-day , nov. 13. 1678. at st. margarets westminster , before the honourable house of commons , upon 1 sam. xii . 24 , 25. a sermon preached before the king at whitehall , march 7. 1678 / 9. upon matt. x. 16. the mischief of separation , a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel , may 11. 1680. before the lord mayor , &c. upon phil. iii. 16. protestant charity ; a sermon preached at s. sepulchres church on tuesday in easter-week , 1681. before the lord mayor , &c. upon galat. vi. 9. of the nature of superstition ; a sermon preached at st. dunstans west , march 31. 1682. upon col. ii. 23. a sermon preached before the king , feb. 15. 1683 / 4. upon job xxiii . 15. a sermon preached at a publick ordination at st. peter's cornhil , march 15. 1684 / 5. upon 1 tim. v. 22. a sermon preached at white-hall , feb. 19. 1685 / 6. being the first fryday in lent , upon luke xv. 18. scripture and tradition compared , in a sermon preached at guild-hall chappel , nov. 27 , 1687. upon col. ii. 6. a sermon preached before the queen at white-hall , feb. 22. 168●●● . upon 1 pet. iv. 8. the antiquities of notinghamshire , extracted out of records , original evidences , leiger-books , and other manuscripts and authentick authorities , beautified with maps , prospects and portraictures ; by robert thoroton , m. d. folio . a discourse concerning the nature of idolatry ; in which a late authors true and only notion of idolatry is considered and confuted . quarto . proposals tendered to the consideration of both houses of parliament , for uniting the protestant interest for the present , and preventing divisions for the future ; together with the declaration of king charles ii. concerning ecclesiastical affairs ; and some proposals of terms of union between the church of england and dissenters ; long since published by the reverend dean of st. paul's : quarto . protestant certainty ; or , a short treatise , shewing how a protestant may be well assured of the articles of his faith : quarto . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61544-e760 4 inst. f. 35. 2 4 inst. f. 325. in b●blioth . cotton . sand. de schif . 4. 157. bract. l. 5. c. 1. flet. l. 6. c. 37. c. 2. c. 36. sect . 5. defence of ecclesiastical commission , p. 8 , 9. littleton's rep. 189. stamford , l. 3. f. 111. malmsb. l. 3. f. 152. edd. vit . wilfred . c. 55. ibid. c. 45. c. 57. florent . wigor . f. 254. spelm. concil . p. 154. mat. westm. a. g. 673. florent . p. 559. mat. westm. a. g. 711. bed. l. 4. c. 2. spelm. p. 190. chronological vindication . to. i. f. 193. decem script . f. 2209. a. c. 742. decem script . p. 2209. spelm. p. 296. p. 324. ingulpb , p. 490. c. ingulph . ib. c. 5. r. ans. to coke's 5th rep. c. 5. n. 20. hob. rep. f. 148. tortura torti , p. 380. elenebus refut . tort. torti , p. 80. c. mart. becpro tort. torti , c. 21. p. 234. p. 22. p. 244. mason , de minist . angl. 1. 3. c. 3. p. 271. apology , &c. f. 263. bramhal's works , p. 340. p. 63. covarruvias pract. quaest. c. 35. n. 3. salgado , de regia prot. part 1. c. 1. n. 23. pasq. recher . l. 3. c. 33. hoveden . f. 259. 2. eadmer . f. 6. hoveden , f. 260. eadm . f. 9. selden . ad eadm . f. 165. eadm . f. 26. f. 30 , 31. 38. id. f. 65 , f. 85 , hen. hunt. l. 7. f. 220. 2. coke 2 inst. f. 602. mat. wesim. f. 320. bract. l. 5. p. 5. c. 15. l. assis. 30. e. 3. pl. 19. brook tit. pr. pl. 10. covarruv . peaut . q. c. 35. n. 5 , 6. jus belgar . p. 70. cod. fab. ad tit. cod. de appel . ab abus . def. 3 , 4 p. 72. covarr . prat. q. 35. n. 5. stat. polon . p. 207 , 208. pre. de lihertes de l' eglis . gal. vol. 2. c. 30. claus. 7 e. 1. placit . parl. 21 e. 1. f. 135 placit . parl. 28 e. 1. f. 227. claus. 31. e. 1. m. 6. 16 e. 3. tit. e. 1. com . 4. lomed . de exempt . c. 3. n. 7. chart. 16. job . m. 9. pat. 22. h. 3. m. 10. hoveden , f. 320. bracton l. 3. c. 9. n. 2. flet. l. 1. c. 29. n. 7. brit. c. 9. horn. ch . 2. sect. 22. c. 12. q. 2. n. 46 , 47. c. clerici de judiciis . c. cum terra declect . c. 1 & ult . de consuet . de multa de prabend . c. innotuit de elect. mat. paris , ad a. d. 1235. matt. wesim. ad a. d. 1233. matt. paris , a. d. 2246. p. 649. a. d. 1251. p. 818. matt. paris , a. d. 1253. p. 873. lib. diurnus pontif. 30. ferrand . vasq. cont. fret . l. 3. c. 51. n. 2. pet. de marca , de concord . sacerd . & imperii , l. 3. c. 10. n. 2. baldus , in c. 2. §. siquis vero de pace const. in l. digna vox . in l. 1. f. de const. princip . jaeobat . de conciliis . l. 7. f. 320. c. hob. r. f. 146. c. 1. q. 7. sect . nisi rigor . praxis dispens . apostolicarum auctore pyrrho corrado . c. 7. q. 1. c. petiisti . ivo epist. 236 bernard de consider . ad eugenium , l. 3. bernard . epist. 7. suarez de legibus , l. 6. c. 18 , 19. vaugbans rep. f. 348. suar. c. 18. n. 6. n. 26. c. 19. n. 6. n. 9. n. 10. vasq. 1. 2. disp. 178. c. 4. n. 34. vaugh. rep. f. 332. grot. de aquit . indulg . & facilitate , c. 2. n. 10 suarez de leg . l. 6. c. 14. n. 2. vasquez 1 , 2. disp . 178. c. 2. pusendorf de jure naturae , & gent. l. 1. c. 6. n. 17. rot. parl. 15 r. 2. n. 1. n. 8. rot. parl. 16. r. 2. n. 8. rot. parl. 17 r. 2. n. 22. rot. parl. 20 r. 2. n. 21. rot. parl. 1 h. 4. n. 85. rot. parl. 2 h. 4. n. 26. n. 42. rot. parl. 7 h. 4. n. 134. rot. parl. ib. rot. parl. 1 h. 5. n. 22. short account , p. 25 ▪ rushworth's collections , vol. 1. p. 574. vaugh. rep. f. 337. s. 339. f. 358. f. 333 , f. 334. f. 335. f. 29. short account , p. 21. v. r. f. 342. bract. l. c. 5. n. 2. f. 349 , f. 344. short account , p. 9. 7 r. 14. 12 r. f. 18. 1 inst. 234. 1 inst. 120. 3 inst. 154. 3 inst. 154. short account , p. 38. p. 30. 4 rep. dionys. halyc . arn. l. 2. bract. l. ● , ● . 1 , c. 3. 1. l. 1. c. 2. n. 6. fortescue , 2. c. 13. f. 32. c. 18. f. 40. c. 34. 35. c. 36. f. 84. matt. paris , f. 854. basel . pontius de matr. l. 8. de dispensat . c. 5. n. 7. sanchez de matr . l. 8. dispens . c. 17. n. 29. buxtorff . in auream bullam , c. 1. sect . 7. gail . observ . l. 1. obs . 41. n. 4 job . wolfg. textor . de jure gent. c. 11. n. 26. bellug . spic . princ. rubr . 7. n. 4. hier. grat. cons. 41. n. 21. rol. a valle , cons. 62. n. 5. vol. 2. celsus hugo , de clausulis , n. 23. eadmer . f. 113 , 115. f. 118 , 121. hunt. f. 226. hoveden , f. 426 , 433 , 465. k. james his premon . p. 300. visitatorial power , &c. p. 262. p. 266. vindication eccles. com. p. 19. co. 5. r. f. 39. 2 cr. f. 37. moor , f. 755. noy , f. 100. p. 14. statut. pro clero . visitatorial power , &c. p. 302. assurance of abby-lands , p. 164 , 184. visitatorial power , &c. p. 297 , 298. p. 200. p. 297 , 298. defence . p. 24 rep. angl. l. 3. c. 10. instit. 51. cottons abr. p. 23. mod. rep. f. 84. dier , f. 209. p. 320. p. 224. visitatorial power , p. 313. king james his works , p. 283. 4 inst. f. 42. bract. 1. 5 de excep . c. 1. l. 2. c. 8. n. 9. l. 5. de exc. c. 14. 2 inst. f. 418. mirror de justic . c. 3. §. 16. l. 3. de action c. 9. n. 3. l. 1. c. 1. n. 2. p. 313. the answer to the report, &c., which the united ministers appointed their committee to draw up, as in the preface also letters of the right reverend the bishop of worcester, and the reverend dr. edwards to mr. williams, against whom their testimony was produced by mr. lob : and animadversions on mr. lob's defence of the report / by daniel williams. williams, daniel, 1643?-1716. 1698 approx. 204 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 54 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a66343 wing w2645 estc r9333 12642768 ocm 12642768 65039 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a66343) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 65039) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 338:15) the answer to the report, &c., which the united ministers appointed their committee to draw up, as in the preface also letters of the right reverend the bishop of worcester, and the reverend dr. edwards to mr. williams, against whom their testimony was produced by mr. lob : and animadversions on mr. lob's defence of the report / by daniel williams. williams, daniel, 1643?-1716. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. edwards, john, 1637-1716. [8], 76 p. printed by sam. darker, for john lawrence ..., london : 1698. reproduction of original in: new college (university of edinburgh). library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng lobb, stephen, d. 1699. -report of the present state of the differences in doctrinals. great britain -church history -17th century. 2002-09 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2002-10 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2002-11 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2002-11 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-12 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the answer to the report , &c. which the united ministers appointed their committee to draw up , as in the preface . also letters of the right reverend the bishop of worcester , and the reverend dr. edwards , to mr. williams ; against whom their testimony was produced by mr. lob. and animadversions on mr. lob's defence of the report . by daniel williams . london , printed by sam. darker , for iohn lawrence at the angel in the poultrey . 1698. the preface . i shall give a true narrative of the composing and publishing of the following sheets . the vnited ministers , after their usual recess , met at st. hellens , sept. 6. 1697. after previous debates [ it was unanimously voted that the committee should take notice of the papers called , the report and the remarks . and if any brother had any thing to offer about the same , that he should communicate it to them , in order to their drawing up an answer . ] the committee consists of dr. bates , mr. hammond , mr. how , mr. alsop , mr. williams , mr. stretton , mr. woodhouse , mr. spademan , mr. nath. taylor . sept. 20. 1697. [ the answer of the committee to the report , &c. was read , and ordered to be read a second time next monday . ] note , 1. they of the committee , who applied themselves to this work , were mr. hammond , mr. alsop , mr. williams , mr. stretton , mr , woodhouse , mr. spademan , and mr. nath. taylor . six of them severally perused this answer to the report ; and after several meetings , all the seven unanimously agreed thereto , and brought it to the meeting as the answer they had prepared . the most material parts were read to dr. bates ( particularly the proposal , p. 27 , 28. the accouut of the subscription to the first paper , and concerning my book , p. 41 , 42 , &c. ) and approved of by him . our rule is , that no matter of moment shall be determined , unless it have been openly and freely debated , and agreed in one meeting , and then re-assumed and concluded in a second meeting . 3. this answer was debated , and agreed to in the meeting ; tho a brother had objected against its being in the name of the body . sep. 27. 1697. [ resolved that the reading of the answer to the report , be deferred to this day fortnight , that the committee may have time to consider . ] note , 1. the occasion of this delay , was not any thing objected against any part of this answer ; but three of the brethren insisted that it was too great a condescention in the body , to answer so insignificant a person as the author of the report ; and that this present answer should be published by a particular brother , and that some inconveniency might attend putting forth any answer in the name of the body . 2. the thing to be considered by the committee was , what expedient could be offered , or reason given , why this answer should not be published in the name of the united ministers as such . 3. the committee met , and debated . but one of the foresaid three brethren remained unsatisfied , that any answer should be printed in the name of the body of the united ministers . the debate was put off to another time . october 11. 1697. [ mr. hammond acquainted the brethren that the committee was not ready to give in their report . ] upon some of the brethren begining to express their resentments at these delays ; i spake to this effect : [ mr. moderator , tho i have met with no reason that 's cogent with me , or with many of the brethren , why any be unwilling the answer should be published in the name of the body of the united ministers , yet the dissatisfaction of any worthy brother , &c. is so inconvenient at this juncture , that i shall not insist on the present reading of our answer here . — but i shall acquaint you , that some or other of the brethren will cause this answer to be printed , with an account how far it hath proceeded among us . ] this proved a satisfying expedient , of which no man expressed any dislike . hereupon a vote which past nemine contradicente , sep. 27. 1697. ( when all were present , who desired further time to consider whether the answer should be in the name of all the united ministers ) was now repeated and unanimously approved ; the vote was , [ we judge it needful that there be an answer to two papers , called the report and the remarks , in vindication of the united ministers from the charge therein made against them . ] thus far and no further did this answer to the report , proceed in our meeting of ministers ; nor did i keep it a secret when in the press . but most of the brethren were informed thereof , whereat none expressed ( that i know of ) any dissatisfaction . as for the epistle and the reflections on the remarks , they went no further than the committee , and were not to be brought to the meeting till after the answer had past . tho this narrative informs you , that this answer is not published in the name of the body of the united ministers , because the confirmation of it by a second reading is suspended , and only so . yet the original papers and the matters of fact declared , are as unquestionable , and the doctrines herein acknowledged are as much their common sentiments as if the answer had been published in the name of the body . for i appeal to the book of st. hellens , for the truth of this narrative , and to the copy perused and marked by the committee , that there is no change in the answer to the report , except one amendment in the date of time . nor in the epistle , or reflections on the remarks , besides one expression softned by the committees direction . could the answer of a particular brother , as well express the doctrines assented to by the united ministers , and obtain the same credit in a recital of matters of fact ( in both which lies their vindication ) as this answer [ which their committee was appointed to draw , and which they brought in to the meeting as their prepared answer , and which was once agreed to by the body , and unexcepted against in any one passage , when it was suspended to gratify three of the brethren , ] i should have preferred the liberty of answering alone , if i had not judged it needless after so great an answer as the faithful rebuke , which was so acceptable that only the modesty of the author preveuted the thanks of the united ministers , for his putting a stop to the evil effects of the report , whilst their meetings were discontinued . i have subjoyned that second paper , mentioned in the report , &c. as also one of the letters of the right reverend the lord bishop of worcester , and one of the reverend dr. edwards , both whose books mr. lob cites against me : and therefore i thought none fitter to vindicate me against his charge , and their own books from the ill use he wrested them to serve . lastly , mr. lob's defence of the report , with a challenge to me coming forth , when these were in the press ; friendship and justice to the rebuker prompted my bestowing a few hours to stop the ill effects of this grand peice of art and misrepresentation , ( it 's nothing else ) until he shall better fift , and more expose it . and one thing i hint , which i thought proper for him to overlook . if after all this evidence mr. lob can find a people so credulous and bewitched by prejudice , as to say , the united ministers , or my self , are socinians ; that the difference on our part ( tho it 's so on theirs ) have been about meer words or trifles ; that we have opposed any thing but gross crispianism , that we brake the union , or refused re-union from a zeal for errors against the satisfaction of christ , or justification by his righteousness ; they deserve pity rather than argument . that at last truth and peace may prevail , is the prayer of , daniel williams . nov. 17. 1697. to the reader . none are more afflicted than our selves under those unseasonable dissentions , which we would have concealed , when our utmost endeavours and compliances could neither prevent , nor yet put a period to . but the authors of the printed papers which we confute , have contrived so to proclaim our differences , by sending those sheets in letters to most of our ministers in the kingdom , yea , to forreign parts , and to multitudes of private persons : that our defence , instead of making our divisions more known , will scarce reach those already mis-informed . had the charge contained only small mistakes , or lesser errors ; christian prudence might forbid an answer . but when they publish us guilty of such destructive opinions , as they say subvert the doctrine of christs satisfaction , yea , and make it impossible ; and this not as rash censures , but pretending to cite our own paper for their charge ; a vindication is necessary , unless we ought to prostitute our ministry , betray the truth , lye under the brand of heretical opinions , induce others by our example to entertain such errors , and confirm those who are already infected . had the accusation been still confined to some particular brethren , our practice hitherto may convince the world , we had not as a body set forth this vindication : but when the authors of the report , &c. accuse all who sent the third paper , i. e. the body of the united brethren in and about london : nothing short of our own publick testimony can be sufficient to declare what our principles be , or acquit us from holding those horrid errors , they so confidently as well as falsely ascribe unto us . a particular brothers defence of us would be incompetent to these ends , had any one been willing thereby to expose himself . and yet tho the reporters write for , and pretend to give the sense of all the dissenting brethren , as well as to arraign and condemn all us the vnited ministers : nevertheless , we direct our confutation only to the authors of the report , and of that called remarks , with such as consented to and approved thereof . we are so far from intending any other persons , that we hope , none besides them will esteem themselves reflected on in this our defence : nor had we given any narrative of the rise and progress of our differences ( least more might appear intended ; ) but that the report and remarks do so frequently declare , that our divisions hitherto have been caused only by our contending for socinian errors against christs satisfaction . we also desire the reader to observe that what we call the first paper , is that which several congregational brethren contend for . that which we call the third paper , is , that which the vnited brethren sent as a mean of re-vnion to those wh● have left the vnion . and when we term such as left the vnion , and approve of the report , dissenters , it is not from any dis-respect , but because the report chuseth to call them by the name of dissenting brethren , p. 4. and whereas once or twice we have occasion to give a narrative only of some things declared by some of our brethren , we do not therein determine concerning such things , further than to report that those brethren have declared such things as we there mention . with this necessitated vindication of our selves and ministry , we think it incumbent on us to warn all persons , especially such of you as stand more peculiarly related to us ; that you be not shaken in mind , but that you remain stedfast in the faith in this time , when seducers not only abound , but under various disguises are so unusually active , and successful to the reproach of christianity , and the apparent danger of the souls seduced by them . lament with us to see all revealed religion exposed by some , the god-head and satisfaction of christ our blessed redeemer denied by others , and doctrines which have a direct tendency to libertinism espoused too many . all which , with the residue of the great errors at this time propagated ; do ( however inconsistent they seem ) jointly contribute to the subverting of the true religion , and threaten misery to these kingdoms . and as we would excite your godly zeal for the truths and laws of christ , against opinions , subverting the foundations of faith , and militating against practical godliness : so with equal concern we must exhort you , to have fervent charity towards all christians , and to walk in peace with all who call upon the name of the lord out of a pure heart . notwithstanding differences in lesser matters . whereunto we have attained , let us all walk by the same rule ; waiting with mutual forbearance , till god shall reveal those things to such , who at present are otherwise minded than our selves . peace is so desirable , that we have suffered our selves to be long misrepresented in hopes that time at least would so abate the prejudices of our dissenting brethren ( as the report calls them ) as not to necessitate us to a publick vindication of our selves . but to our grief we find that the more we submitted , the more some were incouraged to serve their own purposes , by exposing us and our ministry . yet we continued passive until a printed paper , entituled , a report of our differences : written by some of them as if in the name , if not with the consent , or countenance of the rest , compels us at last , to state matters of fact , as they stand , with respect to doctrinals , between us the united ministers in and about london , and such as have deserted our union : which we can freely submit to the judgment of the unbiass'd reader , altho we forbear to mention several things , which would irritate more than those we are forced to recite for our defence against the paper we are now taking into consideration . the title it bears is , a report of the present state of the differences in doctrinals , &c. but upon perusal , we find it neither an impartial , clear , nor true report of those differences ; nor can the design it is to serve be concealed , especially when it is so industriously sent throughout the kingdom , to impose on such as are unacquainted with our case . before we examine the particulars of this report , it 's needful to give an account of the rise , and progress of our differences , wherein it will appear whether we did any thing to break the union , or ommitted any thing within our power to induce those brethren to re-unite , who had separated from us , or were not inclined to live i● peace , when their unperswadeableness made us so un●happy , as to be deprived of their des●red society . about the beginning of the year , 1691. were pub●lished the ●eads of an agreement between the presbyterian and congregational ministers ( as then distinguish'd in and about london , which were drawn up by a numbe● deputed by those of both denominations : of the fir● were , mr. hamond , mr. how , mr. williams , mr stretton with dr. annesly and mr. mayo , who both of the● are now at rest in the lord. of the other were , m●● griffith , mr. mead , mr. chauncey , mr. lobb , with mr● iames and mr. mather , which two also are now fal●len asleep in the lord. these heads of agreemen● were assented to ( as far as we know , ) by all the pres●byterian and congregational ministers then in and abou● london , except mr. cole , mr. mather , and mr. rich. tay●lor . among other things , we therein declared , firs● we would meet and consult , without the least shadow of separate , or distinct parties . secondly , that as to what appertains to soundness of judgment in matters of faith , we esteem it sufficient that a church acknowledge the scriptures to be the word of god ▪ the perfect and only rule of faith and practice ; and own either the doctrinal part of the articles of the church of england , or the confession , or catechisms shorter or larger , compiled by the assembly at westminster ; or the confession agreed on at the savoy to be agreeable to the said rule . by the first , we thought our meetings of ministers were secured , and opposite meetings prevented . by the latter , we provided , that our union should not be dis●olved by every different opinion ; especially such as were known to be espoused by persons when admitted members of the union , as the reverend mr. baxter , mr. cockain , &c. this union was tollerably maintained for a while , notwithstanding the attempts of some to break it , as we have reason to fear , and of others to make it serviceable to purposes not fit to be mentioned . about october , 1692. mr. chauncey in a meeting of the united ministers after many warm expressions declared , he would leave their meetings , and break off from their union . the cause he alledged , was our taking no cognizance of a ●aper of objections , subscribed by mr. griffith , mr. cole , mr. mather , mr. chauncey , mr. trayl , and mr. richard taylor , against mr. williams's book called , gospel truth stated , &c. writen in confutation of dr. crisps's unsound opinions which had been reviv'd , and divulged by his works reprinted ; to which book of mr. williams's , an approbation is prefixt with several of our names . there were many reasons we should take small notice of those objections in our meetings , seeing that three of the six objectors were not of the vnion : the material objections were not only ungrounded , but they recited as mr. williams's words in his book , what we found quite contrary to the letter of his expressions ▪ we might add many more . but notwithstanding , we were convinced , that particular brethrens subscribing mr. williams's confutation of dr. crisp's errors ( which were openly propagated to our common danger and reproach , ) did not affect the union , nor the united ministers as such ; and therefore could be no just cause of any brother , s deserting us ; yet we appointed a number of the brethren to consider those objections against mr. williams's book , who together with the objectors accommodated that affair , by a subscription to certain doctrinal propositions , of which you have an account , printed 1693. called , an agreement in doctrinals ; out of which we shall only collect these passages . p. 1. whereas some differences have of late arisen , occasioned by a book written by mr. williams , entituled , gospel truth stated ( wherein dr. crisps works reprinted are considered , ) and by certain books written by mr. chauncey in opposition thereto , and by an approbation of divers of us prefixt to mr. williams's book , and by a paper snbscribed by mr. griffith , mr. cole , mr. mather , mr. trayl , and mr. r. taylor , in conjunction with mr. chauncey : it is hereby declared , that neither they who subscribed that approbation prefixed to mr. williams's book , did therein more than signify ( as their own words express , ) that they judg'd he had , in all that was material , fully and rightly stated the truths and errors therein mentioned as such , without delivering their sense about the preface , explications , or proofs thereto belonging ; which declaration is not to be esteemed as a disapproval of the said preface , explications , or proofs . here it 's plain , that whatever ground of difference was pretended from that book , or the approbation to it , was then considered and adjusted ; that being the very express and sole matter , which that agreement refers to : and therefore , how unaccountable is it to maintain divisions so long after , upon that same pretence ? p. 2. we and they say , in order to the composing of matters of controversie , &c. we do subscribe these following propositions , as what do most fully provide against the arminian , antinomian , socinian , and popish errors . &c. here was declared a full provision against those respective errors . and is it not strange , that now such phrases and words must be the standard of orthodoxy , which neither this agreement , the church of england , the assemblies , nor the confession of any church require . p. 15. we shall always through god's gracious assistance in our future ministry , to our utmost avoid all appearance of opposition to one another , so as not to hinder or prejudice , but as far as in us lies to promote the success thereof , and the common benefit thereby . when the following behaviour of some of our dissenting brethren , is observed in many signal instances , ●t might be well suspected , whether ever they subscribed an engagement so solemn , or if they did , what ●an be contrived to oblige them ? but that they subscribed ; see p. 16. december 16. 1692. this day the brethren , who endeavoured to accommodate this controversy , did with mr. williams , and mr. chauncy , and these other five , who with him objected against mr. w●lliams's book , subscribe to this agreement , and these doctrinal propositions . daniel williams . samuel annesley . math. barker . edw. veal . iohn iames. stephen lob. iohn how. george hamond . vincent alsop . rich. mayo . sam. slater . isaac chauncy . geo. griffith . tho. cole . nath. mather . rob. trayl . rich. taylor . on december 19. this expedient was brought to a meeting of the united ministers , who unanimously expressed their approbation in the following words , viz. that those brethren , who , at the desire of the united ministers , considered some objections against mr. williams's book , having brought in the above-mentioned expedient , for the accommodation of the matters in controversy ; the united ministers have weighed it , and approve of the same . besides , it was further declared by them , that whereas the united ministers collectively considered , and as such , have not been desired to approve of mr. williams's book ; in like manner , they do not by any thing in this agreement , imply an approbation of mr. chauncy's writings in this controversy ; nevertheless they do rejoyce , that both mr. williams , and mr. chauncy , have accepted this offered expedient . we hoped after this agreement , union and peace were well secured : but ( alas ! ) in a little time ( without any occasion given on our parts ) we found , besides the endeavours of those , who came not into the union , to prejudice people against us and our doctrine , as well as against the union ; several of those called congregational , who were members of the union , frequented not our meeting , but oft joyned with the former in a meeting at pinners-hall , the very day and hour of the week , in which our meetings of ministers are statedly kept . yea , and some of them in print reflected on our meetings in very unbeseeming terms , as will be made appear if occasion require . nevertheless , our zeal for peace , did not only prevail with us to be silent under these publick affronts , but set us on making a new essay for a re-union , about the latter end of the year 1694. to which end , we appointed a number to meet , both with the dissenting brethren , who had left us ; and with such ▪ who had always refused to be of us . these dissenting brethren pretended nothing for their separation , but that there were erroneous persons in the union . to gratify them as to this , the persons deputed by us , admitted such provision as pleased those brethren , against whatever errors they suspected any of our number guilty of . this you will find in the former part of the following paper , which was brought to our meeting , as what would satisfy the dissenters , if assented to by us . some of us , were sensible of this new ●mposition of theirs ( against whose opinions we had so much to object ) and the dangerous consequences of thus multiplying confessions , as also of favouring such unjust suspicions of our principles , which we knew they had no reason for , as 〈◊〉 any of our number . nevertheless , we submitted 〈◊〉 prospect of a coalition ; only we finding their pa●●r to want due provision against crispian and antino●●an errors , which many did publickly espouse and ●●bet , we desired mr. how , mr. stretton , mr. williams , ●●d mr. lob , to supply the said defect . the result ●hereof you have in the ensuing paper , which was un●●imously agreed to in our meeting , and sent from us 〈◊〉 mr. lob , to our dissenting brethren ; in ian. 7. 1694. after a preface it thus follows , ' we the united ministers in and about london , considering of a way whereby to preserve the union , and prevent any mistakes , and remove any prejudices that may arise amongst us , to interrupt the foresaid union , do declare , that we still adhere to the terms thereof , and do still submit to the holy scriptures as the rule of faith and practice , and do own the doctrinal part of those commonly called the articles of the church of england , or the confession , shorter or larger catechisms , compiled by the assembly at westminster , or the savoy confession ; and do renounce , and testify against all opinions and doctrines dissonant therefrom ; as for instance , among many others . first , that there is no definite number of persons elected from all eternity , whom god will by his appointed means certainly save , and bring to eternal life , leaving the rest who fall under a just condemnation for their original and actual sins , especially for their neglect and contempt of the means of salvation . 2. that christ died equally for all men , not intending the final salvation of some more than others . thirdly , that men have in their own power by the use of the natural faculties of their reason and will , unassisted by the special light and grace of the holy ghost , to perform all that is necessary to salvation ; or that his special efficacious light and grace is not necessary to their conversion , perseve●rance , and final salvation . fourthly , that any o● them whom god hath foreknown , predestinated and called effectually according to the purpose of hi● grace , shall fall away either totally , or so as not t● be finally gloryfied fifthly , that faith , repen●tance , a holy conversation , or any act of wor● whatever done by us , or wrought by the spirit o● god in us , are any part of that righteousness fo● the sake of which , or on the account whereof , go● doth justify any man , or entitle him to eterna● life . on the other side . first , that men are under no obligation to mak● use of their natural faculties , with such externa● means of salvation as god affords them , praying i● hope , for his gracious assistance in order to tha● blessed end . secondly , that god hath not made of●fers of grace by christ , to all within the sound o● the gospel , testifying that whoever believeth shall b● saved , without excluding any , and commandin● them to believe accordingly . thirdly , that any ar● in the sight of god justified , or entitled to eterna● life , before they are effectually called , or while the remain unregenerate , or in unbelief . fourthly , tha● any may expect pardon without repentance . fifthly ▪ that continued repentance towards god , and fait● in our lord jesus , and holyness of heart and life are not in the nature of the thing , and by the con●stitution of the gospel necessary to salvation . sixthly ▪ that the moral law is not of use to unregenerate men , to awaken their consciences to fly from th● wrath to come , and drive them to christ , or that 't is not a rule of life to them that live under the gospel , as well as others . seventhly , that believers falling into grievous sins , do not incur gods displeasure ; or that they may expect assurance otherwise , than by the evidence of those graces to which the promises of salvation are made , and by the testimony of the spirit of adoption witnessing with our spirits , that we are the children of god. we have thought it our duty to bear our testimony against all these erroneous opinions , or any other contrary to the plain tenour of the gospel of god : and we do further protest against any design of undermining one another in any matter of church government , but do heartily desire to maintain communion with each other , according to the heads of agreement we have assented to . and if any thing hath been done or spoken by any of us , through mistake or inadvertency , that may cause any just offence to the prejudice of the said union , we are ready upon better information to rectify the same , still desiring and continually resolving a brotherly forbearance towards one another , in any lesser points wherein we may differ . our concern for union will appear , if it be considered that ( to the best of our knowledge ) we retained all the very words sent by them to us , as a guard against each of the errors , of which they suspected any of us : the provisions we added , is generally in the words of the assembly , to which we hoped they would be more easily induced to assent , than if we had expressed our selves in other words ; and we limited our additions to such errors as are the other extreme , as to the articles they had chosen to insist upon , whereas we might have provided against each of dr. crisp's errors . a good issue of this paper was expected by many of us . but to our grief it was rejected , and no answer sent us concerning it to this very day : yea , a coalition hereupon was chearfully hoped for by us , even after their friends had , nov. 7. 1694. necessitated four of our number to leave the lecture at pinners-hall , and all such of the dissenting brethren , who were managers of ●he reiief for poor ministers , had deserted their assoiates with other things , not so directly belonging to the body of united ministers , as such . but alas ! ( as they had generally absented from us long before ) all the bre●hren call'd congregational ( except the reverend and upright mr. barker , and a very few more ) joyned as a separate party from us , in the monday 's meeting at pinners-hall , with the ministers who had opposed the union ever since it was concluded . the temper of our brethrens spirits , the methods taken to expose us , their disappointing us so often , when we thought they had been obliged ; and the unsuccessfulness of so many probable attempts for re-union , might well discourage any further endeavours ; yet when we heard that any of these brethren had the least disposition towards peace , we applyed our selves to an accommodation . in order thereunto , the reverend dr. bates , mr. hammond , mr. hill , and mr. slater , in concurrence with mr. how , and mr. williams , were desired to draw up a proposal , which they brought to our meeting , as that wherein they were all agreed ; and after we had several days considered the same , it was unanimously assented to , and sent by us in a letter to our brethren . the paper , by the report called the third paper , which was sent by the vnited brethren to such as had left the vnion . whereas some unhappy differences have arisen among us , principally about the doctrin of justification , as set forth in mr. williams's book , entituled , gospel truth stated , to which several of our names are pre●ixt ; we being willing to give all reasonable satisfaction therein , for the removing the present , and preventing all future differences , which will otherwise tend to the dishonour of god , disquiet of his churches , and danger of souls ; do here by declare our judgment concerning the same . that we adhere to our former approbation of the doctrinal articles of the church of england , or confession of faith compiled by the assembly at vvestminster , or that at the savoy , as agreeable to the word of god , and particularly , to the articles collected by us out of the confession with the catechisms compiled by the same assembly , printed 1693. a●d further declare , that if any shall express himself disagreeably thereto , in any momentous points of doctrin , we will with brotherly candour and kindness endeavour to give , and receive just satisfaction therein , bearing with one anothers infirmities , and different sentiments in matters of lesser weight , not contending about logical , or philosophical terms , or meer human forms of speech , not judging it reasonable or just , to charge upon any such consequences of any expression or opinion of his , which he himself shall disown . and we further declare , as to the special matters in difference . i. concerning justification . that altho the express word of god do assert the necessity of regeneration , to our entring into the kingdom of god ; and requires repentance , that our sins may be blotted out ; and faith in christ , that we may be justified ; and holiness of heart and life , without which we cannot see god. yet that none of these , or any work done by men , or wrought by the spirit of god in them , is , under any denomination whatsoever , any part of the righteousness for the sake , or on the account whereof , god doth pardon , justifie , or accept sinners , or entitle them to eternal life , that being only the righteousness of christ without them , imputed to them , and received by faith alone . ii. of a commutation of persons between christ and us . as we are to consider our lord jesus christ in his obedience , and sufferings , as god and man ▪ invested with the office of mediator ; so it is apparent , this commutation of persons with us was not natural , in respect of either nature , by which his individual substance should become ours , and ours his ; nor moral , in respect of qualities , or actions , whereby he should become inherently sinful , and we immediately sinless . nor was it any change whereby his office of mediator should be transfered on us . but it is to be understood in a legal , or judicial sense ( as we may call it ) viz. he by agreement between the father and him , came into our room and stead , not to repent and believe for us , which the gospel requires of us as our duty ( tho he hath undertaken the ele●t shall in due time be inabled thereto ) but to answer for our violation of the law of works : he being made sin for us , that knew no sin , that we might be made the righteousness of god in him . 2 cor. 5 21. iii. of god's being pleased or displeased with christ , as standing , and suffering in our stead . we judge that god was always pleased with christ , both in his person , and execution of all his offices , which is exprest most particularly in that of his priestly , 1● iohn 17 , 18 therefore doth my father love me , because i lay down my life , &c. and no otherwise displeased than as having a dispassionate will to inflict upon him the punishment of our sins , which he had undertaken to bear , that god might , without injury to his justice or honour , pardon and save penitent believers , for his satisfaction , and intercession founded thereon . mr. vvilliams freely declareth his concurrence with us in these three particulars , and that his judgment was never contrary to the sence of this paper , for which he appeals to the said book : so it is manifest , that when he useth the prhase of no change of person between christ and the elect , it could not be intended as a denial o● a change of persons between christ and us in the general sence , but only in opposition to the opinion of his adversary he wrote against , for in that very place he expresly affirms , that christ suffer'd and dyed in our room , and stead . and we do declare , that whosoever shall be found , to express themselves in their preaching or writing agreeably to this paper , and to the mentioned articles or confessions , we shall esteem them to deliver the sincere gospel of our lord and saviour jesus christ ; and it shall be remote from us to oppose or reflect upon , but we shall to our utmost encourage , and give countenance to one anothers ministry therein . such of us , whose names are prefixed to the said book , do declare they were given to the state of truth and errors , as formerly exprest in the paper , intituled , the agreement in doctrine , subscribed and published , anno dom. 1692. they who framed this proposal had before them two papers , one which the report calls the first paper , which one of our brethren had with great condescension and inclination to peace , concerted with some of the dissenters : which paper , altho it was never proposed to , nor read in any of our publick meetings of ministers , and was unanimously agreed to be laid aside with a second paper , that had been brought unto us by another brother ; yet it 's manifest , the brethren in the framing of this third ( which is our only paper ) greatly accommodated themselves to the model of the first : for they admit a new debate concerning mr. williams's book , after a solemn accommodation of that whole matter , when the dissenters had unjustly made it an occasion of difference so many years before ; they also recite two passages of mr. williams , as excepted against by the dissenters , and limit the declaration of our judgment to the three heads , the objectors did choose to insist upon , whereas you will presently read a vote of us united ministers , wherein we require a disowning of very many antinomian errors , published by several of these dissenters , whenever they shall make the disowning of any passages out of books written against antinomianism , a term of union . yea further , we retain the whole provision of the first paper , against any of our surmized errors in the doctrine of justification , and what we add is in scripture words . and in the other two heads , we come as near as we can with truth , and freedom from ambiguity , in points of so great concernment , and in a time when so many are at work to propagate crispianism , and antinomianism . a coalition could be no indifferent thing to such , who to obtain it do thus condescend , and deny themselves . but to give our attempt a yet greater advantage , we omitted not to address our selves to our brethren , with the most affectionate , fervent , and humble intreaties , and supplications , as well as perswasive arguments ; as you will see in this letter which we sent to them , with the forementioned paper . note , it was declared , that by the words [ under any denomination whatsoever ] we exclude all righteousness from being meritorious , or attoning , yea , or a procuring cause of these benefits ; none is at all so , but the righteousness of christ. but we intended not to exclude what the gospel requireth in order to our interst , in those benefits given for the sake of christs righteousness . to our reverend , and duely respected , and beloved brethren in our common lord and saviour iesus christ , mr. griffith , mr. mead , mr. chauncey , mr. james , mr. lobb , and the rest of the brethren of the vnion , ( who for some time . ) have forborn to meet with the vnited ministers at dr. annesley's meeting place . reverend brethren , your forbearing to meet with us at our ordinary times and places for so many months ▪ hath made a deep , and smarting impression on our spirits , and filled our hearts with grief and wonder . with grief , because we have been so long deprived of much of that satisfaction and assistance , which your presence with us was wont to afford us . with wonder , because we could neither apprehend nor receive any certain information of those reasons , which prevailed with you , to keep off so long from our conventions . for to this day you never acquainted us , directly , and clearly , of any offence that was ever offered to you , by the united ministers , as standing in that capacity , had you been pleased to signifie your resentments to them ▪ they take themselves to have been obliged to have sought out proper ways and means for the removal of all prejudices , and of rendring to you , reasonable and due satisfaction . all the light that we have received about matters in difference between us , hath been from a reverend brother , who told us , that by conference with some who forbear to come to our meetings , he under stood , that they apprehended , there are those in our union , who have sentiments about the doctrin of justification , different from the common faith of all orthodox protestants , and so dissonant from the holy scriptures , and the confessions , which have been owned and approved by us . the same brother added that if there were sufficient evidence and assurance given them , that the body of the united ministsrs would approve themselves , sound , clear , and stedfast in that most weighty and important doctrin ( which we all acknowledge to be articulus stantis vel cadentis eclesiae , ) they would then maintain all brotherly communion with us . when this was notified to us , we presently conceived great and good hopes , that all jealousies might be easily removed , and that a redintegration of affections would immediately follow . and what should hinder ? for if you do attentively , and deliberately weigh what is asserted in the article of justification , in the inclosed paper , ( which was unanimously agreed unto , after open reading , and that upon several days ) we are confident , that it will evidently and undeniably appear , that we perfectly agree with our brethren in the evangelical doctrin of justification , even in the very phrases and modes of expression . our agreement in the doctrin of justification , which was as the test and cement of our union , being so happily established and fixed ; we shall need to say but little , touching the other two points mentioned in the inclosed paper : which ( as we think ) are so clearly and candidly stated , that we believe , ( as we suppose , upon sure and certain grounds ) there will be nothing remaining ( upon that account ) to obstruct our entire and hearty union it would be superfluous to lay before you any considerations to set forth the desirableness , usefulness , we may add the necessity of ministerial concord : or to represent the sin , and mischief that will inseparably cleave to our unbrotherly breaches . we all find ( by sad experience ) what advantage is given thereby , to some who seek occasion to reproach us , and to hinder the success , or acceptableness of our ministry . they do certainly wish , and will endeavour to make our wound incurable . but we trust , the lord will blast their designs , and frustrate their expectations , by enlightning our minds , to receive and hold fast all truths , and specially those which are fundamental : and by his grace , most sweetly and effectually draw our hearts to love as brethren : that we may closely , strongly , and intimately knit-together in inviolable bonds : and so guide us , that we may all follow after the things that make for peace , and the things wherewith one may edify another . and now ( dear brethren ) we do , with all sincerity and ardor , beseech you to meet us with the like frame of spirit ; that our only emulation and contention may be , who shall be most industrious to promote the interest of our lord redeemer : be most useful to the souls we are set to watch over : and be most forward to embrace each other in the arms of love. that these blessed ends may be the more effectually pursued , we do ( with all importunity and fervor ) beseech you to return to and frequent our meetings , as ye have formerly done : that we may joyn with you there , in your holy prayers : be assisted with your wholesome counsels , and be refreshed with your much desired society : that we may with one mind , and one mouth glorify god , even the father of our lord jesus christ. amen . if , after the perusal of the inclosed paper , ye meet with any thing therein that may seem to need further explanation : and ye be willing to entertain a conference about it : be pleased to appoint the time and place , when and where , a determinate number of the united ministers , may meet with a like number of the brethren nominated by you , and we shall most readily and chearfully comply with your proposal . howbeit , we must add , that we hope , we have already set down our sentiments , as nakedly and perspicuously as we could express , in pursuance of our end , which was to give you all possible satisfaction — we conclude this paper with two earnest requests to you . ( 1. ) upon the hopes which you have conceived , that ( thro' the grace and blessing of our god ) the differences which have risen among us , will be brought to an happy composure : we importunately beseech you , to use your uttermost endeavours , to perswade these brethren who have not as yet entred into our union , that they will joyn with us in it . ( 2. ) that you would ( assoon as conveniently you can ) vouchsafe us an answer to this our letter . finally , brethren farewell , be perfect , be of good comfort , be of one mind , live in peace : and the god of love and peace shall be with you . signed at dr. annesle●'s . october 27. 1696. by mr. hammond moderator . to our letter so submissive , peaceable , and impo●tunate , we received this and no other answer . reverend brethren , having received from you a letter with a paper inclosed , in answer thereunto suffer us to acquaint you , that a paper subscribed by a considerable number of you , and approved of by us some months since , which we have reason to believe some of you have had the perusal of ; we therefore to whom your letter is directed , do not reckon it brotherly in us to forsake them who have subscribed the foresaid paper , but do rather judge our selves bound in conscience to entreat ●our hearty concurrence with them , and us , in that ●●st paper ; which , as we have already said , hath been ●●bscribed by very principal and reverend ministers , ●●ghly esteemed both by you and us : and this we hope , may , through the blessing of god , be the speediest way 〈◊〉 obtain the desirable end. ●ubscribed in the name of several of the brethren , to whom your letter was communicated . this is the letter our reporter complains we gave no reply to , wherein we think we paid a great ●egard to them who sent it , and we shall still overlook 〈◊〉 otherwise than to note , first , it is more than ●robable some of us perused , what a considerable num●er of us subscribed . secondly , our brethren who ●ubscribed , could not judge it unbrotherly , to be for●aken for laying aside the first paper , when every one ●f them had laid it aside before , and joyned in the ●hird paper , and in the letter whereto this answer is ●●●en ( which it's strange any of the dissenters could 〈◊〉 ignorant of . ) thirdly , what is the desirable end ? ●ad they said union , it would have been more accep●able to us , than it seemed to be to such of themselves , 〈◊〉 declared in one o● the meetings about this expe●ient , that it was not intended by this attempted a●reement , that they would joyn with us in our meet●●gs as united ministers , but that an agreement in doctrine might be a step to further union : yea , we 〈◊〉 scarce hope they would have re-united , could we 〈◊〉 submitted to their papers , because , as we are infor●ed , mr. cole and mr. mather refused their assent to 〈◊〉 and this their letter was subscribed in the name , 〈◊〉 of several ( not of all ) to whom it was communica●●●● ; nor ( as we find ) was any union , or agreement ●●gaged , or expressed , except in doctrine , had this expedient obtained . this is the true state of the ca●● between our brethren and us : could we have obtai●●ed a re-union upon mutual forbearance wherein we di●●fer : had any of these accounts of our principles ●●●tisfied them ; ( tho' we therein admit so rigid and 〈◊〉 a tryal wherein they suspected us , and propose so v●●ry short and easy a test when we affirm the trut● denied by them ) had our impo●tunity for peace , atte●●ded with much patience and condescention , been a●●cepted ; the mischievous effects of our differences h●● been prevented . nor can we guess what would p●●●vail with the authors of t●ese divisions , unless tha● book should be disowned , which , the subscribers 〈◊〉 convinced , is of great use for the defence of the go●●pel in a time abounding with errors : and such trut● betrayed , as the usefulness of our ministry and prac●●●cal religion depend upon : things we are sure chr●●● would not app●ove , nor could we expect a peace bought to prove a blessing . we were well assured , that a faithful account of 〈◊〉 state of things among us , must acquit us of the bla●● of those unhappy differences , and prevent the adva●tages some made by mis-representing us : neverth●●less , we had still remained silent , if this so unjust a 〈◊〉 pors ( with a paper of remarks following it ) had 〈◊〉 been obtruded on the world , and with art scatter●● throughout the kingdom , yea , sent to forreign na●●ions as can be proved ; after this , indeed our sile●● would proclaim us stupidly insensible and unconcern●● for the common good , as well as for our own repu●●●tion and usefulness . we shall proceed to consider what is material in 〈◊〉 report . first , the report saith , our differences may be re●●●ced to christs satisfaction and the penal sanction of 〈◊〉 law ; tho' hitherto , the greatest struggle hath been about 〈◊〉 first . answ. 1. the first was no part of the difference till ●f late , that mr. lobb contrived to make it so , tho' ●ithout any reason ; for mr. williams rightly and fully ●sserted the first in his books . and the utmost that ●an be made of the latter is , that mr. williams asserts ●hat if the precepts of the law of works be consi●ered , as taken into the gospel , they fall under the gospel sanction ; and tho' in this respect there is a ●hange of the sanction , yet the precepts considered ●ill as a part of the law of works , they are under ●he same legal sanction as at first , which is to say , the covenant of works and the gospel covenant dif●er . and yet this seems to be reserved for a new controversy , if we had agreed to their very mode of expressing the point he insisteth on . answ. 2. it 's a very great mistake , that our differ●nce with them is reduced to these two points , alas ! ●t extends to many other things ( viz. ) most of dr. crisp's opinions , as to which they refuse to give us sa●isfaction , tho' he granteth these two are all they quarrel with us about , and how unjustly will presently be seen . we shall detect his mistake by a brief narrative . 1. the difference originally appeareth to be about most of those positions , called truths and errors in the state of them in mr. williams's book ; for six of the dissenters did not only object some particular passages ; but they deny those to be truths which are called truths , and such to be errors which are called errors , in the 2.5.7.8.12.16.18 . and 19. chapters of that book : yea , they say , they find not truth and error rightly stated in other places besides these ; thus they say , mr. chauncyes neonomianism unmasked , par. 3. p. 96. whereas many of our brethren subscribed , that each of these were rightly stated . he that will read the truths and errors in those several chapters , may judge of the difference , and whether any of dr. crisp's errors will be disowned . 2. in the forcited articles 1694. you 'll find that when we had owned such to be errors , which they required of us , yet they refused to disown those errors which we added ; and therefore the difference at that time , respected whatever they refused to agree with us in , and was not ever since accommodated . 3. the reporter cannot be ignorant , that september 15. 1695. this vote unanimously passed among the united brethren , upon reading a paper relating to several dangerous expressions in favour of antinomianism , if that any thing objected out of books written against antinomianism be required to be disowned as a term of union , that those things read this day , and further to be collected of that kind out of the books on the other side , shall be required to be disowned . some things collected out of the books of mr. chauncy , mr. cole , mr. mather , and mr. trail . to talk of a gospel threat , is a catechresis at best , and nothing else can save it from being a bull. pardon is rather the condition of faith , and much more having a causal influence thereunto , than faith and repentance are of pardon . it was sin , as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that christ bore , the fault of sin was laid upon christ , the sin it self as opposed to guilt . christ was reputed a criminal , not only by man , but by god. as to the elect , there was never any guilt upon them , in respect of the righteous judgment of god , in foro dei , but that which accompanied the letter of the law , setting in with the conscience . justification is before effectual vocation — the doctrine of justification before faith is not an error , but a great and glorious truth . justification in regard of application must be before believing — the first application , ordine naturae saltem , is to an ungodly man , eo nomine that he may believe ; we believe that we may be justified declaratively . it is denied , that god requires faith as an indispensible qualification in them , whom he will justify for christs merits — he denies that unbelief is the cause why men are barred from justification , and obnoxious to misery . he saith , you talk of an offer to the non elect , and that offer you say must be serious , &c. but i pray , where is any offer of grace to the non-elect at all , as such . and shew me any grace given , or gospel duties required of the non-elect , or benefits promised to the non-elect , upon their performance of grace and duties , &c. and what if the non-elect be in as bad a case as the devils , is god bound to be any better to them than to the devils ? god hath not said , i will save a non-elect person if he believe , more than he hath said , a horse shall be a man , if he can use reason , or speak , or a man shall be a horse if he hath four feet . god was reconciled to the elect at christs death , but we are reconciled to god by the gospel ministry . union with christ is before faith , at least natura , and we partake of the spirit by virtue of that union : there is a compleat union with christ before the act of faith. all that a believer can pray for , is the further manifestation of pardon , for he knows that all his sins are pardoned . a believer is to work from life and not for life . it 's a great truth that god sees no sin in a believer , sin can do no real hurt to a believer . god is not displeased with his people , and is not angry with the persons of believers , for their sins . legal convictions before saving faith are no more than sin , it 's but the filthy conscience polluting guilt of sin . there is no preparatory work distinct from gods act in effectual calling . the gospel is no rule of judgment , that 's the law only . the gospel is not any part of the rule of judgment at the last day , that 's only the law of creation . denies that , at the judgment day there will be a tryal , upon which some will be justified , others condemned . christs precepts are not laws with a sanction . approves of these words , sanctification is not the way of a justified person to heaven — if you look upon graces and duties , and salvation , as two distinct things , i deny that they are necessary to give a right to salvation . all imperfect holiness is sin . turn ye , turn ye , why will you dye ? is but the triumph of the law over a dead sinner . an unsaved person can do nothing in order to salvation . god was displeased with christ as our surety : we in christ satisfied the justice of god. we through christs righteousness have a right to glory , by adams covenant . adam for one good work , should have entred into full possession and a confirmation therein . to teach that a christian upon the actings of graces , and performance of duties , may in the virtue of the promise made to the exercise of those graces or duties , expect any of those promised blessings , is to teach a low and servile spirit . the eternal life in which the angels were created and confirmed by christ , differs from that eternal life which believers have in christ ; the one is a creature life , or a created life , the other is the eternal life of god communicated in time . believers are as righteous as christ , i mean not in a way of similitude , but in a way of equality . christs incarnation was no part of his humiliation ; we coalesoe upon believing into one mystical person with christ , which is distinguisht from legal union , which is before faith. the gospel hath no law-sanction , it 's plainly denied that the gospel is a law of grace . faith is neither a condition nor qualification in the office of justification ; with several things of the same sort as above recited . most of these were then included in the paper , the vote refers to ; which with the other things further collected , shall be proved to be in the printed books of the foresaid authors , and book and page cited for each , when it shall be required . yea , at great deal more , if not worse , of the same sort . by these things it 's manifest what the difference is about , tho' a noise hath been raised about things remote from the true occasion , that while we seemed to be only on the defensive part , their errors might receive countenance as if unopposed , and the abettors thereof might less appear the cause of our divisions . answ. 3. altho' brethren from a zeal for peace condescended to mention but three particulars in the third paper , yet it 's too evident , that the dissenters adhere to their own paper ( called the first ) and refuse ours , because this doth provide some defence against some of the errors , which our difference is about , ( the same cause for which they rejected the articles in 1694. ) and it 's plain by what their paper saith of justification , they had this our paper of ninety four before them , and therefore must know , that we insisted under that head to have it clearly expressed , that none are justified in the sight of god , or entitled to eternal life , before they are effectually called , or whilst they are unregenerate , or in unbelief ; and that men must repent in order to forgiveness ; as also that continued repentance , faith and holyness of heart , and life , are by the constitution of the gospel , as well as in the nature of the things themselves , necessary to salvation , &c. our dissenting brethren knew this , and yet insert nothing in that first paper sufficient to this purpose . by the reporters arguing against us , their not mentioning those things is their disowning of them , and owning the contrary , yea , we have more reason to infer thus , because what they omit was sent by the body of united ministers to them as a mean of union , whereas , what 's omitted by us , was not sent to us , much less to that end , nor adjusted by our appointment . but we need not to insist on this , when by comparing the first and third papers , it 's evident , that the foresaid errors are inconsistent with the few variations in our paper , bnt very consistent with theirs , tho' not in the sense designed by our subscribing brethren . in the first part of the head of justification , their paper saith , repentance , faith , and a holy conversation , are by gods express word manifestly necessary to salvation . they do not say , repentance is necessary to pardon , nor faith to iustification , tho' that be the head treated of : no , these are necessary to no more than a holy conversation is necessary to , i. e. to eternal salvation : nor do they say , that the necessity of these to salvation it self is by the gospel constitution , or any enacted connexion between duty and benefit . things being thus worded , it may pass with such who tell us , the gospel hath neither precept , threatning , nor conditional promise : repentance is not antecedently necessary to pardon , nor faith to the justification of our persons , but only to manifest to our consciences for our inward peace , that our persons were justified before god whilst in our unbelief . but such things are prevented by our paper , which saith , that the word of god requires repentance , that our sins may be blotted out , and faith that we may be justified ; and afterwards , the gospel requires of us as our duty ; that we repent and believe , and god pardons penitent believers . in like manner , their paper in the other heads expresseth things so , as that such may subscribe it , who think the filth and fault of sin were transacted on christ , he was the criminal , the murtherer , &c. in gods account ; that god was really displeased with christ , and abhorred him as our surety ; tho' not considered in himself : and sundry the like ( that our paper gives no countenance to ) which our subscribing brethren do abhor . it 's not then without reason , that the dissenters insist on the first paper ; whether they be such who hold those errors , or resolve to indulge such as do so . and yet there wants not art in placing the differences upon our omitting a phrase in the third paper , wherein the true sense of it is expressed ; for the reporter well saw , a quarrel with us for the omission of a phrase of so uncertain a sense , is as yet more plausible , than their struggle for errors of so ill a sound would be . answ. 4. but if the doctrines about which we differ are not yet sufficiently evident , we shall with a desire of union make this proposal ; if our dissenting brethren will declare their agreement with us . first , that repentance towards god , is commanded in order to remission of sin. secondly , that faith in christ is commanded by the gospel , in order to the justification of our persons before god , for the sake of th● alone righteousness of christ. thirdly , that the word of god requires perseverance in true faith and holyness , that we may be partakers of the heavenly glory . fourthly , that the gospel promiseth pardon through the blood of christ to the penitent , justificaion before god to the believer , and the heavenly glory to such as persevere in faith and holyness ; and also declareth that god will not pardon the impenitent , justify the unbeliever , nor glorify the apostate or unholy . fifthly , that justifying faith is not only a perswasion of the understanding , but also a receiving and resting upon christ alone for salvation . sixthly , that by change of person is meant , that whereas we were condemned for our sins , the lord jesus was substituted in our room , to bear the punishment of our sins , for the satisfaction of divine iustice , that whoever believes on him may be acquitted and saved ; but it is not intended , that the filth of sin was upon christ , nor that he was a criminal in gods account . seventhly , that by christs being our surety is meant , that jesus christ our mediator obliged himself to expiate our sins by his blood , and to purchase eternal life for all that believe , and faith and every saving grace for the elect ; but it 's not intended , that we were legally reputed to make satisfaction , or purchase eternal life . eighthly , that by christs answering for us , the obligations of the violated law of works is intended , that whereas the law obliged us to dye for our sins , christ became obliged to dye in our stead , and whereas we were , after we had sinned , still obliged to yield perfect obedience ; christ perfectly obeyed the law , that upon the account of his active and passive obedience believers might be forgiven , and entituled to eternal life : but it 's not intended that the sense of the law of works should be , that if we , or christ obeyed we should live , and if christ suffered we should not dye , tho' we sinned : nor that believers are justified , or to be judged by the law of works , but by the gospel ; altho' the righteousness for the sake of which they are justified , be as perfect as that law of works required , and far more valuable . if our dissenting brethren will subscribe to these propositions and explications , we will subscribe with them even to the words , change of persons , surety , and answering for us the obligations of the violated law of works , as well as we have already subscribed that no work done by men , nor wrought by the spirit of god in them , is any part of that righteousness for the sake , or on the account whereof we are justified , that being only the righteousness of christ without ut , imputed to us , and received by faith alone , which is the procuring cause of all saving good. how gladly would we re-unite with them , might this but remove the difference ! and since we are content , to use their very words and phrases explained in the orthodox sense ( the omission whereof is , what is excepted against us ) we hope , that such of the dissenters as shall refuse to agree with us , will not hereafter say , that a difference in the doctrines pretended by the report ▪ is the reason why they unite not with us : but acknowledge , that they keep up the differences from their zeal for the foresaid opinions of dr. crisp and the antinomians , which we think to be very erroneous . secondly , the report saith , that the third paper was taken and sent from some who meet at little st. hellens . answ. these some had with them all of our brethren , who subscribed the first paper , yea , several of them were the framers of it , as well as the whole body of the united ministers ( as far as we know ) consented to it . thirdly , the reporter gives the reasons why the dissenters did not approve of the third paper , which are these . 1. he saith the third paper omitted to mention , that a change of persons is the common doctrine of protestants , and that neither justification nor christs satisfaction can be duly explained , or defended without it , and that grotius and the reverend bishop of worcester have proved a change of persons , p. 4. answ. 1. the third paper asserts a commutation of persons , therefore we wonder he , p. 5. affirms , that we have not mentioned it , but having therein fully asserted it in opposition to socinianism , is it not strange our paper should be scrupled , because we duly explained justification and christs satisfaction thereby , but did not say , they could not be explained without it , &c. which tho' we may think , yet the meer saying so is not the hinge of the controversy , nor would it add any strength to the hedge which we have made without it ; or else surely , some of our protestant confessions would at least have made mention thereof , and therefore these brethren must reject every one of those , as well as ours . answ. 2. we have affirmed and explained a change of persons in the same sense , as grotius and the reverend dr. stillingfleet bishop of worcester , have done ( as will appear to any who consult those authors ) but they are far from approving the crispian explication of that phrase , as we shall evidence by a letter of the said reverend bishop to mr. williams . answ. 3. as we durst not imitate the reporters liberty , perswading the world , we denyed and rejected a commutation or change of persons , when we asserted it in express terms , so we assure him , we designed not to offend our brethren , who , he saith , p. 6. are grieved because our letter saith , that on our so happy establishing the doctrine of iustification , we need say but little in the point of commutation of persons . by which words it's plain we meant not , that we said little of it in our paper ▪ where in the second and third heads we said enough to clear it , even twice more than what we said of justification : but we say little of it in our letter , where we have enlarged on justification ; because for several years the dissenters pretended all their great quarrel was about that doctrine ; and may not we justly grieve that for our industry , in clearing our selves beyond all their challenges as to this , we should be hereticated by this report in the new controversy , started by mr. lobb ? the second reason occurs so often , that we cannot avoid answering it again and again . 3. reason , there is such a wrong description given of a change of person in the third paper , as perverts the doctrine of satisfaction , p. 6. yea , p. 7. it tells us , christ did not , yea , could not make satisfaction upon what you affirm . answ. 1. we shall first enquire what description the reporter gives of a change of persons , which is such ●s must with wise men justify our careful expressing our sense of this phrase , p. 7. he saith , a commutation is the same with a proper surrogation , where the surety puts on the quality ▪ state , and condition of the debtor , p. 5. he tells us , we are all by nature under the curse of the law ▪ and destitute of a righteousness entituling to eternal life ▪ and addeth , this is our state and condition , this is the place we are in ; a few lines after he saith , that christ put himself into our place , state and condition , so that whereas we were sin and under a curse , by this blessed change christ was made sin and a curse . here he plainly expresseth his sense of the change of persons : as to what he speaks of christs being a curse , we object not further than that christ was not so by nature ; but the things we observe-are , that he saith , our state place and condition was , that we were destitute of a righteousness , entituling to eternal life ; this was it : he saith , that christ put himself into this our state , place and condition ; if so , then with him christ was destitute of a righteousness , entituling to eternal life . to make this more evident , he saith , we were sin , this was our place , state and condition , into which christ put himself ; and by this change was made sin : now , how were we sin ? we were not a sin-offering but sinful vile offenders ; we were sinful and destitute of all righteousness , that was our condition ; yet he saith , christ came into our condition as we were sin ; which must be , that he was changed to be a sinful vile offender , not an offering for sin , for that was not our condition : by which it's evident , our reporters commutation of persons is not , that christ became a sin offering , and in our stead subject to the punishments , which by the law sinners deserved , that they might be delivered . no , that will not content him ; but that christ was changed to be a sinful person , destitute of a righteousness entituling to eternal life ; this is his change , this is his christs taking on him the person of sinners ; which is a position not only unworthy of the praises he bestows on it , p. 5. but so horrid , that we hope , some of our dissenting brethren will be provoked to clear themselves from the imputation , this reporter seems fond to lay them under . answ. 2. the arguments must be strong by which he saith , our account of a change of person is attaqued , if they will prove that we have thereby perverted the doctrine of satisfaction , yea , and rendred it impossible . whether the arguer and reporter be the same person , we enquire not , but of the same spirit none can doubt : in return whereto , we wish them more charity and modesty for the future : however , some might expect they would have consulted their own credit so far , as not to proclaim the very same men , the most learned and most orthodox , and yet very ignorant and grossly heretical : and that as to the very same point : the first character the reporter bestows on them , for subscribing the first paper ; yet it abates nothing to them of the last , seeing they will frame and approve of the third paper . but it greatly concerns all of us , to peruse the arguments which follow . arg. 1. when we discourse of a commutation , we should consider christ ( who is invested with the office of mediator ) as our surety in the execution of his priestly office , &c. but wording it as they do , is calculated for their meridian , who hold christ suffered only in the person of a mediator not in the person of sinners : for which reason we may perceive , why there must not be the least mention of christs suretyship in the third paper . answ. 1. christs surethyship did not divest him of the office of his mediatorship , but connotes , that as mediator he engaged himself to suffer for condemned sinners , yea , and to do much more for them , than what 's included in the execution of his priestly office , ( viz. ) to teach them , overcome their enemies , &c. nay more , all christs sufferings , as a priest , were his sufferings ▪ as one mediating for sinners , and not one become himself a sinner ; as he is represented to be , by making such a vast difference between him as our mediator , and as surety . answ. 2. tho' we mention not the word surety ( which we scruple not ) yet we did plainly express the thing designed by that word , as far as belongs to a subsequent surety in criminal causes ( tho not pecuniary ) and as is cousistent with christs being a mediator , in all his engagements and performances for us . a disregard to both which occasioneth such confused and mistaken notions concerning these doctrines . arg. 2. their account of a commutation is : it 's to be understood in a legal or judicial sense , as we may call it ; not that it is really so ▪ only we may so call it . answ. 1. as we may call it , is not opposed to really , but we use it as an apology for the term judicial added to legal , and as unscriptural ; we mean that wherein christ suffered , he was judicially dealt with , as if he had been the condemned sinners , in whose room he suffered ▪ but knowing that many give a dangerous sense of the word legal , when without explication or limitation , we added judicial thereto . answ. 2. the reporter might have spared saying , they 'll not quarrel about the term , may the thing they contend for be granted them . instead of complaining of a disrespect to fifty or sixty ministers , we 'll desire all our brethren were as temperate , which would end all quarrels about humane words , when the sense is granted ; nor would this disparage the reporter , who seems so fond of a set of words , as if he highly valued himself , for his discover● of them to his associates ; and therefore he will contend for them so stiffly , that neither union , orthodox explications , nor his reverence for some of us ( when useful to him ) shall signify or amount to any thing , if all his phrases be not still made use of . arg. 3. we apprehend this to be their meaning , because in their explication , there is not a word proper and peculiar to a commutation in a legal sense , &c. what tho' christ dyed in the person of a mediator , to answer for our violation of the law of works , yet if he dyed not in the person of sinners , to answer for them the violated law of works , he did not , he could not , make satisfaction to vindictive , or remunerative justice . answ. 1. we shall not insist how proper satisfaction is to remunerative justice , nor how unfair it is to argue , as if we had said , christ dyed only in the person of a mediator ( when our paper hath no such thing ) only because himself had said , our words are calculated for the meridian of such who hold so . answ. 2. our own words will convince the unbiassed , whether there be strength or truth in this argument ; take what we say in the second and third heads in our paper , which must be connected to express our sense . christ our mediator by agreement with the father , came into our room and stead to answer for our violation of the law of works , he being made sin for us , that knew no sin , that we might be made the righteousness of god in him ; and with christ as standing in our stead , god was no otherwise displeased , than as having a will to inflict on him the punishment of our sins which he had undertaken to bear , that god might , without injury to his justice or honour , pardon and save penitent be●●●●●rs through his satisfaction , and intercession 〈◊〉 ed thereon . can any read these words , and honestly infer , that we have not a word proper to a commutation in a legal sense , or that we denyed christs satisfaction , or that christs satisfaction was impossible by the account we give thereof ? and yet we are charged in the report with each of these : but for the better information of the reader , we shall shew what our account containeth . first , the father as the offended rector proposeth , and agrees upon , terms with christ our mediator , upon which condemned sinners shall be pardoned and saved . secondly , the terms proposed and agreed are such , as sufficiently secure gods honour , and make amends to justice , so that neither are to suffer any injury by pardoning the sinner ; and they are such as answered for all our violations of the law of works , and they are such as render christs sufferings a punishment for our sins . thirdly , the father and son agree not only that these terms are sufficient , but that also they shall be accounted to us , and performed in our room and stead , we mean , vice nostra , & loco nostro ; that therein he was to answer for our violations of the law , and that we should be pardoned and saved thereupon . fourthly , upon this agreement the father as a just ruler , provoked by us sinners , doth justly inflict the punishment of our sins on christ , for satisfaction to his iustice ( which is the same , as that his justice might not be injured . ) fifthly , christ suffers those punishments in our stead , and is therein a sin-offering for us ( tho' not deputed by us ) that we might be made the righteousness of god in him . sixthly , what he suffered is a satisfaction ; his intercession is founded upon that satisfaction , for , and by , which the penitent believer is pardoned and saved : if we have not herein affirmed and explained a legal commutation , and christs suretyship in a sound sense ( tho' not the reporter's ) and affirmed christs satisfaction , yea , enumerated the essentials of it ; we despair that we ever can . and if men will not acknowledge , the reporter doth mis-represent us , and intend his phrases to be a cover for several errors , when this orthodox sense of them could not satisfy him ; we can but bewail their prejudice and partiality . answ. 3. we do not see why our words ( viz. ) christ dyed in our room and stead ( which he leaves out ) to answer for our violations of the law of works , &c. should not make christs satisfaction possible ; yea , and affirm it , as well as their words ( viz. ) christ put on the person of sinners and came into their room and stead , to answer for them the obligations of the violated law of works . putting on the person of sinners , can have no good sense beyond christs coming into our room and stead , which we have asserted ; the words , for them , have but the same import : and seeing the violated law obliged us to dye , for our violations of that law ; if christ in our stead answered for our violations of that law , for which it put us under those obligations to dye ; then christ dyed to answer for us the obligations of that violated law , i. e. its obligations on us to dye for our sins ; to which christs satisfaction ( which is the point in hand ) refers . answ. 4. from what we observe so oft repeated by the reporter , had he justly represented the third paper , and dealt sincerely , he must have reduced all his reasons and arguments to prove his heavy charge against us , and to justify the dissenters refusal of that paper , to this one argument , ( viz. ) they , who in a paper expresly affirm and explain the satisfaction of christ , omitting to mention these words , christ took upon him the person of sinners , do pervert , deny and make the satisfaction of christ imposible . but the presbyterians ( in the third paper ) expresly affirm and explain the satisfaction of christ , omitting to mention these words , christ took upon him the person of sinners ; therefore the presbyterians do in the third paper , pervert , deny , and make the satisfaction of christ impossible . upon this argument , the true weight of the reporters cause and charge doth hang ; and if the major be true , the conseqence will be , that all the churches of christ in their confessions pervert and deny , and make impossible the satisfaction of christ. for to our remembrance these words , christ took on him the person of sinners , are omitted in the confessions of all the churches ; and we had much more reason to omit them , when we knew for what end they are insisted on , by such as the reporter . arg ▪ 4. they impose a sense in express contradiction to the letter , and general scope of mr. williams's book , that when he saith , there is no change of persons between christ and the elect , it could not be intended as a denial of a change of persons , between christ and us in the general sense , but only in opposition to his adversary he wrote against ; for in that very place he expressly affirms , christ suffered and dyed in our room and stead ; for his words are as exclusive of a change of persons in every sense , as words can be , &c. p 37. to 41. gospel truth : first edition . answ. 1. mr. williams no where saith , there is not a change of persons in the plural number , but of person singular ; yet the paper as subscribed made him to say the first ; however , the report doth change it now , nor is this a small mistake with him , when he takes a change of persons , to refer thus to intelligent beings , ( viz. ) christ dying in the room of condemned sinners , which he affirms : but a change of person to denote a change , as to office , acts , qualities , adjuncts , &c. really inseparable , and peculiar to either christ on the one part , or men on the other ; as is plain by all his arguments against a change of person , p. 41. there is no change of person between christ and the elect , for christ was the saviour ; and never ceased to be so ; we are the saved and not the saviours , christ was the redeemer , we the redeemed and not the redeemers : christ was he who by his own merits forgives us , but never was forgiven ; we are forgiven , and never had merits of our own to forgive our selves , or others . it 's profane arrogance for us to pretend to his prerogatives , and it's blasphemy to debase him among them who were enemies without strength and sinners , for whom he was the dying sacrifice ; it 's enough that he reserving the peculiars of a redeemer , should agree to dye for our sins ; it is enough that we are pardoned for his sake , when we deserved endless woe , and are never capable of making the least attonement . here you have all which mr. williams hath written against a change of person , wherein is not a word against change of persons , and it 's evident , he took change of person in the afore-recited sense . answ. 2. when he confutes the sense wherein dr. crisp explains a change of person , he must in denying his sense , deny it under that phrase ( change of person ) of which the dr. gave that sense : take then the doctors words , christ himself is not so compleatly righteous , but we are as righteous as he ; nor we so compleatly sinful , but christ became as compleatly sinful as we ; that very sinfulness that we were christ is made , that very sinfulness before god ; so that here is a direct change , christ takes our person and condition , we take christs person and condition ; with much of this sort , p. 38. here 's the change of person which dr. crisp affirms , this is the change mr. williams denies . answ. 3. mr. w. is so far from denying a change of persons in the general sense , that in that book he oft asserts and proves what the orthodox intend by that phrase , yea , in the very places where he denies a change of person . see p. 37.39 . christs sufferings and obedience were so in our stead , that god cannot exact from us any other atonement for sin , p. 42. he thus explains the imputation of christs sufferings ; to impute to one , what is suffered by another , is to esteem the one undertaken for in the sufferings of the other , and to deal with him as if himself had suffered the same things , p. 43. had not christ suffered for us , we could not have been absolved for the sake of his sufferings , p. 47. god hath provided for his iustice and honour ( in saving true christians ) by the satisfaction of christ , p. 247. the punishment of our sins , yea , the guilt of them as an obligation to punishment was laid upon christ our sponsor . see p. 79.13 . what words can more distinctly and properly express the orthodox sense of a change of persons ? answ. 4. his cavils , p. 9. against mr. williams , as not affirming the sense of a change of persons , tho he say , christ suffered and dyed in our room and stead ; are weak and individious for , first , mr. williams when he had a fit occasion ( as the reporter knows ) duely asserts christs suretyship , and proves ; that christ suffered not only for our good but in our stead , and that he was a proper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , see this at large , man made righteous , p. 91 &c. secondly , the racovian catechism in the amsterdam edition ( and not only modern socinians ) affirm , christ dyed in our stead ; and socinus , crelliu● and others , asserted a change of persons between christ and us , and the sense in which the first take dying in our stead is as metaphorical , and improper , as the last do take a change of persons in . but if our reporter finds a socinian , to use a phrase explained in an ill sense by themselves , and others make use of that phrase in a contrary . sense never so expressly , his way is presently to charge upon them the use of that phrase in the socinian sense ; the same dealings towards him were equally just , when he useth the phrases the antinomians are wont to do . thirdly , after all he hath said , to make the stress of our cause against the socinians , to depend upon the terms , change of persons , &c. an insight into that controversy would convince him , that there are other things which do fa● more certainly define that controversy about the satisfaction , ( viz. ) was christ in his death , an expiatory sacrifice ? did he make atonement to the justice of god ? did christ endure the punishment of our sins ? &c. all these mr. williams in gospel truth asserts . to what 's repeated before out of that book , we will add , p. 7. our sins were imputed to christ with respect to the guilt thereof , so that he by the fathers appointment and his own consent became obliged as mediator , to bear the punishment of our sins , and he did bear those punishments to the full satisfaction of justice , and to our actual remission , when we believe . if he that writes thus must socinianize , none are free besides the antinomian● . but what can be safely said in the opinion of the reporter , who tells us , p. 10. it was a ridiculing dr. crisp , when mr. williams shewing the ground of his mistakes saith , p. 52. because christ suffered in our stead , that the fruit of his sufferings might be our deliverance from suffering and our being saved at last , therefore he thinks there is a change of person : which very words do evidence plainly , that mr. williams by , in our stead , allows the sound sense of a change of persons , while he opposeth dr. crisps erroneous sense of his change of person ; and that mr. w. took a change of person and a change of persons in a very different sense ; tho the disputer or reporter , seem not to distinguish between a surrogation , upon which an innocent expiates anothers crime , and his becoming the very sinning criminal ; or , to use his own metaphor with him , he that is a surety to pay the drunkards debt , must in quality , nature and condition be the drunkard too . fourthly , whatever the reporter saith of the scope , or offensiveness of that book of mr. william's , called , gospel truth stated ; those brethren whom he calleth of biggest name , who subscribed the first paper , have declared they intended not by that paper to censure the passages against which the dissenters objected ; but were so far from condemning any passage therein , that they subscribed the first paper , because they were sure , that upon enquiry it would appear , there was nothing in that book of mr. williams's contrary to the sense of that first paper ; and they still as well as formerly declare , it is an useful book , and that it 's the ca●se of truth it pleads , and have given it under their hands that the state of truth and error is not at all enlarged or changed , since they first subscribed , nor did they mean so in the first paper ; but only that there were in the book , besides the state of truth and error , several explications and arguments added thereunto ; nor indeed could the state of truth and error be enlarged or changed , because ( as it is attested by several , even of those sixteen that were the first , who subscribed to the first edition ) the book as far as it contained the state of truth and error was printed before they subscribed the attestation ; nor do we know of any of the subscribers of that attestation , who do dis-allow the said book , nor any whose names are affixed thereto without their consent — we shall conclude with these further remarks . 1. besides the mis-representation of the points in difference , and of the account given by us ( in the third paper ) of these doctrines , &c. we could detect great mistakes as to matters of fact ▪ some refused to subscribe the first paper , as mr. slater ; some who say they never subscribed it , as mr. barker , are yet set down as subscribers ; others are said to express their approbation of it , who vehemently declared their disallowance of it , as dr. annesley , &c. the reporter saith , he cannot learn , there are five pastors of churches dissenting from it , when it 's notorious to persons , more retired , that from the first about twenty pastors of churches assented not ; yea , we know not one of our meeting who did subscribe it , but were soon convinced that an explication of it was needful , and therefore agreed to the third paper . other mistakes might be added . 2. it was unjust and disingenuous , for the reporter to publish this first paper with the names of our brethren affixed thereto . they , from a zeal for union , condescended to prepare a way for it by subscribing , but then they declared they subscribed not as their conclusive act , but agreed thereto upon condition the meeting of the united ministers would approve of it , and to whom they did wholly refer it . yet he publisheth it as a consummate instrument ( tho the copy was neve deliver'd as such , and the original not at all ) and this without their conse●t , and after he knew they had laid it aside , and agreed to another paper as the instrument of union . such a course must minister jealousie , that the reporter when active in carrying on that paper ; did more design a breach among the united , than union with the dissenters , and that his disappointment produceth this report ; when he saw our union among our selves consolidated of late , and that one of our articles is to this effect , that we 'll suffer none commonly called lay-men , to preach in our pulpits . 3. the reporter hath no reason ▪ to glory in any of our brethrens agreement with him in doctrine , in any point wherein the first paper differs from the third : by which third paper they supply what was wanting , and explain what was doubtfull in the first paper , and determine their sense of those doctrines : nor did they ever intend the weight of their assertions should be laid upon any unscriptnrall words , but upon the orthodox sense of them , which our paper stateth . 4. it 's matter of grief to us , that in opposiition to the preface of both papers , law-terms and humane forms of speech , in doctrines so fully expressed in the gospel and capable of being expressed in the words used and appointed by the holy ghost , should be made engines of division among persons who agree in the sense of such phrases , and yet dare not say , that god designed to limit or extend his revelations by what such terms may signify in humane laws or usages , especially when they need explications and limitations to prevent what 's grosly erroneous ; to instance , christ took on him the person of sinners ; if it be taken in its extent , it will not only be true , that it was of all sinners , but that he took upon him all that belonged to sinners as such , and he was to be reputed as sinfull as they , yea , as all of them : but the churches of christ have been wiser than to insert such phrases into their confessions , knowing it would confound the minds and perplex the consciences of christians in points of greatest concernment to their salvation . 5. this report gives a pregnant instance what zeal for a party will tempt men to ; even to misrepresent persons and things , to invent and applaud slight pretences against union with their brethren , break all rules of decency in praising or dispraising men , as their turn is served ; raise endless noise and clamours , let the juncture be never so unseasonable ; nay , cover and plead for the errors of their associates , which at other times they themselves have condemned . there is occasion enough to invite our enlargement : but we design to irritate no man ; the vindication of our selves from a printed charge so severe ( as the perverting , denying and making the satisfaction of christ impossible ) is so necessary , that all men must justify our publishing this defence : without a narrative of matters of fact as to doctrines ( for other things we omit ) transacted with the brethren who left the union , our apology had been dark and imperfect ; otherwise we had mentioned nothing of that kind . it 's this reporter must bear the blame , that we are compell'd to say so much to convince the world , that if the brethren had such a disposition to peace , as we have all along expressed , the union had never been broken ; after they had made a breach we had soon re united ; and when a re-union was refused by them , we yet had lived in quietness , and prevented their heats , which have stumbled the well-meaning , and advantaged our enemies , by producing such clamorous debates , and unjust reflections and misrepresentations . we have not to our knowledge omitted any thing consistent with integrity to prevent our breaches , or to heal them . another supplicatory letter to the brethren for union was written in reply to the discouraging answer they had given to our former ; being contented to repeat those self-denying methods , which many would judge hardly meet or prudent . but this report hath prevented the sending of this letter , which was delayed by the time taken up in confirming the union among our selves . in this our answer to the report , we have for a reunion proposed to subscribe the very phrases they insist on , provided their sense may be duly adjusted , and those plain truths secured , upon which practicall godliness and a true gospel-ministry so much depend . by which proposall we hope many of our dissenting brethren , who have been imposed on , will be so undeceived , as to reunite with us , and leave such to themselves who will still divide for the sake of such errors as these brethren cannot approve , and therefore will not for the strengthening of their hands be longer contented to bear the imputation of those opinions , and contribute to the propagation of them ; neither of which can be avoided , if they continue to be of a party with those who so publickly plead for those errors , and divide from us only for defending the opposite truths . their own observation will furnish them with many more arguments at last to change their course , especially if they 'll consider where it 's like to end ; it 's already come to this pass , that with a stock of these errors , their ignorant lay-men set up for the only gospel-preachers , and are crouded after . many of their own people are so infected as to decry themselves for legalists , when they dare preach of any thing besides believers priveledges , and the priesthood of christ ; such things cannot but affect all them who mind the interest of christ above their own ; of which number we are perswaded many of the dissenters be , and will approve themselves . we conclude unfeignedly praying , that the god of peace will encrease all our light and love , that with a truly christian spirit we may joyntly serve the interest of our common lord. we shall add some reflections on a paper called , remarks , &c. which soon follow'd the report ; and too much resemble each other . but having already answer'd what 's most material , few further reflections will suffice : and we shall speak of the authors as if but one man. first , it was needful to applaud the publishing his reported paper , as refreshing to himself , p. 1. because it 's so offensive to all serious persons ; nor see we , how even he could be refreshed thereby , further than as he glorieth in deceiving the simple , loves divisions , and hath a prospect of attaining some mischievous purpose by our breaches . secondly , these his papers , instead of removing , do proclaim and fix that reproach upon him and his adherents , viz. that they divide for dividing sake , and know not about what they differ , p. 6. for he assigneth their divisions to one or two meer words or law terms , as to the sillables and letters , and not to the sense , upon which they will not openly fix their disagreement . but if he would remove this reproach , let him plainly and honestly contend for their errors which we oppose , and no longer deceive the world by impertinently nibbling at a few expressions , and from thence charging us with opinions which , he is convinced , all of us abhor . only he thinks it will be a greater reproach to acknowledge , they divide for such horrid errors , than that they divide for dividing sake , and differ about they know not what ; custome and nature being some excuse for both these . thirdly , the confidence of this remarker is more than ordinary , that p. 7.15 . can tell the world , that the points in controversy are by his paper made manifest . which , he saith , is about a change of persons . whereas this change of persons never was the whole , nor any part of the controversy between us . nota part , for it is asserted expressly by all of us in the third paper , assoon as it was objected to us , and the sound sense of it affirmed in mr. williams's book long before . far less was this the whole of the controversy ; for tho' he accounts the bottom in the first paper to be generous , because our bre●hren therein made so little provision against the crispian errors , yet we must mind him these errors gave rise to our differences , and the abettors thereof still refuse to give us satisfaction ; yea , even as to the most pernicious of their opinions . fourthly , sure he is conscious , what we must think of him , when p. 7 , 8 , 9. he heaps so many words to shew that the difference among us , concerning a commutation of persons , is not about trifles , or matters of lesser weight , but what 's essential to salvation . he cannot blame us to ask . is it the meer phrase , change of persons , or the sound ●ense of that phrase , which he saith is the corner-stone of christs satisfaction , and what 's so applauded by iustin martyr and dr. e. &c. if it be the meer phrase , all the churches of christ are condemned , because their confessions omit it . if it be the sense of the reporter and crispians , then the reverend bishop stillingfleet , grotius , dr. e. and our celebrated antisocinian authors are in as bad a case as we , for they reject that sense . but if it be the sound sense expressed by dr. edwards , as cited in the remarks , which deserves these praises , they cannot be denied to us , no not to mr. williams ; for his book asserts , ▪ not only that christs blood was shed instead of ours , his life went in exchange for ours , and that to satisfy justice and answer the law ; but also , that christs sufferings were ●unishments . you 'll presently see the judgment of the learned dr. edwards , whom he recites as a favourer of his cause against mr. williams . fifthly , if the congregational brethren have no more than their signing the first paper , to clear them from the charge of antinomianism , they must still abide under that charge . notwithstanding all that 's said , p. 9 ▪ 10 , 11. the invalidity of his reasons will appear by our answer to each . 1. how can their present declaration of their adhering to their approbation of the articles of the church of england , or to the confessions of faith , &c. prove , they are far from being tainted with antinomianism ? when several of them have published their antinomian opinions , both before and since the like declaration . 2. they do still affirm , that neither repentance nor faith are necessary to a sinners pardon , or justification before god ; but only follow that ; whatever they be to final salvation . nor doth this paper say any thing against it . 3. it 's palpably false , that the first paper affirms , that god doth not pardon , justify , or accept a sinner , nor entitle him to eternal life before the righteousness of christ be applyed and received by faith ( it's strange he said not before repentance too ) but it 's not true as to faith it self . the paper saith , the only righteousness for the sake of which god pardons , iustifies , or accepts sinners , or intitles them to eternal life ▪ is the a lone righteousness of christ without them , imputed to them , and received by faith alone . note , he puts applyed for imputed ( which he would not say is by faith ) and here is not so much , as that it 's only the believing sinner who is justified : but above all , he knows of his party who explains such words , by publishing , that christs righteousness when applyed and received by faith , is only for a manifestation to their consciences for their quiet , that christs righteousness had been applyed to the justification of their persons before god , long before they believed . this is all the justification by christs righteousness as received by faith ; but they were pardoned and entituled to life as much before , tho' they knew it not . and this opinion the paper denies not . 4. the paper saith , christ came into the room of sinners not to repent , or believe for them , which the gospel requires . the remarker knew , if the gospel requires these by its precepts , it was a slip overlook'd by such of them who deny the gospel to be a law , therefore he wordeth it , the elect are not exempt from an obligation of doing it themselves . but he as well knows they hold , there 's no obligation on them to repent or believe as a condition or term of obtaining any benefit purchased by christ ; as to that , they have nothing to do . also that it was the law of works , and that only , which commandeth faith and repentence with any sanction ; and the paper contradicteth them not . 5. tho the paper saith , there is not such a moral change whereby christ became inherently sinful , and we immediately sinless , yet they do and may still hold , that the filth , fault and fact of sin are so transacted on christ , that he was in gods account a very criminal , the blasphemer , &c. and that we are as righteous as christ in equality . and the legal sense of the ●●ange is such , that we are legally reputed to have made satisfaction our selves by obeying and dying ▪ because christ did it in our persons , and we did it in his person . 6. the paper saith , the father was not offended , much less abhorred christ , considered as he was in himself , but as in relation to us as our surety ; and the father was displeased with christ , as the guilt of our iniquities was laid upon him . and he knows his friends do hold , that god was displeased with and abhorred christ , because of the fault and filth of sin upon him as our surety ; which the paper at least forbids not . it 's worth observing , that this article was framed in opposition to one of the two only errors objected here against mr. williams's book : whose words are these : that god testified his threatned indignation against sin , in the awful sufferings of christ in his soul and body , &c. ( and that christ endured the effects of gods wrath ) yet the father was not displeased with christ , much less abhorred him because of the ●ilthiness of sin upon him , p. 31 , 32. here 's the error ( and but once mentioned ) that required one of the three articles to oppose it . our third paper hath given them far more ground to make this the point in controversy , than that of change of persons ( which it asserts both as to name and sense . ) but they insist not on this , because of the odious sound of what they must assert in opposition to it . as to the remarkers hint from the assemblies words , that christ endured the weight of gods wrath ; let us mind him , that displicency is opposed to complacential love , and therefore none can be the object of gods displeasure , but one who is evil and wicked in the sight of the lord , and therefore hateful to him as such . but the effects of gods rectoral wrath may fall on christ , tho beloved as our surety , yea , who was not hated but loved for dying , according to his own voluntary engagements . review these things , and judge what a poor vindication from antinomianism the first paper affordeth . unless they ●hi●k , he must be far enough from this error , that ●●●eth the law of works to be in full force , and the only law , altho they also hold , that the elect have fulfilled this law perfectly in christ , and therefore are themselves to yield no sort of obedience in order to any benefit , or preventing of any punishment . here 's all the zeal for the law which they think enough to acquit them from antinomians , and all who think that we under the gospel are any further obliged , are to be neonomians . but. 7. yet as great a liberty as this paper gives antinomians to subscribe it ; observe in what a faint and dark manner they do subscribe even this poor defence ; their words are ; we are glad to find so good an agreement among us as this paper doth express . this is all . but wherein ? or how far ? or under what limitations ▪ or in hopes of what future advances this agreement is to be construed ? they have reserved sufficient liberty to explain as occasion offers ; and cannot deny the reader a leave to guess , especially when he seeth the reporter already to differ so very much from our brethren , in his explication of a change of persons , and other things contained in that paper . 8. but yet further , as poor a defence against antinomianism as the paper is , if plainly assented to ; and as meer a nullity as the subscription is , there were several of the congregational who refused to do even thus much ; and refused to set their hands to this . which the reporter well knows , whatever art he hath used to hear what they all have done . may not we hope upon so plain evidence . that such of our congregational brethren as are not antinomians , will be convinced , it 's necessary to do yet more for their vindication than thus signing this paper ; seeing that , not only they , who are far from being tainted with this poison , but they who are most infected may safely subscribe as it requires , and they have done , who in the adjusting of this paper could not be brought to grant , that regeneration is necessary to bring us into a good state. 6. notwithstanding his complement to a few subscribers , p. 12 , 13 , 15. the presbyterians need not subscribe the first paper to acquit them from the socinian slander , that they are arminians : no , nor yet from the reporters slander , that they are socinians . they have done it more effectually in the published agreement in doctrine , 1692. they have done it yet more in the articles 1694. which had been also published , if these dissenters could have cleared themselves of antinomianism , as the presbyterians did of arminianism . yea , they have done it as fully by the third paper as can be by the first : that retains the same words in the head of justification , and in all the rest , as far as they oppose arminianism . nay , do not we and mr. williams book , assert christs sufferings to be a punishment in satisfaction to punitive justice ? which the remarker , p. 14.15 . declares to be the distinguishing point ; are not our words , christ came into our room and stead to dye , to answer for our violations of the law of works , and that the punishment of our sins were inflicted on christ , that god might without injury to his iustice or honour , pardon sinn●rs for his satisfaction ? what a slanderous spirit acteth this man , that makes christs satisfaction to punitive justice , to be that which distinguisheth the arminians and socinians from the orthodox ? and yet ranketh us among the former , tho he knows all of us assented to the third paper , which affirmeth christs sufferings were a satisfaction to punitive justice . 7. but how long will this man acquit any of the presbyterians , from the slander of being arminians and socinians too ? he is sure , the world will soon know that even they of our brethren , who subscribed the first paper , have several of them framed , and the others assented to the third paper , as an explication of their sense of the ●●rs● . the reporter saith , the third paper perverts and denies the ●a●isfaction of christ , in the ac●ount given of a change of persons ; if so , he must account these brethren hereafter no other than arminians and socinians in common with the rest of us ; perhaps he 'll pro●laim them apostates too , for not adhering to the first ●aper , in opposition to the ●hird . and he is too well known for us to doubt that when it serves his turn , no presbyterian shall be sound in the faith , because he is not a crispian in doctrine . 8. all his artifice , p. 15 , 16. hath not , nor ever can reduce the controversy among us into a narrower room than this . is repentance required by the gospel , in order to the forgiveness of sin ? and faith in christ in order to the justification of our persons before god. unless he 'll reduce it to this , is any duty on mans part required by the gospel in order to his obtaining any saving benefit , or any kind of sin , a bar to his title to any such benefits by the gospel constitution ? here 's the controversy , and the third paper is refused because it is express , for the affirmative beyond the first . 9. we are sorry we have so much reason to fear , that if this pretended point of a change of persons , were accommodated to the crispians liking , mr. lob would find some occasion to continue our heats and divisions , wherein he had the greatest hand under the name of a pacificator , as soon as other agents became a little quiet . what de●ign he proposeth , or some others by him , if detrimental to the common good , we hope , god will disappoint it , and at last favour such who may be repairers of our breach , and restorers of paths to dwell in . reader , note that our answer comes out so late , because the reporter published his paper , when he knew our meetings were laid down , and that we were not to come together till september . the report and answer make mention of a second paper , which to render the whole matter more plain , is here annexed , with the occasion of it . septemb. 7. 1696. at a meeting of the united ministers , mr. williams spake to this effect : mr. moderator , i hear by some persons , that since our recess , there is a disposition in some of the congregational brethren to peace , if not to re-union : and that the only pretended obstacle is the want of satisfaction concerning the orthodoxness of all of us in the points of iustification , commutation of persons , and the fathers displeasure with christ. for their dissatisfaction , they instance somewhat out of my book as a denial of a commutation of persons , and insinuate as if the other two were not duly asserted . all proposals for re-union should begin with this board , nor ought particular members conclude themselves in a matter of this kind till you are consulted . but though , i confess , i know not what can be justly offered , which we have not done already , and all that concerns my book is long since adjusted ; yet that nothing may seem wanting on our part to promote peace , i would not lose the advantage of their present inclination to it . and being that only my book is objected against , i have drawn up in this paper the heads of a proposal , to be sent to p. hall , which i submit to the judgment of this board . that called the second paper . the preface is made up of what 's cited p. 4. out of the agreement 1692 ; and what is in the preface of the first and third papers . the three doctrinals are in these words . we declare , 1. of iustification , as the gospel plainly requireth repentance towards god in order to a sinner's partaking of the remission of sins , and faith in our lord jesus in order to justification , and a godly conversation in order to eternal glory , promising justification and forgiveness of sin to all penitent believers , and eternal li●e to such as persevere in faith and true holine● ; also declaring all impenitent unbelievers ( wh●le su●h ) to be in a state of condemnation . so by the same gospel it is evident , that none of these , nor any w●●k done by men , or wrought by the spirit of god in them , are under any denomination any part of th● righ●eo●sness , for the sake , or on the account whereof any blessing is merited or procured , much less justification or eternal life . but god justifies , pardons , accepts and entitles sinners to eternal life only for the sake of the righteousness of christ without them , imputed to them , and received by faith alone . 2. o co●mutation o●●ersons . whereas sinners were obnoxio●s to suffer the punishments threatned by the law for their transgressions ; the lord jesus by his compact with the father , became our mediating surety ▪ and as such , he obeyed the law , and our punishments were judicially transferred on him ; which for our redemption he endured in our room and stead , to the satisfaction of justice , that we m●ght be justified when we believe , and be dealt with accordingly . nevertheless we deny that by a commutation of persons there is such a reciprocal change of condition betwixt christ and sinners , or such an imputation , or translation of qualities , as implies that christ was as sinfull as we , and we as righteous as christ. and though we assert that christ hath undertaken the elect shall in due time repent and believe , yet we deny that christ came into the room of the elect to repent or believe for them , or that believers are accounted to have done and suffered what christ did , or that they are justified by the law of works — see more in the next head. 3. of the ●athers being dis●leas●d with christ ; ( thoug● the phrase be not proper , yet we declare ) the lord jesus having engaged in the covenant of redemption , as our mediation surety , to suffer the punishment of our sins for the expiating thereof : he did bear the guilt of our iniquities , to suffer as sinners suffer , and to be dealt with as god threatned to deal with them whom he is displeased with , as far as was consistent with christ's being innocent , and one who became subject to those punishments by his own consent in obedience to the father , and for the redemption of sinners . and therefore christ was under the wrath of god , as that was his will to punish him ; yea he endured the weight of that wrath in the punishment of our sins ; which sins , as to the obligation to endure those punishments , were laid on christ ; it pleased the lord to bruise him , having laid on him the iniquities of us all . but we deny that our sins , as to their fil●h or fault , were transferr'd on christ , or that he was inherently , or in legal esteem , or looked on by the father as one contrary to his holy nature and will , either as he was our surety , or in any other respect . and therefore if by displeased with c●ri●t , is meant , that the father hated or abhorred christ ( which is proper only to one evil in the sight of the lord ) because of our sins imputed to him ; so the father was not displeased with christ. but on the contrary , the father was always well-pleased with him , at all times accounting him ( even as our high priest ) holy , harmless , undefiled and separate from sinners ; and therefore such , when he offer'd himself an expiating sacrifice ; yea , for that he loved him . then follows mr. william's concurrence in these three points , with citations at large out of his book that he had oft affirmed the very same , and that the places objected did not at all contradict any of these things . and then further declareth , that as he had oft proposed it , so now he is willing to an union with the dissenting brethren , either by mutual forbearance , wherein we differ in judgment ; or if satisfaction be insisted on as to any other expressions that have been or shall be objected out of any of his books ( where he knows nothing but what is orthodox ) he is willing to give it in the same time and manner as mr. cole , mr. mather , mr. chauncy , mr. trayl , &c shall be obliged to give satisfaction as to many material exceptions he hath made , and shall yet make , to what they have published in their books . but otherwise he will no farther concern himself , but keep to the vo●e past , sept. 16. 1695. notwithstanding that now for peace-sake , he hath waved the demand thereof in answering the above mentioned exceptions , when they are not required to do the like . lastly , there is the form of words for the subscribers of mr. williams's book which you have before , p. 4 cited out of the agreement 1692 : only with this addition , that mr. w. did not write his book , nor they subscribe the approbation with any design to oppose our congregational brethren as such , or to divide from them . this paper was read and received ; but mr. w. desired it might be waved , when a proposal was made by a subscriber of the first paper , that we should draw up the third paper out of this and another paper , called the first ; which were both voted to be laid aside , altho that called the first ●aper was never read in the meeting , nor once proposed to be received there . a letter from the right reverend dr. stillingfleet , bishop of worcester , in answer to one from mr. williams , who desired his iudgment as to the following questions ; because his lordship's book is in the first paper , a●d the report pleaded against mr. williams . sir , i return you thanks for the papers you were pleased to send me ; by which i am able to understand something more than formerly , of the present state of the difference about the change of persons between christ and us : but i shall meddle no farther in it than i am obliged to do it in answer to the questions you propose to me . and i wish i may be able to do any service therein . the first is about my sense of commutation of persons . it is said in the first paper , that i do with g●otius expressly affirm and irre●ragably prove it with the common sentiment of protestants , and that the doctrines of iustification and christs satisfaction , cannot be duely explained and defended consistently with the denial of any commutation of persons between christ and believers . this had been fairly represented , in case there could be no other sense of commutation of persons than what is asserted by dr. crisp , but there is a 3 fold sense of it , very different from each other . 1. such a change of persons as implies that one is appointed and allowed to act on behalf of others , and for their advantage ; and this sort of commutation of persons the socinians never denied ; as i have shewed in the discourse of s●tisfastion . p. 62. 190 ▪ 191. it is not therefore the use of the words , but the sense of them is to been enquired into for some may affirm a change of persons , and yet be socinians ; and others may deny a change , and be far enough from socinianism , according to the sence in which they are understood . 2. such a change of persons as supposes one to be substituted in the place of others to become an attonement for the● in order to their redemption and deliverance . and when such a substitution is by the will of god and consent of the person who suffers ; here is a real change of persons as to that particular end with is designed by it . and in this sense i did assert a change of persons between christ and us , because by the will of the father and his own consent , he became a sacrifice of propitiation for our sins in order to their remission , and our recontiliation with god on such terms as are declared in the gospel ; as may be seen at large in the discourse already mentioned , particularly ch . 4. § . 4 3. such a change of persons as implies an actual tra●●lation of the personal guilt of all the sins of believers on christ , and his personal righteousness on them , without regard to any conditions on their part , but meerly by the free grace and favour of god. and this i take to be dr. crisp's sence of the change of persons ; of which i shall discourse when i come to the last question . but the authors of the first paper and of the report , p. 4. seem to take it for granted that there can be but one sense of commutation of persons ; wherein they do not discover their profound knowledge in these matters , if they thought so ; or their ingenuity , if they knew otherwise , and designed to impose upon those who did not . for it appears that there is a sense i● which it may and ought to be denied , without the least prejudice to the doctrine of christ's satisfaction . although that cannot be explained or defended without some kind of commutation of persons ; yet it very well may and ought to be defended without and against dr. crisps sense of it , as will be made appear afterwards . the author of the report , p. 5. saith , this is the very hinge on which the controversy between the orthodox and socinian doth turn ; which shews him to be not very deeply skilled in it ; for the hinge of the controversy is not about the words , but the sense of commutation of persons : and even the sense is not the original controversy , but consequential , upon our asserting christs sacrifice to be a propitiation for our sins ; for upon this they ask how the act of one person can be so benificial to others ? and to that we answer , that altho one man's act cannot become anothers , yet if by consent both of the father and son , he becomes our mediatour , and suffers in our stead , in order to our reconciliation , then as to that end and purpose , here is a change of persons : for whereas in strictness we ought to have suffered the desert of our own sins , god was pleased to accept of his suffering instead of ours , and so by virtue of that propitiation we hope for the remission of sins and the favour of god , according to the terms of the gospel . and therein consists the true controversy between the socinians and us : viz. whether the sufferings of christ were to be considered as a punishment for our sins , and as a propitiatory sacrifice to god for them ; o● only as an act of dominion over an innocent person in order to his advancement to glory . but it is said in the ●eport ▪ p 5. that if there be no change of persons between christ and us , there can be no translation o● the guilt , nor a just infliction of the punishment of our sins on christ ; that is , there can be no prope● satisfaction . to this i answer , that there is a twofold translation of guilt to be considered . 1. of the personal guilt , which results from the acts of sin committed by such persons . if this guilt be translated , christ must become the very person who committed the sins ; and so he must be looked on not only as an actual sinner , but as the person that committed all the sins of those for whom he died : which comes so near to horrid blasphemy , that i wonder persons that bear any reverence to our blessed saviour do not abhorr ●he very thoughts of it . 2. of legal guilt , which lies in the obligation to punishment , by virtue of the sanction of the divine law. now this guilt implies two things ; 1. the desert of punishment which follows personnal guilt , and cannot be transferred by a change of persons ; for no man can cease to deserve punishment for his own faults ; nor deserve that another should be punished for them . 2. the obligation to undergo the deserved punishment , but because the execution of punishment depends both on the wisdom and justice of the legislatour ; therefore here a change of persons may intervene , and by the wisdom and justice of god a mediatour may be accepted in such a manner as himself determines , and upon the acceptante of his sacrifice the offenders may be pardon'd and received into the grace and favour of god , on such terms as he hath declared in the gospel . and in this sense the guilt of our sins was charged upon christ as our mediatour , who was to bear the punishment of our sins ; so as by virtue of his sufferings , we may not only hope to escape the just punishment of our offences , but to be admitted into the privileges of the children of god. but the reporter out of a certain manuscript gives another account of commutation of persons , viz. that commutation in a legal sense is the same with a proper surrogation , where the surety puts on the person , and stands in the quality , state and condition of the debtor , and lies under the same obligation to answer for him . but this i have shewed long since to be a very wrong notion of christs satisfaction ; and which in effect gives up the cause to the socinians : for if sins be considered as debts , god may freely forgive them ( without disparagement to his wisdom and justice ) without any satisfaction : and the right of punishment then depends on god● absolute dominion ; and satisfaction must be by way of compensation ; of whiah i have treated at large , ch. 1. § . 2. ul● . but i cannot but wonder at the learned author of the m. s. that he doth at the same time assert our sins to be considered as debts , and the necessity of vindictive iustice : for , what vindictive justice belongs to a creditor ? may not a creditor part with his own right , and forgive what and whom he pleases , without any violation of justice ? i can hardly think , that those who write so rudely and inconsistently , ever penetrated into these matters in their own thoughts ; but only take up with a sett of phrases and common expressions among those they converse with , which they look on as the standard and measure of truth about these matters . but he finds fault with some men who hold that christ only suffered in the pe●son of a mediatour , and not in the person of sinners . what is the meaning of this ? i had thought , that a mediatour interposing for that end , that by his sufferings there might be a propitiation for sins , did so far sustain the person of sinners , as to take upon himself the punishment of their sins , and procure grace and favour for them . but if he means any thing beyond this , he must explain himself . christ suffered in the person of sinners . is it that he suffered that others might not suffer ? that is not denied by those who say that christ suffered in the person of a mediatour . for a mediatour is a publick person , and acts in the stead and on the behalf of others ; and if this be called sustaining the person of sinners , i suppose they will not quarrel with the expression . but if more be meant by it , viz. that the personal guilt of sinners , in dr. cris●s sense , is transferred upon christ , that they have to deny ; as i hope to make it appear in answer to the third question . the 2d question is , whether the author of gospel truth stated , viz. mr. williams be chargeable with socinianism , in what he said , p. 37.40 ? the charge stands thus in the report , p. 4. that he saith , there is no change of persons between christ and sinners : which is there said to be inconsistent with the doctrine of christ's satisfaction ; which must suppose a commutation of persons . ●nd therefore he that denies any change , cannot assert the doctrine of satisfaction . this is the force of the objection . and being desired to give my opinion of it , i examin'd and compared several passages in that book , that i might judge truely and impartially concerning it . and i found the author , p. 3. saying concerning the difference with dr. crisp , that it was not whether christ had made full attonement for sin ; which he thereby owned to be his sense . and p. 7. more fully he owns that our sins were imputed to christ with respect to the guilt thereof , so that he by the fathers appointment , and his own consent , became obliged as mediatour to bear the punishments to the full satisfaction of iustice and to our actual remission when we believe . can any thing be more clear and express against socinianism than this ? there are other passages , p. 10.19.28 . &c. to the same purpose , but these are sufficient to shew , that he could not absolutely deny any commutation of persous but in what words doth he deny it ? for it is possible there may be such words used as may restrain and limit the sense ; and then it is very hard to force such a sense upon them , as is inconsistent with what he had said before , for no man loves to contradict himself ; especially , when he knows what advantage will be taken by it . the words are these , p. 40 the difference lies in these points . 1. whether there be a change of person between christ and the elect ? yea , or betwi●t christ and believers . this the doctor affirms , and i deny . how can any persons , in common ingennity , understand this otherwise , than that he deni●d such change of persons as dr. crisp affirmed ? but against this it is urged by the author of the ms. in the report , p. 81. that his denial of a change of persons , is so express and ●ull ▪ as leaves no room for any distinction , limitation or restriction , or for an owning it in any sense . what! not in the sense that himself had owned it in before ? this is very hard ; especially when he mentions what the doctor affirmed ●nd he denied ▪ there is a very good passage to this purpose in the first paper , mentioned in the report , p. 12. not thinking it reasonable or just to charge upon any brother such consequences of any expression or opinion of his , which he himself shall disown . why then should such a sense be charged upon him , which he disowns at the same time ? there must be something farther in this matter , than appears to an indifferent and impartial reader ; what it is , is no part of my business to enquire . but that which must give the best light into it , will be the resolution of the last question . the 3 d question is , concerning dr. crisp's sense of the change of persons , whether it be true or false ? which , i s●ppose , is truly set down by the author of the gospel-truth stated ; in these words , p. 38. mark it well , christ himself is not so compleatly righteous , but we are as righteous as he ; nor we so compleatly sinful , but christ became , being made sin , as sinful as we ; nay , more , we are the same righteousness ; for we are made the righteousness of god ; that very sinfulness that we were , christ is made that very sinfulness before god. so that here is a direct change , christ takes our person and condition , and stands in our stead , and we take christ's person , and stand in his stead . here is indeed a change of persons supposed , but i do not find it proved ; and therefore is only to be look'd on as an imaginary change , which it is possible for men to fancy ; but that is no ground to build a matter of faith upon ; and such as the salvation of their souls is so nearly concerned in . but to deliver my opinion freely and distinctly about it , i shall shew , 1. that it hath no foundation in scripture . 2. that it is contrary to the tenour of it , and the terms of salvation contained in the gospel . 3. that it is attended with very bad consequences , which naturally follow from it . 1. that it hath no foundation in scripture for which i desire it may be considered , that our blessed saviour himself in all his preaching , who came to reveal the will of god to mankind , saith nothing at all of it : and can any possibly think that he would omit such a point , wherein , i perceive , some do think the substance of the gospel is conta●ned ? all that our saviour saith to this purpose , is , that he came to give his life a ransom for many , mat. 20.28 . and that his blood was shed for many for the remission of sins , mat. 26.28 . what other change of persons is herein implied , but that of a ransom , and a sacrifice of propitiation ? he that knew best for what end he suffered , saith not one word of his taking upon himself the person of sinners , in any other sense than as he suffered in their stead , and for their advantage . here is nothing like his being as compleatly sinful as we ; and our being made as righteous as he . and yet certainly he communicated to his disciples those points on which their justification and salvation depended . but how could they apprehend any such change of persons in this sense , from any words used by himself to them ? and all necessary points of faith were deliver'd by our saviour to his disciples : and therefore to make such a change of persons necessary , and yet not mention'd by him , is to charge him with failing in his prophetical office , which all those ought to consider , who lay such stress upon this matter . but doth not st. paul say , that god hath made him to be sin for us , who knew no sin , that we might be made the righteousness of god in him ? 2 cor. 5.21 . i grant he doth so . but do not these words imply such a change of persons as dr. crisp asserts ? by no means , which i thus prove : dr. crisp's notion of the change of persons , supposes the benefits of this change to be antecedent to any conditions on our side , viz. that it was by a transaction between the father and the son , without regard to any act of ours : but when the apostle speaks of christ's being made sin for us , and our being made the righteousness of god in him ; he supposes , that before we can have the benefit of it , we must be first reconciled to god , which is an act on our part. for to this purpose he saith , v. 18 , 19. that after the reconciliation made by christ at his death , he had given to the apostles the ministry of reconciliation . to what purpose ? was it only to let them know what christ had already done for mankind ? that were to set up a ministry of consolation for believers ; but not of reconciliation . but the apostle lays great force upon it , that god had committed to them the word of reconciliation . now then , saith he , we are ambassadors for christ , as though god did beseech you by us , we pray you in christ's stead , be ye reconciled to god , v. 20. they were by this ministry of reconciliation , after what christ had done and suffered , prayed ; and with great earnestness , to be recon●iled to god ? to what end ? if according to this change of persons , they were more than reconciled to god already , if they were true believers ; for they were as righteous as christ himself , and therefore must be in the grace and favour of god. if they were not believers , then , according to this scheme of the change of persons , they could have no benefit by it ; and consequently , this ministry of reconciliation , is wholly subverted , as to the great purpose and design of it . for either they were reconciled already , or they never could be . and yet the apostle , after those words , v. 21. immediately subjoyns ch. 6.1 . we then as workers together with him , beseech you also , that ye receive not the grace of god in vain . what can the meaning of these words be , if dr. crisp's sense of the change of persons hold good ? can they who are compleatly righteous , ever receive the grace of god in vain ? and to what purpose doth he speak of their working together with god , and beseeching them not to do a thi●g utterly impossible ? for it would be to undo what had long since been done between the father and the son in the change of persons . so that this notion of the change of persons is as different from st. pauls , as may be ; for that supposes no conditions on our side ; and the ministry of reconciliation in st. paul , is wholly founded upon it , and really signifies nothing , as to the ends he proposes without it . for to what purpose is that appointed to perswade men to be reconciled to god , if all that ever shall be admitted to heaven were long since reconciled at the death of christ , and they were made as compleatly righteous as christ himself ? it may be said , that the ministry of reconciliation is not useless , because it is the means whereby god doth ●ffectually convey his grace into the hearts of believers . but this cannot satisfy any one that considers st. pauls expressions : for his words are , we pray you in christs stead , be ye reconciled to god. if he had said , that god had made christ to be sin for you already , and you as righteous as christ was ; how would it have looked to have said after this , we pray you to be reconciled to god ? for , what need they any reconciliation , who were already so much in his favour ? but is there no change of persons then implied in those words of st. paul ; who made him to be sin for us , who knew no sin , that we might be made the righteousness of god in him ? yes certainly . such a change , whereby christ did undergo the punishments of our sins ; and so erasmus observes , that christ is not called a sinner here , as dr. crisp would have it , but sin ; i. e. a sacrifice for sin , according to the scripture sense : and we are made the righteousness of god in him , i. e. that god upon the account of his sacrifice , and our reconciliation to him , would treat us as righteous persons ; or receive us into his grace and favour ; which is all that i can find that st. paul understood by this expression . 2. i am now to shew , that this notion of the change of persons , which dr. crisp asserts , is contrary to the whole tenour of the scripture , and the terms of salvation contained in the gospel . i am sensible how large a field i am enter'd upon : and if i should pursue this matter as it deserves , it would take up much more room than i can allow to this answer . i could easily prove that in all the transactions between god and mankind , some conditions on our side were required in order to his favour . so it was in the state of innocency ; so it continued after mans fall , as appears by those remarkable words of god to cain ; if thou doest well , shalt thou not be accepted ? if thou doest not well , sin lieth at the door , gen. 4.7 . so it was in gods dealing with the patriarchs , and the most excellent persons in the old testament , abraham , moses , david , iob , &c. but i pass over these , ( altho' i suppose they will not be denied to have been of the elect , and to have had the benefit of christs righteousness as well as christians ) and come to the terms of salvation , as declared by christ himself . let any one seriously peruse the doctrine which he preached from the time , when he began to preach and to say , repent , for the kingdom of heaven is at hand , mat. 4.17 . and he shall find the main business of his preaching was to put men upon performing such conditions , as were necessary to their salvation : and for that reason . as may be seen in his sermon on the mount , in which he begins with promising blessedness to the humble , merciful , pure in heart , mat. 5.3 , 4. &c. what do these things mean , if they be not conditions on our parts necessary in order to happiness ? and that they are considered by god as such ? why doth he say , except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the scribes and pharisees , ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven , mat. 5. if such a righteousness , be not a condition required in order to such entrance ? and if it be , no change of persons without inward and real righteousness can be sufficient . our saviour doth not speak of what will be eventually in some persons , but of what is required to be done in order to an end. and therefore he concludes his sermon with saying , whosoever heareth these sayings of mine and doth them , i will liken him to a wise man , who built his house upon a ●ock , &c. mat. 7.24 . not he that believes that he is one of those who is made compleatly righteous by a change of persons , without any change of temper or disposition of mind : he never promises the least degree of happiness to such ; but still insists on our own endeavours , by striving to enter in at the straight gate , which st. paul calls , working out our own salvation with fear and trembling , and st. peter , giving all diligence to make our calling and election sure . for , saith he , if ye do these things ye shall never fall. do not these expressions note the necessity of the performance of conditions on our side ? and therefore all imaginary notions of such a change of persons , as hath no regard to any acts of ours , is wholly repugnant to the main scope and design of the gospel . i meddle not with the dispute about the mortal law , which must continue to oblige us as long as the reason of it continues ; but the main argument to me is from the gospel , as it is delivered by christ and his apostles , who certainly understood the substance and design of it far better than dr. crisp , or the reporter doth . what was transacted between the father and the son , we know no more than they have revealed to us ; and we know they had no design to impose upon mankind , by laying so much weight upon such conditions as god had no regard to ; and by concealing from them such a change of persons as made them compleatly righteous without any act of theirs . men could never be reconciled to the just veneration and esteem we have of the sacred penmen of the scriptures , nor to their knowledge of the mysteries of the gospel , nor to their fidelity in declaring them for the good of mankind . so that if we find nothing of this change of persons in their writings , and so much as is utterly inconsistent with it , we have all the reason in the world to reject it . this notion of the change of persons is attended with very bad consequences . which i do not charge on those who do not see them , or are carrried by some higher principles above them ; but we are not to judge of persons but of things , and the natural tendency of principles . and so the change of persons in this sense hath these very had consequences : that it is apt to lessen our reverence of the divine perfections ; our just sense of the differences of good and evil ; our obligations to all sorts of duties ; it tends to the disparagement of that free grace they pretend to exalt ; and exposes the gospel to the reproach and contempt of infidels , and leaves the minds of those who embrace it , under great temptations to presumption . these things i can only mention , because you des●red a short answer to your questions , and i have brought it into as narrow a compass as i could . i am sir , your faithful friend and servant , ed. wigorn . nov. 10. 97. the learued doctor edwards's answer to the same three questions ; in a letter to mr. williams ; occasioned by mr. lob's remarks . wherein he pretends the doctor 's preservative against socinianism , condemns mr. williams's iudgment concerning a change of persons . sir , i have perused the passages which you refer to , ( viz. gospel-truth stated , p. 37 , 40. the places objected among the rest ) besides severel other parts of your books , though i have not as yet had leisure sufficient to read them over ; however i have read enough to know your opinion , and to understand how you state the matter in debate between you and your antinomian adversaries ; and thereby am sufficiently instructed to answer your queries to the first therefore i say , that when speaking of the sufferings of our saviour , i assert , as other divines usually do , a permutation of persons : i mean no more than what you affirm ; viz. that christ not only died for the good , but likewise vice , or loco peccatorum , in the room and place of sinners . but whe● we assert an exchange , or permutation of persons , this must always be understood under such restrictions and limitations as may help us to avoid those two dangerous errors which the antinomians have fallen into . and therefore , first , we must affirm , we mean no more thereby then an obligation to punishment , which he no otherwise contracted then by his own free and voluntary consent and undertaking , to undergo that punishment which the law threatned , and our sins deserved , viz. death . but this must by no means be so far misconstrued , as to imagine that thereby the filth and turpitude of our sins were transferred upon him : for tho in the former sense , he is said to be made sin for us ; yet in the latter he still continued holy , harmless , undefiled , separate from sinners , and at an eternal distance from them . neither , secondly , must this permutation be extended so far as to imply a reciprocal exchange of persons , viz. of us sinners , into the room and place of christ ; as if god did look upon us as doing all that christ did , and consequently , that we do merit pardon , attone justice , compleatly satisfy and fulfill the law , so that we are actually discharged from punishment without more ado . no , we continue still under the sentence of the law , notwithstanding all that christ did to free us from it , till we perform those conditions upon which the application of pardon is suspended . the immediate therefore effect and consequence of the permutation which we are speaking of , is only this , that christ by dying in our room , had so far reconciled us to his father , as that he is willing to pardon and admit us to his favour , provided that we on our parts perform the conditions of the new covenant , viz. repentance and faith. for tho christ by dying for us hath merited our pardon , yet it still continues so far in his own power , as that he will not dispose of it , but upon such terms as have been agreed upon between him and his father ; which indeed are no other then such , as without which we are neither capable of pardon , nor can god in honour bestow it upon us . to apply pardon to a sinner while he continues in his obstinacy and impenitence , is not only contrary to the holyness of god , but inconsistent with his wisdom , and destructive of his authority and government . and therefore the graces before mentioned must be looked upon by us , to be both the necessary parts of every christians duty , and the indispensible conditions of his happyness . ( in another letter ) i intend no more by an exchange of persons , than what you have affirmed in your writings . as to your second query , i judge those assertions and acknowledgments frequently made by you in your books concerning the sufferings of christ , and the satisfaction thereby made to the justice of god for the sins of men , do fully acquit you from giving any countenance to the errors of socinus in that point . ( in another letter ) you have very rightly , and in an orthodox manner stated the doctrine of christs satisfaction : and it is in perfect agreement with the doctrine of our own and all the reformed churches , and therefore fully acquits you from the imputation of socinianism . thirdly , as to the doctrine of dr. crisp and others of that sect , who affirm such a permutation of persons between christ and sinners ; as if to all intents and purposes , they were to be looked upon in the room and place of each other ; so that christ is to be accounted the swearer , drunkard , blasphemer on one hand , and the sinner to be perfectly righteous on the other ; i cannot but look upon it to be not only false , absurd , impossible , but likewise an impious and blasphemous opinion ; as being highly dishonourable to our saviour , repugnant to the wisdom and justice of god , and tends plainly to subvert the whole design of christianity ; which is hereby exposed to the just and unanswerable reproaches of its adversaries , which can never be wiped off , if the opinion be true . i would say a great deal more upon this occasion , if it were necessary , but what i have thus briefly suggested , may i suppose be sufficient for your present purpose . and if you think that what i have wrote may be any way serviceable to the common cause of our holy religion , i give you leave to make what use you think fit of it ; and in the mean time remain sir , your assured servant , jonathan edwards ▪ iesus coll. oxon. oct. 28. 97. i had not given this trouble to these great men ; but that mr. lob makes frequent use of their testimony against my judgment , in favour of them whom i oppose . and being no authors better understand , and more effectually oppose socinianism , i was sure their vindication of me would be past exception , and therefore made bold to propose to them , whether they intended more by a commutation of persons than i did affirm in my books ( which i sent them . ) secondly , whether i was by the passages excepted against in my book ( by the first paper and mr. lob ) chargeable with socinianism . thirdly , what their judgment was concerning that change of persons which i oppose , and dr. crisp and others of that sect affirm . to these questions they were pleased to send these answers , with a permission to print them . i think , every man will conclude from what they say , that they account our holy religion is struck at by what errors i oppose ; and that mr. lob doth wrest their books when he cites them in confutation of what i affirm . i might have added another letter of this r. r. bishop to the same effect , and wherein he proves that god was not displeased with christ : and also of the said reverend doctor edwards . but these published abundantly suffice . some animadversions on mr. lob's defence of the report . by d. w. note , i call the author of the rebuke , mr. r. though i have the testimony of the ministers and elders of all the dissenting congregations in dublin ( except one ) for my peaceableness and diligence in the promoting of union there ; yet being industriously branded as the great divider in this place , it 's necessary to represent the cause of mens mistakes . to me is ascribed the rise of our divisions , because at the request of several ministers , after other means were unsuccessful , i wrote gospel-truth stated ; when dr. crisp's re-printed book so obtained as to threaten● our ministry . the continuance of our breaches i am charged with , on no better pretence than this , a beaten man makes all that noise which proceeds from the furious blows that fall upon his person . i consented to that expedient 1692. wherein all objected against my book was adjusted , and gave no cause for the objectors to violate that agreement . mr. chauncy , mr. t. mr. k. mr. e. &c. wrote volumes against that book ; to all which i replied in a defence of six sheets ; thinking that sufficient , and in hopes some rest might be obtained by silence . mr. m. revives the assault with a charge of blasphemy and damning errors ; this extorted one small book more . then by contrivances i was voted out of the lecture at pinners-hall . whereupon dr. bates , mr. how , mr. alsop and my self , remove to salters-hall . about two months after this my morals ( upon a search back to my childhood ) are impeached , the united ministers unanimously adjudged and declared me clear and innocent of all that was laid to my charge . i forbear recriminations against many , for which i am furnished . the same book comes again upon the stage with mr. lobs objections , which i answered in one sheet . mr. lob rejoineth , but at the reverend doctor bates request , i laid aside a book ready for the press . the doctor and i fully agree in sense , notwithstanding he had used some phrases which mr. lob hoped to divide us by . they stop not here , as the result of many private meetings with my adversaries ; a paper is gotten subscribed ( when i was at bath ) by some at least of my friends , who fully agreed with me in doctrine . herein there were several mistakes in matters of fact refering to the subscription to my book , many insinuated reflections ( not designed by all ) against the doctrine of that book , with such ambiguities and omissions , as endangered the truths by me defended , and those terms proposed to me , which might startle a man they had no power over , and justly expected better treatment at least from such whose cause i pleaded . yet when this paper was laid aside , and the third paper agreed to , i sate still , tho i knew that first paper ( unprinted ) was sent through the nation to my great detriment . might not one expect some quiet after such various attempts against this book and its author ? ( which i do not ascribe to the congregational , as a body , nor had i mentioned most of these things , if i were not charged with all our divisions . ) my hopes are disappointed ; mr. lob printeth his report , wherein the united ministers for my sake are branded for socinians , and therein inserts that unhappy paper . nay , he soon follows this with his remarks , to fasten his charge the deeper upon me . stops he here ? no , in this his defence i am still pelted , my doctrine grossly arraigned , the learned mr. r. censured as a socinian for defending me . my book sustains the clamour , because it denies the crispian change of person , nay , he hopeth it hath some invisible evil thing within its bowels , which if i do not bring forth ( for no bodv else can ) i must be one offensive and halting , p. 88. nay , as if first in intention , the last words in his book are , whether mr. williams be sincere or no , he must now shew it ; finis . the english of this is , if i be sincere i must shew my self erroneous , that they may have somewhat to justify their past clamours ; for as yet they can prove nothing , and yet ( will you not wonder ) he gives me , p. 9. more hopes of their charity and communion , if i will but write errors plainly , than they can now allow me when i assert the opposite truths . am not i in a streight ? he and others call and provoke me to write , ( and they might do it long enough , if the interest of the gospel , and such injuries to my friend assisted not their calls . ) yet if i write , i shall be deem'd , the cause of all our divisions : but so 't will be if i write not ; nay , if i be not felo de se. i shall therefore adventure , so pressed by mr. lob , to give him some hasty thoughts . i may well call it an adventure , for i foresee , unless he is much changed since he wrote this defence , he will mis-represent what is written with the greatest caution , and if his readers shall think him a fair adversary , he is sure to have the better of any man , as will soon appear . mr. lob , p. 35. the phrase of a change of christs person was never invented , till the gentleman who engaged my brother to enter upon this sorrowful undertaking , started it . and to speak the truth , it 's a phrase only adjusted , to express no more than what the socinians do constantly grant , for they say that christ , tho he suffered not the punishment due to us for sin , yet he endured grievous and dolorous pains , which is aptly enough expressed , when it is said , there was a change of christs person for us , for he was , say these hereticks , changed from ease to pain for our good . note , 1. the phrase , change of person , was used by dr. crisp , and therefore not invented by me , ( whom he meaneth ) it 's from him i cited it . 2. is it so ill a phrase , and serves only a socinian purpose ? then mr. lob should not make me a socinian , only for denying this phrase . he saith , ( and that when he will speak the truth ) it 's adjusted only to express what the socinians constantly grant , and yet quarrels me for denying this dangerous expression . 3. if this bad phrase , change of person , and that good phrase change of persons differ so far as heterodox and orthodox ; did not mr. lob deal unfairly all this while , in telling the world i denied that good phrase change of persons , only because i had denied this bad phrase change of person ? for i assure you , i no where deny a change of persons in the plural number ( tho according to his liberty he saith i did , p. 42. ) and i fully assert the sound sense of it , as the r. r. the bishop of worcester and the reverend dr. edwards do witness , and they are men he makes great use of in his book , as very sound in this point : but being more concerned for my friend , mr. rebuker , i shall with this place , begin an account of some of the stabbing injuries he receives from mr. lob , with an art thou in health my brother ? 1. mr. lob makes mr. r — here to say ( with the socinians ) that there was a change only in the person of christ , without an exchange at all with sinners ▪ because mr. r. saith , there was a change of the person of christ , in exchange for the persons of sinners ( tho not reciprocally in all respects ) this is plain ; for a meer change from ease to pain , is only a change in christs person , p. 31. he saith , my brother is in good earnest only for a change of christs person , without a change between christ and us : when reb. p. 44. this phrase the change of the person of christ , hath truly an honest sound sense , viz. the substitution of one person in the room of another ; and a proper redemption may be obtained by the punishment of one in the room of another — if therefore christs dying by way of change , or exchange , be all they would have , it s granted , &c. ] yet from this very place mr. lob infers , as above . 2. mr. lob represents mr. r. to hold with the socinians , that christ suffered only so for our good , as not to suffer truly in our stead . because mr. r. affirmed , that christs suffering properly in our stead was for our good . mr. lob saith , p. 47. whatever my brother intends , it 's manifest , that while he calls the socinian sense of christs dying in our stead , knavish — he gives the very sense of this phrase , which the socinians who use it do give , and by it means ( if we may judge his meaning by his words ) no more than what socinus crellius , and that fraternity do consistently with a denial of christs satisfaction constantly grant . he saith worse the lines before . see also , p. 36. and 10 times repeats , &c. the place he grounds this upon is , reb. p. 35. [ the caviller proceeds , in our place and stead , with some signify no more , than for our good ; why , it 's impossible they should : that which christ suffered in our stead is for our good , to bear the punishment of our sins , to satisfy divine iustice , was certainly for our good , &c. therefore for our good because in our stead . ] reader , is not christs bearing the punishment of our sins to satisfy divine justice , suffering properly in our stead ? and is suffering properly in our stead , and suffering in our stead in the socinian sense , ( viz. improperly and not at all ) the same thing ? but mr. r. said , it 's impossible in our stead , should signify any more than for our good . i answer , that it is considered with respect to our concernment therein , as it is a benefit designed for us ; but not to exclude its being in our place and stead , which he fully asserts , and without which we had been ruined for ever . is not mans chief end to be happy in the enjoyment of god ? and doth not christs dying properly in our stead subserve that end ? mr. lob might better say , mr. r. denied that christs dying in our stead was for gods glory , to which our good is subordinate , than that he denied that christ dyed properly in our stead , because as to our own felicity it did no more than subserve it , or was it for our hurt , or could it be more beneficial to us than for our good , for it 's only as to our benefit he applies the words . 3. mr. lob represents mr. r. to deny ( with the socinians ) that christs sufferings are a proper punishment for our sins : when mr. r. doth most expressly assert , that christs sufferings were the punishments of our sins , for satisfaction to the vindicative justice of god. mr. lob , p. 48. agreeably hereto ( the socinians trifling in a wretched sense , and rejecting of phrases to make christs sufferings not penal ) my brother , as he rejects the phrases of sustaining the person of sinners , and puts an unsound sense on christs suffering in our place and stead ; so that word ( answering the obligation of the violated law ) which was in the first paper , to make it evident that we esteemed christs sufferings to be proper punishments , is rejected ; as what cannot in my brothers opinion bear a sound sense . this charge that mr. r. denies christs sufferings to be punishments , he imposeth in very many pages . whereas mr. r. saith , p. 35. christ did bear the punishment of our sins to the satisfaction of iustice , p. 48. and it 's freely granted that christ suffered and dyed for the persons of sinners , and for the sins of their persons , and in the room and stead of their persons ; and that he suffered and dyed to make satisfaction to the iustice , to the vindicative iustice of god , &c. what pretends mr. lob against so full conviction ? no other than that we by the third paper rejected this phrase , obligations of the violated law : but this is not true , we only waved it , and mr. r. saith no more . but mr. lob saith , the phrase which we put in its stead , viz. christ came to answer for sinners violation of the law of works , differs as much from their phrase , answering for us the obligations of the violated law of works , as a gospel truth and a socinian error , p. 50. one would think it 's still a true phrase after his mangling it . but pray take it as in our paper . christ came into our room and stead to answer for our violations of the law ( add what follows ) and the punishment of our sins was inflicted on christ , that god might without injury to his justice pardon and save penitent believers . is this a socinian error ? or , is a word wanting to make christs sufferings proper punishments ? nay , what is it for christ in our stead to answer for our violations ? but go yet lower : is not to answer for our sins , another thing than socinians hold ? even this is no less than suffering the punishment of our sins , if we were for violating the law under its obligations , to suffer those punishments : but i come to mr. lob's charge against mr. r. from the words , cannot bear a sound sense . 4. because mr. r. used certain warm words once , and that only against the unsound sense of that single phrase , commutation of persons ( which yet he there saith , may be capable of receiving a sound meaning ) mr. lob makes mr. r. to intend those warm words against the sound sense of that phrase , against that phrase it self , and a great many other good phrases which himself makes use of as very safe , yea , against the sound sense of many other phrases which mr. r. pleads for . i shall fully recite the only place upon which mr. lob grounds his charge , reb. p. 30. [ a change of persons , which may possibly be capable of receiving a good meaning ( elsewhere explained ) and yet is more sounding towards a dangerous sense , the brethren did unanimously agree to grant as much as the sound sense could bear , and modestly to wave and pass by the other , which was liable to be interpreted to a sense , and sound of malignity to the whole of the gospel . ] you see the other which could not bear a sound sense , but was liable to a sound of malignity , is but one thing , for other is not nomen multitudinis , and agrees with the verb was , which is in the singular number . this other , to which these words are appropriated , cannot be the phrase , commutation of persons , for that is not waved , but retained by us in the third paper ; nor can it be the sound sense of that phrase , for that 's provided for by mr. r. much less can it be all the phrases and passages in the first paper omitted in the third . it must then be confined to some one thing expressive of the unsound sense , which the crispians put upon the phase change of persons ; mr. r's . following words point at , [ and the brethren are now more fully perswaded they are in the right by the reporters notions . ] what 's that ? such a change as makes christ to be destitute of a righteousness entitling to enternal life , and to become sin as we are sin : rep. p. 5.7 , i. e. filthy sinners . yet upon this foresaid passage of mr. r. mr. lob says , p. 14. [ this passage of my reverend brothren doth make it manifest , that the paragraphs , terms and phrases , which were in the first paper , and were waved and passed by in the composure of the third , are looked upon by my brother , as what could not bear a sound sense , but a sound of malignity to the whole of the gospel ; that is to say , the phrase of christs taking on him the person of sinners , of answering for us the obligations of the violated law of works , the term surety , and the assertion of the necessity of a commutation of persons — this is the sense of my reverend brother . ] and so these words cannot bear a sound , &c. are trumped up i believe forty times with these by tail , p. 48. to 65. nay , in this last , p. 65. [ according to what my brother declares , it must be supposed ; this passage , ( viz. regeneration , repentance towards god , faith in our lord jesus christ , and a holy conversation , are by gods word manifestly necessary to the salvation of a sinner ) cannot bear a sound sense , but is liable to be interpreted to a sense and sound of malignity . ] must not mr. r. tho thus loudly warned , find it impossible to guard himself against this man ? 5. mr. r. p. 17. saith , [ these phrases , terms , or expressions , viz. change of persons between christ and us , and his taking on him the person of sinners , are unknown to our confessions and not to be found in the body of confessions . ] mr. lob exposeth him by citing a confession that useth some phrases , mr. r. makes use of , and others which he never denied , but mentions no confession that hath the phrases mr. r. said , could not be found . upon this poor work he toiles from , p. 71. to 80. i must stay a little on what occurs , p. 73. and ask , 1. when mr. r. denied only that these phrases ( not the sound sense ) were in the confessions ? why should mr. lob make him deny that the confessions gave any countenance to the sound sense of those phrases ? 2. when mr. lob declares he had silent , if he had not found these phrases in some confessions , and ridicules mr. r. for denying they were in them ; why did not he shew these phrases , or one of them in some or other confession ? 3. if these phrases , as to the letters and syllables ( which mr. r. called for ) are wherever the sound sense of them is to be found , ( which is , what mr. lob pretends , or fondly argues ) why doth he deny that the very phrases christ taking on him the person of sinners , &c. are in the third paper , and say they are rejected by us , seeing the sound sense of those very phrases is there ? 4. mr. lob saith , [ the phrases of change of persons , of christs sustaining our person , of his being substituted into our room , and his suffering in our place and stead , are so nearly allied that they live and dye together , grant one and all necessarily come in with it , &c ] they must then be of the same adequate sense with each other , or the confession could not assert christs sustaining in our person , by its saying , christ dyed in our stead : but if the sense be adequate , then mr. r. denies the right sense of none of these phrases , for he asserts , christ dyed properly in our place and stead , and that he was substituted in our room . whence it will be no better by mr. lobs own confession , than that he makes all this noise to shew his copia verborum : he will have the mentioning of each of the various words of the same signification , to be terms of communion , and the omission of any one as great a bar to it , as if the very sense of all those words were denied ; ay , and that when the full just sense of any of those words is granted . for my part , after all his big words , from p. 58. to 65. about logical terms , or meer humane forms of speech , ( tho i believe , they who drew up the third paper never dreamt of such designs , as he wtih somewhat too like , malice fastens on them ) i would think him a turbulent , uncharitable scismatick , who would divide from others meerly because they scrupled this or that humane form of words , so they held and plainly expressed the scriptural truth designed by those words , yea , tho they expressed it by terms less proper . how much more culpable is it then , to raise such storms only for our omitting a phrase , because less intelligible to the people , more capable of being abused by the etimology and acceptation thereof among the vulgar , and known to be grossly abused by the crispians from that occasion . may not mr. lob commence as just a war , of people should omit his fine phrase , zeal for populacy , and yet be willing to use their plain phrase , zeal for popularity . but to conclude this head : i deny that his change of persons , or christs suffering in our person , or in the crispian sense , or his own , as stated , rep. p. 5. are included in or to be proved from the confession : to pretend the litereal phrases from such words as christ dyed in our stead , was substituted in our room , is sordid , and the confessors meaning in those words , is contrary to the crispian and reporters sense ; and therefore mr : lobs phrases are not at all proved from the confessions ; unless a thing be proved where the phrase is unmentioned and the sense opposed . 6. mr. lob , that he might bring his english reader to judge mr. r. a baffled man , leaves out a considerable word in his translating a part of the scotch confession , p. 81. [ it became the redeemer to be true god , and true man , because he was to suffer the punishments due for our sins , and to appear [ quasi in persona , nostra coram judicio patris , pro nostra transgressione & in obedientia pati , in our person before the judgment-seat of the father , to suffer for our transgressions and disobedience . ] thus mr. lob englisheth the latin words , and boasteth — here you see the church of sco●land useth this very phrase , &c. but least his admirers should applaud his conquest to an indecency , it 's fit they know there 's a word qvasi , which mr. lob did not think for his purpose to english. he ought to have said thus ; and to appear [ as it were ] in our person , that is , christ appeared nor properly in our person ; that phrase is too hard , tho there be somewhat towards it in some certain respect ; as calvin in this case useth quodamodo . but mr. lob , by leaving out quasi , performs what he undertook , p. 73. perhaps it may appear ( i. e. to the englishman ) that the phrase most exposed by him will be found literally in one or other confession . these words cited are all , by which he makes it to appear , and quasi answers to perhaps . nay , had the diminutive quasi been out , he is not sure it had served his turn . but considering the wonted freedom of the man , i wonder he left not out this quasi . for i could give many instances , where the very next words omitted by him , would have defeated his purpose by what he citeth . but , to prevent a snare , i 'll prefer that in his letter to dr. bates , p. 17. he saith , many held christ and us to be one person in law ; ( and ) that it may be said , that we suffered in christ , is the import of that assertion which saith , that christ suffered as our surety ; and is allowed by mr. baxter ; ( just against this , mr. lob cites in the margin ) it is not so aptly said he satisfied , as that he suffered in the person of sinners , mr. baxter , cath. theol. part 2. p. 79. ( it should be , p. 76 , 77. ) amazed , i took mr. baxters book , and found the very next words were ; note , that it is not any other mans person that christ suffered in , but his own , and we mean , that he took upon him the person of a sinner himself , in as much as he consented to suffer for sin , and so personating here , is not becoming any other mans person in law-sense , so as that other legally suffered what he did ; but it is only his own person 's becoming a sufferer in the stead of sinners for their sins — ( and two or three lines before mr. baxter tells us ) to say that christ satisfied in our person , and we by him ; is false , and subverts the gospel . or why did not mr. lob split the word quasi , and leave out the last sillable si , then qua being oft redulplicative , had better fitted , thus he served me , man made righteous , p. 108. i had said , therefore christ herein is what the civilians call , an ex promissor , he suffered alone , tho he acts for another . mr. lob in his letter to dr. bates , p. 12.13 . to expose me as unlearned , and himself skilful , recites several properties of an expromissor , and will have me to mean that all these did belong to christ , and then infers what pleased himself ; whereas i had by the entire word herein , limited it to one property of an ex promissor , viz. he is obliged alone tho he acts for another , ( in redemption-work . ) mr. lob seeing the word herein would mar his project , he fairly splits the word , leaves out in , and makes it ( a local ) here and so found scope for his purpose . these few instances of many , may convince how unsit mr. lob is to report other mens words , tho his talent seems confined to the collecting and publishing what authors write ; 't were well for his readers , he did it with more of true judgment , and less of trick ; for thereby his quotations would more edify , and require less care and pains to become sure the authors are not mis-represented . 7. men will scarce judge it decent or prudent in mr. lob , ( if in his friend ) to publish by that letter to himself , a reflection on the rebuker for his loyalty to the present government , as inconsistent with a few rhetorical expressions , in address to the late king iames , ( to whom his obligations were somewhat peculiar : ) but whereby doth his meaning appear so insincere at that time ? or what is done by him since , so contradictious to what he said , as to render him an exemplar of insincerity now ? no other than swearing allegiance to king william , signing the association and carrying it , becoming a loyal subject in his prayers , sermons , and peaceable behaviour and advices ? what fetters are some in , if once addressing the late king by a few big words , must eternally proclaim a man an hypocrite , unless he be now a non-juror , nonassociator , plotter , and director of other ministers ( in imitation of himself ) to pray so for the king , as either of the two kings may be intended , if they must at all seem to pray for king william ▪ i hope , few will be gull'd into such a character , from the fancied obligations of former addresses ( tho some of them were highly inconsiderate ) , nor any discouraged from persevering loyalty by the forecited aspersion . this would admit enlargement , which provocations might improve . but i retain a respect sufficient to forbid it , nor had i inserted the least hint at such things , except as a warning against the like instances , when his first-rate man is to execute his fiery threats , and his very learned person already roused ( alike obnoxious ) stretcheth forth his claws . let men take their way , but the common interest will not long be sacrificed , ere some ( now imposed on ) will find out the instruments and designs of our breaches . i hope , the reverend rebuker will pardon my interposal , and that i acquainted him not therewith . his abilities for a reply , i acknowledge such , that if these short hints serve for a foile to that he is preparing , and in the interim abate the ill impressions of mr. lobs attempt , i shall account these few hours well employed , which otherwise had been more feelingly spent in resenting those base reflections , that i am his leader , master , principal , and what else became , scarce any man besides mr. lob , their author . mr. lob , p. 8. owneth , i asserted , besides the effects made ours , the righteousness of christ is imputed to believers , but adds , i mean nothing by this grant : because i use a simile to illustrate the manner , in man made righteous , p. 77. if one give me my liberty , which he voluntarily purchased for me at a dear rate . he mediately gives me what he paid for my ransom , tho immediately he gives me my liberty and a right thereto . a. had he cited the apodosis , which is in the next words , he had spoiled his suggestion , i shall contract what i there enlarge on . i make pardon and adoption to be benefits , or effects following upon the imputation of christs righteousness . and the righteousness of christ i distinguish into , 1. his performance of the conditions of redemption . 2. his right ( or jus adjudicatum ) by the covenant of redemption , to our pardon and adoption ; for his performance of the conditions adjusted in that covenant . the former i said , is mediately imputed . the latter i said , is immediately imputed ; it 's reckoned to us when believers , because it was acquired expressly for believers , iohn 3.16 . isa. 53.10 , 11. the judicial imputation of this right of christ intervening ; the righteousness of christ ( as a performance of the conditions ) is imputed as our plea for that pardon , it being the procuring cause of that right of christs , which is immediately imputed to us . and this right i also distinguish from that which the gospel-promise made to believers doth invest them in , for the former right results immediately to christ , from the covenant of redemption , and is subjectively in him , tho imputed to us : whereas the promise , he that believes shall be forgiven , or saved , not only supposeth the former transactions , and is the instrument by which god imputeth christs righteousness to the believer ; but it also , as a conditional promise , giveth believers a right to forgiveness , whereof they are the immediate subjects . here mr. lob may see the vanity of his objection ; it is not pardon , or such possessed effects that intermediate between christs righteousness and us , nor only the right given by the gospels conditional grant . no , it 's christs own right , and that imputed to us by god himself , and that immediately to us . and pray , is gods imputing to us christs performance of the conditions , so far as to be our plea and foundation of claim , no imputation of his righteousness at all , because the imputation of christs acquired right intervenes ? nothing is left out but gods legal accounting us to have performed all that , by which christ merited and made atonement . yet without this proud assumption , nothing will please mr. lob. being so often pressed to it by mr. humfreys and mr. lob , i will endeavour their satisfaction . if christ had acquired by his death a power indefinitely to forgive sins , without a compact determining ( either by name or qualification ) the persons that should be pardoned in the virtue of his death , or only purchased the gospel covenant , as conditionally offering pardon ; i should agree with mr. h. but it being otherwise , i differ from him . and add , as the possessed effects are not properly imputed , so i will not confine the support of my faith ultimately , and only to the gospel conditional promise ( tho that 's infallible ) when god hath made the compact between the father and our mediator , to be my security , and christs performance of the conditions of that compact to be my plea with god , among which conditions was what answers the law of works , which i have transgressed . altho i own i must try my interest by christs gospel law , as what describeth the person who is entitled to pardon , and injoyneth us to be such , with a promise of that interest . in short , a believer having for his security and plea , the gospel promise , the covenant of redemption and the value of christs death , i 'll retain each ; and therefore still say , besides the effects possessed by me , the righteousness of christ is imputed to me , as above accounted for . on the other hand , could i think it was by the covenant of works , that christ was constituted our surety , so that his obligations to suffer the punishment of our sins , did immediately result from that law ; and that we sinners were principals in redemption work , and christ such a surety as to be ioint party with us in that work of redemption . and that the law of works required the divine nature , to give a value to what it accounted to be righteousness . and lastly , that this law promiseth pardon to sinners for the sake of a mediators sufferings ; i should then agree with mr. lob , that we satisfied for our sin , dyed , and obeyed in christs person , and he and we paid the idem . nay , be a full crispian and say , i was justified at the time of christs death ; i had nothing to do to become partaker of the effects of that death , i was as righteous as christ , deny any proper forgiveness , nay , own that christ was really a sinner ; for i am sure the law could immediately oblige no other to dye . but i must disagree with mr. lob and them , because i am well perswaded , god never proposed the work of redemption to condemned sinners , but to christ our mediator . also that to the redemption of sinners , god in justice requiring for the honour of his violated law , that a perfect obedience , and the suffering of what was equivalent to its threatned punishments , should in the humane nature be summitted to by the redeemer . our blessed mediator obliged himself to yield that obedience , and bear those punishments , upon condition that such sinners should be forgiven in his right , who should comply with the gospel terms agreed upon between the father and him . and pursuant hereto , our mediator did in our nature perfectly obey and suffer the punishments of our sins , whereby he had a right to a believers pardon , and believers do obtain it in the way above described . and lastly , i am sure the law of works never promiseth pardon to sinners for the sake of christs sufferings , the payment of the full idem was impossible , ( tho there was a supra-equivalent ) and the law accounteth that righteousness perfect , which an innocent holy creature renders , tho he have not , the divine nature to give that value to his obedience ; without which ( very thing ) we had been entirely lost . here mr. lob may find a surety , viz. an obliged mediator . and under the law , viz. as an article taken into the covenant of redemption , whereby christ was obliged : and in our stead , viz. we were condemned to suffer , we are by and for his sufferings to be saved . nay , he may find the ●ound meaning of his other phrases , as change of persons , yea , christs suffering in the person of sinners . that is , christ our obliged mediator suffers in our stead what we were to suffer ; yet it was that we might be delivered for it , but not legally reputed our selves to suffer . and yet here 's place le●t for pardon , a gospel law , terms of application . &c. that none may mistake , note , 1. i instance pardon , &c. for brevity sake , but exclude no saving benefits , and distinguish saving benefits , which are used as motives to duty in the gospel , from the duties which are conditions of those benefits . 2. and therefore i speak not of christ's peculiar purchasing grace for the elect effectually to perform those conditions whereby , together with the decree , their eventual salvation is secured . this is my judgment ; but i ought not to confound this with that adjustment of things , whereby the gospel-offer of salvation to all men , and the gospel-rule of conferring its benefits , and of our final judgment , are provided for . mr. lob oft objects a contradiction , if i affirm a change of persons , and yet say , i deny there is a change of person . answ. besides answers already given , i say , without any design'd affront , it 's no greater than answer not a fool according to his folly , yet answer a fool according to his folly. by thus gratifying mr. lob's imperious humour , i am the freer to tell him , 1. i am sorry that he so boldly averreth many gross mistakes in mattter of fact , p. 35. i invented the phrase change of person ; whereas i cite and use it as dr. crisp's phrase . p. 26.43 . i deny a change of persons . whereas i never denied it ; what i denied was dr. crisp's change of person , and fully asserted the sense of the other . p. 22. i appealed to the learned witsius . but this i never did . p. 7. that onely mr. toland wrote much in praise of my book . whereas he being then in holland ( and not the man he since appears ) desired them who gave an account of published books , to give their judgment of my book , and the great praises are theirs ; and others have since commended it above its worth . p. 63. that i was the contriver of the third paper . whereas others had drawn it up before i saw it . his vile reflections on mr. r. with respect to this , and his nine subscribers of the first paper , p. 70. makes an account of that matter necessary . the united ministers appointed dr. bates , mr. hamond , mr. slater , mr. hill , with mr. how and my self , to compose an expedient , &c. two of the brethren drew it up ( which is this third paper ) and brought it to the rest of us met together : after some alterations we did all agree to it , and brought it as our agreed act to the meeting at saint hellen. there , among the rest , mr. stretton , mr. quick and mr. evans agreed to it . mr. alsop , mr. burgess , and mr. showers not being present any of the times when it was read in the meeting ; it was brought to the view of mr. alsop , who approved of it . i am very sure also it was shewn to mr. burgess ( his informer ) who appeared to agree to it ; and mr. showers did to more than one express his approbation of it . so that mr. lob hath all the nine subscribers to my book enumerated . mr. lob somewhere saith , all the phrases of the first paper , not into the third , were rejected by my means ; and yet several of them are in my own paper , called the sccond . which i am glad was printed ere i read his defence . he saith the third paper denies a commutation of persons , p. 14. when both phrase and sense are in it . other instances are not wanting . it 's false that the generality of the pastors do not approve my book , though they were asked only to subscribe the state of truth and errors . 2. the cause he undertakes is miserably defended against the rebuke : he appears to give , p. 13. a scheme of his project , viz. the points left out of the third paper which offended the brethren , but where 's his proof that the united ministers were obliged to retain so many phrases of the first paper as they did ? if they had used none but what the church of england and the assembly of divines confessions included , the heads of vnion were observed by them , and violated by such as exacted more . where makes he it good , that the united ministers rejected all the phrases of the first paper which they omitted ; especially when it was never read nor proposed to them : or that the omission of those phrases warrants the breach of vnion ? such matters ought not to pass unargued , without which none can tell what honest cause the report pretends to , unless the traducing men sound in the faith to cover the turbulency of the erroneous , should be so accounted . as these are waved , so he trifles in what he pretendeth to insist on . mr. r. demands the difference between a commutation of persons between christ and sinners , and christs dying properly in the sinners stead . mr. lob grants they are the same , and yet poureth out a flood of impertinent words against the r. as if they widely differed . mr. lob makes christs suffering the punishment of our sins to the satisfaction of justice , the thing which distinguisheth the orthodox from the socinians , and yet he represents mr. r. as a socinian , who oft asserteth , christ suffered the punishment of our sins to the satisfaction of justice , even vindicative justice , mr. r. chargeth his account of change of persons , rep. p. 5. with little less than blasphemy , he bears that with profoundest silence . mr. r. blames him , that he gave not a full report of our difference , and from its rise . to this he saith , he pretended not to give a narrative of the whole . and yet , rep. p. 4. the difference hitherto hath been about the satisfaction of christ. and in his remarks , oft leads his reader to judge we never had any other controversy . indeed his present state of difference was such a piece of art , as he thought it so much pity to spoil it by a fuller account , that their violation of the agreement in doctrines , 1692. he answers only with a groan . their refusal of the paper , 1694. because a disowning of sundry antinomian errors was added , he excuseth no better than by an abrupt dismiss , after a suggestion , that nothing had been added but that about repentance , which is not true ; and yet this being in the assemblies words , he impeacheth the refusers as insincere in subscribing this in the assemblies confessio● , and yet refusing it in that paper . to the horrid passages out of his brethren's books , collected to justifie a demand of satisfaction , and a fit antidote when he formed their creeds : with him 't is enough they were not sent to p. h. as if it matter'd not that he knew they were in their books , and before the united ministers . what saith he to mr. r.'s citations out of my book , fully asserting christ's satisfaction ? ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem , but caluminates still ; where states he a fair question with the r ? instead of that he pursues a logomachy , cites authors to prove what mr. r. pleads for , and to confute what his party reckons he defends ; yea , what himself oft-times asserts . phrases he tires , when the sense is so disregarded , that i would thank him to shew one error of mr. r. ( unless by gross wresting of his words ) he once remarketh ; or one doctrinal truth he pretends to prove , which mr. r. hath not expresly own'd . upon the whole , the cause of the rebuke is still unhurt , otherwise than as its author is pelted with his smoothest brothers rotten eggs ; such as not having a grain of sense , heretical , false , delirous , changeling , and what not ? but as for the cause of the report , the defendant hath wisely got that into a wood , in hopes his party shall not find it 's dead by the rebukers wounds . 3. i 'll foretell from what i already hear and see , how several sorts are likely to judge , and stand affected to his performance . his disciples may say , all we have learned is even this . a change of persons and christs suffering in our person , if explained to a sound sense , are no more than christ's suffering properly in our stead : and yet christ's suffering properly in our stead , is not so much a change of persons , or suffering in our person , but that we mnst call them socinians , who hold christ suffered in our stead , if they will omit any of our masters other phrases , altho they own the sense of all . the sagacious crispians ( if any such ) will say he hath betrayed our cause ; yea , himself condemns it , and anon espouseth it . but one good turn is done , he hath toiled hard to spoil what is a real confutation of it . the factious biggots may glory , whatever becomes of truth , yet it 's worth our contribution , that he has spoiled all hopes of that ill thing , union and peace too , and put the vnited ministers to groan we are abused , and as far as this pacificator can influence , our breaches shall still be wider . they whom he remarked , saying , the dissenters differ about they know not what , will loudly boast , we now see with a witness , even the onely man of close study , that no man can guess what it is about . they who used to trust to quotations from authors , must grow suspicious , and resolve always to examine . hard students ( some such there are besides mr. l. ) will dread a common place book of phrases , least they should divert them from their more important sense , and confound themselves to the distracting of the church , and torment of all mankind . it 's well if some of his reproached preachers say not , we study things more than words , and yet words more than to speak false english , that we may strut in bombastick phrases ; and both to better purpose than our assuming dictator , who brands us with ignorance , and a zeal for populacy , whilst his gain by our more common acceptance , qualifies him for a sort of closer study ; but in time we may become more politique . but which more affects me , plain serious christians with grief will cry , we know not what to think , if the way to heaven be thus perplexed , and the articles of our faith so intricate as these heaps of obscure phrases represent them . the profane are tempted to scoff at religion as a wordy noise , and our enemies well pleased to see us destroy each other by dividing , and this for what exposeth us as much to contempt as ruine . how much should we pray for godly sincerity in our appeals to god , and serviceableness to a common good in our pretended pleadings for truth ! and not still amuse men , as mr. lob hath done , by ● book , the substance whereof is no more than a misrepresentation of the r's words , that the reader may believe him an heretick in grain , when the plain sense of his expression seems oft contended for by mr. lob. nor can people propose a benefit by multiplied quotations of a phrase , when the authors , who use it , design by that phrase no more than mr. r. grants . and his exception is nor ●gainst their sense of that phrase , but against impo●●●● it is a term of union , after the crispians and mr. lob so perverted it . finis . a reply to mr. j.s. his 3d. appendix containing some animadversions on the book entituled, a rational account of the grounds of protestant religion. by ed. stillingfleet b.d. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1666 approx. 147 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 64 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61594 wing s5630 estc r34612 99834099 99834099 38584 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61594) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 38584) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 2063:36) a reply to mr. j.s. his 3d. appendix containing some animadversions on the book entituled, a rational account of the grounds of protestant religion. by ed. stillingfleet b.d. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 116, [8] p. printed by r.w. for henry mortlock at the sign of the phœnix in st. paul's church-yard near the little north-door, london : 1666. a reply to: sergeant, john. sure-footing in christianity. reproduction of the original in the british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng sergeant, john, 1622-1707. -sure-footing in christianity. catholic church -controversial literature -early works to 1800. protestantism -apologetic works -early works to 1800. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-04 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a reply to mr. j. s. his 3 d. appendix , containing some animadversions on the book entituled , a rational account of the grounds of protestant religion . by ed. stillingfleet b. d. london , printed by r. w. for henry mortlock at the sign of the phoenix in st. pauls church-yard near the little north-door . 1666. an appendix to the rule of faith . to his honoured friend mr. john tillotson . sir , as soon as i understood your intentions to answer mr. serjeant , i could not but rejoyce on his behalf , as well as on the truths and your own . for i have that real kindness for him , that i heartily wish him that reason and science he pretends to ; which i could not but despair of his attaining , unless he were undeceived in that monstrous opinion he hath of himself and his undertakings . and i knew no person more fit then you , to let him understand the tr̄uth and himself together . in which , your performances have been so clear and satisfactory , that i hope mr. serjeant in stead of another letter of directions to his answerer , will write you one of thanks , for the reason and kindness you have shewed him throughout your book . unless it fares with you , as it hath done with some other adversaries of theirs , that their civility hath been interpreted as an argument of their uncertainty , and their own confidence cried up for a demonstration . in which sense only i shall grant our protestant writer● to build on uncertainties , and mr. white and mr. serjeant to be the great demonstrators of this age . if their own reason had been as severe as the censures at rome against them , they had saved us the labour of any answer , and would have found out their own sophistry without a confutation . but the least thing we can imagine by their excessive confidence , is , that they are deceived themselves ; and therefore i● is a part of charity to them as well a● justice to the truth , to let the world ●e , that big words are quite another ●ing from science , and a strong pre●mption from a regular demonstra●on . as to which , no more need to ●ve been said , than what you have al●ady done , if mr. serjeant had not ●ought it an accession to the glory of ●s atchievements , to lead two pages ●f my book in triumph after him . i ●nfess i was somewhat surprised to see person who would be noted for his ●lour in assaulting protestant writers , ●eal so behind the main bulk and design ●f my book , and when he had gotten ●o single pages by themselves , fall ●pon them with as much pomp and ●tentation , as if he had attacqu'd the ●hole . and this must be noised abroad an answer to me , by the same figure ●at his arguments are called demon●rations , which is by an hyperbole un● for any , but such who never flag be●w the sphere of science in their own ●dgements , though they seem not to ●ome near it in others . yet since ●r . serjeant is not only pleased to ●ncern himself so far as to answer that ●rt of my book relating to oral tradition , but in most express terms t● challenge me to reply to him , he ma● now see ( assoon as i could get any liberty from greater imployments ) ho● ready i am to give him all reasonabl● satisfaction . and in the first place return him thanks for the weapon h● hath made choice of , viz. that of re●son ; there being no other , i desire t● make use of in managing this deba● between us : and i hope he will find much civility towards him througho● this discourse , as he exptesses towar● me in the entrance to his ; if that m● be accounted any real civility which intended meerly out of design wi● the greater advantage to disparage t● cause i have undertaken , and yet ● no reason to repent of . if in his curs● view of two chapters of my book he h● ( as he saith ) quite lost me , he had no ca● to be troubled for it , if he had fou● far more excellent persons , such dr. hammond , and the dissuader , a● dr. pierce instead of me . but to sure he intends not this in honour any of us , but by way of a comm● reproach to us all , as though we did talk out of nature or things , but wo● and imagination . i could heartily have wished mr. s. would have cropt so much of the victory due to anothers learning and industry , as to have shewed me one proposition in those discourses , which a rational understanding that would be true to it self , could not settle or rely on ; but if such insinuations as these must pass for answers , i must needs say , i judge mr. s. equally happy in confuting our grounds , and in demonstrating his own ; in both which , his greatest strength lies in the self-evidence of his bare affirmations . but it seems he is willing to resign the glory of this victory to the judicious author of labyrinthus cantuariensis , or to some others for him ; and when they have once obtained it , i shall not envy them the honour of it . and i suppose those persons , whoever they are , may be able by this time , to tell mr. s. it is an easier matter to talk of victories than to get them . but if they do no more in the whole , than mr. s. hath done for his share , they will triumph nowhere , but where they conquer , viz. in their own fancies and imaginations . therefore leaving them to their silent conquests , and as yet , unheard of victories , we come to mr. s. who so liberally proclaims his own in the point of oral tradition . which ( in a phrase scarce heard of in our language before ) is the post , he tells us , he hath taken upon him to explicate further and defend . what the explicating a post means , i as little understand , as i do the force of his demonstrations ; but this , and many other such uncouth forms of speech , up and down in his book , ( which make his style so smooth and easie ) are i suppose intended for embellishments of our tongue , and as helps to sure-speaking , as his whole book is designed for sure-footing . but letting him enjoy the pleasure and felicity of his own , expressions , i come to consider the matter in debate between us . and his first controversie with me , is , for opposing the infallibility of oral tradition , to doctrinal infallibility in pope and councils . a controversie fitter to be debated among themselves , than between him and me : for is any thing more notorious , than that infallibility is by the far greatest part of romanists attributed to the present church in teaching and delivering matters of faith , not by vertue of any oral tradition , but the immediate assistance of the holy ghost : and that this is made by them the only ground of divine faith ? for which mr. s. may if he please , consult his judicious author of labyrinthus cantuariensis , or any other of their present writers , except mr. white and himself . he need not therefore have been to seek for the meaning of this doctrinal infallibility as opposed to traditionary , if he had not either been ignorant of the opinion of their own writers , or notoriously dissembled it . for this infallibility is not attributed to the rulers of the church , meerly as doctors or scholars , but as the representative church whose office it is to deliver all matters of faith by way of an infallible testimony to every age , and thereby to afford a sufficient foundation for divine faith . but mr. s. attributes no such infallibility to the representative church , as teaching the rest , but derives their infallibility from such grounds as are common to all parts of the essential church . wherein he apparently opposes himself to the whole current of their own authors , whe resolve all faith into the immediate assistance of the holy ghost , without which they assert there could be no infallibility at all in tradition or any thing else ; and therefore these opinions are as opposite to each other as may be . for such an infallibility is not attributed by them to the teachers of the church , meerly on some signal occasions , as mr. s. seems to suppose , when they are to explain new matters of faith ; but it is made by them to be as necessary as believing it self , because thereby the only sure foundation of faith is laid , and therefore it is very evident they make it proper to the church in all ages : or else in some age of the church men were destitute of sufficient grounds of faith . for they by no means think it a sufficient foundation for faith , that one age of the church could not conspire to deceive another ; for this they will tell him at most is but a humane faith ; but that christ by his promise hath assured the church that there shall never be wanting in it the infallible assistance of his holy spirit , whereby they shall infallibly teach & deliver all matters of faith . and if this be not their opinion , let them speak to the contrary , which if they do , i am sure they must retract their most elaborate discourses about the resolution of faith written by the greatest artists among them . let mr. s. then judge who it is that stumbles at the threshold : but of this difference among them more afterwards . by this it appears it was not on any mistake that i remained unsatisfied in the question i asked , whether am i bound to believe what the present church delivers to be infallible ? to which mr. s. answers , i understand him not . my reply shall be only that of a great lawyers in a like case , i cannot help that . i am sure my words are intelligible enough ; for i take infallible there as he takes it himself , for infallibly true ; although i deny not the word to be improperly used in reference to things ; and that for the reason given by him , because fallibility and infallibility belong to the knowing power , or the persons that have it , and not to the object . but we are often put to the use of that word in a sense we acknowledge improper , meerly in complyance with our adversaries , who otherwise are apt to charge us with having only uncertainties and probabilities for our faith , if we do not use the term infallible as applyed to the truth of the thing . i am content therefore wherever , in what i have writ , he meets that term so applyed , that he take it only in his own sense , for that which is certainly true ; for i mean no more by it . and in this sense mr. s. answers affirmatively ; and gives this account of it , not only because the present church cannot be deceived in what the church of the former age believed , but because the church in no age could conspire against her knowledge to deceive that age immediately following in matter of fact evident in a manner to the whole world . the question then is , whether this be a sufficient account for me to believe that to be certainly true , or to be the doctrine of christ and his apostles , which the present church delivers ? and consequently whether the resolution of faith be barely into oral tradition ? thus we see the clear state of the question between us . i come therefore to the vindication of those things which i had objected against this way of resolving faith into oral tradition . three things i especially insisted on . 1. that it is inconsistent with the pretensions of the present roman church . 2. that it hath not been the way owned in all ages of the christian church . 3. that it is repugnant to common sense and experience , and that the church of rome hath apparently altered from what was the belief of former ages . if these three be made good , there will be no cause to glory in this last invention to support the sinking fabrick of that church . these three then i undertake to defend against what mr. serjeant hath objected against them . 1. that it is contrary to the pretensions of the present roman church . and if it be so , there can be no reason for those who are of it , to rely upon it . for if so be that church pretends that the obligation to faith arises from a quite different ground from this ; how can they who believe that church infallible , venture their faith upon any other principle than what is publikly owned by her ? and whosoever thinks himself bound to believe by virtue of an infallible assistance of the present church , doth thereby shew that his obligation doth not depend upon what was delivered by the former ages of the church . as those who believed the apostles were infallible in their doctrine , could not resolve their faith into the infallibility of oral tradition , but into that immediate assistance by which the apostles spake ; and where there is a belief of a like assistance , the foundation of faith cannot lie in the indefectibility of tradition , but in that infallible spirit which they suppose the church to be assisted by . for supposing this oral tradition should fail , and that men might believe that it had actually failed , yet if the former supposition were true , there was sufficient ground for faith remaining still . and what assurance can any one have that the present church delivers nothing for matter of faith but what hath been derived in every age from christ and his apostles , if such an infallible spirit be supposed in the present church which was in the apostles themselves ? for on the same reason that those who heard the apostles were not bound to trouble themselves with the tradition of the former age ; no more ought they who believe the present roman church to have the same infallible assistance . they need not then enquire whether this age knew the meaning of the former , or whether one age could conspire to deceive another , or whether notwithstanding both these , errours might not come into the church ; it is sufficient for them that the definitions of the present church are infallible in all matters of faith . therefore my demand was built on very good reason ; how can you assure me the present church obliges me to believe nothing but only what , and so far as it received from the former church ? and mr. s's answer is far from being satisfactory , that this appears by her manifect practice , never refusing communion to any man , that could approve himself to believe all the former age did . for this may be resolved into a principle far different from this , which is the belief of the infallibility of the present church . for supposing that , they are not bound to enquire themselves into the reasons why the tradition could not faile in any age ; it is sufficient for them to believe the church infallible ; and if it be so , in proposing matters of faith , it must be so in declaring what the belief of the former age was . but my demands go on , what evidence can you bring to convince me both that the church alwayes observed this rule , and could never be deceived in it ? which question is built on these two principles which the infallibility of oral tradition stands on . 1. that the church must alwayes go upon this ground . 2. that if it did so , it is impossible she should be deceived . both which are so far from that self-evidence which mr. serjeant still pretends to in this way , that the jesuits principles seem much more rational and consistent , than these do . for granting them but that one postulatum , that there must be an inherent infallibility in the testimony of the present church to afford sufficient foundation for divine faith , all the rest of their doctrine follows naturally from it . whereas this new way of resolving faith is built on such suppositions , which no man well in his wits will be ready to grant . for unless it be self-evident that the church did alwayes proceed on this ground , it cannot be self-evident that oral tradition is infallible ; because the self-evidence of this principle depends on this , that in all ages of the church , the only rule and measure of faith was , what was delivered by oral tradition from the age foregoing . now if it be possible that matters of faith might be conveyed in wayes quite different from this , what self-evidence can there be that the church must alwayes proceed upon this ? mr. s. then , must demonstrate it impossible for matters of faith to be conveyed to posterity in any other way than oral tradition ; and not only that the thing is impossible , but that the church in all ages judged it to be so ; or else he can never make it at all evident that the church alwayes made this her rule of faith . but if either there may be a certain conveyance of the doctrine of faith another way , viz. by writing , or that the church might judge that way more certain , whether it were so or not , either way it will appear far enough from self-evidence that she alwayes judged of doctrines of faith , meerly by the tradition of the preceding age . if another way be granted possible , there must be clear demonstration , that the church notwithstanding this , did never make use of it ; for if it did make use of another way of resolving faith in any age of the church , then in that age of the church oral tradition was not looked on as the ground of faith ; and if so , notwithstanding what ever mr. s. can demonstrate to the contrary , that age might have believed otherwise that the immediately preceding did . for let us but suppose tha● all necessary doctrines of faith , were betimes recorded in the church in books universally received by the christians of the first ages ; is it no● possible that age which first embrace● these books , might deliver them to posterity as the rule of their faith and so down from one age to another and doth it not hence follow that the rule of saith is quite different from ● meer oral tradition ? let mr. s. the● either shew it impossible that the doctrines of faith should be written ; or that being written , they should be universally received ; or that being universally received in one age , they ●hould not be delivered to the next ; ●r being delivered to the next , those ●ooks should not be looked on as con●aining the rule of faith in them ; or ●hough they were so , yet that still oral ●adition was wholly relyed on as the ●ule of faith ; & then i shall freely grant ●●at mr. s. hath attempted something ●●wards the proof of this new hypothe● . but as things now stand it is so far ●om being self-evident that the church ●ath alwayes gone upon this princi●e , that we find it looked on as a great ●ovelty among them in their own ●hurch ; and it would be a rare thing ●r a new invention to have been the ●nse of the church in all ages ; which it hath not been , the strength of it is ●ereby taken away . but let us suppose that the church ●d proceed upon this principle , that ●thing was to be embraced , but what 〈◊〉 derived by tradition from the a●tles ; how doth it thence follow that nothing could be admitted into th● church but what was really so derive● from them ? do we not see in th● world at this day , that among tho● who own this principle , contradicto● propositions are believed ; and bo● sides tell us it is on this account , b● cause their doctrine was delivered ● the apostles ? doth not the greek chur● profess to believe on the account tradition from the apostles as well the latin ? if that tradition failed the greek church which was preserv● in the latin , either mr. s. must i●stance on his own principles in th● age which conspired to deceive t● next , or he must acknowledge t● while men own tradition they may deceived in what the foregoing ● taught them ; and consequently th● things may be admitted as doctri● coming from the apostles which w● not so , and some which did may lost , and yet the pretence of tradit● remain still . what self-evidence t● can there be in this principle , w● two parts of the church may b● own it , and yet believe contradicti● on the account of it ? it is then wo● our enquiring what self-evidence this is which mr. s. speaks so much of , which is neither more nor less , but that men in all ages had eyes , ears , and other ●enses , also common reason , and as much memory as to remember their own names and frequently inculcated actions . which ●s so very re●sonable a postulatum , that suppose none who enjoy any of these will deny it . let us therefore see how ●he proceeds upon it . if you disprove ●his , i doubt we have lost mankind , the ●bject we speak of ; and till you disprove ●t , neither i , nor any man in his wits can doubt that this rule depending on testify●ng , that is sense on experience , can possibly ●ermit men to be deceivable . big words in●eed : but such as evidence that all men who are in their wits do not constantly 〈◊〉 them . for i pray sir , what doth mr. s. think of the greek church ? ●ad not those in it eyes , ears and other ●●ses , as well as in the latin ? do not they pretond and appeal to what they ●eceived from their fore-fathers as well ●s the latins ? it seems then a decepti● is possible in the case of testifying , 〈◊〉 therefore this doth more than per●●● men to be decievable ; for here hath been an actual deception on one side or other . but we need not fear losing mankind in this ; for the possibility o● errour supposeth mankind to continue still ; and if we take away that , we m●● sooner lose it than by the contrary . but what repugnancy can we imagine to humane nature , that me● supposing doctrines of faith to come down from christ or his apostles , should yet mistake in judging what those doctrines are ? had not men eyes and ears , and common sense in christ and the apostles times ? and yet we see eve● then the doctrine of christ was mistaken ; and is it such a wonder it should be in succeeding ages ? did not the nazarenes mistake in point of circumcision , the corinthians as to the resurrection , and yet the mean time agree i● this , that christs doctrine was the rule of faith , or that they ought to believe nothing but what came from him ? di● not the disciples themselves err , eve● while they were with christ , and certainly had eyes and ears , an● 〈◊〉 sense as other men have , concern●●●me great articles of christian faith , christs passion , resurrection , and the nat● . of his kingdom ? if then such who had the greatest opportunities imaginable , and the highest apprehensions of christ , might so easily mistake in points of such moment , what ground have we to believe that succeeding ages should not be lyable to such misapprehensions ? and it was not meerly the want of clear divine revelation which was the cause of their mistakes ; for these things were plain enough to persons not possessed with prejudices ; but those were so strong as to make them apprehend things quite another way than they ought to do . so it was then , and so it was in succeeding ages ; for ●et parents teach what they pleased for matters of faith , yet prejudice and ●yableness to mistake in children might easily make them misapprehend either the nature or weight of the doctrines delivered to them . so that setting aside a certain way of recording the matters of faith in the books of scripture , and these preserved entire in every age , it is an easie matter to conceive how in a short time christian religion would have been corrupted as much as ever any was in the world . for when we consider how much notwithstanding scripture , the pride , passion , and interests of men have endeavoured to deface christian religion in the world , what would not these have done if there had been no such certain rule to judge of it by ? mr. s. imagin● himself in repub . platonis ; but it appear● he is still in faece romuli ; he fancies there never were , nor could be any differences among christians ; and that all christians made it their whole business to teach their posterity matters o● faith , and that they minded nothing in the world but the imprinting tha● on their minds that they might have i● ready for their children ; and that al● parents had equal skill and sidelit● in delivering matters of religion t● their posterity . whereas in truth w● find in the early ages of the christia● church several differences about matters of faith , and these differences continued to posterity , but all parties stil● pleading that their doctrine came fro● the apostles ; & it fell out unhappily for mr. s. that those were commonly most grossly deceived who pretended the most to oral tradition from the apostles ; still we find the grand debate was what came from the apostles , and what not ? whereas had tradition been so infallible a way of conveying , how could this ever have come into debate among them ? what , did not they know what their parents taught them ? it seems they did not , or their parents were no more agreed than themselves ; for their differences could never be ended this way . afterwards came in for many ages such a succession of ignorance and barbarism , that christian religion was little minded either by parents or children as it ought to have been ; instead of that , some fopperies and superstitions were hugely in request , and the men who fomented these things were cryed up as great saints and workers of miracles . so that the miracles of s. francis and s. dominick were as much if not more carefully conveyed from parents to children in that age than those of christ and his apostles ; and on this account posterity must be equally bound to believe them , and have their persons in equal veneration . if men at last were grown wiser , it was because they did not believe mr. s's . principles , that they ought to receive what was delivered by their parents ; but they began to search and enquire into the writings of former ages , and to examine the opinions and practices of the present with those of the primitive church , and by this means there came a restauration of learning and religion together . but though matters of fact be plain and evident in this case , yet m. s. will prove it impossible there should any errours come into the christian church ; and his main argument is this , because no age of the church could conspire against her knowledge to deceive that age immediately following in matter of fact evident in a manner to the whole world . but before i come more particularly to shew the weakness of this argument , by manifesting how errours might come into the church without such a conspiracy as this is , i shall propound some queries to him . 1. what age of the church he will instance in wherein all persons who were not cast out of the church , had the same apprehensions concerning all points of faith ? i. e. that none among them did believe more things delivered by christ or the apostles than others did . i am sure he can neither instance in the age of the apostles themselves , nor in those immediately succeeding them ; unless mr. s. the better to defend his hypothesis will question all written records because they consist of dead letters , and unsenc't characters , and wordish testimonies . never considering that while he utters this , he writes himself ; unless he imagins there is more of life , sense and certainty in his books , than in the scriptures or any other writing whatsoever . 2. where there were different apprehensions in one age of the church , whether there must not be different traditions in the next ? for as he looks on all parents as bound to teach their children , so on children as bound to believe what their parents teach them . on which supposition different traditions in the succeeding age must needs follow different apprehensions in the precedent . 3. whether persons agreeing in the substance of doctrines may not differ in their apprehensions of the necessity of them ? as for instance , all may agree in the article of christs descent into hell , but yet may differ in the explication of it , and in the apprehension of the necessity of it in order to salvation . so that we must not only in tradition about matters of faith enquire what was delivered , but under what notion it was delivered ; whether as an allowable opinion , or a necessary point of faith ; but if several persons , nay multitudes in the church may have different notions as to the necessity of the same points , by what means shall we discern what was delivered as an opinion in the church , and what as an article of faith ? but mr. s. throughout his discourse takes it for granted that there is the same necessity of believing and delivering all things which concern the christian doctrine ; and still supposes the same sacredness , concern , necessity , in delivering all the points in controversie between the romanists and us , as there was in those main articles of faith , which they and we are agreed in . which is so extravagant a supposition that it is hard to conceive it should ever enter into the head of a person pretending to reason ; but as extravagant as it is , it is that without which his whole fabrick falls to the ground . for suppose we should grant him that the infinite errors which depend on the belief of the christian doctrine should be of so prevalent nature with the world , that it is impossible to conceive any one age should neglect the knowing them , or conspire to deceive the next age about them ; yet what is all this to the matters in difference between us ? will mr. s. prove the same sacredness , necessity , concern , and miraculously attestedness ( as he phrases it ) in the invocation of saints , purgatory , transubstantiation , supremacy , &c. as in the believing the death and resurrection of the son of god : if he doth not prove this , he doth nothing ; for his arguments may hold for doctrines judged universally necessary , but for no other . therefore mr. s. hath a new task which he thought not of ; which is , to manifest that these could not be looked on as opinions , but were embraced as necessary articles of faith , for unless he proves them such , he can neither prove any obligation in parents to teach them their children , nor in children to believe what their parents taught , but only to hold them in the same degree which they did themselves . when mr. s. will undertake to prove that the whole church from the time of christ did agree in the points in difference between us , as necessary articles of faith , i may more easily believe that no age could be ignorant of them , or offer to deceive the next about them . but when mr. s. reflects on his frequent concession that there are private opinions in the church , distinct from matters of faith , he must remember before he can bring home his grounds to the case between their church and ours , that he must prove none of the things in debate , were ever entertained as private opinions , and that it is impossible for that which was a private opinion in one age , to become a matter of faith in the next . but because this distinction of his ruines his whole demonstration , i shall ●irst propound it in his own terms , and ●hen shew how from thence it follows , ●hat errors may come into the church , and be entertained as matters of faith . his words are , it being evident , that we have but two wayes of ordinary know●edge , by acts of our soul , or operations ●n our body ; that is by reason and expe●ience ; the former of which belongs to ●peculators or doctors , the second to de●iverers of what was received , or testi●iers . and this distinction he frequent●y admits , not only in the present age of the church , but in any ; for the same reason will hold in all . from ●ence i propose several queries further to mr. s. 1. if every one in the church●ooked ●ooked on himself as bound to believe ●ust as the precedent age did , whence came any to have particular opinions of their own ? for either the church●ad ●ad delivered her sense in that case or not ; if not , then tradition is no certain conveyer of the doctrine of christ ; ●f she had , then those who vented private speculations were hereticks in so doing ; because they opposed that doctrine which the church received from christ and his apostles . if mr. s. replie● that private speculations are in such case● where there is no matter of faith at all he can never be able to help himsel● by that distinction in the case of hi● own church ; for i demand , whether i● it a matter of faith , that men ought to believe oral tradition infallible ? i● not , how can men ground their faith upon it ? if it be , then either some are meer speculators in matters of faith ; or all who believe on the account o● the popes infallibility are hereticks for so doing . 2. if there were speculators in former ages as well as this , whether did those men believe their own speculations or no ? if not , then the father● were great impostors who vented those speculations in the church which they did not believe themselves ; and it i● plain mr. s. speaks of such opinions which the asserters of , do firmly believe to be true : and if they did , then they look on themselves as bound to believe something which was not founded on the tradition of the church ; and consequently did not own oral tradition , as the rule of faith . so that as many speculators as we find in the church , so many testifiers we have against the in●libility of oral tradition . 3. whether those persons who did themselves believe those opinions to be true , did not think themselves obliged to tell others they ought to believe them ; and consequently to deliver these as matters of faith to their children ? let mr. s. shew me any inconsequence in this ; but that it unavoidably follows upon his principles that they were bound to teach their children what themselves received as the doctrine of christ , and that the obligation is in all respects equal as if they had believed these things on the account of oral tradition . 4 if children be obliged to believe what their parents teach them for matters of faith , then upon mr. s's . own concessions is not posterity bound to believe something which originally came not from christ or his apostles ? for it appears in this case , that the first rise was from a private opinion of some doctors of the church ; but they believing these opinions themselves , think themselves obliged to propagate them to others ; and by reason of their learning and authority , these opinions may by degrees gain a general acceptance in the ruling part of the chur●● ; and all who believe them true , t●●●● they ought to teach them their ●●●●dren ; and children they are to believe what their parents teach them . thus from mr. s's . own principles , things that never were delivered by christ or his apostles , may come to be received as matters of faith in the present church . thus the intelligent reader needs no bodies help but mr. s. to let him understand how invocation of saints , purgatory , transubstantiation , &c. though never delivered either by christ or his apostles , may yet now be looked on as articles of saith , and yet no age of the church conspire to deceive another . either then mr. s. must say , there never were any private opinators or speculators in the church as distinct from testifiers , and then he unavoidably contradicts himself ; or he must deny that posterity is bound to believe what their fore-fathers delivered them as matters of faith ; which destroyes the force of his whole demonstration . perhaps he will answer , that children are not bound to believe what barely their parents , or a●other number of persons might deliver matters of faith , but what the whole ●hurch of every age delivers . this , ●ough the only thing to be said in ●e case , yet is most unreasonable ; be●●use it runs men upon inextricable dif●culties in the way of their resolving ●ith . for suppose any children ●ught by their parents what they are ● believe ; mr. s. must say , they are ●ot bound to believe them presently , ●ut to enquire whether they agree ●ith the whole church of that age●rst ●rst , before they can be obliged to as●nt . which being an impossible task ●ther for children , or men of age ● find out in the way of oral tradi●on ; this way of resolving faith , ●oth but offer a fairer pretence for ●fidelity . for we see how impossi●le it is for mr. s. to make it appear , ●hat their church is agreed about the ●ule of faith ; for by his own confession , ●he far greater number as speculators●ppose ●ppose the way asserted by him : how ●uch more difficult then must it needs ●e to find out what the sense of the whole essential church is in all matters which parents may teach their children for doctrines of faith ? so that if chrildren are not bound to believe what their parents teach them , till they know they teach nothing but what the whole church teaches , it is the most compendious way to teach them they are not bound to believe at all . but if this distinction be admitted , as mr. s. makes much use of it , then it appears how errors may come into the church at sirst under the notion of speculations , and by degrees to be delivered as points of faith , by which means those things may be received in the church , for such , which were never delivered by christ or his apostles , and yet no age conspire to deceive the next , which was the thing to be shewed . this is one way of shewing how errors may come into the church , without one ages conspiring to deceive the next ; but besides this , there are several others i might insist upon ; but i shall mention only two more ▪ 1. misinterpreting the sence of scripure . 2. supposing it in the power o● some part of the church to oblige the whole in matters of faith . for the first we are to consider that no imaginable account can be given either of the writing or universal reception of the books of the new testament , if they were not designed for the preservation of the doctrine of christ. and ●lthough it should be granted possible ●or the main and fundamental articles of christian faith ( such as the apostles creed gives a summary account of ) ●o have been preserved by the help of ●radition ; yet , unless we be extream●y ungrateful , we cannot but acknowledge that god hath infinitely ●etter provided for us , in not leaving ●he grounds of our religion to the ●eer breath of the people , or the care ●f mothers instructing their children , ●ut hath given us the certain records ●fall the doctrines and motives of faith ●reserved inviolably from the first ages ●f the church . and when the church●w ●w with what care god had provided ●r the means of faith , tradition●as ●as little minded ; thence the memory ●f those other things not recorded in ●cripture is wholly lost ; all the care ●as imployed in searching , preserving and delivering these sacred books t● posterity . to these the primitiv● church still appeals ; these they plea● for against all adversaries , defendin● their authority , explaining their sense vindicating them from all corruption● tradition they rely not on any fu●ther then as a testimony of the trut● of these records , or to clear the sen● of them from the perverse interpr● tation of those hereticks who preten● ed another kind of tradition th● what was in scripture . and when the● were silenced , all the disputes th● arose in the church concerning matte● of faith , was about the sense of the books ; as is evident by the procee●ings in the case of arius and pelagi● wherein tradition was only used a means to clear the sense of the s●ptures , but not at all as that which t● faith of all was to be resolved int● but when any thing was pleaded fr● tradition for which there was ground in scripture , it was reject with the same ease it was offered ; a● such persons were plainly told , t● was not the churches way ; if they b● plain scripture with the concurr● sense of antiquity , they might produce ●t and rely upon it . so that the whole ●se of tradition in the primitive church ( besides attesting the books ) was , to shew the unreasonableness of ●mposing senses on scripture , against the universal sense of the church from the apostles times . but as long as men were men , it was not avoidable , but they must fall into different apprehensions of the meaning of the scripture , according to their different judgements , prejudices , learning and education . and since they had all this apprehension that the scripture contained all doctrines of faith , thence as men judged of the sense of it , they differed in their apprehension , concerning matters of faith . and thence errors and mistakes might easily come into the church without one age conspiring to deceive the next . nay if it be possible for men to rely on tradition without scripture , this may easily be done ; for by that means they make a new rule of faith not known to the primitive church , and consequently that very assertion is an error in which the former age did not conspire to deceive the next . and if these things be possible , m. s's . demonstration fails him ; for hereby a reasonable account is given how errors may come into a church without one age conspiring to deceive another . again , let me enquire of mr. s. whether men may not believe it in the power of the ruling part of the church to oblige the whole to an assent to the definitions of it ? to speak plainer , is it not possible for men to believe the pope and council infallible in their decrees ? and i hope the jesuits ( as little as mr. s. loves them , or they him ) may be a sufficient evidence of more than the bare possibility of this . if they may believe this , doth it not necessarily follow that they are bound to believe whatever they declare to be matter of faith ? supposing then that transubstantiation , supremacy , invocation of saints , were but private opinions before , but are now defined by pope and council , these men cannot but look on themselves as much obliged to believe them , as if they had been delivered as matters of faith , in every age since the apostles times . is it now repugnant to common sense , that this opinion should be believed or entertained in the church ? if not , why may not this opinion be generally received ? if it be so , doth it not unavoidably follow that the faith of men must alter according to the churches definitions ? and thus private opinions may be believed as articles of faith , and corrupt practices be established as laudable pieces of devotion , and yet no one age of the church conspire to deceive another . thus i hope mr. s. may see how far it is from being a self-evident principle , that no error can come into the church , unless one age conspire to deceive the next in a matter of fact evident in a manner to the whole world . which is so wild an apprehension , that i believe the jesuits cannot entertain themselves without smiles to see their domestick adversaries expose themselves to contempt with so much confidence . thus i come to the reason i gave why there is no reason to believe that this is the present sense of the roman church . my words are , for i see the roman church asserts , that things may be de fide in one age , which were not in another ; at least popes and councils challenge this ; and this is the common doctrine maintained there , and others are looked on as no members of their c●urch , who assert the contrary ; but as p●rsons at least meritoriously if not actually excommunicate . where then shall i satisfie my self what the sense of your church is as to this particular ? must i believe a very few persons whom the rest disown as heretical and soditious ? or ought i not rather to take the judgement of the greatest and most approved persons of that church ? and these disown any such doctrine , but assert that the church may determine things de fide which were not before . in answer to this , mr. s. begs leave to distinguish the words de fide which may either mean christian faith or points of faith taught by christ ; and then he grants 't is non-sense to say they can be in one age , and not in another . or de fide may mean obligatory to be believed . in this latter sense none i think ( saith he ) denies things may be de fide in one age and not in another ; in the former sense none holds it . upon which very triumphantly he concludes , whatrs now become of your difficulty ? i believe you are in some wonderment , and think i elude it rather then answer it ; i shall endeavour to unperplex you . i must confess it a fault of humane nature to admire things which men understand not ; on which account i cannot free my self from some temptation to that he calls wonderment ; but i am presently cured of it when i endeavour to reduce his distinction to reason . for instead of explaining his terms he should have shewed how any thing can be obligatory to be believed in any age of the church , which was no point of faith taught by christ , which notwithstanding his endeavour to unperplex me , is a thing as yet i apprehend not : because i understand no obligation to faith to arise from any thing but divine revelation : and i do not yet believe any thing in christian doctrine to be divinely revealed , but what was delivered by christ or his apostles . and my wonderment must needs be the greater , because i suppose this inconsistent with mr. s's . principles . for oral tradition doth necessarily imply that all points of faith were first taught by christ , and conveyed by tradition to us ; but if a thing may be de side in this latter sense which was not before , what becomes of resolving faith wholly into oral tradition ? for faitb is resolved into that from whence the obligation to believe comes ; but here mr. s. confesses that the obligation to believe doth arise from something quite different from oral tradition ; and therefore faith must be resolved into it . besides , all the sense i can find in that distinction , is , that men are bound to believe something in one age , which they were not in another ; and if so , i shall desire mr. s. to unperplex me in this , how every age is bound to believe just as the precedent did , and yet one age be bound to believe more then the precedent . but however , i am much obliged to him for his endeavour to unperplex me as he speaks : for really i look on no civilities to be greater than those which are designed for clearing our understandings : so great an adorer am i of true reason and an intelligible religion . and therefore i perfectly agree with him in his saying , that christianity aims not to make us beasts , but more perfectly men : and the perfection of our manhood consists in the use of our reasons . from whence he inferrs , that it is reasonable , consequences should be drawn from principles of faith , which , he saith , are of two sorts ; first such as need no more but common sense to deduce them ; the others are such as need the maxims of some science got by speculation to infer them ; and these are theological conclusions : the former sort , he tells us , the church is necessitated to make use of upon occasion , i. e. when any heretick questions those , and eadem opera , the whole point of faith it self , of which they were a part ; as in the case of the monothelites , about christs baving two wills . but all this while , i am far enough from being unperplexed : nay by this discourse i see every one who offers to unperplex another is not very clear himself . for since he makes no theological conclusions to be de side , but only such consequences as common sence drawes , i would willingly understand how common sence receives a new obligation to faith . for to my apprehension the deducing of consequences from principles by common sense , is not an act of believing , but of knowledge consequent upon a principle of faith . and the meaning is no more then this , that men when they say they believe things , should not contradict themselves , as certainly they would do , if they deny those consequences which common sense draws from them . as in the case of the monothelites , for men to assert that christ had two natures , and yet not two wills , when the will is nothing else but the inclination of the nature to that good which belongs to it . so that there can be no distinct obligation to believe such consequences as are drawn by common sense ; but every one that believes the principles from whence they are drawn , is thereby bound to believe all the consequences which immediately follow from them . indeed the church , when people will be so unreasonable to deny such things , may explain her sense of the article of faith in those terms which may best prevent dispute ; but this is only to discriminate the persons who truly believe this article from such as do not . not that any new obligation to faith results from this act of the church : but the better to prevent cavils , she explains her sense of the article it self in more explicite terms . which as he saith , is only to put the faith out of danger of being equivocated . which is quite another thing from causing a new obligation to believe . as suppose the church to prevent the growth of the socinian doctrine , should , require from men the declaring their belief of the eternal existence of the son of god ; would this be to bind men to believe some thing which they were not bound to before ? no , but only to express their assent to the deity of christ in the simplest terms ; because otherwise they might call him god by office , and not by nature . now how can any one conceive that any should be first obliged to believe that christ is god ; and yet receive a new obligation afterwards to believe his eternal existence ? thus it is in all immediate consequences drawn by common sense ; in all which the primary obligation to believe the thing it self , extends to the belief of it in the most clear and least controverted terms , which are not intended to impose on mens faith , but to promote the churches peace . for neither i● there a new object of faith ; for how can that be which common sense draws from what is believed already ▪ neither is there any infallible proponent , unless common sense hath usurped the popes prerogative . but mr. s. offers at a reason for this , which is that none can have an obligation to believe what they have not an obligation to think of ; and in some age the gen●rality of the faithful have no occasion , nor consequently obligation to mind , reflect , or think on those propositions involved in the main stock of faith . from whence , he saith , it follows , that a thing may be de fide or obligatory to be believed in one age , and not in another . but let mr. s. shew how a man can be obliged to believe any thing as an article of faith , who is not bound to thin● of all the immediate consequences o● it ? because faith is an act of a reasonable nature , which ought to enquire into the reasons and consequences of things which it doth believe . bu● mr. s. mistake lies here , in not distinguishing the obligation to believe , from the obligation to an explicite declaration of that assent . the former comes only from god , and no new obligation can arise from any act of the church ; but the latter being a thing tending to the churches peace , may be required by it on some occasions ; i. e. when the doctrine is assaulted by hereticks as in the time of the four first general councils : but still a man is not at all the more obliged to assent , but to express his assent in order to the churches satisfaction . but mr. s. supposes me to enquire , how the church can have power to oblige the generality to belief of such a point . to which his answer is , she obliges them to believe the main point of faith , by vertue of traditions being a self-evident rule , and these implyed points by vertue of their being self-evidently connected with those main and perpetually used points , so that the vulgar can be rationally and connaturally made capable of this their obligation . but we are not now enquiring what the obligation to believe the main points of faith is , nor whether traditiou be a self-evident rule ; but how there should be a new obligation to believe something self-evidently connected with the former points , is beyond my capacity to understand . and they must be vulgar understandings indeed , that can rationally and connaturally be made capable of such an obligation . for if it be self-evidently connected with the main points , no one can believe the one , without believing the other : for nothing is self-evident but what a man assents to at the first apprehension of it ; and if he doth so , how comes there a new obligation to believe it ? is it possible to believe that any thing consists of parts , and not believe that the whole is greater than any of those parts ▪ for this is a thing self-evidently connected with the nature of the whole . but these are self-evident riddles , a● the former were unintelligible demonstrations . and yet though these b● rare theories , the application of them to the case of the roman church exceeds all the rest . whence , saith he , the government of our church is still justified to be sweet , and according to right nature , and yet forcible and efficacious although i admire many things in mr. s's . book , yet i cannot say i do any thing more than this passage , that because men are obliged to believe no implyed points , but such as are self-evidently connected with the main ones , therefore the government of the roman church is sweet and according to right nature , &c. alas then , how much have we been mistaken all this while , that have charged her with imposing hard and unsufferable conditions of communion with her ! no , she is so gentle and sweet that she requires nothing but the main points on the account of a self-evident rule , and implyed points by reason of self-evident connexion with the former . i see mr. s. ( if he will make good his word ) is the only person who ●s ever like to reconcile me with the church of rome : for i assure you , i ●ever desire any better terms of communion with a church , than to have no ●ain points of faith required from me ●o assent to , but what are built on a self-evident rule , nor any implyed points ●ut such as are self-evidently connected with the former . and no work can ●e more easie , than to convince me upon these grounds ; for all endeavours of proof are taken away by the things being said to be self-evident . for the very offer of proof that they are so , self-evidently proves they are not so : for what ever is proved by something beside it self , can never be said without a contradiction to be self-evident . but not to tye up mr. s. from his excellent faculty of proving , if mr. s. will prove to me that any of the points in difference between us , as transubstantiation , purgatory , supremacy of the roman church , &c. have any self-evident connexion with any main poin● of faith in the apostles creed , i solemnly promise him to retract all i have writ against that church ; so far shall bee from needing a new obligation to believe them . but if these be so remot● from self-evidence , that they are plainly repugnant to sense and reason ( witne● that self-evident doctrine of transubstantiation ) what then must we thin● of mr. s. ? surely the least is , that sin● his being a roman catholick , his min● is strangely inlightned , so far that tho● things are self-evident to him , whi● are contradictions to the rest of t● world . but withal mr. s. acquaints us with another mysterie ; which is , how these points descended by a kind of tradition , and yet confesses , they were never thought of or reflected on , by the generality , till the church took occasion to explain them . such a silent tradition doth very sutably follow the former self-evident connexion . for he that can believe transubstantiation to be self-evident , no wonder if he believes that to have been delivered by a constant tradition , which was never heard of from the apostles times to these . now mr. s. is pleased to return to me , and draws up a fresh charge against me , which is , that i act like a politician , and would conquer them by first dividing them , and making odius comparisons between two parties of divines . but to shew us how little they differ , he distinguishes them , as faithful , and as private discoursers ; in the former not●on , he saith , they all hold the same divinely constituted church-government , and the same self-evident rule of faith ; but as private discoursers he acknowledges they differ in the explication of their belief . i meddle not here ●●th the government of their church , ( which i have elswhere proved to be far enough from being divinely constituted ) but with the rule of faith ; and the question is , whether the infallibility of or altradition , be that self-evident rule which that church proceeds on ; yes , saith mr. s. they are all as faithful agreed in it , but as discoursers they differ about it . which in short is , that all in the church of rome , who are not of his opinion , know not what they say ; and that they oppose that which they do really believe . which in plain english is , that they are egregious dissemblers and prevaricators in religion ; that they do intolerably flatter the pope and present church with loud declamations for their infallibility , but they do really believe no such thing , but resolve all into oral tradition . but is not this an excellent agreement among them , when mr. white and his party not only disown the common doctrine of the infallibility of pope and councils , but dispute against it as pernicious and destructive to christian faith ? on the other side the far greater part of romanists say , there can be no certainty of faith , unless there be an infallible divine testimony in the present church , and this lodged in pope and councils ; that those who endeavour to overthrow this , are dangerous , seditious , heretical persons . accordingly , their books are censured at rome , their opinions disputed against , and their persons condemned . and yet all this while , we must believe that these stick together like two smooth marbles as faithful , though they are knocked one against another as discoursers ; and that they perfectly agree in the same self-evident rule of faith , when all their quarrels and contentions are about it : and those managed with so great heat , that heresie is charged of one side , and arch-heresie and undermining religion on the other . doth he think we never heard of mr. whites sonus succinae , nor of that chapter in it , where he saith , that the doctrine of pope and councils infallibility tends to overthrow the certainty of christian faith ; and that the propagating such a doctrine is a greater crime then burning temples , ravishing the sacred virgins on the altars , trampling on the body of christ , or the sending the turk or antichrist into christian countreys ? or doth he think we can believe that the pope and cardinals , the jesuites and all the papists of forreign countreys do as faithful agree with mr. white in this ? it seems not so by the proceedings in the court of rome against him , in which as appears by the censure of the inquisition against him , dated 17. november 1661. his doctrine is condemned not only as false , seditious and scandalous , but as heretical and erroneous in faith . and if it were not for this very doctrine he was there censured , why doth mr. white set himself purposely to defend it in his tabulae suffragiales ? if these then do agree as faithful , who cannot but envy the excellent harmony of the roman church , in which men condemn each other for hereticks , and yet all believe the same things still ? well sir , i am in hopes upon the same grounds mr. s. will yield us the same charity too , and tell us that we agree with him as faithful , only we differ a little from him as discoursers ; for i assure you , there is as great reason : the only difference is , we give them not such ill words as they do each other . for let mr. s. shew us wherein we differ more from him about the rule of faith , than they do among themselves : for mr , white when he hath said , that all kind of heresie doth arise from hence that men make the holy scripture , or a private spirit , the rule of faith ; he presently adds , it is all one , if one make councils or pope any other way than as witnesses to be the authors of faith . for , saith he , this is to subject the whole church to that slavery , to receive any errour for an article of faith , which they shall define , or propose modo illegitimo , i. e. any other way then as witnesses of tradition . either then we differ from mr. s. only as discoursers , or he and his brethren differ from each other more then as such . and so any one would think who reads the oppositions and arguments against each other on this subject , particularly mr. whites tabulae suffragiales . but let mr. white say what he will , mr. s. tells me , i am not aware how little they differ even as divines . the more shame for them to have such furious heats and oppositions where there is so little difference . but as little as they differ , mr. white thinks it safer to talk of their unity in england , than to try whether they be of his mind at rome , by going thither to clear himself ; for he justly fears he should find them differ from him some other way the● as bare discoursers . yet let us hea● mr. s's . reason ; for , saith he , thoug● some speculators attribute to the churc● a power of defining things not held before , yet few will say she hath new revelations or new articles of faith . bu● we know the temper of these men better then to rely on what they barel● say . for they say what they think 〈◊〉 most for their purpose ; and on● of mr. whites adversaries , ( if himsel● may be credited ) plainly told him , i● the doctrine of the popes infallibility wer● not true , yet it ought to be defended b●cause it was for the interest of the churc● of rome : for which he is sufficientl● rebuked by him . it is one thing the● what they say , and another what necessarily follows from the doctrin● which they assert . but for plain dealing commend me to the canonists , who say expresly , the church ( by whic● they mean the pope ) may make new articles of faith : and this is the sense of the rest , though they are loth to speak out . else mr. white was much too blame in spending so much time in proving the contrary . but what man of common sense can imagine that these men can mean otherwise , who assert such an infallibility in pope and councils , as to oblige men under pain of eternal damnation to believe those things which they were not obliged to , before such a definition ? and what can this be else but to make new articles of faith ? for an article of faith supposes a necessary obligation to believe it : now if some doctrine may become thus obligatory by virtue of the churches definition which was not so before , that becomes thereby an article of faith which it was not before . but these subtle men have not yet learnt to distinguish a new doctrine from a new article of faith : they do not indeed pretend that their doctrine is new , because they deny any such thing as new revelation in the church ; but yet they must needs say , if they understand themselves , that old implicit doctrines , may become new a●ticles of faith by virtue of the churcher definition . so little are they relieved by that silly distinction of explicit and implicit delivery of them , which mr. s. for a great novelty acquaints us with . for what is only implicitly delivered , 〈◊〉 no article of faith at all : for that can be no article of faith , which men are not bound to believe ; now there are none will say that men are bound to believe under pain of damnation i● they do not the things which are only implicitly delivered ; but this they say with great confidence of all things defined by the church . and let now any intelligent person judge ; whether those who assert such things , do not differ wide enough from those who resolve all into oral tràdition , and make the obligation to faith wholly dependent upon the constant tradition of any doctrine from age to age ever since the apostles times . but mr. s. is yet further displeased with me for saying , that pope and councils challenge a power to make things de fide in one age , which were not in another . for 1. he says i speak it in common , and prove it not . 2. he adds , that take them right , this is both perfectly innocent , and unavoidably necessary to a church . and is it not strange he should expect any particular proofs of so innocent and necessary a thing to the being of a church ? but he will tell me it is in his own sense of de fide , which i have already shewn to signifie nothing to his purpose . let him therefore speak out whether he doth believe any such thing as inherent infallibility in the definitions of pope and councils ? if not , i am sure at rome they will never believe that mr. s. agrees with them as faithful ; if he doth , whether doth not such an infallible definition bind men by virtue of it to the belief of what is then defined ? if it doth , then things may become as much de fide by it , as if they were delivered by christ or his apostles . for thereby is supposed an equal obligation to faith , because there is a proposition equally infallible . but will he say , the pope doth not challenge this ? why then is the contrary doctrine censured and condemned at rome ? why is the other so eagerly contended for , by the most zealous sons of that church , and that not as a school-opinion , but as the only certain foundation of faith ? mr. s. is yet pleased to inform me further , that nothing will avail me but this , if a pope and council should define a new thing , and declare they ground themselves on new lights , as did their first reformers in england : but i shall find , he saith , no such fopperies in faith-definitions made by the catholick church . is this the man who made choice of reason for his weapon ? could there be a greater calumny cast on our church , than to say her reformers grounded themselves on new lights : when our great charge against the church of rome is for introducing novelties , and receding from pure and primitive antiquity . whether the charge be true or no , yet sure it follows they did not declare they ground themselves on new lights , but expresly the contrary . well , but pope and councils neither define new things , nor ground themselves on them : but what means the man of reason ? that they make no new definitions : surely ot ; for then what did they meet for ? ●d what mean their decrees ? but he ●tends , that they deliver no new do●rine : but how must that be tryed ? ●r hath mr. s. gained the opinion of ●fallibility both from pope and coun●ls , that we must believe his bare ●ord ? but we not only say but prove ●hat even their last council hath defi●ed many things , which never were ●elivered by christ or his apostles . and it is to no purpose whether they ●y they ground themselves on new lights , ●r pretend to an infallible assistance ; ●or it comes all to the same at last . for ●f the assistance be infallible , what mat●er is it whether the doctrine hath been ●evealed or no ? for on this suppositi●n it is impossible that pope and council●hould ●hould miscarry . therefore if any church be guilty of fopperies in faith-definitions , it must be that which you miscall the catholick , but is more truly known by the name of the roman church . there is yet one piece of mr. s's . sagacity to be taken notice of as to this particular , which is , that i am at an end of my argument , because i say the opinion of the pope and councils infallibility is the common doctrine maintained : in which i confound the church with the schools , or some private opinaters , and then carp at those mens tenets . and this is the force of all that paragraph . he tells me , i wa● not wit to know that no sober catholic● holds humane deductions the rule of their faith , schoolmen definers of it , no● the schools the tribunal whence to propose it authoritatively and obligingly to the generality of the faithful . neither doth mr. s. want the wit to know that our present enquiry is concerning the sense of their present church about the rule of faith . since the● mr. s. must confess it necessary to faith to know what the certain rule of it is ; let me enquire further , whether any particular person can know certainly what it is , unless he know● what the church owns for her rule of faith ; and whether that may be owned as the churches judgement , which is stiffly opposed by the most interessed persons in the roman church , and the most zealous contenders for it . ? especially when the pope who is said to be head of the church , condemns the doctrine asserted , and that only by a small number of such who are as much opposed by themselves , as by any of us . is it then possible to know the churches judgement or not ? if not , t is to no purpose to search for a rule of faith : if it be , which way can we come to know it , either by most voices or the sense of the governours of the church ; either of the wayes , i dare put it to a fair tryall whether oral tradition , or the infallibility of pope and councils be the doctrine most owned in the church of rome ? but mr. s. still tells us , these are only private opinators and schoolmen who assert the contrary doctrine to his . but will not they much more say on the other side , that this way of oral tradition is a novel fancy of some few half-catholicks in england , and tends to subvert the roman church . but is the present pope with mr. s. a private opinator , or was the last a meer schoolman ? i am sure what ever mr. s. thinks of him he thought not so of himself , when he said , he was no divine in the controversie of jansenius . doth the court of rome signifie no more with mr. s. then a company of scholastick pedants , that know not what the sense of the church is , concerning the rule of faith ? i meddle not with the schools but with the authority of the present church , and him whom mr. s. owns for the head of it : and is it consistent with his headship to condemn that doctrine which contains in it the only certain rule of faith ? mr. s. may then see they were no such impertinent topicks which i insisted on , and as stout as mr. s. seems to be , i am apt to believe he would not look on the censure of the inquisition as an impertinent topick . but at last mr. s. offers at something whereby he would satisfie me of the sense of the church , as to this particular , and therefore asks , whether i never heard of such a thing as the council of trent ? i must ingenuously confess i have ; and seen more a great deal of it , then i am satisfied with . but what of that ? there , he tells me , i may find a clear solution of my doubt by the constant procedure of that most grave synod in its definitions . that is i hope to find that oral tradition was acknowledged there as the only self-evident rule of faith : if i do this . i confess my self satisfied in this enquiry . but how much to the contrary is there very obvious in the proceedings of it ? for in the 4. session the decree is , that scripture and tradition should be embraced with equal piety and reverence ; and the reason is , because the doctrine of faith is contained , partly in scripture , partly in tradition ; but what arts must mr. s. use to inferr from hence , that oral tradition in contradistinction to scripture was looked on as the only rule of faith ? i cannot but say that the ruling men of that council were men wise enough in their generation ; and they were too wise wholly to exclude scripture ; but because they knew that of it self could not serve their purposes , they therefore help it out with tradition , and make both together the compleat rule of faith . where i pray in all the proceedings of that council doth mr. s. find them desine any thing on the account of oral tradition ? instead of which we find continual bandyings about the sense of scripture and fathers , which might have been all spared if they had been so wise as to consider they could not but know the sense of the present church , nor that of the precedent , and so up to the time of christ. but they were either so ignorant as not to light on this happy invention , or so wise and knowing as to despise it . it is true they would not have their doctrines looked on as novelties , therefore they speak much of tradition and the ancient faith ; but that was not by what their parents taught them , but what the fathers of the church delivered in their writings ; for by these they judged of traditions , and not the oral way . and therefore i see little reason to believe , that this was either the sense of the council of trent , or is the sense of any number of roman catholicks , much less of the whole church none excepted as mr. s. in his confident way expresses it . and if he will , as he saith , disavow the maintaining any point , or affecting any way which is not assented to by all , i hope to see mr. s. retract this opinion , and either fall in with the court of rome , or return as reason leads him into the bosom of the church of england . but there seems to be somewhat more in what follows , viz. that though schoolmen question the personal infallibility of the pope , or of the roman clergy , nay of a general council , yet all affirm the infallibility of tradition , or the living voice of the church essential ; and this , he faith , is held by all , held firmly , and that it is absolutely infallible . to this therefore i answer ; either mr. s. means that none do affirm that the universal tradition of the church essential can erre ; or that the church of rome being the church essential cannot erre in her tradition : but which way soever he takes it , i shall easily shew how far it is from proving that he designs it for . for if he take it in the first sense , viz. that all the faithful in all ages could not concur in an error , then he may as well prove protestants of his mind as papists , for this is the foundation on which we believe the particular books of scripture . if this therefore proves any thing , it proves more then he intends , viz. that while we thus oppose each other , we do perfectly agree together ; and truly so we do , as much as they do among themselves . but if mr. s's . meaning be , that all of their religion own the roman church to be the church essential , and on that account , that it cannot erre ( setting aside the absurdity of the opinion it self ) i say from hence it doth not follow , that they make or●l tradition the rule of faith , because it is most evident that the ground why they say thei● church cannot erre , is not on mr. s's . principles , but on the supposition of an infallible assistance which preserves that church from error . so that this fall● far short of proving that they are all agreed in this rule of faith ; which is a thing so far from probability , that he might by the same argument prove that scripture is owned by them all to be the rule of faith . for i hope it is held by all , and held firmly that the living voice of god in scripture as delivered to us is infallible ; and if so then there is as much ground for this as the other . but if we enquire what it is men make a rule of faith , we must know not only that they believe tradition infallible , but on what account they do . so . for if tradition be believed infallible barely on the account of a promise of infallibility to the present church , then the resolution of saith is not into the tradition , but into that infallible assistance ; and consequently the rule of faith is not , what bare tradition delivers , but what that church which cannot erre in judging tradition doth propose to us . it is not therefore their being agreed in general that tradition is infallible doth make them agree in the same rule of faith ; but they must agree in the ground of that infallibility , viz. that it depends on this , that no age could conspire to deceive the next . but all persons who understand any thing of the roman church , know very well that the general reason why tradition is believed infallible is , because they first believe the church to be infallible ; whereas mr. s. goes the contrary way , and makes the infallibility of the church , to depend on the infallibility of tradition . and therefore for all that i can see we must still oppose private opinators in this controversie ; the church of rome , not having declared her self at all on mr. s's behalf , but the contrary : and the generality believing on the account of the present churches infallibility . and it is strange mr. s. should find no difference between mens resolving faith into common sense , and into the immediate assistance of the holy ghost . if this then be the first principle of controversie , as mr. s. pretends , we see how unlikely they are to agree about other matters , who are so much divided about the principle of resolving them . and if this be the ground of faith , then most romanists build on a wrong foundation . but if the infallibility of oral tradition , be the foundation on which that formidable structure is erecting , which he speaks of ; woe then to the court of rome , for that is known to build on quite a different foundation . and if this , as he saith , rises apace , and has advanced many stories in a small time , it only lets us know how fast their divisions grow , and that they are building so fast one against another , that their church will not stand between them . by this discourse , mr. s. pretends to answer all those if 's which follow ; which are these , in case the church may determine things de fide which were not before , whether the present church doth then believe as the precedent did or no ? if it did , how comes any thing to be de fide which was not before ? if it did not , what assurance can i have that every age of the church believes just as the precedent did and no otherwise ? when i see they profess the contrary . and if a thing may be de fide in one age which was not in a foregoing , then a church may deliver that as a matter of faith at one time , which was never accounted so before : by which means the present church may oblige me to believe that as a matter of faith , which never was so in christs or the apostles times , and so the infallibility on the account of tradition is destroyed . to all which mr. s. gives a very easie answer : viz. that they do not hold any disparate or unimplyed points of faith ; but such as are involved and implyed in the main point . this is more easily said then understood : for if these be implyed in the former , how can there come a new obligation to believe them ? for to take his own instance , will any man in his senses say , that he that believes , homo est animal rationale , doth not believe homo est animal ? and this he makes choice of as an example how one point of faith may be involved in another so as to receive a distinct obligation to believe it . i grant that homo est animal is involved in the other , but he that shall say , that after he hath assented to that proposition , homo est animal rationale , he may be capable of a new obligation to believe the former which is involved in this , it may be justly questioned whether such a one as to himself can truly say , homo est animal rationale or no. but after such rare subtilties , he doth very well to tell me , that i ought to consider what logick tells us , that the conclusion is in the premises , which reflection ( in his courtlike expression ) he saith will much unblunder my thoughts . but let the conclusion be as long as it will in the premises , will any man in his wits say , that he that believes the truth of the premises is not thereby bound to believe the conclusion ? and the more the one is involved in the other , the less is it possible to make the obligation to believe them distinct . and it is hard for me to believe , that this is a way to unblunder my thoughts , when i see what horrible confusion such expressions argue in his own . let the church then clear her thoughts never so much , yet all this cannot amount to a distinct obligation to believe those things which were involved before , but to a more explicit declaring them for the churches peace and satisfaction . the only conclusion then involved in these premises is , that if some things may be de fide in one age which were not in another , then the present age may believe otherwise then the precedent did . and if this doctrine be held in the church of rome , nothing can be more evident , then that mr. s's . first principle of controversie , is far from being the doctrine of the roman church : which was the thing to be proved . my second chief argument against this way of oral tradition was , that it had not been owned in all ages of the christian church ; to manifest which , i enquired into the reason of the obligation in any age of the church to believe and practise just as the precedent did . mr. s. rejoyces in that confession of mine , that the only thing to be proved in this case is , that every age of the church and all persons in it looked on themselves as obliged not to vary in any thing from the doctrine and practise of the precedent age . and i there offer the choice of three wayes to prove it , reason , testimony or tradition ; he tells me , he accepts the way of reason ; yet quarrels with me for pressing for a demonstrative medium to prove it , when yet mr. s. seldome speaks unde●●he rate of demonstrations . but he thereby notes the unconsonancy of my carriage ; wherein i wonder ? that i should desire them to perform their promise , viz. to give us demonstrations for the grounds of faith ? but he saith withal , he will yield me the honour of professing i have no demonstration but probability for the ground of mine , and he make● this serious protestation for himself , tha● he should esteem himself very dishonest , did he assert and press on others an● argument for the ground of his faith which he judged not evident , that is demonstrative . what is it these men mean , when they cry up their own way for demonstrative , and say that we build ●ur faith meerly on probabilities ? do ●hey say that religion is capable of ●rict and rigorous demonstration ? if 〈◊〉 , let them demonstrate the being of ●od and immortality of the soul with as ●uch evidence , as that the three angles ●f a triangle are equal to two right angles . ●nd it is strange if they think particu●r problems in religion are more capa●le of demonstration then those theorems●n ●n which they are built . but by all he enquiry i can make , all the diffe●ence between us is , that mr. s. will ●ave that called a demonstration , which ● scarce a probability , and we call tha● ●fficient reason , which any wise man ●ay safely rely on in matters of religi●n . in the mean time how much do ●e suffer by our modesty , that because ●e speak not as big as mr. s. does , we ●ust be censured presently to have no●hing but probabilities for our faith ? are ●hose bare probabilities which leave no ●uspicion of doubt behind them ? and ●uch we freely assert the grounds of ●ur religion to do ; i. e. i assert that we have the highest actual certainty of the truth of our religion which the mind of any reasonable man can desire , and if mr. s's . demonstrations can do any more then this , let him tell us what it is . for my part i know nothing higher in the mind of man then a certain assent , and if i did not think there was the greatest ground in religion for that , i abhorr dissimulation so much that i should leave off perswading men to embrace it . and if any men have made us shye of the word demonstration and infallibility , they are such men as mr. s. have done it , who talk of these things when their arguments fall beneath some of the remotest probabilities we insist on . nay if there be any force in his demonstration as to matters of fact , it hath been used by us long before his book saw the light . but we love to give the true names to things , and not to lose our credit with all intelligent persons , by playing mountebanks in religion , crying 〈◊〉 those things for infallible cures which an ordinary capacity may discern the insufficiency of . but was it any thin● but justice and reason in me to expe●● and call for a demonstration from them who talk of nothing under it ? and therefore i said , that it was impossible to demonstrate this way of oral tradition , unless it were proved impossible for men not to think themselves obliged to believe and do all just as their predecessors did . for where the contrary is not only possible , but easily supposable , ●s that men may believe those things as new articles of faith which are defined by pope and council , i wonder how mr. s. will demonstrate that men must ●ook on themselves as obliged to be●●eve just as their predecessors did ? for i had thought demonstrations had ●ever place in contingent propositions ; but it seems mr. s. who tells me , logick will unblunder my thoughts , in●ends to make a new one for me . and ● assure you so he had need , before i ●hall ever call his arguments demon●trations : and although he thinks him●elf very honest in calling them so , yet ● should think him much wiser if he did not . but before i come to the particular debate of these things , i freely tell him , that i grant all he requests ; ● shall take along with me the nature of the matter in hand , the doctrines an● practises spoken of , the manner of delivering them , the necessary circumstance● which give weight to both ; yet for al● these , i cannot look on his way as demonstrative . and that both our meanings may be better understood , it i● very necessary the reader should hav● a true account of the state of the question between us . and if he will believe me , i never intended to disput● with him or any one else , whether me● were bound to wear their clothes , or buil● houses , or manage estates just as thei● predecessors did , but whether eve● age is obliged to believe and practi● just as the precedent did by vertue o● meer oral tradition ; for about that i● all the controversie between us . i d● not deny but that a succeeding ag● may look on it self as bound to believe what the precedent did ; bu● whether that obligation doth ari● purely from the delivery of that doctrine by the precedent in the way o● of tradition , is the thing in dispute between us . for in case the ground ● faith be wholly the written word conveyed from age to age , i deny not but an obligation to believe descends with the doctrine to every succeeding age . but that which mr. s. is to prove is , that abstractly from scripture every age is absolutely bound to believe just as the precedent did , without any enquiry whether that doctrine doth agree with scriptures or no , but that he is therefore bound to believe all which is proposed to him , because it was the doctrine of the immediately preceding age . and this is that which i deny , and desire mr. s. to prove for which he first gives us a large instance in historical matters , and then comes to the matters of christian saith . his instance is , in alexanders conquest of asia , as to which he saith , that the memory of it is fresh and lively , though some thousand years since . and that the universal and strong perswasion of this matter of fact was not caused by books , as curtius his history , but by humane tradition : that the continuance of this perswasion was the notoriety of the fact to the then livers which obliged them to relate it to their posterity , and that this testifying by the fore-fathers was that which obliged posterity to believe things as true , because there could be no imaginable motive why the whole world should conspire to deceive them , or be deceivable in their sensations : on which principle it passed to the next age , and so came down by way of tradition to our dayes : and the obligation to believe in every age depended upon this that the senses of the first could not be deceived ; and having this security in every age that no one would conspire to deceive the next ; it followes that no age could say a former age testified so , unless it did so ; therefore , saith he , it follows demonstratively that it was testified ; and so the descendents in every age to the very end of the world have the same obligation to believe their immediate fore-fathers saying it was testified by theirs , and so to the very first who were witnesses of his actions . this is the substance of what he more largely discourses in several paragraphs ; which when he hath done , he tells me , he expects what i will reply to this discourse . not to frustrate therefore his expectation , and in order to the readers satisfaction , we are to consider that in the present case there are two distinct questions to be resolved . 1. how a matter of fact evident to the world comes to be conveyed to posterity ? 2. by what means a compleat history of all passages relating to it may be conveyed ? as 〈◊〉 the first , i grant that a fact so noto●us as alexanders conquest of asia might have been preserved by humane tradition , and conveyed in a certain way from one age to another . but if we enquire into that which is alone proper to our question , viz. by what means we may judge what is true and false as to the particulars of that conquest , then i deny that bare tradition is to be relyed on in this case . for the certainty of conveyance of all particulars doth depend not upon the bare veracity , but the capacity and skill of communicating from one age to another . for which one would think we need no clearer evidence then the considerations of the different account of former times in the several nations of the world . for who can imagine , but the barbarous nations were as unwilling to deceive their posterity as any other ? yet we see a vast difference in the histories of former ages among them , and more civilized people . and i wish mr. s. would rather have instanced in some history which had been preserved meerly by tradition and not in such a one , which , if any other , hath been most carefully recorded and propagated to posterity . if mr. s. would have undertaken to have told us who they were that first peopled america , and srom what place they came by the tradition of the present inhabitants , and what famous actions had been done there in former ages , we might have thought indeed that sole tradition had been a very safe way to convey matters of fact from one age to another . but since all mr. s's . arguments will hold as well for the s●ythians and americans and the most barbarous nations , as the most civil and polite ; what reason can mr. s. give why there is not among them as certain an account of former ages , as among the greeks and romans ? were not their senses , who saw those matters of fact , as uncapable of being d●ceived as others ? was not every a● among them as un●illing to deceive their posterity as elswhere ? yet notwithstanding the force of mr. ss. demonstration , we see for want of letters how grosly ignorant they are of what was done before them . and if this principle were true , why have we not as true an account of the eldest ages of the world , as of any other ? nay , why were letters invented , and writing ever used , if tradition had been found so infallible ? but it is one thing superficially to discourse what is impossible should be otherwise , and another to consider what really hath been in the world . doth not the constant ●xperience of all times prove that where any history hath not been timely recorded , it hath been soon corrupted by notorious ●alsities , or obscured by fabulous reports ? as we see among our selves what difference there is in point of certainty between the several stories of k. arthur and william the conqueror ; what will mr. s. say , that these who lived in k. arthurs time could not know what he did ; or that they conspired to deceive their posterity ? but if tradition be so infallible , why have we not the ancient story of britain as exact as the modern ? if mr. s. will impute it to the peoples ignorance , want of letters , frequ●nt conquests by other nations , and succeeding barbarism , he may easi●y find how many wayes there are for matters of fact to be soon lost or corrupted , when they have not been diligently preserved by authentick records ; and that without one age conspiring to deceive another . but notwithstanding mr. s's . confidence , i cannot think it possible for mr. s. to believe that we should have had as true an account of alexander● conquest of asia , if arrian , curtius , o● plutarch had never writ his story , a● we have now . yet this he must asse● by vertue of his principles . and he that can believe that , i wonder he should scruple believing the popes infallibility ; for certainly no principle o● the jesuites is more wild and absurd then this is . besides , i admire how it came into mr. s's . head to think , no error could come into history unless o● age conspired to deceive another , when we find no age agreed in the present matters of fact which are done in it , as to the grounds and particulars of them . to give mr. s. an instance home to his purpose , in the late council of trent ; we see already what different representations there are made of it in so little a time as hath already passed since the sitting of it . one , though he had all the advantages imaginable of knowing all proceedings in it , living at the same time , conversing with the persons present at it , having the memoires and records of the secretaries themselves , yet his story is since endeavoured to be blasted by a great person of the roman church as fictitious and partial . we see then it is at least supposed that interest and prejudice may have a great hand in abusing the world in matter of story , though one-age never agree to deceive another . and in stead of being perswaded by mr. s's . demonstrations , i am still of the mind , that we have no sufsicient security of the truth of any story , which was not written while those persons were in being who were able to contradict the errors of it . however i deny not but some notorious matters of fact , such as alexanders bare conquest of asia , might by the visible effects of it be preserved both in asia and greece for a long time . but if we come to enquire particularly whether this or that was done by him in his conquest , which is alone pertinent to our purpose , we have no security at all from tradition , but only from the most authentick records of that story . and by this , i hope mr. s. will have cause to thank me for unblundering his thoughts ( his own civil expression ) and shewing him how errors may come into a story without one age conspiring to deceive the next ; and what a vast difference there is between preserving a bare matter of fact , and all the particulars relating to it . and hereby he may easily see how far the obligation extends in believing the report of former ages . for there can be no obligation to believe any further then there is evidence of truth in the matter we are obliged to . if then there be not only a possibility but a very great probability of mistakes and errors in matters of fact , i pray what obligation doth there lye upon men absolutely to believe what is delivered by the preceding age ? but to put an issue to this controversie , let mr. s. examine himself , and try if he can name one story that was never written , which was ever certainly popagated from one age to another by meer oral tradition ; and if he cannot , he may thereby see how little real force his argument hath in the world . for all the force of tradition lies in an unquestionable conveyance of those books , which contain in them the true reports of the actions of the times they were written in . but can mr. s. think , that if the roman history had never been written , it had been possible for us to have known what was done under the kings and consuls as now we do ? yet if his principle holds , this necessarily follows ; for those of that age could not but know them , and no age since could conspire to deceive the next . and from hence , the most useful consequence of all is that mr. s. might have writ a history from the beginning of the world to this day , with a full relation of all particulars , if there had never been any book written in the world before . and doth not mr. s. deserve immortal credit for so rare an invention as this is , and all built on nothing short of demonstrations : but mr. s. very prudently foresees , what it is i must be forced to recurre to , viz. that being baffled with his former demonstration , i have no other shift to betake my self to , but to say the case is different between histories and points of faith . and therefore to bring his business home , he applyes it at large to the delivery of the christian faith , which that he might do in more ample sort , he very finely descants on the old verse , quis , quid , ubi , &c. containing the circumstances of human actions , and from every one of them derives arguments for the infallibility of oral tradition : which briefly and in plain english may be summed up thus ; since the author of this doctrine was the son of god , the doctrine it self so excellent , and delivered in so publick a manner , in the most convincing way by miracles and good living , and for so good an end as to save mens souls , and that by writing it in mens hearts and testified to others ; and all this at a time when men might judge of the miracles and motives for believing it ; therefore since in all these respects it was imcomparably beyond the story of alexanders conquests , it follows that in a manner infinitely greater must the obligation be to believe christs doctrine , than alexanders or william the conquerours victories , or any history of the like nature whatsoever . all which i freely grant , but cannot yet see how from thence it follows that oral tradition is the only rule of faith , or the means whereby we are to judge what is the doctrine of christ , and what not . those arguments i confess prove that the christians of the first age were highly concerned to enquire into the truth of these things , and that they had the greatest reason imaginable to believe them ; and that it is not possible to conceive that they should not endeavour to propagate so excellent a doctrine and of so high concernment to the world . but the question is , whether abstractly from the books written in the first age of the christian church , there is so much infallibility in the oral tradition of every age , that nothing could be embraced for christs doctrine which was not and consequently whether every age were bound to believe absolutely what was delivered it by the precedent for the doctrine of christ ? mr. s. therefore puts himself to a needless task of proving that every age was bound to believe the doctrine of christ , which i never questioned ; but the dispute is , whether every age be bound on the account of oral tradition to believe what is delivered by the precedent for christs doctrine . but it is to be observed all along how carefully mr. s. avoids mentioning the written books of the new testament ; because he knew all his game about oral tradition would be quite spoiled by a true stating the matter of fact in the first ages of the christian church . i hope he will not be angry with me , for asking him that question about the scripture , which he asks me about the council of trent ; did he never hear of such a thing as the scripture ? or is it so hard to find it ? but if he hath heard of it , i intreat him to resolve me these questions . 1. whether he doth not believe that the books of the new testament were written at such a time , when the mat●ers of fact therein recorded , were ca●able of being throughly examined ? which he cannot deny upon his own ●rinciple ; for tradition being then in●allible as to the doctrine of christ , the writers of these books cannot be con●eived to deliver it amiss , unless they ●esolved to contradict the present tradition of the church , which if they had done , those books could never have found any reception among christians . if tradition then convey the doctrine of christ infallibly , these books must convey it infallibly , because they contain in them the infallible tradition of the first age of the christian church : and were written at that time when many persons living had been able to disprove any thing contained therein repugnant to truth . and that these books were written by those persons whose names they bear , i appeal to mr. s's . own rule , tradition ; for if that be infallible in any thing , it must be in this ; and if one age could conspire to deceive another in a matter of such concernment , what security can be had , that it may not do so in all other things ? 2. whether he believes that those whose intention was to write an account of the life , actions and doctrine of christ , did leave any thing out of their books which did relate to them as of concernment for us to believe ? for upon mr. s's principles , any one may easily know what the tradition of the church is ; and especially such certainly who were either present themselves at the matters of fact , or heard them from those who were ; and what satisfaction can any one desire greater then this ? but the question is , whether this testimony were not more safely deposited in the church to be conveyed by word of mouth , then it could be by being committed to writing by such who were eye and ear-witnesses o● the actions and doctrine of christ ? upon which i advance some further queries . 3. if oral tradition were the more certain way , why was anything written at all ? it may be mr. s. will tell us , for moral instructions , and to give precepts of good life ; bu● then why may not these be as infallib● conv●yed by tradition as doctrines of faith ? and why then were any matters of fact and points of faith inserted in the books of the new testament ? by which it certainly appears that the intention of writing them was to preserve them to posterity . let mr. s. tell me whether it was consistent with the wisdom of men , much less with the wisdom of an infinite being to imploy men to do that , which might be far better done another way , and when it is done can give no satisfaction to the minds of men ? 4. whether those things which are capable of being understood when they are spoken , cease to be so when they are written ? for mr. s. seems to understand those terms of a living voice , and dead letters in a very strict and rigorous manner ; as though the sense were only quick when spoken , and became buried in dead letters . but mr. s. seems with the sagacious indian to admire how it is possible for dead letters and unsenc'd characters to express mens meanings as well as words . it cannot enter into mr. s's . apprehension how 24. letters by their various disposition can express matters of faith ? and yet to increa● the wonder , he writes about matte● of faith , while he is proving that matters of faith cannot be conveyed b● writing . so that mr. s's . own writing is the best demonstration against himself ; and he confutes his own sophistr● with his fingers , as diogenes did zeno● by his motion . for doth mr. s. hop● to perswade men that tradition is ● rule of faith by his book or not ? i● not , to what purpose doth he write ● if he doth , then it is to be hoped so● matters of faith may be intelligibly conveyed by writing ; especially if mr. s. doth it ; but by no means we are t● believe that ever the spirit of god ca● do it . for whatever is written by me● assisted by that , is according to him bu● a heap of dead letters , and insignifican● characters ; when mr. s. the mean while is full of sense and de●onstration . happy man that can thus out-do in●nite wisdom , and write far beyond either prophets or apostles ! but if he will condescend so far as to allow that to inspired persons which he confidently believes of himself , viz. that he can write a book full of sense , and that any ordinary capacity may apprehend the design of it , our controversie is at an end . for then matters of faith may be intelligibly and certainly conveyed to posterity by the books of scripture ; and if so , there will be no need of any recourse to oral tradition . 5. if the books of s●ripture did not certainly and intelligibly convey all matters of faith , what made them be received with so much veneration in the first ages of the christian church ? which were best able to judge of the truth of the matters contained ●n them , and the usefulness of the books themselves . and therein we still find that appeals were made to them , that they thought themselves concerned to vindicate them against all objections of heathens and others ; and the resolution of faith was made into them , and not tradition , as i have already manifested , and must not repeat . 6. whether it be in the least credible , since the books of scripture were supposed to contain the doctrines of faith , that every age of the church should look on it self as obliged absolutely to believe the doctrine of the precedent by vertue of an oral tradition ? for since they resolved their faith into the written books , how is it possible they should believe on the account of an oral tradition ? although then the apostles did deliver the doctrine of christ to all their disciples ; yet since the records of it were embraced in the church , men judged of the truth or falsehood of doctrines , by the conveniency or repugnancy of them to what was contained in those books . by which we understand that the obligation to believe what was taught by the precedent age , did not arise from the oral tradition of it , but by the satisfaction of the present age , that the doctrine delivered by it was the same with that contained in s●ripture . it is time now to return to mr. s. who proceeds still to manifest this obligation in posterity to believe what was delivered as matter of faith , by the precedent age of the church ; but the force of all is the same still ; viz. that otherwise one age must conspire to deceive the next . but the inconsequence of that , i have fully shewed already , unless he demonstrates it impossible for errors to come in any other way : for if we reduce the substance of what he saith to a syllogistical form , it comes to this ; where there is no possibility of error , there is an absolute obligation to faith ; but there is no possibility of error in the tradition of any age of the church . ergo in every age there is an absolute obligation to believe the tradition of the present church . the minor he thus proves . if no age of the church can be ignorant of what the precedent taught , or conspire to deceive the next , then there is no possibility of error coming into the tradition of the church in any age ; but the antecedent is true , and therefore the consequent . now who sees not that the force of all this , lyes not in proving the minor proposition , or that no age could conspire to deceive another ? but the consequence , viz. that no error can come into a church , but by a general mistake in one whole age , or the general imposture of it , which we utterly deny : and have shewed him already the falsness of it from his own concessions . and i might more largely shew it from those doctrin●s or opinions which they themselves acknowledge to have come into their church without any such general mistake or imposture , as the doctrines of papal insallibility , and the common belief of purgatory . the very same way that mr. white and mr. s. will shew us how these came in , we will shew him how many others came in as erroneous and scandalous as those are . for whether they account these matters of faith or no , it is certain many among them do , and that the far greatest number , who assert and believe them to be the doctrine of their church too . if therefore these might come in without one age mistaking or deceiving the next , why might not all those come in the same way which we ●harge upon them as the errors of their church ? and in the same manner that corrupt doctrines come in , may corrupt practises too , since these , as he saith , spring srom the other . he might therefore have saved himself the trouble of finding out how an acute wit , or great scholar would discover the weakness of this way . for without pretending to be either of these , i have found out another way of attaquing it , then mr. s. looked for : viz. from his own principles and concessions ; shewing how errors might come into a church , without a total deception or conspiracy in any one age . which if it be true , he cannot bind me to believe what ever he tells me the present church delivers , unless he can prove that this never came into the church as a speculation or private opinion , and from thence by degrees hath come to be accounted a point of faith . therefore his way of proof is now quite altered , and he cannot say we are bound to believe whatever the present church delivers ; for that which he calls the present church , may have admitted speculations and private opinions into doctrines of faith ; but he must first prove such doctrines delivered by christ or his apostles , and that from his time down to our age they have been received by the whole church for matters of faith ; and when he hath done this , as to any of the points in controversie between us , i will promise him to be his proselyte . but he ought still to remember that he is not to prove it impossible for one whole age to conspire to deceive the next ; but that supposing that , it is impossible for any errors to come into the tradition of the church . let us now see what mr. s. objects against those words i then used , against the demonstrating this way ; it is hard to conceive what reason should inforce it but such as proves the impossibility of the contrary ; and they have understandings of another mould from others who can conceive it impossible men should not think themselves obliged to believe and do all just as their predecessors . and whatever mr. s. sayes to the contrary , i cannot yet see , but that therein i argued from the very nature and constitution of the thing . for that which ● looked for , was a demonstration , which i supposed could not be unless the impossibility of the contrary were demonstrated . but if it be possible , for men , christians , nay romanists to believe on other accounts then the tradition of the precedent age , i pray what demonstration can there be , that men must think themselves obliged to believe and do all just as their predecessors did ? surely if mr. s's . fancy had not been very extravagant , he could never have thought here of mens being obliged to cut their beards , or wear such garters and hat-bands as their fore-fathers did . for do i not mention believing first and then doing ? by which it were easie to apprehend , that i meant matters of faith , and such practises as flow from them . neither was there any such crafty and sophistical dealing as he charges me with ; for i am content his doctrine be taken in his own terms ; and i have now given a larger and fuller account why i am far from being convinced by the way he hath used for resolving faith . passing by therefore his challenge , which i accept of , as long as he holds to the weapon of reason and civility , i come to consider his last enquiry , why i should come to doubt of such an obligation in posterity to believe their ancestors in matters of faith ; and he judiciously resolves it into a strange distortion of human nature , but such as it seems , is the proper effect of the protestants temper , which is , saith he , to chuse every one his faith , by his private judgement or wit working upon disputable words . which as far as we own it , is , not to believe what we see no ground for ; and if this be such a distortion of humane nature , i envy not mr. s's . uprightness and perfection . if he means that we build our faith on our private judgements in opposition to scripture or the universal tradition of the church in all ages , let him prove it evidently in one particular , and i engage for my self and all true protestants , we will renounce the belief of it . if he hath any thing further to object against the grounds of our religion , he knows where to attaque me ; let him undertake the whole ; or else acknowledge it a most unreasonable thing thus to charge falsities upon us , and then say we have nothing else to say for our selves . we pretend not to chuse our faith , but heartily embrace whatever appears to have been delivered by christ or his apostles ; but we know the church of rome too well to believe all which she would impose upon us , and are loth to have her chuse our religion for us , since we know she hath chosen so ill for her self . but if mr. s. will not believe me in saying thus , what reason have i to believe him in saying otherwise ? such general charges then signifie nothing , but every one must judge according to the reason on both sides . i now come to the last part of my task ; which is to shew , that this way is repugnant to common sense and experience , and that the church of rome hath apparently altered from what was the belief of former ages . to which purpose my words are : it is to no purpose to prove the impossibility of motion when i see men move ; no more is it to prove that no age of the church could vary from the preceding , when we can evidently prove that they have done it . and therefore this argument is intended only to catch easie minds that care not for a search into the history of the several ages of the church , but had rather sit down with a superficial subtilty , then spend time in further enquiries . but two things mr. s. tells me , are required ere i can see that their faith varies from the former . first to see what their church holds now , and then to see what the former church held before ; and he kindly tells me , if he sees any thing , i see neither well . it seems i want mr. s's . spectacles of oral tradition to see with ; but as yet i have no cause to complain of the want of them , but ● see much better without them , the● with them . he tells me , i cannot see what their present church holds , an● therefore i cannot assure any what w● held before ; because if i renounce tradition i take away all means of knowing . the reason why i cannot candidly see ( as he phrases it ) what their church holds now , is , because i cannot distinguish between faith and its explication , some schoolmen and the church . by which it seems it is impossible for me to know what their church holds concerning invocation of saints , worship of images , communion in one kind ; for those are the points i there mention , wherein it is evident that the church of rome hath receded from the doctrine and practise of the primitive church . or are these only the opinions and practises of some schoolmen among them , and not the doctrine and practise of their church ? but that we might come to some fuller state of these controversies , i wish m. s. would settle some sure way whereby we might know distinctly what are the doctrines and practises of their church . if the council of trent and roman-catechism , be said to be the rule of doctrine , i desire no other ; so that those may be interpreted by practises universally allowed among them . as when that council only defined that due honour be given to saints , the general practise of that church may tell us what they mean by that due honour ; and if that be not fair , i know not what is . but i see all the shift mr. s. hath , is , when he is pinched , . to say those are the opinions of schoolmen and private speculators , and not the doctrine of their church . and if such shifts as these are , must serve the turn , i should wonder if ever he be to seek for an answer . but the shortest answer of all would be that none but those of their church can know what she holds ; and therefore it is to no purpose for protestants to write against her : or it may be , that none but mr. s. and one or two more can tell ; for many among them say , those are the doctrines of their church which they deny to be . so that except mr. white and mr. s. and some very few demonstrators more , all the rest are schoolmen , private opinators , and not to be relyed on . but i cannot see what their church held formerly neither . no wonder at all of that ; for if i cannot see an object so near me as the present church , how can it be expected i should see one so much further off as the doctrine of former ages ? and his reason is so strong as may well perswade me out of one at least of my five senses . for , saith he , if i question tradition , i question whether there be any doctrine delivered , and so any fathers . and is not this argued like a demonstrator ? first he supposes there never was any way used in the world but oral tradition , and then strongly infers , if i deny that , i can know nothing . but i can yet hardly perswade my self that the fathers only sate in chimney corners teaching their children by word of mouth , and charging them to be sure to do so to theirs ; but as they loved preserving the doctrine of faith , they should have a great care never to write down a word of it . but why i wonder , should mr. s. think that if i do not allow of ●ral tradition , i must needs question whether there were any fathers ? i had thought i might have known there had ●een fathers by their children ; i mean ●he books they left behind them . but if ●ll mr. s. pleads for be only this , that ●o books can be certainly conveyed ●ithout tradition , he disputes with●ut an adversary ; but as i never op●ose this , so i am sure it doth him lite service . it is then from the books ●f the fathers that i find what the sense ●f the church of their age was , and ●om thence i have shewed how vastly ●ifferent the opinions and practises of ●e roman church are from those of ●e primitive . although then i may ●ot think my self obliged to believe ●ll that the present church delivers for ●atter of faith ; yet i hope i may find ●hat the opinions and practise of the ●ormer church were by the records ●hat are left of it ; and the reason ●hy i cannot think any one obliged ●o believe what every age of the ●hurch delivers , is , because i think no man obliged to believe contradictions ; and i see the opinions and practises of several ages apparently contrary to each other . well , but i call this way a superficial subtilty : and so i think it still ; so little have mr. s's . demonstrations wrought upon me . but , saith he , is that which is wholly built on the nature of things superficial ? no ; but that which pretends to be so built , may . and of that nature i have shewed thi● way to be , and not the former . bu● that i may not think him superficia● as well as his way , he puts a profound question to me , what do i think controversie is ? and that he may the better let me know what it is , he answers himself . i deal plainly with you , saith he ; you may take it to be an a● of talking , and i think you do so , though you will not profess it ; but i take it to be a noble science . but to let him see that i will deal as plainly with him , as he doth with me , i will profess it , that i not only think controversie as usually managed , but some mens way of demonstrating ( mr. s. may easily know whom i mean ) to be a meer art of ●alking , and nothing else . but he takes ●t to be a noble science : yes doubtless , ●f mr. s. manage it , and he be the ●udge of it himself . his meaning i ●uppose is , by his following words , ●hat be goes upon certain principles , and ●e do not . we have already seen how ●ertain his principles have been , and i ●hould be somewhat ashamed of my ●eligion if i had no better . but what ●ur rule of faith is , hath been so amply ●iscoursed already by you , and that in ●r . s's . clearing method , that nothing ● left for me to do , but to touch at ●hat remains , and concludes this an●er . i had the better to illustrate ●he weakness of that argument from ●ral tradition , brought an instance in ●hat case parallel , viz. that if one ages ●elivering to another would prove that ●e faith of christ was in every age ●nalterable , because no age did testifie ●ny such alteration to be in it ; by ●he same argument the world might be ●roved eternal , because no age did ●ver testifie to another , that the world ●as ever otherwise then it is . so that ●f oral tradition were only to be relied on , there could be no evidence given of the worlds being ever otherwise then it is , and consequently the world must be believed to have been alwayes what we see it is . this a● far as i can apprehend , is a clear and distinct ratiocination , and purposely designed to prove that we must admit o● other rules to judge of alterations i● the church by besides oral tradition ▪ but mr. s. ( in his own expression ) strangely roving from the mark i aime● at , professes there is not a tittle in i● parallel to his medium , nay that he never saw in his life more absurdities couche● in fewer words . but i must take al● patiently from a man who still perche● on the specifical nature of things and never flags below the sphere of science . yet by his good leave , he either apprehends not , or wilfully mistakes my meaning : for my argument doth no● proceed upon the belief of the world● eternity , which in his answer he run● wholly upon as far as eighthly and lastly but upon the evidence of oral tradition as to no discernable alteration in an● age of it . for the question between us● is , whether in matters of alteration i● the fa● or practice of the church we are bound to rely only on the testimony of oral tradition ; so that if no age can be instanced in wherein any alteration was made , and this delivered by that age , then we are bound to believe there hath been no alteraration since christ and the apostles times : now i say , if this ●old good , i will prove the world eternal by the same argument ; taking this for our principle , that we are bound to rely only on oral tradition in the case , originally derived from the matter of fact seen by those of the first age ; for that which never was otherwise then it is , is eternal ; but we cannot know by oral tradition that the world ever was otherwise then it is : for no age of the world can be instanced in , wherein we have any testimony of any alteration that was in it ▪ either then we must believe that the world ever was what it is , i. e. eternal ; or else we must say , that we are not to rely barely on oral tradition in this case , but we must judge whether the world were made or no , by other mediums of scripture and reason . and this was all which i aimed at , viz. to shew that where there is no evidence from oral tradition , yet if there be scripture and reason , there is sufficient ground for our faith to stand upon . and so i apply it to the present case ; though we could not prove barely from the tradition of any one age that there had been any alteration in the faith or practice of the church ; yet if i can prove that there hath been such from scripture and reason , this is sufficient for me to believe it . and now i dare appeal to the indifferent reader , ●ether thi● be so full of absurdities , or it b● such a rambling chimerical argumen● ( as he calls it ) no two pieces ● which hang together with themselves 〈◊〉 any thing else . which being expressions of as great modesty as science ▪ i am content mr. s. should bear away the honour of them and his demo●strations together . the last thing he quarrels wit● me for , is , that i say , if we can ●v dently prove that there have been al● rations in the church , then it is to ● purpose to prove that impossible which we see actually done . and this appears not only because the scripture supposes a degeneracy in the christian church , which could never be , if every age of the church did insa●libly believe and practise as the precedent up to christs time did : but because we can produce clear evidence that some things are delivered by the present church which must be brought in by some age since the time of christ. for which i refer the reader to what i had said about communion in one kind , invocation of saints , and worship of images : in all which , i say , i had proved evidently that they were not in use in some ages of the christian church ; and it is as evident that these are delivered by the present church , and therefore this principle must needs be false . in answer to this , mr. s. wishes , i would tell him first what evidence means , whether a strong fancy or a demonstration ? i mean that which is enough to perswade a wise man who judges according to the clearest reason , which i am sure is more then ever his demonstrations will do . but it is a pleasant spectacle to see how mr. s. layes about him at my saying that the scripture supposes a degeneracy in the christian church . incomparably argued ! saith he ; why , see we not the place ? does it evidently speak of faith or manners , the universal church or particular persons ? but be it in faith , be it universal , does it suppose this degeneracy already past , which is only proper to your purpose , or yet to come ? that is , does it say there must be a total apostacy in faith before the year 1664. ? alas he had forgot this . most incomparably answered ! for if the degeneracy be in 1665. or any years a●ter , what becomes of m. s's . d●monstration then , that no errors could come into the church ? but it seems his demonstration holds but till 1664. and i easily believe an other year will never believe the truth of it . but if such a thing as a degeneracy be possible , how then stands the infallibility of tradition ? when there can be no degeneracy without falling from the doctrine and practices of christ and his apostles . but that such a degeneracy hath already been in that which calls it self the catholick church , and that both in faith and manners , i shall referr mr. s. to the learned author of the late idea of antichristianism , and synopsis prophetica , where he may find enough to perswade him that his demonstration was far from holding so long as 1664. and now i leave the reader to judge whether the foregoing evidences against the infallibility of oral tradition , or mr. s's . demonstrations have the greater force of reason in them . and if he will not stoop so far from the height of his perch as to take notice of what i have elsewhere said , i am resolved to let him see i am not at all concerned about it : i begin to understand him so well by this appendix , that i can give my self a reasonable account why he thought it not sit to meddle with any other part of my book . but if mr. s. be resolved not to answer any of the testimonies i there produce , unless i single them out and print them at the end of this answer , ( i. e. remove them from that evidence which attends them in the series of the discourse ) i can only say , he is the most imperious answerer i have met with , who is resolved never to deal with an adversary , but on his own unreasonable terms . thus , heartily wishing mr. s's . science as great as his opinion of it , and a good effect of our endeavours to promote the one , by removing the other , i am sir , your affectionate friend and servant , edward stillingfleet . london . june 28. finis . postscript . sir , since the dispatch of the former papers , i have met with another treatise , wherein i find my self concerned , written by the author of fiat lux , the title whereof is diaphanta : i am afraid the title affrights you ; for i assure you it is the most formidable thing in his whole book . but the man is a very modest man and hugely different from mr. s's . humor ; for he is so far from offering to demonstrate the grounds of faith ; that all he pretends to in the title of his book , i● to excuse catholick religion against the opposition of several adversaries . what fault i pray hath the catholick religion committed , that it must now come to be excused inst●ad of being defended ? but when i look into that part which concerns my self , i presently understand the meaning of it , which is not to excuse catholick religion , but themselves , for not being able to defend it . for he very ingenuously tells us , that faith is firm and constant , though all his talk for it be miserably weak : i. e. he is sure they have an excellent religion , though he knows not what to say for it ; and their faith is a very good faith , but it hath not yet had the good fortune to be understood by them . for he acknowledges , that as often as they dispute , they are beyond the business , ( so may any one believe , who reads their late books , ) which is in effect to say , there is no way left of disputing any longer with adversaries about their faith ; only they must believe it stoutly themselves ; but it is to no purpose to offer to defend it . nay , it doth their faith a great deal of mischief ; for , saith he , in reading controversies we see not so much the nature of the faith , as the wit of him who opposes or defends it . from whence we may easily gather what unspeakable mischief they do their cause by writing for it . by which expressions we may guess , at what a low ebbe the defence of their faith is among them : for the way now taken to defend it , is by disowning the defenders of it , and by saying , that they only vent their own opinions ; and though we confute them never so much , yet their faith holds good still . was ever a good cause driven to such miserable shifts as these are , especially among those who pretend to wit and learning ? one , he saith , t. c. vents a private opinion of his own , and it is not a pin matter whether it stand or fall ; another , he saith , the same of i. s. a third of j. v. c. and yet for all this , their religion is very firm and sure , and they all at perfect agreement about it . is this the victory over me mr. s. mentions to be so easie a thing ? i see that by the same figure mr. s. calls his way of arguing demonstration , running out of the field shall be accounted conquering . for i never saw any person do it more openly then this author does . for he plainly confesses , that his catholick gentleman went quite besides his business , that he built upon indefensible principles , that his theological ratiocination was indeed pretty , but too weak to hold . and are not we hugely too blame , if we do not cry up such mighty conquerors as these are ? truly sir , i expect the very same answer should be returned to your book ; that mr. s's . argument , is a pretty theological ratiocination ; and that your answer is not unwitty : but though that way will not hold , another will. thus when they are beaten off infallibility , they run to tradition : and when they are again beaten off tradition , then back again to infallibility . so that the short of all their answers is , though such a one cannot defend our faith , yet i can ; though i cannot , yet the fai●●s firm and constant still . i wonder what their superiors think of this ●ay of proceeding among them ; we ●hould imagine if they be so weak ●s they say themselves , they had much ●etter keep them from appearing ●broad and exposing their cause so ●idiculously to contempt . but it may ●e , they think their faith is the bet●er as well as their devotion , for their ●gnorance : and that it would be a ●ighty disparagement to their cause , ●or such silly people to be able to de●end it . it is enough for them to ●dmire it themselves , and to say as ●heir common people use to do , though ●hey cannot defend it , yet there are ●ome that can . and although it ●ay be no particular person can do ● , yet their cause is able to defend ● self . but for all that i can see , by ●ck kind of answers , the intention of ●hem , is , to intreat us , not to tri●mph over the weakness of their pre●nt writers , but to wait till the ●ause it self thinks fit to write . and when it doth so , they may expect further answer ; but it were a grea● piece of cruelty for us to hasten the● ruine , who fall so fast before us b● each others pens . finis . errata . page 16. l. 16. for that , r. than : p. 2● l. 8. for errors , r. concerns . books printed for , and sold by henry mortlock at the sign of the phoenix in st. pauls church-yard near the little north door . a rational account of the ●rounds of protestant religion ; being a vindication of the lord-achbishop of canterburyes relation of a conference , &c. from the pretended answer by t. c. wherein the true grounds of faith are cleared , and the false discovered ; the church of england justified from the imputation of schism ; and the most important particular controversies between us and those of the church of rome thoughly examined : by edward stillingflee● b. d. origines sacrae ; or a rational account of the grounds of christian faith , as to the truth and divine authority of the scriptures , and the matters therein contained : by the sam author : the third edition correcte● and amended . irenicum : a weapon-salve for the churches wounds : by the same author . shecinah : a demonstration of the divine presence in places of religious worship : by j. stillingfleet rector of beckingham in lincolnshire . the moral philosophy of the stoicks bain upon the ephesians . knowledge and practice : or a plain discourse of the chief things necessary to be known , believed and practised in order to salvation : by sa● cradock b. d. the second edition corrected and enlarged , &c. the believers duty towards the spirit ; the sprits office towards believers by h. h. b. d. notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61594-e150 §. 1. p. 236. p. 202. §. 2. p. 203. p. 204. § 3. §. 4. p. 205. §. 1. 5. §. 6. p. 203. §. 7. §. 8. p. 05. p. 206. p. 207. §. 9. p. 208. §. 10. de fide & th●ol . tract . 2 , sect . 22. p. 158. ibid. p. 209. tabul . suffrag . p. 318. §. 11. p. 210. §. 12. p. 211. p. 212. p. 213. p. 214. §. 13. p. 216. §. 14. p. 236. p. 217. p. 218. p. 223. §. 15. p. 224. part. 1. chap. ● . §. 16. ● . 229. &c. p. 231. p. 234. p. 235. p. 236. p. 237. §. 17. p. 238. p. 239. §. 18. p ; 240. p. 241. p. 242. p. 243. §. 19. p. 244. notes for div a61594-e14160 p. 210. p. 2●9 . a discourse concerning the unreasonableness of a new separation, on account of the oaths with an answer to the history of passive obedience, so far as relates to them. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1689 approx. 97 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 25 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-05 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61547 wing s5584 estc r16935 13153719 ocm 13153719 98150 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61547) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 98150) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 751:43) a discourse concerning the unreasonableness of a new separation, on account of the oaths with an answer to the history of passive obedience, so far as relates to them. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [4], 42, [2] p. printed for richard chiswell ..., london : 1689. errata: prelim. p. [4]. advertisement: p. [1]-[2] at end. includes bibliographical references. attributed to edward stillingfleet. cf. nuc pre-1956. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng seller, abednego, 1646?-1705. -history of passive obedience since the reformation. dissenters, religious -england. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-03 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2004-03 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a discourse concerning the unreasonableness of a new separation , on account of the oaths . with an answer to the history of passive obedience , so far as relates to them . licens'd , october the 25th . 1689. london , printed for richard chiswell , at the rose and crown in st. paul's church-yard , mdclxxxix . the contents . some general reflections upon the new separation , on account of the oaths p. 1 , &c. of oaths in general p. 3. whether the obligation of the former oaths continues ibid. the general good the measure of obligation p. 5 of the state of slavery p. 6 no such thing as absolute power in nature p. 7 of a state of vsurpation p. 8 allegiance to be measured by the laws ibid. no apostasie from the church of england by taking the present oaths . the history of passive obedience considered , and the force of the whole resolved into three points , viz. p. 9. 1. that the present oath is to the prejudice of a third person 2. that it is contradictory to our former oaths p. 11 3. that the person who had the right hath given no release p. 12 dr. hammond's arguments considered ibid. our constitution considered , and that it is a branch of it for the three estates to limit the succession , and determine the oaths of allegiance p. 13 so it was under the british and saxon government ibid. england a true successive monarchy , and yet reason of state and the publick good was wont to overrule p. 19 and it was lawful to transfer allegiance accordingly ibid. of the norman line p. 20 the case of maud and stephen ibid. of york and lancaster p. 23 the agreement of richard duke of york and hen. vi . ibid. an oath of allegiance , declarative of right or submissive p. 25 of a king in possession , according to our constitution , and the difference between a king de jure & de facto , and an vsurper p. 28 , 29 , 30 of the rise and reason of that difference de facto & de jure p. 32 the case of the lady jane p. 31 the case of k. john and lewis . the homilies considered p. 32 the case of tiberius p. 34 and of the jews under him p. 36 errata . page 8. line 21. read of england . p. 10. l. 24. r. to preserve the right of , &c. p. 18. l. 8. r. tied . p. 27. l. 28. but it may be said , our — p. 36. l. ult . after place r. , p. 37. l. 1. r. as at that — and after state r. , p. 38. l. ult . for can r. such : marg. l. 6. r. confestim . a discourse concerning the unreasonableness of a new separation on account of the oaths . sir , your former letter gave me an account of your own and others dissatisfaction about the oaths ; but your second carries the point a great deal farther ; for therein you tell me , those who are unsatisfied , think themselves bound to separate from the communion of those who have taken them ; and that if ease be not given to the scrupulous , new congregations will be immediately formed ; and therefore you beg my assistance in clearing these points , in order to the preventing a new separation . i was not a little surprized at the reading these passages ; and i soon apprehended the mischievous consequence of a new schism , especially among the members of the church of england : but i can hardly think it possible that those who have expressed so great a sense of the mischief of it in others , should be so ready to fall into it themselves , and that upon the meer account of scruples ; when the difference is only about the resolution of a case of conscience , wherein wise and good men may easily differ : but it cannot be a mark either of wisdom or goodness , to separate from those who do so . some think the oaths lawful , and therefore take them ; others do not , and therefore forbear : but is taking the oaths made a condition of communion with us ? is it required of all who joyn in our worship , at least , to declare , that they think the taking of them to be lawful ? if not , what colour can there be for breaking communion on the account of the oaths ? suppose those who take the oaths are to blame ; if they act according to their consciences therein , what ground can there be of separation from them for so doing , unless it be lawful to separate from all such who follow the dictate of an erroneous conscience ? and so there can be no end of separations , till all men's consciences judge alike : for a man's conscience in his practical judgment concerning moral actions ; and there are so many circumstances , which vary the nature of such moral actions , as oaths , that i do not wonder to see men differ about them ; but i should wonder and lament to see them separate from each other for the sake of such a difference . but , there is a great deal of difference between a tenderness and a sowreness of conscience . there is a natural tenderness in the eye , which makes it apt to be offended with mores ; and in that case it is to be gently dealt with : but when an ill humour falls into it , there seems to be greater tenderness , but from a worse cause ; and then the best way of cure is to sweeten or remove the bad humor which caused it . i cannot imagine why , because some men's consciences are so tender in the point of loyalty , that they cannot take the oaths , that they must be so tender too , as not to joyn in communion with those who do it . this seems to come from another cause , and not from the original scruple : are they afraid of joyning with others , not so tender as themselves ? this is the scruple about mixt communion , which hath been so long exploded among us . what then ? have we hereby changed the standard of our communion , or are there in this case imposed any new terms of communion with us ? how then comes a scruple about the oaths , to lead men to think of a separation ? how come they to make so much conscience of one , and so little of the other ? is a separation from our church become a duty with those , who so lately looked on it as so great a fault in others ? but , i perceive , a tender conscience is like a tender constitution , it is soon put out of order : so much greater care then ought those to have who forsake any worldly advantages for the sake of their consciences , lest that which begun with a scruple , at last end in humour and faction , and the ruine of that church , which they have alwaies pretended to value . but to leave these general reflections , i shall now apply my self to the main point , whether there be any reason for these scruples about the oaths ? for if there be not , it will be granted that there can be no reason for a separation on the account of them . if there be any reason , it must arise , either from the continuing obligation of the former oaths ; or from the nature of the present oaths : and therefore i shall enquire into two things : first , the nature and measure of the obligation of political oaths in general . secondly , the difficulties which relate to our oaths in particular . first , as to the nature and obligation of political oaths ; by which i mean such as have immediate and particular respect to human society , and the government we live under ; as all oaths of allegiance do . and herein the difference lies between those and the common oaths between man and man ; because these are founded on an equality of right , but the other on the general security of human society . in political oaths we must distinguish the particular intention and designs of the persons to whom they are made , from the general end and scope of the oaths themselves . i do not deny but such oaths at first came from the mistrust , which those in power had , of such as were at present in subjection to them . and because the fears of a deity made the strongest impressions on people's minds , therefore they were not contented with bare promises , but they added the solemnities of oaths , that they might look on god as concerned , both as a witness and a judge . but if we search narrowly into this matter , the obligation comes not from the bare oath , but from something antecedent to it , or from the promise contained in it , to which the oath adds greater solemnity on the account of religion . and therefore it is generally resolved by the civilians as well as casuits , that an oath follows the nature of the thing about which it is conversant ; for that , say they , is the principal , and the other is but the accessary ; and the accessary still follows the nature of the principal . even molina , who is noted for singularity in this matter , ( for asserting , that an oath added an obligation of justice besides that of religion ) yet when he comes to explain himself , he founds it on the promise included in the oath , and not in the oath it self : for after an oath taken , such as the obligation was before , such is it after , and the promise contained in an oath admits of the same conditions , which it would have had , if no oath had been joyned with it . if there be a law , which makes a contract void , on the account of the publick good , the adding an oath to such a contract doth not make it valid : as for instance , if the law of a country makes void all clandestine marriages ; if a man marries a woman after such a manner , although this be an obligation of the strictest nature : yet such is the force and power of laws made for a publick good , that although the intention of one person was to tie the other in an indissoluble bond ; yet the law supersedes that obligation , or else it is made to no purpose , at least , so far as it relates to the civil contract , which is as much as is necessary to my purpose ; for , even that hath an obligation of conscience going along with it , which however in this case is superseded for the publick good. i do not deny , that the chief intention of those who require oaths of allegiance to themselves , is to bind men as fast as may be to them ; and there is a personal obligation consequent upon it . but then , i say , that the rule & measure of it , is not to be taken from such intention of the persons , but from the general good , which was chiefly intended in such things . for , there is a common good of humane society , which mankind have an obligation to , antecedent to that obligation they are under to particular persons . for , as magistrates were designed for a general good , so the obligation to them must be understood so , as to be still in subordination to the main end . and it is agreed on all hands , that an antecedent and superiour obligation doth void that which is subsequent and inferiour , when they contradict each other ; else an oath might bind a man to sin ; which no man will assert . therefore whatsoever the intention of the persons was , how strict soever the expressions may be , if the keeping of the oath be really and truly inconsistent with the welfare of a people , in subverting the fundamental laws , which support it ; i do not see how such an oath continus to oblige : for , there is no relation of mankind one to another , but there is some good antecedent , which is the just measure of that obligation they stand in to each other . thus it is between parents and children , husbands and wives , masters and servants ; and therefore it is most reasonable to be so between princes and their subjects . a vow to god is as solemn a thing as an oath ; but our saviour declares , if it hinders that good which children are bound to take care of with respect to parents , it ceaseth to oblige . if parents , instead of regarding the good of their children , do openly design their ruin , and contrive ways to bring it about ; none will say but that they are bound to take care of their own welfare , although such parents may call it obstinate disobedience . for , even the government of parents , as natural as it is , is not absolute , but is limited by reason and the good of their children . and when they are of age , they are allow'd to judge of what concerns their welfare , and ( if it be necessary ) to withdraw from their parents immediate care , but preserving a due reverence and respect to them . the hardest case we can suppose , is that of slavery , i.e. of dominion by force ; but altho' the law of nations allows it , yet it is with such limitations , as still shew , that whatever the condition of men be , with respect to one another , there is still a regard to be had to the benefit of those who are in subjection to others . the only thing which makes a state of slavery reasonable , is , that when men are taken captive by others , they are at their mercy ; and the giving of life is so great a benefit , as cannot be compensated by any thing less than a perpetual service ; and in consideration of it , the master is to afford protection and maintenance . still we see all reasonable subjection is in order to some good of those who are under it ; and without it , as aristotle saith , they are not used as men , but as tools . and it is agreed by the best writers on this subject , that if the slave be kept in chains , he is under no obligation of conscience to him that keeps him ; but he may find his own way to escape , because he is treated as an enemy , and therefore hath all the right of war on his side . but if he yields upon terms , then he is under obligation , but it is according to the terms upon which he yielded himself . mr. hobbs indeed saith , that those who submit upon compact , are capable of no injury afterwards ; because they have given up their wills already , and there can be no injury to a willing mind . but this is very false reasoning ; for himself grants , that where there is such a compact , there goes some liberty or priviledge along with it . and it is not to be imagined , that such who entred into compact for their benefit , should renounce all right to it when they have done it ; and if they have right , they may be wronged . and in the case of the greatest slavery , natural equity was required , and a common right was still due to slaves , as men : so that nature owns no such thing , as meer absolute power in some over others , meerly for their own advantage ; but all reasonable power supposes consent , and a good to be attained by it . but when it is carried to a contrary end , it is against the intention of nature , which lays an obligation on some men towards others , with regard to a common good , which cannot otherwise be attained . it is not denied by the strictest casuists in these matters , but that under a state of usurpation , notwithstanding their oaths to the rightful prince , men are bound to do those things which tend to the publick safety as well as their own . but then they found it upon a presumptive consent of the absent prince ; whereas , the true reason is , that men are in the first place bound to promote the publick good , and consequentially , and with respect to it , to regard the will of their princes , who are appointed by god and nature for that end . and if such be rendred uncapable of doing it , yet the obligation on others remains . whereas , if it depended on the will of the absent prince , his presumptive will would not be sufficient ; for that can lay no obligation . but , that the publick good is the true and just measure of the obligation in these oaths , doth further appear , in that the oaths are reciprocal . whereas , if only the good of the persons to whom oaths of allegiance are made , were to be our rule , then there would be no mutual oaths . i am not now enquiring how far in reciprocal oaths one party's failing disobliges the other , but i am shewing , that it must be a general good that is aimed at when both parties are sworn to each other ; so it was in the strictest feudal allegiance , the lord was as much sworn to the tenant to protect and defend him in his rights , as the other was to attend him in his wars for the security of his person . and this was certainly founded on a mutual contract , called by the old feudists liga , and thence ligeas and ligeantia , and so our allegiance . the words of glanvil and bracton and the customary of normandy , are plain , to shew the reciprocal obligation in this case , and the measures on both sides were to be the rights , and customs , and laws of the land. so that allegiance originally implies a compact , and is to be measured by the laws , which are the standard of the publick good of a country . 2ly , having thus in general fixed these grounds to proceed upon , i come to the particular examination of the difficulties which relate to the present oaths ; and because we are charged with apostacy from the principles of the church of england , and that is made the main ground of the designed separation , i would fain know what this charge is built upon , with respect to the oaths , for that is all we are concerned in . if any particular persons have advanced new hypotheses of government , contrary to the sense of our church , let them answer for themselves . the case of the oaths is quite of another nature . here is no renouncing the doctrine of passive obedience , or asserting the lawfulness of resistance ; but the single point is , whether the law of our nation doth not bind us to allegiance to a king and queen in actual possession of the throne , by consent of the three estates of the realm ? and whether such an oath may not lawfully be taken , notwithstanding any former oath ? and by this very stating of the case , any one may see how impertinent to this purpose the book called the history of passive obedience is ; the truth is , there are not many passages in it which come near the business ; but those that do , contain in them the main difficulties which relate to the oaths , and therefore i shall impartially consider them . which are these , i. that they are to the prejudice of a third person . ii. that they are contradictory to a former oath . iii. that the person to whom they were made , hath given no release or discharge from them . for the first we have these testimonies ; bishop hall , p. 46. saith , that a promissory oath , which is to the certain prejudice of another man's right , cannot be attended with iustice. bishop sanderson , p. 61. an oath imposed by one that hath not a just authority , is to be declined as much as we can ; if it be forcibly imposed , it is to be taken with reluctancy , upon this condition , that the words imply nothing unlawful or prejudicial to the rights of a third person ; for if so , we must refuse the oath at the peril of our lives . i grant , it is a rule among the casuists , that an oath ought not to be taken to the prejudice of a third person ; but so it is likewise , that it ought not to be taken against the publick good ; and these two are often put together . it is a sin , saith zoesius , to make a compact to the publick prejudice and injury of another ; and an oath that is conversant about such a matter , is unjust , and not to be kept . so that the right of a third person is not to be taken as distinct from the publick good ; for , if it be inconsistent with it , there is no ground to set up a personal interest against a general good. and so far a mischief is better than an inconvenience ; for it is a standing rule in reason as well as law , the publick right cannot be changed by the contracts of particular persons , ff . l. 2. tit . 14. if a man takes an oath to a third person , to do something which the law forbids ; although he suffers by it , yet it is concluded , that such an oath doth not bind , because the publick good is to be preferred , as often as a compact doth depart from the common right , it ought not to be kept ; nor is an oath requiring it to be observed . ff . l. 2. tit . 14. iuris gentium § . 16. and again , an oath against the force of law and authority of right is of no moment . what is the reason that an oath doth not bind against the law ? is not the authority of god above that of men ? no doubt of it ; but since god hath established government and laws for a publick good , their meaning is , that men cannot by any act of their own be bound to overthrow it , in what solemn manner soever it be done . it is resolved in the text of the canon law , in the king of hungary's case , that an oath taken against the good of the kingdom , doth not oblige , de jurejur . c. 33. intellecto ; although it were to the prejudice of others , because it was in praejudicium regni sui , to the prejudice of his kingdom ; which was more to be regarded ; and because it was contrary to the oath which he took at his coronation , iura regni sui illibata servare , that the rights of the kingdom were to be preserved inviolable . sylvester in sum . 6. juram . 4. n. 16. saith roundly , that an oath doth not bind against the publick good in the first place ; but if it be for a private benefit principally , and consequentially for the publick , then the oath holds ; because still the publick good is to overrule in all such oaths . if a man swears to keep a secret , and that be to the prejudice of a third person , the casuists say , that oath doth not oblige ; how much less , where the publick interest and safety is concerned ? and it is generally agreed by our divines , that an oath of secrecy , where the publick safety is in danger , doth not bind ; as in garnet's case , who pleaded his oath for not discovering the gun-powder-treason . now if an oath doth oblige against the common good , garnet made a good plea ; for his discovery was to the prejudice of others : but if his plea was naught , then the publick good doth make the obligation of an oath to cease . suppose a man makes a contract with another , who thereby acquires a right ; yet if that contract be against the common good , and be confirmed with an oath ; that oath doth not oblige , saith bonacina , de contract . disp . 3. q. 1. p. 1. there are two sorts of law , saith suarez , which respect the publick good ; some which concern ipsum statum reipub. & utilitatem communitatis ; the general state of the commonwealth , and benefit of the community : others which concern bonum commune mediante privato ; that common good which results from every man 's good : against the former , he saith , an oath cannot oblige ; but in the latter , it may , as far as concerns his own benefit . suarez de juram . l. 2. c. 26. no obligation , though sworn to , is of any force against those things which are owing to god and the kingdom , saith zei●lerus in his notes on grotius de jure b. & p. l. 2. c. 13. § . 7. from all this it appears , that if the right of a third person be inconsistent with the publick good , such an oath doth not oblige . and it is to be observed , that those persons , whose testimonies are alledged , never put the case of the right in a third person and a publick good standing in competition ; and therefore they do not reach our present case . ii. it is alledged , that this oath is contradictory to a former oath . bishop hall again , history of passive obedience , p. 46. no oath is or can be of force that is made against a lawful oath formerly taken ; so that he that hath sworn allegiance to his sovereign , and thereby bound himself to maintain the right , power and authority of his said soveraign , cannot by his second oath be tied to do ought that may tend to the infringement thereof ; and if he hath so tied himself , the obligation is , ipso facto , void and frustrate . no doubt , if the first oath continues in force , the second is void , so far as it contradicts it . but we say , the former oath is not in force , as it is repugnant to the publick good , and so the second may be taken without any contradiction : and if the doctrine there laid down holds in our case , i cannot see how it is consistent with the former oath , for any such persons to continue under the protection of the present government , or to enjoy the benefit of the laws ; or to take out a writ in their names , any more than to pray for them ; the one being owning their authority as much as the other . iii. because the person who had the right hath given no release . for this dr. hammond is quoted , in his practical catechism , history of passive obed. p. 54. s. but was not tiberius an vsurper , and yet christ saith , render to caesar the things that are caesar's . c. julius caesar wrested the power out of the hand of the senate ; but before the time of tiberius the business was accorded between the senate and the emperors , that the emperors now reigned unquestion'd , without any competition from the senate ; which case , he saith , is distant from other forcible vsurpations , where the legal sovereign doth still claim his right to his kingdoms , and to the allegiance of his subjects , no way acquitting them from their oaths , or laying down his pretensions . to clear this matter , i shall enquire into two things . 1. how far a discharge is necessary from the person concerned . 2. how far our saviour's rule holds in our case ? as to the former , i say , the resolution of conscience in this case doth not depend upon the will and pleasure of the person to whom the former oath was made , but upon the grounds on which it was made , and from which it had its force to oblige : and if those cease , the obligation of the oath ceases together with them . and whether they do or not , no particular person is so fit to judge as the three estates of the realm ; as i shall now prove from several remarkable instances to this purpose in our histories and parliament records ; whereby i shall make it appear , that when a dispute hath happened about the right of succession , and to whom the oaths of allegiance were to be made , they have looked on it as their proper right , to limit the succession , and to determine the oaths . under the british government , we find a considerable instance to our purpose ; vortigern the british king had entered into a secret league , to bring over the saxons ; upon which the great men of the nation deserted him , and chose vortimer in his room . here it is plain , they thought the introducing a foreign power , a sufficient discharge of their obligation to him , it being so directly contrary to the publick good of the nation , although vortigern gave them no discharge . in the saxon times , sigebert king of the west saxons , was complained of for misgovernment , and for changing their laws for his own ends ; but when he persisted in his way , there was a convention of the nobility and people , ( convenêrunt proceres regni cum populo universo , saith matt. westminster ) and they declared themselves free from allegiance to him , and chose kineulfus in his room . in the kingdom of mercia beornredus for not governing by the laws , was by a convention of the nobility and people set aside from the government , and offa chosen king ; who was of the royal stem , but not the next heir ; and so william of malmsbury observes , in the west saxon kingdom after ina , that no lineal succession was then observed ; but still some of the royal line sat in the throne . and of ina himself , that he was rather put into the throne for his virtue , than by right of succession . aethelulphus , king of the west saxons , went to rome , and there crowned alfred , his youngest son , king , and married the king of france's daughter in his return , and made her queen , against their laws ; for which reasons he was excluded his kingdom : his eldest son and alstan , bishop of shireburn being at the top of this act of exclusion ; and he came back only upon the terms of receiving his son into a share of the kingdom : which shews , that they looked on the laws as the measure of their allegiance ; and where those were openly broken , that it was in their power to transfer it . if our allegiance cannot be transferred by the states of the realm , it must be because ( as some think ) by the fundamental constitution of this kingdom we are bound in allegiance to the next right heir in a lineal succession ; but i find no such thing in the saxon times : for although generally they kept to the royal line , yet not so , but that when it appeared to be much more for the publick good , they did not stick upon the point of proximity . i shall not meddle with the kingdom of the northumbers , which alone was originally elective , as appears by matt. westminster ; wherein there happened so great disorders and confusions , that at last william of malmsbury saith , none could be perswaded to accept of the kingdom ; and so it continued thirty three years , till at last egbert took it into his hands ; and so it became a part of the english monarchy ; which was established in him . but if by the fundamental constitution , allegiance were indispensably due to the next rightful heir in this monarchy , how came athelstan to be crowned , magno consensu optimatum , saith malmsbury , when he was not the rightful heir ? some say ( from an old monk in malmsbury ) that his father left him the crown by his testament ; ( which doth not clear the difficulty as to the inviolable right of succession by the constitution ) . but this cannot be true , for his elder brother elwardus died after his father ; and none pretend that his father disinherited him : and if athelstan were lawful heir , what made him to dispatch his brother edwin out of the way , and to build two monasteries for expiation of that guilt ? how came alfred to oppose his election , as being illegitimate , as malmsbury confesses ? but matt. westminster gives the reason , the times were then difficult , and edward's other sons were too young to manage the government , and therefore they set up athelstan , as one fit for business . how came edred to succeed edmond , and not his sons edwin and edgar ? matt. westminster and bromton give the same reason ; they were uncapable by reason of their age , repugnante illegitimâ aetate , patri succedere non valebant . florence of worcester saith , the northumbers sware allegiance to edred ; and he saith , he was next heir , and yet there were two sons of edmond before him ; for he confesses , that they were the sons of edmond and algiva his queen . after the death of edred , the eldest son of edmond succeeded ; but being found under a moral incapacity , ( for in florentius his words , and matt. westminster , in commisso regimine insipienter egit ) he was set aside , as to all the government beyond thames , and edgar put into it : and not long after into the whole kingdom , by general consent . how came a dispute to happen about the election , after the death of edgar , between his eldest son edward , and etheldred his youngest ? i lay no force on his mother's endeavours to advance him ; but if there had been such an unalterable right of succession , there had not been any colour or pretence for it ; especially since it is said , that his father declared his mind , that the elder should succeed . but saith florentius wigorn. there was a great contention among the great men , about the choice of the king : how could there be any dispute , if they knew the constitution of the kingdom to be , that the next heir must inherit the crown ; and that those are perjured who transfer their allegiance ? after the death of ethelred , the nobility and people were divided , some chusing canutus the dane , and swearing allegiance to him ; others to edmund the son of ethelred . the former pleaded for themselves , that ethelred had broken his faith with them , and therefore they deserted him , so as he was fain to fly into normandy ; and that edmond was not his legitimate son. matt. westminster saith , that the greatest part of the nation , clergy as well as laity , did swear allegiance to canutus ; without any discharge from ethelred , while living , or his son after him . after the death of canutus , a new difference arose about the succession ; some were for harold his supposed son by algiva , others for hardecnute , his son by emma . if the lineal succession were a part of our constitution , how come such perpetual disputes to be concerning it ? for , if it had been owned as a fundamental law , the right of succession must have been clear beyond dispute . but reason of state and the publick interest still over-ruled this matter , and so ethelred's sons by emma , who were the true heirs by legal succession , were set aside , and harold , being upon the place , and so best able to manage the affairs of the kingdom , carried it . hardecnute being dead , how came the banisht sons of edmund ironside , if he were lawful heir , not to be sent for to succeed ? if edmund had no good title , how was the right of succession then preserved ? how could allegiance on these principles be sworn to him ? if he had a good title , how could the oaths be taken to edward the confessor , when the heirs of edmond ironside were living ? i perceive some , to salve the succession , make the mother of edmond to have been ethelred's first wife , and call her elgiva duke thored's daughter ; but william malmsbury saith , she was so obscure a person , that she was not known ; and that edmond ironside made up what was wanting in the management of his father , and the quality of his mother . and the same is said by matt. westminster . florentius wigorn , shews the reason of the mistake ; for he saith , that emma , ethelrede's queen , was in the saxon language called algiva ; and so , out of two names , they have made two queens . bromton leaves the matter in dispute , and saith some affirm , the mother of edmond was betrothed to king ethelred , and was the daughter of count egbert : others , that she was a stranger and a concubine . now , if a man's conscience be strictly hid in such oaths of allegiance , to the right heir in a lineal succession , what satisfaction can he have as to the taking them , since he is then bound to satisfie himself in the strict justice of a title ? for , if edmond's mother was not married , he had no title , and no oath of allegiance could be taken to him ; and whether he was married or not , for all that we can perceive , there was a great doubt at that time , and so continued . and , it is not easie to determine what is to be taken for marriage in a prince , unless the law be the rule . and , if the law determines the nature of contracts in princes , why not as well the obligation of subjects ? for , if there be no rule , it is not possible to satisfie conscience in the niceties of titles ; if there be a rule , the general consent of the people , joined with the common good , seems to have been that which our ancestors proceeded by . i do not hereby go about to set up the power of the people over kings , which is in effect to overthrow monarchy ; for then the whole soveraignty lies in the people , and kings are but their servants : and so there is but one sort of reasonable government , viz. that of a commonwealth . whereas , from the eldest times , the rights of soveraignty have been placed in single persons , before any popular governments were known ; and monarchy hath been ever esteemed a distinct and a reasonable government , especially where it is limited by laws , and those laws made by the consent of the people , i.e. by the three estates of the realm ; which are together the true representatives of the people . i see no necessity of going about to undermine the monarchy , that i may come at a resolution of the present case ; for , i take ours to be a true original monarchy , especially after the rights of the lesser monarchs were swallowed up or delivered into that of the west-saxon kings . and farther , i do not stick to affirm , that it was hereditary , where the right of succession and the publick good did not interfere ; i.e. where there was not a natural or moral incapacity : a natural , as in the sons of the elder edmond , when edred was made king before them ; a moral , as when edgar's elder brother was set aside for his ill government , by one half of the nation , and the other never disputed the matter with them ; and when ethelred was so far deserted , that he went into normandy , and was recalled upon promise of better government . si ipse vel rectius gubernare , vel mitius eos tractare vellet , are the words in florentius ; and to the same purpose matt. westminster , and bromton , and malmsbury : h. huntingdon adds , that he promised omnia rege & populo digna ; all things worthy of the king and people . these things i mention to shew , that although this were a true & successive monarchy in ordinary course ; yet where the publick good was by the estates of the realm judged to require it , they thought it no perjury , or breach of faith , to transferr their allegiance , although it were without the consent of the actual governour , or the next lineal heirs . having thus far cleared this point , as to the saxon constitution of our government , i come to that of the norman ; and here i shall not go about to shew how broken the succession was by force and faction , but what the judgment of the nation was , as to the transferring allegiance . and , the first instance i shall bring , is in the case of the oath taken to maud the daughter of henry the first , in the one and thirtieth year of his reign ; and there is no question , but he designed her to succeed him ; legitimâ & perenni successione , as malmsbury's words are ; but stephen , ( who had before sworn allegiance to her ) watched his opportunity , and by the help of a party made by his brother , ( the bishop of winchester ) he was crowned king ; and although at first , malmsbury saith , but three bishops , and very few noblemen , joined with him , yet he soon after saith , that most of them went in to him : and even robert of gloucester , king henry the first 's natural son , took an oath to him , but with the condition of his preserving his honour and covenants . there are several things worthy our observation in this affair , with respect to oaths of allegiance . ( 1 ) that those who excuse them from perjury , who had sworn allegiance to maud before , do it upon this account , because it is said by rad. de diceto , that hugh bigod sware , that king henry the first , on his deathbed , disinherited his daughter , and made stephen his heir . supposing the story true , what is this to the discharge of the oath as to maud ; ( for the oath was not made to henry the first , but to his daughter , and her right was chiefly concerned in it . ) if this hold , an oath of allegiance may cease , without discharge from the party to whom it is made . and so the archbishop of canterbury , and the bishops of winchester and salisbury , as well as the nobility , thought themselves at liberty to take a new oath of allegiance , without a release from the party concerned in the former oath . ( 2. ) that upon the agreement between k. stephen and h. 2. maud her self was set aside , and stephen was to continue king for his life , and h. 2. to succeed him . now if oaths of allegiance must not be interpreted by the publick good , here are insuperable difficulties as to the obligation of these oaths . for the allegiance was transferr'd from the right heir to an usurper , as stephen must be owned to have been by those who deny that allegiance can be transferr'd from the right heir . and they must continue allegiance to the usurper for his life ; which is repugnant to the nature of our constitution , if it be founded in a lineal and legal succession . and again , maud , to whom they had sworn , is set aside , and the reversion of the crown is entailed on her son , although she was living . fortescue , in a manuscript-discourse about the title of the house of lancaster , saith , this was done in parliament , communi consensu procerum , & communitatis regni angliae . rad. de diceto , who lived nearer the time , saith no such thing ; but fortescue appeals not only to the chronicles , but to the proceedings of parliament , for it . and matt. westminster and paris say , the right of h. 2. was declared by k. stephen in conventu episcoporum , & aliorum de regno optimatum ; which was the description of a parliament of that time ; for , as yet , the baronage represented the nation . gervase saith , the great men were summoned to perfect the agreement , by giving their assent to it , and confirming it by their oaths . fortescue saith further , that h. 2. was crowned king in the life of his mother , ( who lived to the 13 of h. 2. ) by the general consent of the kingdom . which shews how far the publick good was thought to be the measure of the obligation of these oaths . for gul. neuburgensis saith , that the bonum publicum was the foundation of this agreement . and matt. westminster , that the king and the lords did all swear to it , and a solemn charter was made of it , and kept in a most secure place . and thus the oaths of allegiance were continued to one that had no right for his life ; and made to one who pretended to no right , but after his mother , who was set aside in this agreement . so that here were three oaths of allegiance at once , that to maud the empress , that to k. stephen , and to h. 2. and yet the general good of the nation must give an equitable sense of these oaths , or there must be perjury on all sides . for those who had first sworn to maud , could not transfer their allegiance on any other account , either to stephen , or h. 2. during her life . for we never read that she was present at the agreement , or resigned her right to the crown . the next instance i shall produce , is in the oaths that were taken during the controversies between the houses of york and lancaster . which was not so plain a case as men commonly imagin ; and in truth , if the just legal title be the only rule of conscience in this case , it was hard to take the oaths on either side . for , as on the one side , a lineal descent was pleaded from the daughter of the duke of clarence , who was elder brother to iohn duke of lancaster , from whom by marriage the duke of york claimed his title ; so , on the other side , it was objected , that there was no sufficient evidence of the legitimacy of philippa daughter to the duke of clarence ; because , as fortescue observes , the duke of clarence was abroad from before the time of her conception till after her birth , and that he never owned her mother after ; that she never assumed the arms of the duke as her father , nor those descended from her , till the duke of york pretended to the crown ; that e. 3. made an entail of the crown upon his heirs male ; ( of which i have seen a written account as old as the time of h. 6. which not only affirms the absence and divorce of the duke of clarence ; but that e. 3. seized all his lands into his hands , and in parliament soon after entailed the crown on his heirs male , and that his daughters there present agreed to the same . ) but besides they pleaded , that so long a prescription as the house of lancaster had of above threescore years , was allowed by the ius gentium , to purge the defects of the first title : these are things which deserved consideration against such a meer lineal descent as the house of york insisted upon . and against the house of lancaster , the intrusion of h. 4. upon the deposition of r. 2. is an invincible objection to such as found allegiance on the right of succession . but that which i lay the greatest weight upon , is the way of ending this difference in parliament , which hath several remarkable things in it : ( 1. ) that the duke of york , notwithstanding his title , takes an oath of allegiance in parliament to h. 6. during his life ; reserving to himself the right of succession after him . for he swears to do nothing to the prejudice of his reign or dignity-royal , nor against his life or liberty ; and that he would to the utmost of his power , withstand all attempts to the contrary . the same oath was taken by his sons edward earl of march ( afterward e. 4. ) and edward earl of rutland . was this a lawful oath or not ? to say it was unlawful , is to reflect on the wisdom of the three estates , who looked on this as the best expedient for the publick good , as being the way to prevent the effusion of christian blood. and it is not easy to prove such an oath unlawful ; as containing nothing unlawful , nor to the prejudice of a third person , when he who was chiefly concerned voluntarily took it . if it were a lawful oath , then an oath of allegiance on the account of possession , is a lawful oath . for the matter of right is not mentioned in it , and richard duke of york did not renounce the opinion of his own right hereby , ( whether true or false ) but did bind up himself to do nothing to the prejudice of the royal dignity of h. 6. and yet he look'd on him as meer possessor of it ; therefore in his judgment and the parliament's , an oath of allegiance may lawfully be taken , on the account of the possession of the crown , although persons be not satisfied of the right of it . the words of his agreement are remarkable to this purpose , as they are to be found in the parliament-rolls . the said title notwithstanding , and without prejudice of the same , the said richard duke of york tenderly desiring the weal , rest and prosperity of this land , and to set apart all that might be trouble to the same ; and considering the possession of the said king henry the sixth , and that he hath for his time be named , taken , and reputed king of england and france , and lord of ireland , is content , agreeth and consenteth , that he be had , reputed and taken king of england and of france , with the royal estate , dignity and preeminence belonging thereto , and lord of ireland , during his life natural ; and for that time the said duke , without hurt or prejudice of his said right and title , shall take , worship and honour him for his sovereign lord. here was certainly an oath taken to a king , whom the person taking it looked on only as a king de facto , and not de jure ; and yet this oath was taken and allowed , nay contrived in parliament ; and that for no less an end , than for the weal , rest , and prosperity of the land , i.e. for the publick good. it may be said , that the case is different ; for richard duke of york parted with his own right ; but we cannot with anothers , which we have sworn to preserve . i answer , that he did not look on such an oath as parting with his right , but as a thing fitting to be done on the account of possession for the publick good. and so many others taken such another oath of allegiance , wherein there is no declaration as to right , but the same things required , which the duke of york promised in his oath to hen. 6. but allegiance is not due but where there is a right to claim it ; and that cannot be , where there is no right to the crown . i answer , that an oath of allegiance may be twofold : 1. declarative of right ; and in that case none can be owned to have right , but he that hath it . 2. submissive allegiance ; where no more is required than is contained in the duke of york ' s oath , and yet he declared this was no prejudice to his right . but it may be said , he declared so much before he took the oath , and so gave the sense in which he took it . i answer , that his putting in his claim , and his title being allow'd after the king in being , had been sufficient ; but in our case there is no need of a declaration , since the declaratory part is left out ; which is a fuller declaration of the sense of the oath , than our words can make . but to proceed ; ( 2. ) the first objection the parliament made to the duke of york's claim was , from the oaths they had taken to h. 6. to which the duke of york gave a large answer , that oaths must not bind against truth and iustice. but this was to take it for granted , that he had the truth and justice of his side , whereas there was a long possession of threescore years against him ; surely matters of fact which were necessary to the disproving his title , were then so far out of memory , that it was impossible to make clear evidence about them ; and others were not examin'd , as whether the duke of clarence were absent so long from his wife abroad , when philippa was born ? whether one sir iames awdely suffer'd about it ? whether he was divorced from her upon it ? whether e. 3. after the death of the duke of clarence , did entail the crown on his heirs male ? whether upon the deposition of r. 2. the claim of right on behalf of the duke of clarence's heir , ought not to have been made ? how far edmond mortimer's owning the title of h. 5. and the duke of cambridge's attainder did affect him ? whether he had not renounced his own pretentions , by owning h. 6. to be his supream and soveraign lord , as he had often done in a most solemn manner , particularly in his oaths at the altar at st. pauls , which is to be seen in the book of oaths , p. 146. and elsewhere . but at that time , h. 6. was under the power of the duke of york ; and that was a very unfit time to clear a sinking title . but however the lords in parliament were concerned for their oaths to h. 6. and proposed the former expedient , not only for the publick welfare , but in regard to their oaths , notwithstanding that they allow'd the duke's title to be good . their words are , it was concluded and agreed by all the said lords , that since it was so , that the title of the said duke of york cannot be defeated , and in eschewing the great inconvenience that might ensue , to take the mein above rehearsed , the oaths that the said lords had made unto the king's highness at coventry and other places saved . from whence it is plain that they look'd on their oaths to hen. 6. as consistent with owning the right to be in the duke of york ; and that possession was a sufficient ground for continuing their oaths . ( 3. ) in 1 e. 4. where the right and title of the d. of york is most amply set forth , yet there this agreement , 39 h. 6. is recited , and the proceedings against h. 6. are grounded upon his breach of it . which shews farther that those parliaments which did assert the right of succession highest , ( among which , this of e. 4. ought to be reckon'd ) yet it was never disputed , whether those who had taken the oaths to h. 6. were perjured ; for they look on the possession of the crown as a sufficient ground for the allegiance required . but it may be said , that from hence we see that he was look'd on as having the best title , who had the best right by lineal succession . i answer , that we are not enquiring into titles , but searching into the reasons and measures of oaths of allegiance ; and whether those do require full satisfaction about the best title ? or supposing one unsatisfied about that , he may not yet be satisfied in taking such an oath as the d. of york and his sons did ? but such precedents prove nothing , unless they be agreeable to our laws and constitution . yes , a great deal , while we are enquiring into our legal constitution ; and we find such things allowed in parliaments ; and not only so , but in such parliaments which allow'd not the title of the king to whom those oaths were made . our law owns no king meerly as in possession , but the right heir is the legal king , whether in possession or not . our law does own a king in possession , if treason may be committed against him ; and for this we have not only the authority of sir e. c. but of the year-books , 9 e. 4. where it is deliver'd for law at that time ; and with a particular respect to h. 6. et home sera arraigne de treason fait a dit roy. h. and therefore sir e. c. had good authority for what he said ; and that not in the reign of a king de facto , but when a king thrust out another for want of right , and derived his whole right from a lineal succession . bagot's case goes farther than grants and judicial proceedings of a king de facto ; for therein it is declared treason to compass the death of a king de facto ; and it is very absurd to imagine treason against one whom the law doth not own : for treason is a high violation of the law , and how can the law be violated against one whom the law doth not own ? besides , in bagot's case there is a distinction made between a meer vsurper , and one on whom the crown is setled by parliament ; and so h. 6. is denied to be a meer usurper . et six le dit roy h. de fait merement , come vsurper , car le corone fuit taille a luy per parliament . so that by our constitution a great deference is to be shew'd to the judgment of the three estates in matters that concern the right of the crown ; or else , an entail made by them could make no difference ; but the whole resolution must be into the lineal desent . and thus i look on the statute , 11 h. 7. as agreeable to our constitution ; for if it be treason to compass the death of a king de facto , there is great reason there should be indemnity for those who act for him. but what doth this signify to the consciences of men ? very much , if they are to be satisfied by our constitution . i grant meer indemnity doth not clear a man's mind ; but its agreeableness to former proceedings and judgments shews how far our constitution allows us to go , and that there is no argument from thence which can hinder the satisfaction of conscience so far . but suppose a king de jure be in possession of this act , and another comes and dispossesses him , and so is king de facto , doth this law indemnify those who fight against the king de jure for the king de facto ? whosoever is in actual and quiet possession of the crown , by consent of parliament , hath the right to challenge the benefits of this act for those who serve him. but i do not say , that this act gives any man right to oppose a rightful king ; but it only provides for the indemnity of those who assist the present possessor , although another had the right by descent . for , after the d. of york's challenging the crown by right of succession against the possessor , there were two parties in the nation , the one was for the right of succession , and the other for the right of possession by a national consent . and the disputes between these two continued as long as the differences between the houses of york and lancaster lasted . when h. 7. was setled in the throne , without regard to the right of succession , although there was a general submission , yet there was still a great dissatisfaction in the york party ; which occasion'd all the disturbances of h. 7th's reign , from setting up an heir of the house of york . ( and sir william stanly was gained to that party , which cost him his life . ) and they went so far as to conclude it treason to stand by the possessor against the next lineal heir . which i take to have been the true occasion of the statute 11 h. 7. which doth certainly indemnify those who adhere to the possessor , although another may claim a better right ; and thereby declares a possessory right to be a sufficient ground of allegiance , as far as that act goes . there are three sorts of persons may be said to have possession of the crown , an vsurper , a king de jure , and a king de facto ; and because the distinction between these doth not seem to be well understood , i shall briefly explain it . an usurper is one , who comes in by force , and continues by force . a king de jure is one , who comes in by lineal descent , as next heir , and whose right is owned and recognized by the estates of the realm . a king de facto is one , who comes in by consent of the nation , but not by virtue of an immediate hereditary right ; but to such a one being owned and receiv'd by the estates of the realm , the law of england , as far as i can see , requires an allegiance . or else the whole nation was perjur'd in most of the reigns from the conquest to h. 8. for the two williams , six at least of the seven henries , king stephen , and king iohn were all kings de facto , for some time at least , for they came not in as next heirs in a lineal descent . but still oaths of allegiance were taken to them ; and no such scruples appear to have been made all that time ; nor any charge of perjury , on those who did what our law and constitution required . was the nation perjured in the time of h. 7. who , as all know , had no pretence of an hereditary right ? yet being received and crowned , the oaths of allegiance were taken to him , before he was married to the daughter of e. 4. for , he was crowned 30 octob. 1485. had the crown entailed in parliament nov. 7. and was married ian. 18. but the first parliament of r. 3. endeavoured to make void the title of the children of e. 4. upon pretence of a precontract with the e. of shrewsburies daughter ; and of george duke of clarence by his attainder , thereby to make r. 3. right heir to the crown ; but lest these things should fail , to his claim of inheritance , they join their own election , and desire him to accept the crown ▪ as to him of right belonging , as well by inheritance as by lawful election . it seems , they would have made him a king de jure as well as de facto ; but the excluding the children of e. 4. never gave satisfaction since the lady lucy her self disowned it to the mother of e. 4. and if such an allegation would hold , the whole succession both of york and lancaster might be questioned ; for both derive from h. 3. whose mother was believed at that time to have been precontracted at least to hugh le brun , before she was married to k. iohn , and was married to him , whilst his former wife was living . and if q. eleanor's divorce from the k. of france were not good ( as it is hard to prove it so ) what becomes of all the line of h. 2. who married her , after she had two children by her former husband ? but if mens consciences are tied to a strict legal and lineal descent , they must be satisfied in all these points . but supposing the right of the children of e. 4. to have been never so good ; what doth this make towards the justifying the oaths of allegiance , which were made to h. 7. whom some will not allow to have any claim by the house of lancaster , since they say , the same act which legitimated iohn of gaunt's children by kath. swinford , did exclude them from any title to the crown ? yet the oaths of allegiance were taken by the whole nation in the time of h. 7. and no dispute was then made about it ; because it was then believed , that quiet possession was a sufficient ground for allegiance . it is objected , that it cannot be agreeable to the law of england to swear allegiance to a king de facto , when the duke of northumberland suffered by the law for adhering to a queen de facto . a king de facto according to our law ( as i said ) is one in quiet possession of the crown , by consent of parliament , without hereditary right ; such as h. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7. were all thought to be , by those who made this distinction . for , as far as i can find , the distinction of a king de facto and de jure was then started , when the house of york so much insisted on their hereditary right ; and so many of our kings had governed the kingdom by consent without it . therefore the lawyers , to find a sufficient salvo for the kings of the house of lancaster , framed this distinction of kings de facto and de jure ; but still they meant kings regnant , as they called them , or in full possession of the royal dignity by a national consent . ( the distinction had been better of a two-fold right , viz. possessory and hereditary . ) but this was far from being the case of queen iane , who was set up by a particular party against the general sense of the nation , as soon appeared ; for the main point her title stood upon was this , whether the king by his grant could dispose of the crown against an act of parliament which setled the succession ? and that this was the true point , appears evidently by judge mountague's papers , who was imployed against his will , in drawing up the grant. so that the duke of northumberland's case doth by no means reach the point of a king de facto . but it is further urged from our homilies , that our church therein condemns those english who did swear fidelity to the dauphin of france , breaking their oath of fidelity to their natural lord the king of england . to which i answer , ( 1. ) that king iohn was only a king de facto himself , if a legal succession makes a king de jure . for , ( 1. ) his eldest brother's son arthur was then living , as all confess . ( 2. ) he was convicted of treason against his brother r. 1. and the sentence pronounced against him by hugo de pudsey bishop of durham , as the king of france pleaded to the pope's legat who came to solicit for him . ( 3. ) hubert archbishop of canterbury declar'd at his coronation , that he came not in by hereditary right , but by election ; and he accepted of it so . ( 4. ) what right he had after the death of his nephew , he gave up by the resignation of his crown to the pope . he could have no hereditary right while arthur's sister lived , who survived him , and was kept in the castle at bristol . but supposing it , i do not understand how he that gave up his right of dominion to the pope , could still retain it ? and if he was feudatary to the same , he could not challenge allegiance as due to him , but to the pope as lord paramount . and it was pleaded against him , that although he could not dispose of his crown without consent of his barons , yet he might demise it . and upon his resignation he ceased to be king ; and so the throne was vacant . and by that means there was a devolution of right to the barons to fill up the vacancy ; who made choice of lewis by the right of his wife , who was heir to king john. if after all this , an oath of allegiance to him was lawful , then , i say , an oath to a king de facto is so , for king iohn was no more . ( 2. ) as to the barons calling in lewis , and forsaking k. iohn , it is necessary to observe on what reason it is that our homilies condemn it . for the whole design of that homily is , to shew the popes vsurpations over princes , and their stirring up subjects to rebellion against them , by discharging them from their oaths ; and for those the instance of king john is produced . as appears by the words just before ; now had english-men at that time known their duty to their prince set forth in god's word , would a great many nobles , and other english-men natural subjects , for this foreign and unnatural vsurper his vain curse of the king , and for his feigned discharging them of their oath and fidelity to their natural lord , upon so slender , or no ground at all , have rebelled against their sovereign lord the king ? would english subjects have taken part against the king of england , and against english men , with the french king , and french men , being incensed against this realm by the bishop of rome ? ( 3. ) this doth not concern the present case . for men may condemn those english men who sent for lewis , and yet may lawfully take the present oaths . by which men are not bound to justify such proceedings , but to promise faith and allegiance to such as are in actual possession of the throne . which the oaths taken to k. iohn will justify . thus i have considered the greatest difficulties i have yet met with about taking the oaths , and have not dissembled the strength of any of them . there is only one thing remains , and that is the answer given to the case of tiberius , who was an vsurper , and yet our saviour said , give unto cesar the things that are cesar's . the answer is , that although it were a forcible vsurpation in julius cesar , yet before that time the matter was accorded between the senate and the emperors , and they reigned unquestioned without any competition from the senate . so that it was not lawful to swear allegiance to iulius cesar , who had the full possession of the power , but it was to tiberius : and why so ? where was the right of government in the time of iulius cesar ? in the senate and people . and so it continued all iulius cesar's time . but how came the senate and people to lose their right in the time of tiberius ? ( 1. ) had they given it up by any solemn act of theirs , as many say they did by the lex regia , which iustinian confidently affirms ? then all the right which the emperor had , was by devolution from the people ; and so they acted by virtue of that power which the people gave them ; ( populus comprehends both senate and community . ) and then the emperors had their rights of soveraignty from the people , and not from god. for here was no other act but that of the people giving up their right . and then the case of obedience to the roman emperors will be found very different from that of the northern kingdoms , where the people never gave up their rights in such a manner ; but in cases of difficulty concerning succession , the three estates did look on themselves as particularly concerned ; as might be easily proved , if it were needful , in all the northern kingdoms . ( 2. ) but suppose they did not formally give up their right , but were partly wheedled and partly forced out of it ; doth this give a good title ? suppose augustus had by his acts procured the consent of the people , as to his own government ; what was this to tiberius ? did they give him a power to make whom he pleased his successor ? something may be said from dion and strabo as to the former ; but there is no pretence as to the latter : for it was a meer arbitrary act in augustus to nominate tiberius ; and all the title he had at first was from the praetorian band and legions : afterwards the consuls , and senate , and souldiers , and people did swear allegiance to him , as the historians tell us . now here i desire to know , whether tiberius were any more than emperor de facto , when they did thus swear to him ? for all the right he had was from their voluntary submission to him at rome . as to the roman provinces , tacitus saith , they were content with the present change of government , because they suffered by the factions and avarice of the great men ; which made them weary of the government by the senate and people . but this only shews they were willing to change their masters , hoping they might mend their condition , but signifies little to the matter of right . since after they were made provinces , they owned their subjection to the roman government , by paying tribute , and receiving magistrates from it , however that government was managed , whether by senate or people , or by one who had the imperial power , whatever name he were called by . but as to the province of iudea in particular , there are several conditions of it to be considered . ( 1. ) while it was tributary to the kings of persia and syria . jaddus the high priest told alexander that they had taken an oath of fidelity to darius , and therefore could not bear arms against him while he lived . but was darius king de jure or de facto over the iews ? he was not king over them by a lineal succession from their own princes ; nor by the fundamental constitution of their government , which owned no legal king that was not of their brethren : i do not say they were not to submit to , but not to chuse any other . but what right had darius over the iews , any more than succeeding in the persian monarchy gave a right to the chaldean conquests ? i grant , the iews did act under the persian monarchs , as nehemiah was governour under artaxerxes , and that they did swear to them , appears by iaddus ; but the question is , on what right that oath was founded ? and whether upon alexander's conquest , they could not as well take a new oath to him ? for why should not present actual dominion give as much right , as succeeding into anothers right of dominion , which was at first gained by conquest ? if possession gives right in one case , why not in the other ; since there is more reason for allegiance , where there is a power of protection , than where there is none . and so we find iaddus and the iews did submit to alexander afterwards , and some of them went into his army , although darius was still living ; which shews , that as they were not forward to break their allegiance sworn to darius ; so they were not obstinate in opposing alexander , but yielded to the over-ruling hand of providence . ( 2. ) when the iews had their liberty granted them by the kings of syria . for antiochus eupator made peace with them , by which they were to have the liberty of their own laws ; and although he soon brake his agreement with them ; yet the lacedaemonians and romans owned them as a free-people , and treated with them as such . and simon pleaded to athenobius in this war ; we have neither taken other mens land , nor holden that which appertaineth to others ; but the inheritance of our fathers , which our enemies had wrongfully in possession a certain time . wherefore we having opportunity , hold the inheritance of our fathers . which plainly shews , that they look'd on those who ruled over them as unjust possessors ; at that time when they were so far under them , as to swear allegiance to them . after this antiochus pius did grant them their liberty upon composition ; which they enjoyed as their neighbours did , and suffered not as slaves to the kings of syria , but as sometimes oppressed by them . ( 3. ) when they were reduced into the form of a roman province ; which was done by pompey . and from that time they were in subjection to the roman state ; being only permitted to enjoy the liberty of their religion . but i shall take notice only of the case of the iews subjection to the roman emperor in our saviour's time . suetonius takes notice of the strange impudence of tiberius , in seeming so long to decline the accepting the soveraignty , when from the very first he had assumed the soveraign power , without asking the leave either of senate or people . * tacitus saith , that he took upon him the government immediately upon the death of augustus ; and did exercise the imperial power every where ; only when he was in the senate he seemed to demur , for fear of germanicus and his legions . † dio , that he exercised all the parts of the government , having secured the italian forces to himself ; but he declined the name , till he understood the design of germanicus . so that here we have a plain original usurpation in tiberius ; there being no consent of senate and people to his assuming the soveraign power . and yet tacitus saith , first the consulls and great officers , then the senate and people did swear allegiance to him . which was before he had their consent . for he used his own art afterwards , that he might seem to be chosen by them ; and not to come to his power by the force of arms , or the intrigues of his mother . but what appearance of consent soever afterwards he gained from the senate , it was extorted from them by force or fraud ; as is evident from the same historians . but what right can such a consent give ? and he took away the remainder of the peoples liberties in their comitia , and never asked their consent . what then was the right of tiberius to the government founded upon ? augustus had several repeated acts , whereby they continued his government from time to time , and thereby shewed their consent , as dion and strabo affirm , that the whole government was committed to him from the senate and people ; but what is there like this in the case of tiberius ? he was augustus his wife's son , and he made him his heir by his testament : and what was that to the roman state ? was not agrippa posthumus , then living , much nearer to augustus , who was his own grand-child ? and by , the story in tacitus of fabius maximus , seemed designed by him to succeed him ; but upon the discovery of it , first augustus , and then agrippa was sent out of the world to make way for tiberius , who had before-hand engaged the italian legions . so that he trusted to no testamentary right , as appears by all his collusions with the senate , which there had been no place for , if he had assumed the government by virtue of augustus his testament or adoption . here we have then a plain instance of one who was in the possession of power without colour of right , and yet oaths of allegiance were taken to him , both by the senate and people . and when these oaths were taken , there was no adjusting the matter between him and the senate ; for he had newly assumed the government by force when they took these oaths . here was no unquestion'd authority from the senate ( whatever vell. paterculus pretends ) but when he had gotten the power into his hands , he required them to own it . augustus was so wise , as when they offer'd him their oaths , he refused them for this reason ; he considered well , saith dio , that if they gave their free consent , they would do what they promised without swearing ; and if they did not , all the oaths in the world would not make them . but tiberius was of another mind , and he required their oaths in the first place ; and it is not improbable that the same were required in several provinces . when our saviour appeared in iudea , tiberius was in possession of this power , over the roman empire ; and because the jews were more scrupulous than other people , on account of their fundamental laws , as to the owning any usurped jurisdiction over them ; some among them put the question to him about paying tribute to caesar , i. e. about owning any act of subjection to an usurped power . for there were plausible arguments on both sides ; one was from the strictness of their laws ; the other was from the benefit they received from the roman protection . the former seemed to have more of conscience , and the latter of human prudence . our saviour takes a wise method to answer the doubt ; he asks for the currant tribute-mony , and finding it had cesar's superscription , saith , give to cesar the things that are cesar's . they might have replied , they are his de facto , but not de iure . why did not our saviour answer this difficulty , but leave them to collect their duty from the use of cesar's coin among them ? might not one that had no right , have the power of coining mony , and dispersing it , so that it should be in common use ? and was not tiberius such an one ? what then doth he mean by this answer ? either we must say , that he declines the main question , or that he resolved it to be lawful , upon general reasons , to shew acts of subjection to such a power , which we may not be satisfied , is according to our laws . for so it is plain the roman power was not agreeable to the jewish constitution ; and although that were from god , yet our saviour , who gives the best directions for conscience , would by no means have men to be peevish or obstinate in such matters . but paying of tribute is quite another thing from oaths of allegiance . it is so , as to the manner of testifying our subjection ; but the main question is , whether any act of subjection be lawful or not ? if it be lawful to testify it one way , why not another ? if in paying tribute , why not in solemn promising to pay it ? if in promising , why not in swearing , i. e. in calling god to witness that i do it ? thus far then we may go ; we may swear to pay tribute ; but on what account ? is it not as a token of allegiance , i. e. of a duty owing on the account of protection ? then we have gained one step farther , viz. that we may swear to perform some parts of allegiance . but why then may we not do so as to all that such an oath implies ? if it respects no more than the duty which we owe , with respect to the publick . and that is certainly the meaning of an oath , when all declarations of right are left out , and only those of duty expressed , as it is in our present case . as to the dreadful charge of perjury and apostacy , which some , of much greater heat than judgment , have made use of against those who hold it lawful to take the oaths ; if what i have said be true , it is little less than ridiculous : and it would have had more appearance of reason , if the pharisees had urged it against our saviour's resolution of the case about tribute-mony . for , had not god by his own law settled the government among them ? and was it not a fundamental article of that law , that none should rule over them , but one of their brethren ? was the roman emperor , or pontius pilate such ? have not all the ancient zealots of the law opposed any such foreign power ? what can it be then less than perjury and apostacy to give any countenance to such an open violation of this law , and to incourage men to renounce it ; when they find such liberties allowed by such a teacher ? but i forbear . to conclude then ; i have , at your earnest desire , taken this matter into serious consideration , and have impartially weighed the most pressing difficulties i have met with ; i cannot promise to give you satisfaction , but i have satisfied my self , and have endeavoured to do the same for you . i am heartily sorry for any breaches among us at this time , and it is easy to foresee who will be the gainers by them . but i am glad to understand that the chiefest of those who scruple the oaths , have declared themselves against the attempts of such an unseasonable separation , and i hope others will be so wise as to follow their example . i am , sir , yours . octob. 15. 1689. books lately printed for richard chiswell . the case of allegiance in our present circumstances considered , in a letter from a minister in the city to a minister in the country , 40. a breviate of the state of scotland in its government , supream courts , officers of state , inferiour officers , offices and inferiour courts , districts , jurisdictions , burroughs royal , and free corporations . fol. some considerations touching succession and allegiance . 4to . reflections upon the late great revolution : written by a lay-hand in the country , for the satisfaction of some neighbours . the history of the desertion ; or an account of all the publick affairs in england , from the beginning of september , 1688 , to the twelfth of february following . with an answer to a piece called , the desertion discussed , in a letter to a country-gentleman . by a person of quality . k. william and k. lewis . wherein is set forth the inevitable necessity these nations lie under of submitting wholly to one or other of these kings ; and that the matter in controversy is not now between k. william and k. iames , but between k. william and k. lewis of france , for the government of these nations . a sermon preached at fulham , in the chappel of the palace , upon easter-day 1689. at the consecration of the right reverend father in god gilbert lord bishop of sarum : by anthony horneck , d. d. the judgments of god upon the roman catholick church , from its first rigid laws for universal conformity to it , unto its last end. with a prospect of these near approaching revolutions , viz. the revival of the protestant profession in an eminent kingdom , where it was totally suppressed . the last end of all turkish hostilities . the general mortification of the power of the roman church in all parts of its dominions . in explication of the trumpets and vials of the apocalypse , upon principles generally acknowledged by protestant interpreters . by drue cressener , d. d. a discourse concerning the worship of images ; preached before the university of oxford . by george tully , sub-dean of york , for which he was suspended . two sermons , one against murmuring , the other against censuring : by symon patrick , d. d. now lord bishop of chichester . an account of the reasons which induced charles the second , king of england , to declare war against the states general of the united provinces in 1672. and of the private league which he entred into at the same time with the french king to carry it on , and to establish popery in england , scotland , and ireland , as they are set down in the history of the dutch war , printed in french at paris , with the priviledg of the french king , 1682. which book he caused to be immediately suppress'd at the instance of the english ambassador . fol. an account of the private league betwixt the late king iames the second and the french king. fol. dr. wake 's sermon before the king and queen at hampton-court . dr. tennison's sermon against self-love , before the house of commons , iune 5. 1689. mr. tully's sermon of moderation , before the lord-mayor , may. 12. 1689. an examination of the scruples of those who refuse to take the oath of allegiance . by a divine of the church of england . a dialogue betwixt two friends , a iacobite and a williamite ; occasioned by the late revolution of affairs , and the oath of allegiance . the case of oaths stated . 4to . a letter from a french lawyer to an english gentleman , upon the present revolution . 4to . the advantages of the present settlement , and the great danger of a relapse . the interest of england in the preservation of ireland . the answer of a protestant gentleman in ireland to a late popish letter of n. n. upon a discourse between them , concerning the present posture of that country , and the part fit for those concern'd there to act in it . 4to . an apology for the protestants of ireland , in a brief narrative of the late revolutions in that kingdom ; and an account of the present state thereof : by a gentleman of quality . 4to . a true representation to the king and people of england how matters were carried on all a long in ireland by the late k. iames , in favour of the irish papists there , from his accession to the crown to the 10th of april , 1689. the mantle thrown off : or the irish-man dissected , 4to . reflections upon the opinions of some modern divines , concerning the nature of government in general , and that of england in particular . with an appendix relating to this matter , containing , 1. the seventy fifth canon of the council of toledo . 2. the original articles in latin , out of which the magna charta of king iohn was framed . 〈◊〉 the true magna charta of king iohn in french : by which the magna charta in matth , paris is cleared and justified , and the alterations in the common magna charta discovered . ( of which see a more particular account in the advertisement before the appendix . ) all three englished . the doctrine of non-resistance , or passive obedience no way concerned in the controversies now depending between the williamites ▪ and the iacobites . jacobi usserii armachani archiep. historia dogmatica controversiae inter orthodaros & pontificios de scripturis & sacris vernaculis , nunc primum edita . accesserunt ejusdem dissertationes de pseudo-dionysii scriptis , & de epistola ad laodicenos ante hac inedite . descripsit , digessit & notis atque auctuario completavit henricus wharton , a. m. r. archiep. cantuar. à sacris domest . 4 o. a discourse concerning the unreasonableness of a new separation on account of the oaths . with an answer to the history of passive obedience . a discourse concerning the ecclesiastical commission opened in the ierusalem . chamber , octob. 10. 1689. notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61547-e930 less . de iust. & iure , l. 2. c. 17 n. 52. molina de iust. & iure , tr . 3. disp . 150. de cive c. 8. n. 7. arist. nic. l. 8. c. 13. sen. de clem. l. 1. c. 18. mutua quidem debet esse dominii & homagii fidelitatis connexio , ita quod quantum debet homo domino ex homagio , tantum illi debet dominus ex dominio praeter solam reverentiam . glanvil . l. 9. c. 4. bracton . l. 2. §. 2. cust. norm . c. 43. zoës . in dig. l. 12. tit. 2. n. 66 jus publicum privatorum pactis mutari non potest . a. g. 454. magnates brit. regem vortigernum penitus deserentes , unanimiter filium suum in regem sublimaverunt . mat. west . p. 83 , cum autem modis omnibus male tractaret eos , legesque antecessorum suorum propter commodum suum , vel depravaret , vel mutaret . matt. west . a. d. 756. h. huntingd. l. 4. p. 196. a g 758. gen. de regno merciorum , contra regem suum beornredum insurgens , pro eo quod populum non aequis legibus , sed per tyrannidem gubernaret , convenerant in unum omnes , tam nobiles quam ignobiles , & offa duce ipsum à regno expulerunt , mat. west . nam & ipse brithricus & caeteri infra inam reges licet natalium splendore gloriantes , ( quippe qui de cerdicio originem traherent ) non parum tamen à lineâ regiae stirpis exorbitaverant , will. malmsb. de gestis reg. angl l. 1. c. 2. regnum per inam novatum qui cinegisli ex fratre cuthbaldo pronepos magis pro insitlvae virtutis industria , quam successivae sobolis prosapia in principatum ascitur . id . ib. matth. west . a. d. 854 , 867. mat. west . p. 101. bromton p. 862. w. malmsbur . l. 1. c. 3. p. 14. mat. west . a. d. 934. a. d. 939. mat. west . a. 946. bromton . p. 862. flor. wigorn . a. 949. a. 957. a. 975. florent . wigorn. a. d. 1016. w. malm. l. 2. p. 35. 2. mat. west . a. d. 1013 , 1015 , 1016 a. 1055. wil. malm. l. 2. p. 40. mat. west . a. 1015. florent . a. 102. append. 7. ad vit . alt. bromton inter 10. script . p. 877. florentin . wigor . a. d. 1014. h. huntin . l. 6. p 207. 2. malmsb. hist. novel . l. 1. p. 100 , 105. 2. rad. de diceto , a. d. 1153. matt. westm. a. 1153. mat. paris . ib. gervas . a. d. 1153. gul. neoburg . l. 1. c. 30. matt. westm. s. 1153. rot. pa l. 39. h. 6. n. 21. n. 20. mat. west . a. 1200. sixth part of the homily against wilful rebellion . mat. paris . f. 280. matt. westm. a. 1216. mat. paris . a. 1199. mat. paris . a. 1216. l. 281. tacit. l. 1. tacit. ib. joseph . l. 11. c. 8. deut. 17. 15. neh. 8. 9. joseph . 12. c. 13. 1 maccab. 14. 16. 40. 15. 33. 34. * principatum , quamvis neque occupare confetim , neque agere dubitâsset , et statione milirum , hoc est , vi et specie dominationis assumpta , diu tamen recusavit impudentissimo animo . sutton . c. 24. † sed defuncto augusto , signum praetoriis cohortibus , ut imperator dederat , excubiae , arma , catera aulae ; miles in forum , miles in curiam comitabat ; literas ad exercitus , ranquam adepto principatu misit ; nusquam cunctabundus nisi cum in senatu loqueretur . tacit. l. 1. dio. l. 57. dio l. 54. the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's letter, concerning some passages relating to his essay of humane understanding, mention'd in the late discourse in vindication of the trinity with a postscript in answer to some reflections made on that treatise in a late socinian pamphlet. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1697 approx. 199 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 79 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61522 wing s5557 estc r18564 11939609 ocm 11939609 51242 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61522) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 51242) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 515:30) the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's letter, concerning some passages relating to his essay of humane understanding, mention'd in the late discourse in vindication of the trinity with a postscript in answer to some reflections made on that treatise in a late socinian pamphlet. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 154 p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1697. first edition. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng locke, john, 1632-1704. -essay concerning human understanding. toland, john, 1670-1722. -christianity not mysterious. trinity. 2002-09 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2002-10 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2002-11 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2002-11 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-12 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's letter , concerning some passages relating to his essay of humane understanding , mention'd in the late discourse in vindication of the trinity . with a postscript in answer to some reflections made on that treatise in a late socinian pamphlet . london , printed by i. h. for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , 1697. the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's letter , &c. sir , i have seriously consider'd the letter you were pleased to send me , and i find it made up of two parts ; a complaint of me , and a vindication of your self : to both which i shall return as clear and distinct on answer , and in as few words , as the matter will permit . 1. as to the complaint of me , it runs quite through the book , and even your postscript is full of it . the substance of it is , that in answering objections against the trinity , in point of reason , i produce several passages out of your essay of humane vnderstanding , as if they were intended by you to that purpose ; but you declare to the world , p. 150. that it was written by you without any thought of the controversie between the trinitarians and unitarians ; and p. 224. that your notions about ideas have no connexion with any objections that are made by others against the doctrine of the trinity , or against mysteries . and therefore you complain of it , as an injury done to you , in imputing that to you , which you have not done , p. 95. or at least in leaving it so doubtfull , that the reader cannot distinguish who is meant , p. 96. and this you call my peculiar way of writing in this part of my treatise . now to give you and others satisfaction as to this matter , i shall first give an account of the occasion of it , and then shew what care i took to prevent misunderstanding about it . the occasion was this , being to answer the objections in point of reason , ( which had not been answered before ) the first i mention'd , was , that it was above reason , and therefore not to be believed ; in answer to this , i proposed two things to be consider'd ; 1. what we understand by reason . 2. what ground in reason there is to reject any doctrine above it , when it is proposed as a matter of faith. as to the former i observ'd that the vnitarians in their late pamphlets talk'd very much of clear and distinct ideas and perceptions , and that the mysteries of faith were repugnant to them , but never went about to state the nature and bounds of reason in such a manner as those ought to have done who make it the rule and standard of what they are to believe . but i added , that a late author in a book , call'd christianity not mysterious , had taken upon him to clear this matter , whom for that cause i was bound to consider ; the design of his discourse related wholly to matters of faith , and not to philosophical speculations ; so that there can be no dispute about his application of those he calls principles of reason and certainty . when the mind makes use of intermediate ideas to discover the agreement or disagreement of the ideas received into them , this method of knowledge , he saith , is properly called reason or demonstration . the mind , as he goes on , receives ideas two ways : 1. by intromission of the senses . 2. by considering its own operations . and these simple and distinct ideas , are the sole matter and foundation of all our reasoning . and so all our certainty is resolved into two things , either immediate perception , which is self-evidence , or the use of intermediate ideas , which discovers the certainty of any thing dubious ; which is what he calls reason . now this i said did suppose , that we must have clear and distinct ideas of what-ever we pretend to any certainty of in our minds ( by reason ) and that the only way to attain this certainty is by comparing these ideas together ; which excludes all certainty of faith or reason , where we cannot have such clear and distinct ideas . from hence i proceeded to shew , that we could not have such clear and distinct ideas , as were necessary in the present debate , either by sensation or reflection , and consequently we could not attain to any certainty about it ; for which , i instanced in the nature of substance and person , and the distinction between them . and by vertue of these principles i said , that i did not wonder , that the gentlemen of this new way of reasoning had almost discarded substance out of the reasonable part of the world. which expression you tell me you do not understand . but if you had pleased to have look'd back on the words just before , a person of your sagacity could not have missed the meaning i intended . which are , now this is the case of substance ; it is not intromitted by the senses , nor depends upon the operations of the mind , and cannot be within the compass of our reason . but you say , that if i mean that you deny or doubt that there is in the world any such thing as substance , i shall acquit you of it , if i look into some passages in your book which you refer to . but this is not the point before us , whether you do own substance or not ? but whether by vertue of these principles , you can come to any certainty of reason about it ? and i say , the very places you produce do prove the contrary ; which i shall therefore set down in your own words , both as to corporeal and spiritual substances . when we talk or think of any particular sort of corporeal substance , as horse , stone , &c. tho' the idea we have of either of them be but the complication or collection of those several simple ideas of sensible qualities which we use to find united in the thing called horse or stone , yet because we cannot conceive how they should subsist alone , or one in another , we suppose them existing in and supported by some common subject , which support we denote by the name substance , tho' it be certain we have no clear or distinct idea of that thing we suppose a support . the same happens concerning operations of the mind , viz. thinking , reasoning , &c. which we considering not to subsist of themselves , nor apprehending how they can belong to body or be produced by it , we are apt to think these the actions of some other substance , which we call spirit , whereby yet it is evident , that having no other notion or idea of matter , but something wherein those many sensible qualities , which affect our senses do subsist , by supposing a substance wherein thinking , knowing , doubting , and a power of moving , &c. do subsist , we have as clear a notion of the nature or substance of spirit as we have of body , the one being supposed to be ( without knowing what it is ) the substratum to those simple ideas we have from without , and the other supposed ( with a like ignorance of what it is ) to be the substratum to those operations which we experiment in our selves . you mention other places to the same purpose , but these are sufficient for mine . these and the like fashions of speaking , you say intimate , that the substance is supposed always something , &c. i grant that you say over and over , that substance is supposed ; but that is not what i looked for , but something in the way of certainty by reason . yes , you say , we cannot conceive how these sensible qualities should subsist alone , and therefore we suppose a substance to support them . it is but supposing still , because we cannot conceive it otherwise . but what certainty follows barely from our not being able to conceive ? are there not multitudes of things which we are not able to conceive , and yet it would not be allowed us to suppose what we think fit on that account ? i could hardly conceive that mr. l. would have brought such evidence as this against himself ; but i must suppose some unknown substratum in this case . but you go on , that as long as there is any simple idea , or sensible quality left , according to my way of arguing , substance cannot be discarded , because all simple ideas , all sensible qualities carry with them a supposition of a substratum to exist in and of a substance wherein they inhere . what is the meaning of carrying with them a supposition of a substratum and a substance ? have these simple ideas the notion of a substance in them ? no , but they carry it with them . how so ? do sensible qualities carry a corporeal substance along with them ? then a corporeal substance must be intromitted by the senses together with them . no ; but they carry the supposition with them . and truly that is burden enough for them . but which way do they carry it ? it seems it's only because we cannot conceive it otherwise . what is this conceiving ? it may be said that it is an act of the mind , not built on simple ideas , but lies in comparing the ideas of accident and substance together , and from thence finding that an accident must carry substance along with it ? but this will not clear it ; for the ideas of accidents are simple ideas , and carry nothing along with them ; but the impression made by sensible objects : and the idea of substance comes in by way of supposition with the other , so that it is not the comparing two ideas together , but the supposing one idea from another , and that a very obscure and confused one too , as is confessed , viz. that it is something which supports accidents , and was found out for that substantial end. as appears from these remarkable words of yours . they who first ran into the notion of accidents , as a sort of real beings that needed something to inhere in , were forc'd to find out the word substance to support them . had the poor indian philosopher , but thought of this word substance , he needed not to have been at the trouble to find an elephant to support it , and a tortoise to support his elephant . the word substance would have done it effectually . and it might have been taken for as good an answer from an indian philosopher , that substance without knowing what it is , is that which supports the earth , as we take it for a sufficient answer , and good doctrine from our european philosophers , that substance without knowing what it is , is that which supports accidents . what can be ridiculing the notion of substance , and the european philosophers for asserting it , if this be not ? i forbear now your repetition of it ; because i see it doth not please you . but truly it was not to upbraid you with the bare repetition as a fault in writing ( many of which i am too much sensible of my self , to blame it in others ) but only to shew that it was not a sudden fancy , but a deliberate , and ( as you thought ) a lucky similitude . but you say , you would be glad to hear a clearer and more distinct idea of substance , but you can find no better in your own thoughts , or in the books of logicians . are not these logicians a sort of european philosophers , who were despised so much before , for this very notion of substance ? even burgersdicius and sanderson ( whom you quote ) were so , as well as many others of the dull tribe of logicians . but i do not find fault with the definition of substance brought by logicians ; for they do not say , that it was found out only to support accidents , but they say , it first implies a subsistence by it self ; and then that it supports accidents : but you say , the former implies no more than that substance is a thing or being ; or in short , something they know not what . is there no difference between the bare being of a thing , and its subsistence by it self ? i had thought accidents or modes of matter which make sensible impressions on us , were things or beings ; or else there could be no effect of them , but you will not say they subsist of themselves , and are in no other thing as the proper subject of them , and you confess at last , that substance doth imply that it is not supported it self as a mode or accident . so that our european philosophers happen to be in the right at last . well! but i would think it hard to be thought to discard every thing which i do not comprehend ; for i own mysteries . why then should i charge others for discarding substance , because they have but a confused idea of it . this is the force of the charge which i bring into as few words , as may be , but without the least intention to abate the strength of it . to which i answer , that i do not charge them with discarding the notion of substance , because they have but an imperfect idea of it ; but because upon those principles there can be no certain idea at all of it , whereas i assert it to be one of the most natural and certain ideas in our minds , because it is a repugnance to our first conception of things that modes or accidents should subsist by themselves ; and therefore i said the rational idea of substance is one of the first ideas in our minds ; and however imperfect and obscure our notion be , yet we are as certain that substances are and must be , as that there are any beings in the world. herein you tell me you agree with me , and therefore you hope this is no objection against the trinity . i never thought it was , but to lay all foundation of certainty as to matters of faith upon clear and distinct ideas , which was the opinion i opposed , does certainly overthrow all mysteries of faith , and excludes the notion of substance out of rational discourse , which at length you apprehend to have been my meaning . but , say you , if any assert , that we can have no ideas but from sensation or reflection , you declare , that this is not your opinion . i am very glad of it : and i will do you all the right i can in this matter . but we must take your meaning from your own words . and there are three particulars you express it in . ( 1. ) that your meaning was , to signifie all those complex ideas of modes , relations , and specifick substances , which the mind forms out of simple ideas . so that these ideas are allowed by you although they come not by sensation or reflection . but is not the notion of particular substances a complex idea , because it is a complication of simple ideas , as will presently appear from your own words ; but all simple ideas come in by sensation and reflection . but you may say the combination of them to make one idea , is an act of the mind , and so this idea is not from sensation or reflection . it seems then , the mind hath a power to form one complex idea out of many simple ones , and this makes a true idea of a particular substance not coming in by sensation or reflection . but i am still to seek , how this comes to make an idea of substance ; i understand it very well to be a complex idea of so many accidents put together ; but i cannot understand , how a complex idea of accidents should make an idea of substance . and till you do this you are as far as ever from a true idea of substance , notwithstanding your complex ideas . ( 2. ) you never said that the general idea of substance comes in by sensation or reflection . and if there be any expressions that seem to assert it to be by a complication of simple ideas , ( and not by abstracting and inlarging them ) because we accustom our selves to suppose a substratum ; it ought to be look'd on as a slip of the pen , or a negligence of expression . in which cases , i think no man ought to be severe . but was there not too much occasion given for others to think , that the idea of particular substance was only a complication of simple ideas ; and because all simple ideas do come in , you say , only by sensation and reflection , therefore all the ideas of particular substance ( which is but a complication of them ) must either come in those ways , or else we can have no true idea of particular substance at all ? so that there are two things , wherein you are very far from giving satisfaction . 1. that although you say , that the idea of substance in general is made by abstraction ; yet you add , that all the ideas we have of particular distinct substances are nothing but several combinations of simple ideas . from whence it is plain , that according to your repeated assertions , we can have no idea of particular and distinct substances , but what is made up of a complication of simple ideas : and although there may be some abstracted notion or general idea of substance , which is only an act of the mind , yet there is no real idea of any particular substance , but what is a complication of simple ideas . and that a man hath no other idea of any substance , let it be gold or horse , iron , man , vitriol , bread , but what he has barely of those sensible qualities , which he supposes to inhere with a supposition of such a substratum , as gives as it were a support to those qualities or simple ideas , which he has observed to exist united together . these are your own words ; and what can the meaning of them be , but that we neither have nor can have any idea of a particular substance , but only with respect to the simple ideas which make it up ; and these being sensible qualities , there is no such thing as an idea of substance , but only a supposition of a substratum to support accidents . 2. that although the idea of substance be made doubtfull by attributing it only to our accustoming our selves to suppose some substratum ; yet the being of substance is not . how is this possible ? is not the being doubtfull if the idea be ; and all our certainty come in by ideas ? no , say you , the being would not be shaken , if we had no idea of substance at all . what! not as to our knowledge ? but you say , there are many things in nature of which we have no ideas . and can we have any certainty of reason as to those things ? for about that our debate is , viz. what certainty we can have as to substance , if we can have no idea of it ? so that the being of substance on these principles is far from being safe and secure as to us , when we have so lame an account of the idea of it . but you have yet a farther distinction to bring off the idea of substance ; for you say , ( 3. ) that the idea of substance is a relative idea . for the mind can frame to it self ideas of relation , and perceiving that accidents cannot subsist of themselves , but have a necessary connexion with inherence or being supported , which being a relative idea , it frames the correlative of a support , which is substance . and now i think we have all that is said in defence of the idea of substance ; viz. that there is a complex , abstracted and relative idea of it ; which is derived from the simple ideas got by sensation or reflection . but this relative abstracted idea is confessed to be an obscure , indistinct , vague idea of thing or something ; and is all that is left to be the positive idea , which hath the relation of a support or substratum to modes or accidents : and that what idea we have of particular and distinct substances is nothing but a complication of simple ideas with the supposition of a substratum or support . these being the concessions and distinctions you make in this matter , i must now return to the occasion of this debate , which was , whether the ground of our certainty , as to the nature of substance can be resolved into the simple ideas we receive in by sensation or reflection . the question is not , whether you doubt or deny any such being as substance in the world ? nor whether the notion you have of it be clear and distinct ? for you confess it is not ; but the point in debate is , what certainty we can have of the nature of substance from the simple ideas we have by sensation or reflection ? and here the question is not , whether the mind cannot form complex and abstracted general ideas from those simple ideas ? but whether those simple ideas are the foundation of our knowledge and certainty as to the nature of substance ? for you affirm over and over ( if i may have leave to say so ) that the simple ideas we have by sensation and reflection are the foundation of all our knowledge . and yet that the ideas we have of particular distinct substances are nothing but several combinations of simple ideas of accidents . which being supposed , i think it no hard matter to make it appear that we cannot come to any certainty as to the nature of substance in this way of ideas . for , 1. the simple ideas afford no ground of certainty any farther than as to themselves . outward objects make an impression on our senses ; and all the certainty we have by them is that our senses are so and so affected by them ; but what that is in those objects which produces those effects in us , these simple ideas do not acquaint us . for the old or new doctrine of qualities may be true , notwithstanding any effect of these simple ideas upon us ; for the same effects would be whether there be real qualities in the objects , or only a power to make such impressions on us , which we fancy to be qualities without us . and so for our inward perceptions ; we certainly know , that we have a power of thinking , doubting , considering , &c. these simple ideas we are very certain of ; but whether these perceptions come from a material or immaterial substance , you say , cannot be certainly known by these simple ideas : for you think matter may be so refined and modified as to produce them . now it is a very strange thing to me , that men of understanding should make these simple ideas the foundation of all our knowledge and certainty ; and yet , that we should be able to attain to no certainty at all by them , from whence they proceed . for if these ideas were intended for the means of our attaining to any certainty , this would be the first thing we should know by them . it is not distinguishing primary and secondary qualities will help us out here . for these sensible qualities of bodies , which arise from the first , viz. bulk , figure , texture and motion of parts , do not carry any evidence along with them that they are not resemblances of something in the objects as well as the primary . it is very easie to affirm , that there is in truth nothing in the objects themselves , but only powers to produce various sensations in us : but i intend not to dispute whether it be so or not ; all that i observe , is , that there have been philosophers , both european and others , of another opinion ; and that these simple ideas , which are said to be the only foundation of our knowledge , do not help us one jot in the discovery . for it is confessed by your self , that sensation discovers nothing of bulk , figure or motion of parts in the production of sensible qualities , nor can reason shew how bodies by their bulk , figure and motion should produce in the mind the ideas of blew , yellow , &c. how then are these simple ideas the foundation of our knowledge and certainty , when by them we can discover nothing of the true causes of those impressions which are made upon us ? and you own , that the ideas of sensation are often corrected by iudgment , and that so insensibly , that we are apt to mistake one for the other ; so that these simple ideas are but a very slippery and uncertain foundation for our knowledge , unless reason and judgment be watchfull to prevent the errors we are liable to in the ideas of sensation but if no more be meant by the simple ideas that come in by sensation or reflection , and their being the foundation of our knowledge , but that our notions of things come in either from our senses or the exercise of our minds : as there is nothing extraordinary in the discovery , so i am far enough from opposing that , wherein i think all mankind are agreed . but when new terms are made use of by ill men to promote scepticism and infidelity , and to overthrow the mysteries of our faith , we have then reason to enquire into them , and to examine the foundation and tendency of them . and this was the true and only reason of my looking into this way of certainty by ideas , because i found it applied to such purposes . ( 2. ) the idea of particular substances being only the complication of many simple ideas , can give no greater foundation of knowledge or certainty than those simple ideas of which it consists . which is so clear of it self , that i shall not go about to prove it . but that you make the ideas of particular substances to be no other , is plain from the several places before mention'd , produced by your self in this book . so that as to the notion of particular substances , we can find no foundation of knowledge or certainty at all from the ideas . it cannot be denied , that you joyn the supposition of a substratum with this complication of simple ideas ; but we must take notice that you place the idea of particular and distinct substances in that complication , and only reserve the supposition of the substratum , as a general confused unknown thing , which makes no part of the idea , but is only kept at a dead lift to support accidents . your words are , when we talk or think of any particular sort of corporeal substance , as horse , stone , &c. tho' the idea we have of either of them be but the complication or collection of those several simple ideas of sensible qualities , we use to find united in the thing called horse or stone : then follows , yet we suppose them existing in some common subject , &c. so that the idea was compleat before the supposition . and again , whatever be the secret nature of substance in general , all the ideas we have of particular substances are nothing but several combinations of simple ideas . can any thing be plainer ? yet there follows , co-existing in such , though unknown cause of their vnion , as makes the whole subsist of it self . here we have still an unknown support , but made no part of the idea it self . in another place , the idea of substance is said to be a complication of many ideas together , because not imagining how these simple ideas can subsist by themselves , we accustom our selves to suppose some substratum which we call substance . and this is said to be the notion of pure substance in general , and not of any particular substance , which consists in a complication only of simple ideas . ( 3. ) the relative idea of substance arising from the necessary support of accidents is a mere effect of reason and judgment , and no effect of any simple ideas . for it arises from nothing suggested by the ideas of sensation or reflection , but it comes only from the mind it self . because , as i said before , it is a repugnancy to our first conception of things , that modes or accidents should subsist by themselves . but which of the simple ideas is this built upon ? you tell me , you say the same thing , and quote these words of yours ; and i say , because we cannot conceive how simple ideas of sensible qualities should subsist alone , or one in another , we suppose them existing in and supported by some common subject . but you have not told me , how this is founded on the simple ideas , which was your main point ; you boast , you say , of my agreement with you herein : i wish we might as well agree in all other things under debate ; but why did you not inform me , how you came to this , by your simple ideas ; and what steps and progress you made in the complication of your simple ideas before you came to it . for truly , i should have found some difficulty in it , since you make the idea of a particular substance a complication of many simple ideas : for if it be so , how could a complication of simple ideas , which cannot subsist by themselves , make the idea of a substance which doth subsist by it self ? this looks a little untowardly in the way of knowledge and certainty . but there is no help for it , a substratum must be supposed to support these unlucky accidents . let it be so then . how came we to know that these accidents were such feeble things ? what simple ideas inform'd you of it ? if none , then it is to be hoped there is some other way to attain knowledge and certainty in this matter . no ; you tell me , there is no need of any other way , but this of ideas . how so ? your words are these , the general indetermined idea of something , is by the abstraction of the mind derived also from the simple ideas of sensation and reflection . but alas ! we are not upon the general indetermined idea of something ; but upon the particular idea of distinct substances , which is granted not to be by abstraction , but by a complication of simple ideas . so that this is quite off from the matter . but as to your general abstracted idea , i have something farther to say . ( 4. ) a general abstracted idea of substance is no real substance , nor a true idea of one , if particular substances be nothing but a complication of simple ideas . for you say , that the mind by abstraction from the positive simple ideas got by sensation or reflection comes to the general relative idea of substance . if then the general idea be raised from the simple ideas , and those simple ideas make that of particular and distinct substances only by complication , then the general idea of substance can be nothing but an abstracted complication of these simple ideas , or else it is not by abstraction from the simple ideas . but i do not deny that there is a general nature of substance , which is as real as a general idea can be , and it is that , which makes any particular substance be what it is in its own nature without respect to individual modes and properties . and although this general substance doth not exist of it self , yet it doth really exist in the several individuals that belong to its kind ; and the several kinds of particular substances are really distinguished from each other , not merely by simple ideas of sensible qualities , but by their inward frame and constitution : as the substance of a man is from that of a horse or a tree . for it is ridiculous to imagine , that these really differ from each other only as individuals of the same sort under the general abstracted idea of substance . and if there be substances of several kinds really different from each other , an account must be given , not only of the general notion of a substratum for accidents , but of the specifick nature of different substances , and wherein the difference of the unknown support lies , as to the modes and accidents of their kinds , which i despair of ever seeing done by the simple ideas of sensation and reflection . and your self confess , that we have no idea of abstract substance ; and that by the complex idea of sensible qualities , we are as far from the idea of the substance of body , as if we knew nothing at all . and now i freely leave the reader to judge whether this be a tolerable account of the idea of substance by sensation or reflection , and whether i deserve so much to be complained of , for exposing the unreasonableness of laying the foundation of all our certainty and knowledge upon simple ideas which we receive by sensation or reflection . but before i proceed further , it will be proper here to take notice how you justifie your idea of substance from the etymology of the word ; which , say you , is standing under or upholding . i told you very little weight is to be laid on a bare grammatical etymology , when the word is otherwise used by the best authors for the essence of a thing ; and i named cicero and quinctilian ; and the greek word imports the same . but still you say , it is derived à substando ; and you tell us your opinion , that if we knew the original of words , we should be much helped to the ideas they were first applied to and made to stand for . if you mean the true ideas of them , i must beg leave to differ in my opinion , and my reason is this , because words were used before men came to form philosophical notions or ideas of things ; and therefore they were forced to make use of words applied in another sense ; or else to coin words on purpose to express their own ( as cicero often doth , as qualities , evidence , comprehension , &c. ) so that if substare were used in another sense before , it doth not follow , that it ought to be so , when we enquire into the true ideas of things . but one of the best criticks of the latin tongue in our age , hath told us , that substantia is so called , quia per se substat . and substare is used by terence , not for standing under , but for being stedfast , metuo ut substet hospes . but as to your general observation ; i think there are very few words used in the philosophical language of the romans , but what were taken off from the original sense they were applied to ; as persona was first taken for a man in masquerade , genus for a pedegree , species for a sight , from specio , to see , virtus for manly courage , and distinguish'd from probity . sit virtus etiam non probitate minor . ovid. de pont. l. 3. and so anima was first taken for the breath in the body , as well as spiritus . thence varro saith , their ancestors , although they eat leeks and onions , yet were bene animati , had no ill breath ; and thence animam agere and efflare , saith cicero ; and from anima , he saith , came animus , by which they understood the mind ; hinc animus ad intelligentiam tributus , saith varro ▪ and many others of a like nature . but i shall only add one more , and that is the name of idea , so very often used by your self and others of late . i wish we had been told the original use of it , and how it was first applied , that we might better judge of the true meaning of it now when so much weight is laid upon it . i find in thucydides , who was an accurate writer , and understood the true sense of words , that an idea is used by him for an appearance and shew without reality , as when he saith , that the athenians in dealing with the sicilians , made use of the same idea which they had done before . where it can signifie nothing but what he calls before a pretence . but when the philosophers came to use this word , they applied it to another sense ; plato made use of it to signifie the true exemplars or models of things , according to which the several sorts of them were framed and distinguished . this notion he had , as many others , from the pythagoreans , but what they mystically called numbers he called ideas . but idea in its original sense from the etymology of it , is derived from seeing , and so the natural sense of it is something visible ; from thence it came to signifie the impression made in us from our senses ; and thence it was carried to the general notion of a thing , and from thence by metaphysical and abstracted speculations to the original exemplars of particular essences , which were simple and vniform and not liable to those changes which visible objects are subject to . so cicero tells us , plato formed his notion of idea , which he would by no means allow to any representation made by our senses , which are dull , heavy , uncertain and imperfect either by the minuteness , or distance , or mutability of the objects ; thence the philosophers of his school denied any true grounds of certainty to be laid in the ideas we have by our senses , which can only afford ground for probability ( not as to the bare objects ) but as to the notions we take from them . but all knowledge and certainty was placed in the acts of the mind ( scientiam nusquam esse censebant nisi in animi notionibus atque rationibus ) i. e. in examining and comparing , not the bare ideas , but the definitions of things ; and from these , judging of the truth and certainty of them . and if our ideas of things be so few , so superficial , and so imperfect as you confess them to be ; if we are so much to seek , as to the connexion of ideas , and the finding out proper intermediate ideas , i am afraid this way of certainty by ideas will come to very little at last . and so this agreement and disagreement of ideas will have the fate of the stoicks criterion of truth , which only multiplied disputes , but ended none . never any men talked more of certainty than they ; and they boasted of their discoveries of the true grounds of it : and the question then was not about a criterion of the bare existence of things ; ( about which they allow'd the judgment of the senses to be sufficient , and the ideas from them to be true ; ) nor was it about a criterion for the actions of life , for which they thought probability or opinion sufficient ; but it was about finding out such a mark of truth in the ideas of our minds as could not agree to a falshood , i. e. such an impression or signature , as cicero expresses it , as appear'd in that which was , which could not be found in that which was not . and this was called visum , or a true idea ; his words are , quale igitur visum ? quod ex eo quod esset , sicut esset , impressum est , signatum , & effectum . the greeks called it a comprehensive idea , which they compared to light , which discovers it self as well as other things . but when they came to be pinched with particular difficulties about the natures of things , they were never able to make out that infallible mark of truth in their idea ; and yet this was a more likely way to have found it , than to place the grounds of certainty in the comparing the agreement and disagreement of ideas , unless it could be made out that we have a full stock of ideas , and are able to discern and make out the connexion of them with one another . for if we fail in either of these , the talking of ideas and comparing those which we have will do us little service in finding out of truth . but i confess , the design in general is so good , that it's pity that it should lie open to so many objections ; and much more , that it should be abused to very bad purposes . but my joyning your words with another's application , is that which hath given you so much offence as to make you think it necessary to publish this letter for your vindication . 2. i come therefore now to shew the care i took to prevent being mis-understood ; which will best appear by my own words . i must do that right to the ingenious author of the essay of humane vnderstanding , ( from whence these notions are borrow'd to serve other purposes than he intended them , ) that he makes the case of spiritual and corporeal substances to be alike . it was too plain , that the bold writer against the mysteries of our faith took his notions and expressions from thence , and what could be said more for your vindication , than that he turned them to other purposes than the author intended them ? and the true reason why the plural number was so often used by me , was because he built upon those which he imagin'd had been your grounds , and my business was to shew that those expressions of yours , which seemed most to countenance his method of proceeding could not give any reasonable satisfaction . but you say , you do not place certainty only in clear and distinct ideas ; but in the clear and visible connection of any of our ideas . and certainty of knowledge , you tell us , is to perceive the agreement or disagreement of ideas , as expressed in any proposition . whether this be a true account of the certainty of knowledge or not , will be presently consider'd . but it is very possible he might mistake or misapply your notions ; but there is too much reason to believe , he thought them the same , and we have no reason to be sorry , that he hath given you this occasion for the explaining your meaning , and for the vindication of your self in the matters you apprehend i had charged you with : and if your answer doth not come fully up in all things to what i could wish , yet i am glad to find that in general you own the mysteries of the christian faith , and the scriptures to be the foundation and rule of it . for thus you conclude your book , in the last paragraph of the postscript . the holy scripture is to me , and always will be the constant guide of my assent , and i shall always hearken to it , as containing infallible truth relating to things of the highest concernment . and i wish i could say there were no mysteries in it ; i acknowledge there are to me , and i fear always will be . but where i want the evidence of things , there yet is ground enough for me to believe , because god hath said it : and i shall presently condemn and quit any opinion of mine , as soon as i am shewn that it is contrary to any revelation in the holy scripture . which words seem to express so much of a christian spirit and temper , that i cannot believe you intended to give any advantage to the enemies of the christian faith ; but whether there hath not been too just occasion for them to apply them in that manner is a thing very fit for you to consider . for in an age wherein the mysteries of faith are so much exposed by the promoters of scepticism and infidelity , it is a thing of dangerous consequence to start such new methods of certainty as are apt to leave mens minds more doubtfull than before ; as will soon appear from your own concessions . for if the ground of certainty be resolved into the agreement and disagreement of the ideas as expressed in any proposition ; is it not natural enough from hence to infer , that from whencesoever this proposition comes , i must judge of it by the agreement or disagreement of the ideas contained in it ? you make a distinction between the certainty of truth and the certainty of knowledge . the former you say , is when words are so put together in propositions as exactly to express the agreement or disagreement of the ideas they stand for : and the latter , when we perceive the agreement or disagreement of ideas , as expressed in any proposition . but our question about certainty must relate to what we perceive , and the means we have to judge of the truth and falshood of things as they are expressed to us ; which you tell us , is by the agreement or disagreement of the ideas in the proposition . and in another place , where-ever we perceive the agreement or disagreement of any of our ideas , there is certain knowledge ; and when-ever we are sure those ideas agree with the reality of things , there is certain real knowledge : and then conclude , i think i have shewn wherein it is that certainty , real certainty , consists , which , what-ever it was to others , was , i confess , to me heretofore , one of those desiderata which i found great want of . so that here is plainly a new method of certainty owned , and that placed in the agreement and disagreement of ideas . but the author already mention'd , professes to go upon the same grounds , and therefore it was necessary for me to examine them . he saith , that the simple and distinct ideas we receive by sensation and reflection are the sole matter and foundation of all our reasoning ; and that our knowledge is in effect nothing else but the perception of the agreement or disagreement of our ideas . and that where our perception is not immediate , our certainty comes from the clear and visible connexion of ideas . for he saith , that if the connexion of all the intermediate ideas be not indubitable , we can have no certainty . wherein now do his grounds of certainty differ from yours ? but he applies them to other purposes . i grant he doth so , and that was it which i had said for your vindication . but the question now is , whether your general expression had not given him too much occasion for it ? it is true , that ch 3. he distinguishes the means of information from the ground of perswasion ; and he reckons all authority divine as well as human among the means of information : and the ground of perswasion he makes to be nothing but evidence ; and this evidence , he saith , lies in our ideas , ch. 4. in the agreement or disagreement of them , p. 19. and he places certainty in our clear perceptions of this agreement or disagreement , which you call clear and visible connexion of ideas . and wherein then lies the difference as to the grounds of certainty ? but his design is to overthrow the mysteries of faith. this is too true . but upon what grounds ? is it not upon this principle , that our certainty depends upon the clear perception of the agreement or disagreement of ideas in any proposition . now let the proposition come to us either by human or divine authority : if our certainty depends upon this , we can be no more certain , than we have clear perception of the agreement or disagreement of the ideas contained in it ; and so he thought he had reason to reject all mysteries of faith , which are contained in propositions , upon your grounds of certainty . but you say , you own the infallible truth of the scriptures , and that where you want the evidence of things there is ground enough for you to believe , because god hath said it . i do verily believe you , because i have a far greater opinion of your sincerity and integrity than i see reason for , as to the other person who pretends mightily to own the authority of scripture at the same time when he undermines it . for his words are , the authority of god or divine revelation is the manifestation of truth by truth it self , to whom it is impossible to lye , p. 16. but when he comes to state the point , how far we are to believe upon divine revelation , he hath these words , sect. 2. ch . 1. n. 10. the natural result of what hath been said is , that to believe the divinity of scripture , or the sense of any passage thereof without rational proofs , and an evident consistency is a blameable credulity , and a temerarian opinion ordinarily grounded upon an ignorant and wilfull disposition . and in the next chapter he saith , that revelation is not a necessitating motive , but a mean of information . not the bare authority of him that speaks , but the clear conception i form of what he says is the ground of my perswasion . and again , whoever reveals any thing , his words must be intelligible , and the matter possible . this rule holds good , let god or man be the revealer . as for unintelligible relations , we can no more believe them from the revelation of god , than from that of man. sect. 2. ch . 2. n. 16. p. 42. but what are all these things to you , who own , that where you want the evidence of things , the authority of revelation is ground enough for you to believe . i do not impute them to you , but i must say , that he alledges no ground for his sayings but your ground of certainty : for in the same page he saith , that the conceived ideas of things are the only subjects of believing , denying , approving , and every other act of the understanding . all the difference we see is , that he applies that to propositions in scripture , which you affirm'd of propositions in general , viz. that our certainty depends upon the clear perception of the agreement or disagreement of the ideas contained in them . but i shall do you all the right i can , as to this matter , by shewing what reason i had to say , that your notions were turn'd to other purposes than you intended them , and that i shall make appear from several passages in the same book . 1. you own the great defects of humane knowledge , notwithstanding the simple ideas we have by sensation or reflection . and from these things , 1. the paucity and imperfection of our ideas in general ; because our sensation and reflection goes so little a way in respect of the vast extent of the universe ; and the infinite power and wisdom of the creator of it : so that what we see in the intellectual and sensible world , holds no proportion to what we see not : and whatever we can reach with our eyes or our thoughts of either of them , is but a point , almost nothing in comparison of the rest . 2. the want of ideas which we are capable of , because although we have ideas in general of bulk , figure and motion ; yet we are to seek as to the particulars of them in the greatest part of the bodies of the universe ; although we daily see their effects . and that because of the distance and remoteness of some , and the minuteness of others , and therefore we cannot come to a scientifical knowledge in natural things , much less to that of spiritual beings , of which we have only some few and superficial ideas . 3. want of a discoverable connexion between those ideas we have . because the mechanical affections of bodies have no affinity at all with the ideas they produce in us ; there being no conceivable connexion between any impulse of any sort of body , and any perception of any colour or smell which we find in our minds . and so the operations of our minds upon our bodies are unconceiveable by us ; and the coherence and continuity of parts of matter ; and the original rules and communication of motion , are such as we can discover no natural connexion with any ideas we have . 4. want of finding out such intermediate ideas , which may shew us the agreement or disagreement they have one with another . and this for want of due application of mind in acquiring , examining and due comparing those ideas ; and by ill use of words , which have so much perplexed and confounded mens understanding . 2. you own the many failings in our reason . by which you understand two faculties in our minds , viz. sagacity and illation ; the one finding out , and the other ordering the intermediate ideas ; so as to discover the connexion between them . but reason , you say , fails , where our ideas fail us , and because of the obscurity , confusion or imperfection of our ideas , both as to matter and our own minds , and the divine operations ; and for want of intermediate ideas ; and by proceeding upon false principles and dubious expressions . 3. as to propositions you own these things ; 1. those are according to reason , whose truth we can discover , by examining and tracing those ideas we have by sensation or reflection ; and by natural deduction find to be true or probable . 2. those are above reason , whose truth or probability we cannot by reason derive from those principles . 3. those are contrary to reason , which are inconsistent with , or irreconcileable to our clear and distinct ideas . 4. as to faith and divine revelation you own , 1. that faith is the assent to any proposition , not thus made out by deductions of reason , but upon the credit of the proposer , as coming immediately from god which we call revelation . 2. that things above reason and not contrary to it , are properly matters of faith , and to be assented to on the authority of divine revelation . thus far i have endeavoured with all possible brevity and clearness to lay down your sense about this matter . by which it is sufficiently proved that i had reason to say , that your notions were carried beyond your intention . but you still seem concerned that i quote your words , although i declare , that they were used to other purposes than you intended them . i do confess to you , that the reason of it was , that i found your notions as to certainty by ideas was the main foundation which the author of christianity not mysterious went upon ; and that he had nothing which look'd like reason , if that principle were removed ; which made me so much endeavour to shew that it would not hold . and so i suppose the reason of my mentioning your words so often is no longer a riddle to you . i now proceed to other particulars of your vindication . among other arguments against this principle of certainty , i instanced in the being of spiritual substances within our selves , from the operations of our minds , which we do perceive by reflection , as thinking , doubting , considering , &c. this argument i yielded to be very good ; but that which i urged from thence was , that it could not be from those simple ideas of the operations of the mind ; because you had affirmed that it is impossible for us by the contemplation of our ideas to be certain without revelation that a material substance cannot think . this is a point , in my apprehension , of great consequence , and therefore i must more strictly examine what you say in answer to it . which is , that thinking is inconsistent with the idea of self subsistence , and therefore hath a necessary connexion with a support or subject of inhesion , i. e. if there be thinking there must be something that thinks . but the question is , whether that something be a material or immaterial substance ? but this thinking substance is in your sense a spirit . the question i put is , whether matter can think or not ? if not , then the substance which thinks must be immaterial ; if it can think , then there can be no evidence from the idea of thinking to prove the substance which thinks to be immaterial . this i take to be plain reasoning ; which you must allow , because it is about the agreement or disagreement of two simple ideas , viz. matter and thinking . but you say , that the general idea of substance being the same every-where , the modification of thinking , or the power of thinking joyned to it makes it a spirit , without considering what other modification it has , as whether it has the modification of solidity or not . as on the other side , substance , which hath the modification of solidity , is matter , whether it has the modification of thinking or not . and therefore if i mean by a spiritual an immaterial substance , you grant that you have not proved nor upon your principles can it be demonstratively proved , that there is an immaterial substance in us that thinks . i have thus set down your own words , that you may not complain i have done you injury . but when you put in demonstratively proved , i suppose you mean in the way of certainty by ideas ; for concerning that our dispute is . and therefore when you add , that you expect that i should conclude it demonstrable from principles of philosophy ; you must give me leave to say , this is going off from the business before us ; which is about your principles of certainty from ideas ; for it was only to that purpose , that i brought this argument to prove , that we cannot from our ideas be certain of one of the points of greatest importance , viz. that there is a spiritual substance within us ; and yet the operations of our mind are made one of the sources of those simple ideas , which are made by you the foundation of knowledge and certainty . so that the point before us is , whether this assertion of yours , that the power of thinking may belong to modified matter , doth not overthrow your certainty by ideas ? no , say you , that which you are certain of by the idea is only , that there is in us a spiritual substance , and that , you say , implies no more than a thinking substance , i. e. that by thinking you can prove you have a power of thinking , which i believe may be demonstratively proved . but i pray sir , consider how this question arose , it was from your distinguishing spiritual and corporeal substances from each other ; and saying that we have as clear a notion of a spirit as we have of a body . against this i urged , that if it be possible for matter to think , which you assert , then from the idea of thinking , we cannot prove the certainty of a spiritual substance within us , where it is plain , that a spiritual substance is opposed to the power of matter . it is not , whether matter so modified can think , but whether matter can think ; and let it be modified how it will , matter is matter still . but the power of thinking makes it a spirit , say you . but doth it cease to be matter or not ? if not , then it is matter still endued with a power of thinking ; and so our idea can be no other , than of a material thinking substance . but you say further , that the power of thinking makes it a spirit , without considering what other modifications it has , whether it hath the modification of solidity or not . that is , although it be really a material substance , yet the modification of thinking makes it a spiritual substance ; for we are to go no farther than that modification of thinking , and from thence we are to conclude it to be a spiritual substance . but we are now enquiring not into the bare modification of thinking ; but whether from thence we can prove an immaterial substance within us , or which is all one , a spiritual substance as opposed to corporeal , which is your own distinction . and that i may not be thought to do you injury , i shall produce your own words . by the simple ideas we have taken from our own minds — we are able to frame the complex idea of a spirit . and thus by putting together the ideas of thinking , perceiving , liberty and power of moving themselves , we have as clear a perception and notion of immaterial substances , as well as material . so that here we have two things clear . 1. that a spirit and immaterial substance are the same . 2. that from the operations of our minds , we have a clear idea of an immaterial substance within us . again you say , that the primary ideas we have of body as contradistinguished to spirit , are the cohesion of solid and consequently separable parts , and a power of communicating motion by impulse . these you think are the original ideas proper and peculiar to body . here body is contradistinguished to spirit ; and as it is so , the cohesion of solid and separable parts is made one of the original ideas proper and peculiar to body as distinguished from a spiritual substance : how then , i pray , can a spiritual substance consist of solid and separable parts ? for whatever is solid , you grant to be consequently separable . this seems to me to confound the ideas of body and spirit , which you had taken so much care to distinguish ; and so must destroy all certainty of a spiritual substance from your ideas . for although the bare simple idea of thinking may be said to be distinct from that of a solid body ; yet it is impossible from that idea so explained to prove a spiritual substance , as distinct from body . which was the thing i intended to prove . but you go on to compare the complex idea of spirit and body in these words ; let us compare then our complex idea of spirit , without our complex idea of body . our idea of bod● is an extended solid substance , capable of communicating motion by impulse ; and our idea of our souls is of a substance that thinks and has a power of exciting motion in body by will and thought . these you think are our complex ideas of soul and body as contradistinguished . here you do not speak of the bare ideas of thinking and solidity ; but of the different substances , and one is said to be a solid substance and the other a substance that thinks . i shall add one passage more to the same purpose . the idea we have of spirit compared with that we have of body , stands thus . the substance of spirit is unknown to us , and so is the substance of body equally unknown to us . here we have again the substance of spirit and the substance of body distinguished from each other ; and not the bare modifications . so that i need no body to answer you but your self . but least such expressions should be thought a mere slip of the pen ; you are pleased again to assert the notion of an immaterial knowing substance to imply no more of a contradiction than an extended divisible body . and yet after all this you confess , that you have not proved an immaterial substance , and that it cannot be proved upon your principles . what is the meaning of this ? i cannot think you intended to lessen the authority of your book in so considerable a part of it : and i should much rather have thought the latter passage a slip of your pen , but that in your letter you go about to defend it . therefore i must attend your motions in it . you say , that all the great ends of religion and morality are secured barely by the immortality of the soul without a necessary supposition that the soul is immaterial . i am of opinion , that the great ends of religion and morality are best secured by the proofs of the immortality of the soul from its nature and properties ; and which i think prove it immaterial . i do not question whether god can give immortality to a material substance ; but i say it takes off very much from the evidence of immortality , if it depend wholly upon god's giving that , which of its own nature it is not capable of . for if the soul be a material substance it is really nothing but life ; or matter put into motion with such organs and parts as are necessary to hold them together ; and when death comes , then this material substance so modified is lost . god may by his power grant a new life ; but will any man say , god can preserve the life of a man when he is dead ? this is a plain absurdity , and i think no such thing tends to preserve religion or morality . mr. hobbes speaks very consonantly to his own principles ( although not to those of religion and morality . ) for he saith , that the universe being the aggregate of all bodies , there is no real part of it that is not also a body . and so he saith , that substance and body signifie the same thing , and therefore substance incorporeal are words which destroy one another . but what then is a spirit ? that , he saith , in the proper signification of it in common speech , is either a subtle , fluid , invisible body , or a ghost , or other idol or phantasm of the imagination . but is there not an immortal soul in man ? the promise of immortality , saith he , is made to the man and not to the soul ▪ and immortal life doth not begin in man till the resurrection . from whence it is plain , he look'd on the soul as nothing but the life ; and so he saith , that soul and life in scripture do usually signifie the same thing . and in the vindication of his leviathan , he saith , that his doctrine is , that the soul is not a separated substance , but that the man at his resurrection shall be revived . and he answers that place , fear not them which kill the body , but cannot kill the soul ; thus ▪ man cannot kill a soul , for the man killed shall revive again . i think he might as well have said , that man cannot kill the body ; for that shall be revived at the resurrection . but what is all this to you ? i hope nothing at all . but it shews , that those who have gone about to overthrow the immortality of the soul by nature , have not been thought to secure the great ends of religion and morality . and although we think the separate state of the soul after death is sufficiently revealed in scripture , yet it creates a great difficulty in understanding it , if the soul be nothing but life , or a material substance , which must be dissolved when life is ended . for if the soul be a material substance it must be made up as others are , of the cohesion of solid and separate parts , how minute and invisible soever they be . and what is it which should keep them together , when life is gone ? so that it is no easie matter to give an account , how the soul should be capable of immortality , unless it be an immaterial substance ; and then we know the solution of the texture of bodies cannot reach the soul being of a different nature . and this is no more than what the wisest and most intelligent philosophers have asserted , merely from the consideration of the nature and properties of the soul : as you very well know ; and i need not for your sake , run into such a digression , ( or as you call it step out of my way ) any farther , then you give occasion for it in what follows . for you tell me , you have great authorities to justifie your using a spiritual substance without excluding materiality from it . and for this you refer me to two great men indeed among the romans , cicero and virgil. i was surprized at what you say out of cicero , having been no stranger to his writings about these matters , and i have consulted the place you refer to ; where you say that he opposes corpus to ignis and anima , i. e. breath ; and that the foundation of his distinction of the soul from the body is , because it is so subtle as to be out of sight . it is a very easie matter to multiply citations out of cicero , where spiritus and anima are both taken for breath ; but any one who will but read the very beginning of his tusculan questions , may understand his meaning . for in the entrance of that dispute he takes animus for the soul , and neither anima nor spiritus : and he tells us , there were two opinions about it at death . some held a discessus animi à corpore , a departure of the soul from the body , others said , that the soul never departed , but was extinguished with life : and the several opinions he sets down at large , ch. 9 , 10. and then ch. 11. he summs up the different opinions ; and saith he , if it be the heart , or blood , or brain ; because it is a body , it will be extinguished with it : if it be anima , the vital breath , it will be dissipated , if it be fire , it will be extinguished . it is true , he distinguishes here the vital breath from the body ; and no one questions such a distinction of the animal and vital spirits from the grosser parts of the body ; but all this proceeds upon the supposition of those who held nothing to survive after death ; but then he goes on to those who held the souls , when they are gone out of their bodies , to go to heaven as their proper habitation . and here he plainly supposes the soul not to be a finer sort of body , but of a different nature from the body which it leaves . nam corpus quidem , saith he , quasi vas est & receptaculum animi , c. 22. and elsewhere he calls the body the prison of the soul , c. 30. and saith , that every wise man is glad to be dismissed out of the bonds and darkness of it : and his business in the body is secernere animum à corpore , to draw off the soul from the body ; which the philosophers called commentatio mortis , i. e. a continual exercise of dying ; therefore , saith he , disjungamus nos à corporibus , id est , consuescamus mori . is it possible now to think so great a man look'd on the soul but as a modification of the body , which must be at an end with life ? instead of it , there are several things very remarkable in this very book concerning the immortality of souls by nature ; 1. he extremely despises those who made the soul a mere mode of matter which was extinguished with life ; and he saith , they were plebeii philosophi , ch. 23. a mean sort of philosophers , and in another place minuti philosophi , de senect . c. 23. who held there was no sense after death . but he represents cato there , as weary of the noise and filth of this world , and longing to go to far better company . o praeclarum diem , cum ad illud divinum animorum concilium coetumque proficiscar , atque ex hâc turbâ & colluvione discedam ! did these men look on the souls of men , as mere modifications of matter ? 2. he urges the general consent of nations for the permanency of souls after death . c. 16. and he affirms nature it self de immortalitate animorum tacitè judicare , c. 14. and i do not think the general consent of mankind in this matter , so uncertain , or so slight an argument , as some have made it ; even since the late discoveries : as i think it were no hard matter to prove ; but i shall not here go out of my way to do it . 3. the most ancient philosophers of greece held the same opinion as he shews from pherecydes , pythagoras , socrates , plato , &c. c. 16 , 17 , &c. and they went upon far better reasons than the other , as he proves at large , c. 21 , 22 , 23. 4. that the bodies and souls of men have a different frame and original . our bodies , he saith , c. 19. are made of terrestrial principles ; but the souls , he saith , are of a divine original ; and if we could give an account how they were made , we should likewise how they were dissolved , c. 14. as we may of the parts and contexture of bodies ; but saith he , animorum nulla in terris origo inveniri potest , nihil est enim in animis mixtum atque concretum , aut quod ex terra natum atque fictum esse videatur , c. 27. so that here he plainly makes a difference between our bodily substance , and that of our souls , which have no bodily texture and composition ; because there is no material substance , which can reach to the wonderfull faculties and operations of the soul ; and therefore he concludes in these words , singularis est igitur quaedam natura atque vis animi sejuncta ab his usitatis notisque naturis . what can express the soul to be of a different substance from the body , if these words do it not ? and presently adds , that the mind is of a divine and spiritual nature and above material composition as god himself is . i hope this may give you satisfaction as to cicero , how far he was from making the soul a material substance . and the only place you produce out of him , c. 22. proves nothing but that the soul is invisible , as you may see by looking upon it again . as to virgil , you quote that expression , dum spiritus hos regit artus ; where it is taken for the vital spirit ; which sense i know no body questions ; and so tully expresses life , quae corpore & spiritu continetur , and opposes it to a life of immortal fame , which he there speaks of , pro marcello , c. 9. but the only matter in debate is , whether they excluded any other notion of spirit , which was not done , as i have made it appear concerning cicero , and so i shall of virgil too . for soon after , aeneid 4.385 . he hath these words , et cum frigida mors animae seduxerit artus , omnibus vmbra locis adero , dabis improbe poenas . which shews that virgil did believe the soul to be more than a mere vital spirit , and that it subsisted and acted in a separate state : and it is observed by servius , that virgil uses spiritus , mens and animus for the same . in aeneid 6.726 . spiritus intus alit , totamque infusa per artus . mens agitat molem — and he proves , that virgil asserted the immortality of souls , and answers the arguments against it ; and as far as he could understand , he saith , that our bodies are from the elements and our souls from god ; and the poets intention was , vt animos immortales diceret . so that neither cicero nor virgil do you any kindness in this matter , being both assertors of the souls immortality by nature . if these will not do you bring me to scripture , and say , that solomon himself speaks after the same manner about man and beast , as the one dieth , so dieth the other , yea , they have all one spirit , eccles. 3.19 . i will not dispute about the proper sense of the hebrew word , but i must about solomon's sense . for although he makes life and death common to man and beast ; yet he saith , v. 21. the spirit of a man goeth upward , and the spirit of a beast goeth down to the earth . but you say , if the notion of a spirit excludes materiality then the spirit of a beast must be immaterial , as well as that of a man. i answer , that although the bare word doth not prove it , yet the design of solomon's discourse doth , and so the going upward of the spirit of a man must be understood in a very different sense , from the going downward of the spirit of a beast . for he saith concerning man , that the spirit shall return to god that gave it , c. 12.7 . to what purpose ? to be dissipated in the common air ? or to be lost in the vast confusion of matter ? no , but he concludes his book thus ; v. 14. for god shall bring every work into iudgment with every secret thing , whether it be good , or whether it be evil . if these be solomon's words , as no doubt they were , and he were a man of sense , and laid his sayings together , as no doubt he did ; these last words must interpret the foregoing , and his other sayings be made consonant to this . yes , you may say , this relates to the general iudgment , and not to the soul's subsistence after death . but solomon speaks of the spirit of a man going upward at death , and returning to god that gave it : what sense is there in this , if it be a material substance which vanishes and is dissolved then ? and if the soul be not of it self a free , thinking substance , i do not see what foundation there is in nature for a day of judgment . for where there is nothing but matter , there is no freedom of acting ; where there is no liberty , there is no choice ; where there is no choice , there is no room for rewards and punishments , and consequently no day of iudgment . but solomon positively concludes , there will be a judgment to come as to good and evil actions in another world , and therefore he must be understood in those expressions , to mean a free and thinking , and consequently an immaterial spirit in us . but you urge farther , that our saviour himself opposes spirit to flesh and bones , luk. 24.39 . i. e. to such a gross compages as could be seen and felt . the question then was , whether it were the real body of christ or only an appearance of it ; and how could this be resolved better than our saviour doth ? handle me and see , for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have . but he calls this a spirit . what follows ? therefore a spirit is only an appearance ? i do not think that is your meaning . and no body questions but the name of spirits is sometimes given to apparitions . but this is far from our case , which is , whether that real spiritual substance we find in our selves be material or not ? doth a spiritual substance imply matter in its idea or not ? you cannot say it doth : then it may be immaterial : but how come we to know things but by their distinct ideas ? is the idea of matter and spirit distinct or not ? if not , to what purpose do we talk of knowledge by ideas when we cannot so much as know body and spirit from each other by them ? is it then any absurdity to call a spiritual substance immaterial ? no , you say , you would not be thought to affirm , that spirit never does signifie a purely immaterial substance ; for in that sense the scripture attributes the notion of spirit to god , and you have proved from your principles , that there is a spiritual immaterial substance . and this you think proves an immaterial substance in your way of ideas . but of that afterwards . we are yet upon the proving an immaterial substance in our selves from the ideas we have by sensation and reflection . now , i say , still this is impossible if the spiritual substance in us may be material . and at last you grant , that what i say is true , that it cannot upon these principles be demonstrated . then , say i , your grounds of certainty from ideas are plainly given up . but you say , it may be proved probable to the highest degree . but that is not the point ; for it is not probability , but certainty , that we are promised in this way of ideas ; and that the foundation of our knowledge and real certainty lies in them ; and is it dwindled into a probability at last ? the only reason i had to engage in this matter was a bold assertion , that the ideas we have by sensation or reflection are the sole matter and foundation of all our reasoning : and that our certainty lies in perceiving the agreement or disagreement of ideas as expressed in any proposition ; which last are your own words . how can we then be certain where we have no ideas from sensation or reflection to proceed by ? as in the present case . i have a mind to be resolved whether the soul in man be an immaterial substance or not ; and we are to judge of the truth of it by our ideas . i ask then , what idea you have of the soul by reflection ? you answer , that it is a thinking substance . but doth this prove it immaterial ? you answer , that you cannot be certain , but that it is very probable . is not this giving up the cause of certainty ? but you say , you never offer'd it as a way of certainty where we cannot reach certainty . but did you not offer to put us into the way of certainty ? what is that , but to attain certainty in such things , where we could not otherwise do it ? and what a strange way is this , if it fails us in some of the first foundations of the real knowledge of our selves ? but you say , if i dislike your way , you desire me to shew you a better way of certainty as to these points . i am sensible that you design herein , to draw me out of my way to do you a kindness ; but i will so far gratifie you at this time ; and to oblige you the more , i will make use of no other principles or ideas , than such as i meet with in your book ; and from thence i do not despair of proving , that we may be certain that a material substance cannot think . and the method i shall proceed in , shall be to prove it , by such ways and steps as you have directed me to , although you might not think to find them so laid together . 1. from your general principles as to knowledge and certainty . you say , that all our knowledge consists in the view the mind hath of its own ideas ; which is the utmost light and greatest certainty , we with our faculties and in our way of knowledge are capable of . here you resolve our knowledge and certainty into the view of the ideas in our minds ; therefore by those ideas we may come to know the certainty of things ; not in the frame and inward essence of them , as you often tell us ; but by the powers and properties which belong to them . whatever , say you , be the secret and abstract nature of substance in general , all the ideas we have of particular distinct substances , are nothing but several combinations of simple ideas and you take pains to prove , that powers make a great part of our complex ideas of substances : and their secondary qualities are those which in most of them serve principally to distinguish substances one from another ; which secondary qualities , as has been shewn are nothing but bare powers . so that our knowledge cannot reach the inward substance of things ; and all our certainty of knowledge as to them , and their distinction from each other , must depend on those powers and properties which are known to us . one would think sometimes , that you would allow mankind no more knowledge than suits with the conveniencies of life ; but this would overthrow the great design of your book , which is to put us into a way of real certainty by the agreement or disagreement of ideas ; and where ever we perceive the agreement or disagreement of any of our ideas , there is certain knowledge . so that here you own we may come to a certainty of knowledge ( which is beyond mere probability ) and that by perceiving the agreement or disagreement of ideas . 2. if we can find the disagreement of any two ideas upon your own principles , we must do those of body and spirit . for the idea of matter in general , you say , that in truth it contains nothing but the idea of a solid substance , which is every-where the same , every-where uniform . and that body stands for a solid extended figured substance . so that solidity , extension and figure are the inseparable properties of bodies . and in another place you have these words , the primary ideas we have peculiar to bodies as contradistinguished to spirit , are the cohesion of solid and consequently separable parts , and a power of communicating motion by impulse . these you think are the original ideas proper and peculiar to body , for figure is but the consequence of finite extension . here we have the idea of body laid down by your self as contradistinguished to spirit . therefore by your own confession we may perceive the disagreement of these two ideas of body and spirit , and consequently may certainly know their distinction from each other by their inseparable properties . but if it be possible for matter to think , then these ideas must be confounded : yet you distinguish the ideas of a material and immaterial substance in these words , putting together the ideas of thinking and willing , and the power of motion or rest added to substance , we have the idea of a spirit , and putting together the ideas of solid coherent parts , a power of being moved , joyned with substance , we have the idea of matter . the one is as clear and distinct an idea as the other ; the idea of thinking and moving a body being as clear and distinct ideas , as the ideas of extension , solidity and being moved . can any thing now be plainer than the disagreement of these two ideas , by the several properties which belong to them ? but if after all this matter may think , what becomes of these clear and distinct ideas ? and yet you have th●se words , thus by putting together the ideas of thinking . perceiving , liberty and power of moving themselves and other things , we have as clear a perception and notion of immaterial substances as we have of material . here it is plain , that you make thinking and perceiving to be part of the complex idea of an immaterial substance . how is this possible , if a material substance be capable of thinking as well as an immaterial ? either therefore you must renounce your own doctrine of certainty by ideas , or you must conclude , that matter cannot think . 3. but i urge this yet further from your notion of liberty and necessity . liberty , you say , is the idea of a power in any agent to do or forbear any action , according to the determination or thought of the mind , whereby either of them is preferred to the other . so that liberty cannot be , where there is no thought , no volition , no wish . and again , agents that have no thought , no volition at all are necessary agents . but you make a power of thinking and liberty to be parts of the complex idea of an immaterial substance , in the words before cited . but what liberty can you conceive in mere matter ? for you grant , that bodies can operate upon one another only by impulse and motion ; that the primary qualities of bodies which are inseparable from it , are extension , solidity , figure and mobility from any body . now how can the idea of liberty agree with these simple ideas of body ? to be moved only by impulse from another body ; and from the free determination of our own thoughts ; are two ideas as disagreeing with each other , as we can well imagine . but if matter may think , it may have liberty too , because you join these together ; but if it be uncapable of liberty which goes along with thinking , how can you imagine it should be capable of thinking ? i argue , from your notion of personal indentity , which you place in self consciousness . for you tell us , that a person is a thinking intelligent being that has reason and reflection ; and can consider it self , as it self , the same thinking thing in different times and places ; which it does only by that consciousness , which is inseparable from thinking , and seems to you essential to it . from whence it follows , that if there can be no self-consciousness in matter , then it cannot think , because it wants that which you say is essential to it . it being impossible , for any one to perceive , but he must perceive , that he doth perceive . but what is there like self-consciousness in matter ? or how is it possible to apprehend that meer body should perceive that it doth perceive ? for bodies , you say , operate only by impulse and motion ; i. e. one body upon another . but how can a body operate upon it self without motion ? those you call the secondary qualities of bodies , are only you say , the effect of the powers in some bodies upon others endued with sense and perception . so that the effects of these powers in bodies , or of the primary qualities of bulk , site , figure , motion , &c. is not upon themselves but upon other bodies , either by changing those primary qualities in them by different site , figure , motion , &c. or producing those effects in us , or which we call sensible qualities . but either of these ways there is no possibility for matter to operate upon it self in a way of self-consciousness . if then every intelligent thinking being have this so inseparably belonging to it , that you say , it is impossible , for any one to perceive , without perceiving that he doth perceive ; and it be impossible from the idea of matter to make out that a meer body can perceive that it doth perceive , i think it is more than probable in the way of ideas that matter cannot think . 5. i argue , from the power of abstracting which you make proper to a thinking substance . this is done , say you , by considering ideas in the mind as separate from the circumstances of time and place . and this power of abstracting , you add , puts a perfect distinction between man and brutes ; and is an excellency which the faculties of brutes do by no means attain to . you tell me , that you did not say the chief excellency of mankind lies chiefly , or any ways , in this that brutes cannot abstract ; for brutes not being able to do any thing , cannot be any excellency of mankind . but i hope it is the excellency of mankind , that they are able to do what the brutes cannot : and you say , this puts a perfect distinction between man and brutes ; and i had thought in comparing man and brutes that which put a perfect distinction was the chief excellency with respect to them . but let that be as it will ; the thing i insist upon is , the power of abstracting following that of thinking so closely that you utterly deny it to brutes ; but if it may be in the power of matter to think , how comes it to be so impossible for such organized bodies as the brutes have to inlarge their ideas by abstraction ? pomponatius thinks to avoid the argument from abstraction to prove the souls imateriality , by saying , that in the most abstract speculation the mind rests upon particulars ; vniversale in singulari speculatur . but this doth not reach the force of the argument ; which is not , whether the mind hath not an eye to particulars , when it forms universal notions ; but whether the power of forming such abstract ideas from particulars do not argue a power which meer matter can never attain to : and all that philosopher hath said , doth not amount to the least proof of it . 6. lastly , i argue from the reason you give , why god must be an immaterial substance . for these are the words in your letter . and the idea of an eternal , actual , knowing being is perceived to have a connection with the idea of immateriality , by the intervention of the idea of matter , and of its actual division , divisibility and want of perception , &c. here the want of perception is owned to be so essential to matter , that god is therefore concluded to be immaterial ; and this is drawn from the idea and essential properties of matter , and if it be so essential to it , that from thence you concluded god must be an immaterial substance , i think the same reason will hold , as to any thinking substance . because the argument is not drawn from any thing peculiar to the divine perfections , but from the general idea of matter . but after all , you tell me , that god being omnipotent , may give to a system of very subtil matter , sense and motion . your words before were , a power to perceive or think ; and about that , all our debate runs ; and here again you say , that the power of thinking joined to matter , makes it a spiritual substance . but as to your argument from god s omnipotency , i answer , that this comes to the same debate we had with the papists about the possibility of transubstantiation . for , they never imagin'd , that a body could be present after the manner of a spirit in an ordinary way , but that by god's omnipotent power it might be made so : but our answer to them was , that god doth not change the essential properties of things while the things themselves remain in their own nature : and that it was as repugnant for a body to be after the manner of a spirit , as for a body and spirit to be the same . the same we say in this case . we do not set bounds to god's omnipotency : for he may if he please , change a body into an immaterial substance ; but we say , that while he continues the essential properties of things , it is as impossible for matter to think , as for a body by transubstantiation to be present after the manner of a spirit ; and we are as certain of one as we are of the other . these things i thought necessary on this occasion to be cleared , because i look on a mistake herein to be of dangerous consequence as to the great ends of religion and morality : which , you think , may be secured although the soul be allowed to be a material substance ; but i am of a very different opinion : for if god doth not change the essential properties of things , their nature remaining : then either it is impossible for a material substance to think , or it must be asserted , that a power of thinking is within the essential properties of matter ; and so thinking will be such a mode of matter , as spinoza hath made it : and i am certain you do not think , he hath promoted the great ends of religion and morality . i shall now proceed to consider the arguments for proving a supream immaterial substance , which you freely allow to be so . and my design , as i said , was to shew , that the certainty of it is not placed upon any clear and distinct ideas , but upon the force of reason distinct from it . to this you answer , that knowledge and certainty in your opinion , lies in the preception of the agreement or disagreement of ideas , such as they are , and not always in having perfectly clear and distinct ideas . but those who offer at clear and distinct ideas , bid much fairer for certainty than you do ; and speak more agreeably to your original grounds of certainty . for your relative idea , which you here run to again is no certainty at all from the idea , but from the plain evidence of reason , that accidents cannot support themselves . i pass over all which i think i have sufficiently answered already ; as when you spend so many pages about my using the plural number when your words are only mentioned , &c. but i shall pass over nothing which may seem to an indifferent reader to require any farther consideration . whether you took this way of ideas from the modern philosopher mentioned by you , is not at all material ; but i intended no reflection upon you in it ( for that you mean by my commending you as a scholar of so great a master ) i never meant to take from you the honour of your own inventions ; and i do believe you when you say , that you wrote from your own thoughts , and the ideas you had there . but many things may seem new to one that converses only with his own thoughts , which really are not so ; as he may find when he looks into the thoughts of other men which appear in their books . and therefore , although i have a just esteem for the invention of such who can spin volumes barely out of their own thoughts ; yet i am apt to think they would oblige the world more , if after they have thought so much themselves , they would examine what thoughts others have had before them concerning the same things , that so , those may not be thought their own inventions , which are common to themselves and others . if a man should try all the magnetical experiments himself , and publish them as his own thoughts , he might take himself to be the inventor of them ; but he that examines and compares them with what gilbert and others have done before him , will not diminish the praise of his diligence , but may wish he had compared his thoughts with other mens , by which the world would receive greater advantage , altho' he lost the honour of being an original . the matter of certainty , you say , one cannot imploy too many thoughts about , viz. as to the finding the true grounds of it , or wherein it is placed . this i was led to consider , by our vnitarians placing it in clear and distinct ideas ; and therefore rejecting the mysteries of faith , because they could not have clear and distinct ideas of them . and one wrote purposely to shew that we were not to believe any mysteries in the gospel , because all our certainty depended upon the preception of the agreement or disagreement of those simple ideas which we have by sensation or reflection . now if these principles of certainty hold good as to all propositions we can have no certainty of faith , where we cannot perceive the connexion of the ideas contained in them . i own that you say , that faith is an assent to any proposition not made out by any deductions of reason , but upon the credit of the proposer . but this doth not clear the matter ; for , is faith an vnreasonable act ? is it not an assent to a proposition ? then , if all certainty in acts of reason be derived from the perceiving the agreement or disagreement of the ideas contained in it , either there can be no certainty of the reasonable act of faith , or the grounds of certainty must be laid some other way . but you say , where you want evidence of things there is yet ground enough for you to believe because god hath said it . which doth not yet remove the difficulty , from the true ground of certainty ; for say they , revelation is but a means of information ; and god discovers by that such propositions , which we could not have found out without revelation ; but where-ever propositions are offered to our vnderstandings , we must judge of them by our perception of the agreement and disagreement of the ideas contained in them . and faith doth not overthrow nature : if therefore the nature of certainty lies herein we cannot be certain without it . is it not enough for you to disown the consequence , but to shew that it doth not follow from your principles of certainty : but of this i have spoken already , and i love not repetitions . i only take notice , that you assert and hold to the same . i stick to my own plain way of certainty by ideas . and so do those who reject the mysteries of faith , because not agreeable to their ideas , and think they proceed upon your grounds . but you say , that according to my rules you know not where to place certainty ; for in the account i give of des cartes , i have these words concerning him . the first thing he found any certainty in , was his own existence , which he founded upon the perception of the acts of his mind . from hence he proceeded to enquire how he came by this certainty , and he resolved it into this , that he had a clear and distinct preception of it . and from hence he formed his general rule , that what he had a clear and distinct perception of was true . which in reason ought to go on farther , than where there is the like degree of evidence ; for the certainty was not grounded on the clearness of the perception , but on the plainness of the evidence . which is of that nature that the very doubting of it proves it , since it is impossible that any thing should doubt or question its own being that had it not . so that here it is not the clearness of the idea , but an immediate act of perception , which is the true ground of certainty . and this cannot extend to things without our selves , of which we can have no other perception , than what is caused by the impression of outward objects . but whether we are to judge according to those impressions doth not depend on the ideas themselves , but upon the exercise of our judgment and reason about them , which put the difference between true and false , and adequate and inadequate ideas , so that our certainty is not from the ideas themselves , but from the evidence of reason , that those ideas are true and just , and consequently , that we may build our certainty upon them . these i acknowledge to be my words ; and yet i see no reason why i may not stick to them . but you say , that i have placed the grounds of certainty of our own existence , sometimes in the plainness of evidence , in opposition to the clearness of perception ; sometimes in the immediate act of perception in opposition to the clearness of the idea ; and the certainty of other things without us in the evidence of reason , that these ideas are true and just in opposition to the ideas themselves ; so that such is your dulness you cannot by these rules tell , where to place certainty . but all these mists will easily be scattered , if you set your self a little to consider the design of my discourse ; which was not , to lay down rules of certainty , but to shew that the grounds of certainty from clear and distinct ideas were not well laid at first by des cartes himself . because he deduced his rule as to certainty of other things , from the evidence he had as to his own existence , which he had both from immediate perception and uncontroulable evidence , when even the doubting of it necessarily proved it . but the main question was , whether this would reach to other things without us : yes said he , the rule will hold , where-ever there are clear and distinct ideas . but i say the certainty doth not depend upon the idea but upon inward perception and the evidence founded upon it ; and we have not the same as to external objects : for we have no inward perception of them , nor any evidence that results from our own beings ; therefore the rule of certainty is carried beyond the true ground of it . i do not oppose in the former case the plainness of the evidence to the clearness of the perception ; but i suppose them both as to our own existence . i say indeed after , that it is not the clearness of the idea , but an immediate act of perception which is the true ground of certainty as to our own existence ; but there i take idea as des cartes did , for the clear and distinct perception of our minds , which might reach to other objects as well as our selves ; and such an idea i deny is the ground of certainty as to our own beings , which is founded on an immediate act of perception . and when they prove this as to such outward objects , which we have the ideas of , they may then carry the rule so far ; but i say the case is vastly different , as to a clear perception we have from our own acts , and that which we have as the impressions from outward objects ; in the former case we have such an evidence , as it is impossible to doubt of , but the very doubting must prove it : is it the same as to the ideas of external objects ? and as to these i do not deny , but we may come to a certainty : but i say , it is not from the ideas , which may be true or false , adequate or inadequate , and whether we may be certain of them or not , depends upon the exercise of our reason and judgment about them . so that i found the certainty of ideas upon reason , and not reason upon the certainty of ideas . and so i come more closely to consider the argument from the idea as to the proof of a supream immaterial substance . if our certainty did arise from clear and distinct ideas then it must hold , where we have a clear and distinct idea , as it is confessed we have concerning god. but this argument from the idea will not be allowed in this case ; it is denied by others plainly ; but i do not say , that it is denied by you , but that it is made a doubtfull thing . which comes to the same , in the point of certainty : and so the force of my argument doth by no means fail . but you say , that you intended by your words not to deny that the idea of a most perfect being doth prove a god , but to blame those who take it for the only proof , and endeavour to invalidate all others . for the belief of a god being the foundation of all religion and genuine morality you thought no arguments that are made use of to work the perswasion of a god into mens minds should be invalidated , which you grant is of very ill consequence . here you must give me leave to ask you , what you think of the universal consent of mankind , as to the being of god ? hath not this been made use of , as an argument not only by christians , but by the wisest and greatest men among the heathens ? and what then would you think of one who should go about to invalidate this argument ? and that by proving , that it hath been discover'd in these latter ages by navigation , that there are whole nations at the bay of soldania , in brasil , in the caribbe islands , and paraquaria , among whom there was found no notion of a god , and even the author of the essay of human vnderstanding hath done this . this cannot be thought a mere slip of the pen. for men do not quote authors so punctually then . but if it would not be thought stepping too much out of my way , i think i could prove that these instances are very ill chosen , because either they were taken from such as were not sufficiently acquainted with the people and language of the country ; or that their testimony is contradicted by those who have been longer among them and understood them better ; or lastly that the account given of them makes them not fit to be a standard for the sense of mankind , being a people so strangely bereft of common sense , that they can hardly be reckoned among mankind , as appears by the best accounts both of the cafres of soldania , and the caiguae of paraquaria . but this would be too much a digression in this place . i return therefore to the argument for proving the existence of god ; and you may plead for your self that your design was only to prove , that there is no innate idea of a god. but doth not this however take off from the force of an argument some have used to perswade men that there is a god ? i meddle not with innate ideas ; but have not some persons of note , in these matters , used the argument from the mark and character of god imprinted on the minds of men to prove his being ? and have you not set your self to disprove it ? but i leave this , and come to the argument from the idea of god , concerning which you say , that though the complex idea for which the word god ( whether containing in it the idea of necessary existence or no , for the case is the same ) will not prove the real existence of a being answering that idea , any more than any other idea in any ones mind will prove the real existence of any real being answering that idea , yet you conceive it does not hence follow , but that there may be other ideas by which the being of god may be proved . and afterwards you offer to shew that your proof of a deity is all grounded on ideas , i. e. from the ideas of our selves , as we are thinking beings . but you confess , that you think , that the argument from the idea will not hold , but however you will not give up the argument from ideas . against which i urged your own argument , that from the consideration of what we find in our selves and in our constitutions , our reason leads us to the knowledge of this certain and evident truth , that there is an eternal , most powerfull , and most knowing being . all which , i said , i did readily yield ; but we see plainly , the certainty is not placed in the idea , but in good and sound reason from the consideration of our selves and our constitutions . to which you reply , that you never thought the consideration of our selves and our constitutions excluded the consideration of the idea of being or of thinking , two of the ideas that make a part of the complex idea a man hath of himself . but is the reason you speak of , which leads us from thence to the knowledge of an eternal , most powerfull , and most knowing being , con●ained in the complex idea of a man or not ? a complex idea is made up of simple ideas , all simple ideas come in by sensation or reflection ; and upon comparing these simple ideas our certainty you say is sounded . what simple ideas then are there in man , upon which you ground the certainty of this proposition , that there is a god ? i grant you , that there is a certainty grounded upon our beings and the frame of our natures ; but this i still say , is a certainty of reason and not of ideas you say , you do not well understand what i mean by being not placed in the idea ; for you see no such opposition , but that ideas and sound reason may stand together ▪ i. e. in reason rightly managing those ideas so as to produce evidence by them . but what need all this great noise about ideas and certainty , true and real certainty by ideas : if after all , it comes only to this , that our ideas only represent to us such things , from whence we bring arguments to prove the truth of things ? but the world hath been strangely amuzed with ideas of late , and we have been told , that strange things might be done by the help of ideas , and yet these ideas at last come to be only common notions of things , which we must make use of in our reasoning . you say , in that chapter about the existence of god , you thought it most proper to express your self in the most usual and familiar way , by common words and expressions . i would you had done so quite through your book ; for then you had never given that occasion to the enemies of our faith to take up your new way of ideas , as an effectual battery ( as they imagin'd ) against the mysteries of the christian faith. but you might have enjoy'd the satisfaction of your ideas long enough , before i had taken notice of them , unless i had found them employ'd in doing mischief . but at last you tell me , that whether i will call it placing the certainty in the idea , or placing the certainty in reason ; or if i will say , it is not the idea that gives us the argument , but the argument , it is indifferent to you . and if you mean no more by your certainty from ideas , but a certainty from reason , i am not such an unreasonable man to disagree with you . the next argument for the existence of god stands thus , as i have summ'd it up . we find in our selves perception and knowledge . so that there is some knowing , intelligent being in the world. and there must have been a knowing being from eternity , or an unknowing ; for something must have been from eternity : but if an unknowing , then it is impossible there ever should have been any knowledge , it being as impossible for a thing without knowledge to produce it , as that a triangle should make three angles bigger than two right ones . to which i added , that allowing the argument to be good , yet it is not taken from the idea , but from principles of true reason , as that no man can doubt his own perception ; that every thing ( we see ) must have a cause ; that this cause must either have knowledge or not ; if it have , the point is gain'd ; if it hath not , nothing can produce nothing , and consequently a not knowing being cannot produce a knowing . in your answer to this , i must first take notice of your exception to that expression , allowing the argument to be good ; which you say , seems to imply that i thought the argument not to be good , which was very far from my meaning . for i had said before , that you brought very good arguments to prove the existence of a god in that chapter : and afterwards , that i was far from weakning the force of your arguments . and so i hope that exception is removed . you except not , you say , against my arguments or principles of reason : but you think still , this is an argument taken from ideas : if you will think so , i cannot help it . but you endeavour to shew , that the very principles you allow are founded upon ideas : as that a man cannot doubt of his own perception ; this , you say , is by perceiving the necessary agreement of the two ideas of perception and self-consciousness . but i rather think , it is from that self-evidence which attends the immediate perception of our own acts , which is so great , that as s. augustin observes , the academicks had nothing to say against that kind of certainty , but only against that which arose from things convey'd by our senses to our mind . the next principle that every thing must have a cause , must be understood of the matter treated of , i. e. the things we see and perceive in the world. you say , it is a true principle that every thing that hath a beginning must have a cause , because by contemplating our ideas we find that the idea of beginning is connected with the idea of some operation ; and that with the idea of something operating which we call a cause , and so the beginning to be , is perceived to agree with the idea of a cause , as is expressed in the proposition . is not here a great ado to make a thing plain by ideas , which was plainer without them ? for is not any man who understands the meaning of plain words satisfied that nothing can produce it self ? or , that what is not cannot make it self to be ? and so the evidence doth not depend on the agreement of the ideas of beginning , and operation , and cause ; but upon the repugnancy of the contrary supposition . as in that principle , that it is impossible for a thing to be and not to be at the same time : if you say , that this depends upon the disagreement of the ideas of not-being and being , it will be to little purpose for me to say any more about it . but there is one thing which deserves to be consider'd ; which is the connexion between the idea of an eternal , actual , knowing being with the idea of immateriality . this was the thing i look'd for . and by what means now doth this connexion between these two ideas appear ? by the help of an intermediate idea . what is that ? even the idea of matter . how so ? the idea of matter you tell us , implies its actual division , divisibility , and want of perception , &c. which are the arguments you use in this proof . are they so indeed ? and will not the same ideas prove our souls to be immaterial ? if want of perception be in the very idea of matter , how can matter be made capable of perceiving ? but i find you do not always attend to the agreement or disagreement of your own ideas . but of this before . i proceed to the last argument i produced to shew , that your proofs of the existence of god doth not depend upon ideas . and the substance of it i thus put together . if we suppose nothing to be first , matter can never begin to be ; is bare matter without motion be eternal , motion can never begin to be ; if matter and motion be supposed eternal , thought can never begin to be . for if matter could produce thought , then thought must be in the power of matter ; and if it be in matter as such , it must be the inseparable property of all matter , which is contrary to the sense and experience of mankind . if only some parts of matter have a power of thinking , how comes so great a difference in the properties of the same matter ? what disposition of matter is requir'd to thinking ? and from whence comes it ? of which no account can be given in reason . this i took to be the force of your argument , which i said , i was far from designing to weaken : only i observed that the certainty of it is not placed upon clear and distinct ideas , but upon reason distinct from it ; which was the thing i intended to prove . but you say , you do not see but the same proof may be placed upon clear and distinct ideas , and upon reason too . i hope this matter is made a little clearer to you ; having so fully shew'd to you before , that in the way of ideas you can come to no certainty about any substance , but by reason as it is distinct from the ideas ; i. e. as to material substances that your certainty is resolved into this principle of reason , that accidents cannot subsist without a substratum . as to spiritual substance in us , that depends on two things , 1. that thinking is only a mode , and must suppose a substance . 2. that matter cannot think , and therefore it must be an immaterial substance ; which i have proved from your own principles . as to a supreme immaterial substance , the evidence depends upon this reason , that matter and motion cannot produce thought ; and therefore an eternal thinking being must be immaterial . and that matter and motion cannot produce thought , is proved by this reason , that either it must be an inseparable property of matter ; or some account in reason must be given why some part of matter should think and not others . and doth not all this proceed upon reason as distinct from ideas ? and when i said , that the certainty of it , i. e. the argument is not placed on clear and distinct ideas , but upon the force of reason distinct from it , i meant the certainty from ideas , although it were not so clearly expressed as it might have been ; but here i observe you call for the plural number , which you are so offended with in other parts of your letter . the next thing i undertook to shew was , that we can have no clear and distinct idea of nature and person from sensation or reflection . here you spend many pages to shew that this doth not concern you . let it be so . but it concerns the matter i was upon ; which was to shew that we must have ideas of these things which we cannot come to by sensation or reflection . my words are , i grant that by sensation or reflection we come to know the powers and properties of things . but our reason is satisfied , that there must be something beyond these , because it is impossible that they should subsist by themselves . so that the nature of things properly belongs to our reason , and not to mere ideas . still you are at it , that you can find no opposition between ideas and reason : but ideas are the objects of the vnderstanding , and vnderstanding is one of the faculties imploy'd about them . no doubt of it . but you might easily see that by reason , i understood , principles of reason , allow'd by mankind . which i think are very different from ideas . but i perceive reason in this sense is a thing you have no idea of , or one as obscure as that of substance . but if you set aside these common principles of reason , your ideas will signifie very little ; and will like accidents want a substratum to support them . but your notion of nature and person deserves to be more throughly consider'd . therefore to proceed more clearly in a debate of this consequence with respect to the doctrine of the trinity ( what-ever you pretend to the contrary ) i shall first set down your notions of nature and person from your own words , and then enter upon the examination of them . as to nature , you tell me in short it is this , that it is a collection of several ideas combined into one complex abstract idea . which when they are found united in any individual existing , though joyned in that existence with several other ideas , that individual is truly said to have the nature of a man , or the nature of man to be in him : for as much as all these simple ideas are found united in him , which answer the complex abstract idea to which the specifick name man is given by any one ; which abstract specifick idea keeps the same , when he applies the specifick name standing for it , to distinct individuals , i. e. no body changes his idea of a man , when he says , peter is a man , from that idea which he makes the name man to stand for , when he makes john a man. as to person in the way of ideas , you tell us , that the word person in it self signifies nothing , and so no idea belonging to it , nothing can be said to be the true idea of it ; but when any language appropriates it to any idea , then that is the true idea of a person and so of nature . these are therefore the signs of two ideas they are put to stand for ; and by enumeration all the simple ideas that are contained in the complex idea that each of them is made to stand for ; we shall immediately see the whole difference that is between them . after which , you conclude , that you must content your self with this condemned way of ideas , and despair of ever attaining any knowledge by any other than that , or farther than that will lead you to it . but this must not hinder me from enquiring a little more strictly into these notions of nature and person , for if these hold , i do not see how it is possible to defend the doctrine of the trinity . for if these terms really signifie nothing in themselves , but are only abstract and complex ideas , which the common use of language hath appropriated to be the signs of two ideas ; then it is plain , that they are only notions of the mind , as all abstracted and complex ideas are ; and so one nature and three persons can be no more . we must therefore examine what your notion is , of abstracted and complex ideas , and how it can be applied to nature and person : and whether they are only signs of such ideas as people have agreed to signifie by them . to explain this , i must give an account , as well as i can , from your self , how these abstracted and complex ideas come to be formed in our minds , and what is implied in them . the vnderstanding , you say , seems to you not to have the least glimmering of any ideas which it hath not by sensation or reflection . these and their several modes and the compositions made out of them , we shall find contain our whole stock of ideas ; and that we have nothing in our minds which did not come in one of these two ways . from hence you consider the several sorts of ideas , some simple and some complex . the simple ideas are the materials of all our knowledge ; and when the vnderstanding is once stored with these simple ideas , it has the power to repeat , compare and unite them , even to an almost infinite variety , and so can make at pleasure new complex ideas : but no understanding can make one new simple idea , not taken in by the ways before mention'd , nor can it destroy those that are there . after you have given an account of the simple ideas both ways , you come to the faculty of discerning in our minds , and there you reckon up , distinguishing ideas , comparing , compounding and abstracting . the reason of abstraction , you say , is to have one general name for many particulars , or else names would be endless . which abstraction is performed by separating the ideas of particular objects from the circumstances of real existence , as time , place , &c. complex ideas are those simple ideas which the mind unites as one idea . but still it is confin'd to those simple ideas which it received by sensation or reflection , which are the ultimate materials of all its compositions . of these you reckon , modes , substances and relations . the ideas of substances are such combinations of simple ideas , as are taken to represent particular things subsisting by themselves . and these are of two sorts , one of single substances as they exist separately , as of a man , &c. the other of several of these put together as an army of men. in your chapter of complex ideas of substances ▪ you affirm the ideas of particular substances to be made by a combination of simple ideas : and again , that it is by such combination of simple ideas as co-exist in some unknown cause of their vnion . that the complex ideas we have of god and separate spirits are made up of the simple ideas we have by reflection ; by inlarging the ideas we find in our selves . in your 3d book you consider general terms . and the reason of them , you say is because it is beyond the power of human capacity to frame and retain distinct ideas of all particulars . and these are made by way of abstraction from circumstances of time and place . after which you tell us , that general natures are nothing but abstract ideas ; and the whole mystery of genera and species , which make such a noise in the schools , is nothing else but abstract ideas with names annexed to them . from whence , you say , it is plain , that general and vniversal , belong not to the real existence of things , but are the inventions and creatures of the vnderstanding ; made by it for its own use and concern only signs whether words or ideas . and the abstract idea and the essence of the species or genus of the same thing : and every distinct , abstract idea is a distinct essence . but then you distinguish the real and nominal essence . the former is the real , internal constitution of particular things ; and the nominal is the abstract idea . but there is so near a connexion between them that the name cannot be attributed to any particular being , but what has this essence , whereby it answers that abstract idea , whereof that name is the sign . these things you repeat and inlarge upon in several other places , but this i think is the substance of what you say upon this matter : for i would not willingly mistake or mis-represent your meaning . the question now between us comes to this , whether the common nature or essence of things lies only in an abstract idea , or a general name , and the real essence consists only in particular beings from which that name is abstracted ? the question is not , whether in forming the notion of common nature , the mind doth not abstract from the circumstances of particular beings ? but it is whether there be not an antecedent foundation in the nature of things upon which we form this abstract idea ? for it there be , then it cannot be called an universal name only : or a meer sign of an idea , which we have formed from putting many simple ideas together , which name belongs to all of such a sort , as have those simple ideas united together . i know not how it comes to pass , that a man spinning books out of his own thoughts should hit so luckily upon the thoughts of another man : i do not mean now , about clear and distinct ideas , but about this point of universal names . for mr. hobbs in his chapter of speech , tell us , that names were to serve for marks or notes of remembrance , and therefore were called signs . of these names , some are proper and singular to one thing , as peter , john , this man , this tree ; some are common to many things , as man , horse , tree , in respect of all which it is called an vniversal , there being nothing in the world vniversal but names ; for the things nam'd , are every one of them individual and singular . one universal name is imposed on many things , for their similitude in some quality or other accident ; and whereas a proper name bringeth to mind one thing only vniversals recall any one of those many . and of vniversals some are of more , or less extent , the larger comprehending the less large , and some of equal extent , &c. this is enough to let you see that these notions are not so peculiar but that another person , from his own thoughts too , had said much the same things . but whoever said or thought them first , we must examine how reasonable these thoughts are . i know no body that thinks now-a-days , that vniversals exist any where by themselves ; but i do think , that there is a difference to be made between that and making them meer names , or signs of ideas . i. and the reasons i go upon are these . in the first place , we are agreed , that there is a supream immaterial most perfect being ; whose essential attributes do not depend upon our arbitrary ideas ; nor any names or signs of honour we give him , nor upon the meer inlarging the ideas of our own perfections ; or such as we account to be so in our selves : for we attribute those to god which we are not capable of , as eternity or necessary existence , immutability , &c. herein , we take up no complex ideas from several individuals ; but we form a true idea of a divine essence , from such attributes as are essential to an infinitely perfect being , which being infinite is thereby , incomprehensible by us . and so you own , that the great god of whom and from whom are all things is incomprehensibly infinite . and that god is infinitely beyond the reach of our narrow capacities . ii. in the next place , we look on this supream being , as the wise creator of all things , who hath ordered the several sorts and ranks of beings in the world according to his own eternal wisdom ; and hath given them all such properties as himself thought fit , whereby they are really and essentially distinguished from one another ; as appears by mankind , and brutes , and plants . and no man that ever imploys his own thoughts can think , that these are distinguished from each other , only by an act of our minds . iii. among these it is evident , that there are some things , wherein they agree ; and some wherein they differ . they all agree in being real , created beings , and having a sort of life belonging to them . but they differ , that some have sense , which others have not ; and some have reason and understanding which others want . and all this , is so plain and evident , that one might question , whether those had understanding or not , who could think the difference of these from each others was not in their natures , but only depended on the several names that we call them by . iv. among the individuals of the same kind , there is an agreement in the same essential properties ; as all men in being rational creatures ; and there is a real difference from each other in the several accidents that belong to them ; as to time , place , qualities , relations , &c. and no man in his senses can call this in question . for his most plain and simple ideas will inform him of it . v. the question now is , whether that wherein they do all agree , be a meer vniversal name and abstract idea or not . it is certain , that what god created is no meer name or idea : it is certain , that god created not only individuals but the several kinds , with the differences , which they have from each other ; it is certain , that these differences do not lie in meer names or ideas : how comes it then not to be certain that there is a real common essence or nature in the individuals of the same kind ? but it comes not to us in the way of ideas . if it be so , the way of ideas and reason are two different ways ; and i shall never forsake one for the other , unless i could see better reason for it ; and even then i should not ; but adhere to reason still . but how doth it appear by reason , that nature is any thing else but a collection of several ideas combined into one complex abstract idea . that will be done by considering , 1. what these ideas are , which are so collected into a complex idea ; which is called nature . 2. what that essence is which is implied in this idea ; whether it be a real or only a nominal essence . 1. what these ideas are , of which this complex idea of nature consists ; and they are said to be , the simple ideas of particular substances united together , without the circumstances of time and place . but those simple ideas may be considered two ways . 1. with respect to the qualities of things , and these ideas are said to be true and adequate ; but they go no farther than the qualities ; which reaches only to that sense of nature , as it is taken for properties . 2. with respect to the subject of them , which is the nature or substance that supports them , and of this you confess we have only imperfect and inadequate ideas . as they are true and adequate ; and so they are not the true representations of things without us , but of the effects of such powers in them as produce impressions in us ; which are those you call secondary qualities . and in that sense i take your words . and of these i said , that we can understand nothing really by them but the effects they have upon us ; i. e. the powers and not the ideas . the ideas are the impressions on our minds ; and by these we can understand nothing but the effects which the powers in outward objects have upon us , and consequently not the nature of them . this i take to be plain sense . to this you answer two things ; 1. that we certainly know to distinguish things by ideas , supposing them nothing but effects produced in us by these powers , as if they were representations . 2. that we have certainly as much pleasure and delight by those ideas , one way as the other . granting all this to be true , what is it to the complex idea of nature , which arises from these simple ideas ? nature is a collection of several ideas combined into one complex abstract idea . but the simple ideas acquaint us not with the nature of the objects , but only with the powers which are in them ; by the help of bulk , size , figure and motion ; which you call the primary qualities . now these , you say , are really in the things themselves ; whether the senses perceive them or not ; and the ideas of these are the true resemblances of what exists in the objects ; i. e. that by the impressions we find in our selves , we are certain that there are bodies of a determinate bulk , size , figure and motion . and this is all , we can by these simple ideas come to , as the nature of corporeal substances . but suppose one should ask how we can understand , the nature of these operations of the primary qualities in producing the secondary ; we are soon answered , that there is no conceivable connexion between them and that reason cannot shew how bodies by their bulk , figure and motion should produce in the mind , the ideas of blue , yellow , &c. and so we are extremely helped by these simple ideas in understanding the nature of any particular substance . for the sensible qualities in us are only the effects of certain powers in the objects , caused by their bulk , size , figure and motion ; but if we ask how they are produced , we are plainly told , that our reason by these simple ideas can reach to no knowledge of it . and so we are left in as much ignorance , as ever as to the manner how things without us produce ideas in us . but say you , by these simple ideas , we can as certainly distinguish the beings wherein those powers are , and receive as certain advantages from them , as if those simple ideas were resemblances . as to advantages from them , that is quite out of our enquiry ; which is concerning the idea of nature ? as it is a complexion of simple ideas ; and all that it amounts to is , that by these simple ideas , we understand the distinct powers in several bodies to produce impressions in our minds ; and by the secondary qualities we find in our selves , we are certain of the primary qualities in bodies , from their different bulk , size , figure and motion . but still we have nothing but an idea of qualities , which goes no farther than the essential properties ; but the idea of nature goes farther and implies that being wherein those qualities are ; and that i said , which is the subject of powers and properties is the nature or substance of it ; which in this respect is the same . have we any adequate idea of this ? to this you say : 2. that all ideas of substances , which are referr'd to real essences are in that respect inadequate . this is what your self own to be your sense ; and is as much as i desire . for , i pray consider what a fine abstract complex idea you have given us of nature . our adequate ideas go no farther than qualities , and if we enquire into the real essence , or substance that supports them , we are told that they are inadequate ; and consequently we can have no true notion or idea at all of it . but you say farther , that you do not affirm , that abstract ideas are only general names . for you assert a real essence in things ; the internal unknown constitution is the real essence ; and the abstract idea is the nominal essence . the former you tell me , you do readily own ; viz. that essence which is in particular substances ; but the question before us is , whether that which is in more individuals than one , be a real or only a nominal essence . 2. and this is that , which we are next to examine . to clear this , i put the instance of the sun , where an essence was said by you to be in one individual ; and yet more suns might agree in it . in this one sun there is a real essence , and not a meer nominal and abstracted essence : upon which i asked , if there were more suns , would not each of them , have the real essence of the sun ? for what is it makes the second sun , to be a true sun , but having the same real essence with the first ? if it were but a nominal essence , then the second would have nothing but the name . here i must examine your answer , as far as i can understand it : for here indeed you may complain of the want of clear and distinct ideas ; but i will do what i can to explain that which i conceive to be your sense . you say , this doth not at all concern the real , but the nominal essence . how is this possible ? is there not the real essence of the sun in that individual , we call the sun ? but i put the case , that there were a multiplication of individuals ; and there were more suns : would not each of these have the real essence of the sun ? if it were only a nominal essence , the rest would have only the name . but you say , you did not mean the real essence of the sun was in that individual . how could you mean otherwise , when you acknowledge the real essence to be in particular substances ? and is not the sun a particular substance ? but the idea of it being a complex and abstracted idea , could not be the real essence . i answer , that the essence of the sun being communicated to another is a real essence ; or else , the second is but the name and nothing else . you tell me , that you say expressly , that our distinguishing substances into species by names , is not at all founded on their real essences . and i think it is clear to any one that understands things , and not meer ideas ; that another true sun must have the real essence of a sun. you ask , what i mean by a true sun. i answer , that which hath the essence of a sun ; and that the name cannot be truly applied to that which hath it not . yes , say you , it may to any thing , which hath united in it that combination of sensible qualities , by which any thing else that is called sun is distinguished from other substances , i. e. by the nominal essence . so that now the abstract complex idea is owned to be nothing but a combination of qualities in one idea . but i must still ask , what becomes of this combination of qualities in the second sun , if there be not a real essence to support them ? you grant it when the second sun comes to exist . and if it does not exist , how can it be the second sun ? should it be true , say you , that the real essence of the sun were in any of the fixed stars , yet it could not be called by us the sun , whilst it answers not our complex idea , or nominal essence of a sun. if the real essence of a sun be in a fixed star , it is really a sun , whether you call it so or not ; as a laplander is as really a man whatever you call him , if he hath the essence of a man. and it is strange to me to find any man dispute such evident things . and so i come to the instance of the individuals among men. i said , that there must be a real essence in every individual of the same kind . peter , iames and iohn are all true and real men ; not by attributing a general name to them ; but because the true and real essence of a man is in every one of them . but you say , i first suppose them to be men : no otherwise than as they are individuals of the same kind . your weweena , cuchepy and cousheda i have nothing to say to , they may be drills for any thing i know ; but peter , iames and iohn are men of our own country , and we know them to be several individuals of the race of mankind : and what is it makes them men , but that the true and real essence of a man is in every one of them ? yes , say you , if making be taken for the efficient cause . whoever dreamt of a specifick essence being the efficient cause ? but i said , that it was the true and real essence of a man , which made every individual a true and real man ; of which i said we are as certain , as that we are men. that , say you , is only by our senses finding those properties , which answer the abstract , complex idea , which is in our minds of the specifick idea to which we have annexed the specifick name man. i leave to you the honour of this scholastick language , which is always most proper when there is nothing under it . i love to speak plain sense if i can , and so as to be understood by every one that is acquainted with these matters : but these specifick names and abstract and complex ideas , i think tend to confound mens apprehensions ; who can never think otherwise , but that every man is said to be a true real man ; not for any specifick name , but because his properties shew him to be endued with the true real essence of a man. i said , that the general idea is not made from the simple ideas , but by meer act of the mind abstracting from circumstances , but from reason and consideration of things . you reply , that you thought reason and consideration had been meer acts of the mind , when any thing was done by them . i hope the ideas you have of the acts of your own mind , are clearer than those you have of other mens . for it is plain , i opposed your general and abstract idea by a meer act of the mind , to a rational inference from the nature and properties of things . for i added ; for , when i see so many individuals , that have the same powers and properties , we thence inferr , there must be something common to all , which makes them of one kind ; and if the difference of kinds be real , that which makes them of one kind and not of another , must not be a nominal but a real essence . is there now no difference between these two acts of the mind , viz. abstraction and ratiocination . and you grant , that the inference is true . but you say , it doth not follow , that the general or specifick idea is not made by the meer act of the mind . where do i deny that abstraction is made by an act of the mind ? but that is not the question ; but whether the notion of essence in individuals of the same kind , be a meer act of the mind by abstraction , or have a real foundation in the nature of things ? i. e. whether it be a real or a nominal essence . but you say , there may be objections to the name of nominal essence . my objection is not to the name , but to the thing you understand by it , viz. that there is nothing beyond individuals but names , which utterly overthrows the difference of nature and person . for if there be nothing really , but an individuated essence , then it must follow , that there can be no difference of hypostases in the same nature : for nature individuated must take in the hypostasis ; and nature being taken as common is affirmed by you to be nothing but an abstract and complex idea , and a mere nominal essence . you say , that we cannot know the differences of things by their real essences . and what then ? do i ever deny , that the difference of kinds is to be understood from the different properties ? but we are not upon our knowledge of the difference of species , but upon the real and nominal essence . and i shew'd that the real essence doth not depend upon complex ideas ; because if men mistake never so much in the combination of ideas , yet the same essence remains ; as i instanced in the essence of a man , a horse and a tree . true , you say , our thoughts or ideas cannot alter the real constitutions of things that exist ; but the change of ideas can and does alter the signification of their names , and thereby alter the kinds , which by these names we rank and sort them into . but this doth by no means reach the point , which is not concerning our sorting of things , which is by names , but god's sorting them , when he made them of different kinds . for so i said , that the essences remain always the same , because they do not depend on the ideas of men , but on the will of the creator , who hath made several sorts of beings . all the answer you give is this , that the real constitution or essence of particular things existing , do not depend on the ideas of men , but on the will of the creator , but their being ranked into sorts , under such and such names , does depend and wholly depend upon the ideas of men. but my argument did not proceed upon particular things existing , but upon the several kinds of god's making , and is it possible for you to think that the kinds are not of his making , but that men only by their ideas make the several sorts ? if so , i have very little hopes to remove you from your ideas ; but i am bound to do what in me lies to hinder such notions from overthrowing the mysteries of our faith. and it is a great satisfaction to me to find , that these notions of ideas , as far as they tend that way , have so very little foundation in reason , or rather are so manifestly repugnant to them . before i conclude my self , i must take notice of your conclusion , viz. that you must content your self with this condemned way of ideas , and despair of ever attaining any knowledge by any other than that , or farther than that will lead me to it . which is in effect to say , that you see no way to avoid scepticism but this : but my great prejudice against it is , that it leads to scepticism , or at least , that i could find no way to attain to certainty in it upon your own grounds . for ( 1. ) you say , that knowledge to you seems to be nothing , but the perception of the connexion and agreement or disagreement , and repugnancy of any of our ideas . in this alone it consists . whence it unavoidably follows , that where we can have no ideas , we can have no knowledge . but you go about to prove , that there are many more beings in the world , of which we have no ideas , than those of which we have any ; and that one holds no proportion to the other . so that we are excluded from any possibility of attaining to knowledge , as to the far greatest part of the universe for want of ideas ; and yet you say , that he that will consider the infinite power , wisdom and goodness of the creator of all things , will find reason to think it was not all laid out upon so inconsiderable , mean and impotent a creature , as he will find man to be , who in all probability is one of the lowest of all intellectual beings . and not long after , you say , that the intellectual world is a greater certainly and more beautifull world , than the material . but whence comes this certainty , where there can be no ideas ? is a general reason sufficient without particular ideas ? then why not in other cases as well ? 2. suppose we have no ideas of the intellectual world , yet surely we may have as to the visible world : no , you say , that although we have ideas of bulk , figure and motion in general ; yet not knowing what is the particular bulk , figure , and motion of the greatest part of the bodies of the vniverse , we are ignorant of the several powers , efficacies and ways of operation , whereby the effects we daily see are produced . these are hid from us in some things by being too remote , in others by being two minute . so that you confess , we can attain to no science , either as to bodies or spirits . and what a narrow compass must our knowledge then be confined to ? you confess , we have no ideas of the mechanical assertions of the minute particles of bodies ; and this hinders our certain knowledge of universal truths concerning natural bodies ; and our reason carries us herein very little beyond particular matter of fact. certainty and demonstration we must not in these things pretend to . so that all certainty is given up in the way of knowledge , both as to the visible and invisible world , or at least , the greatest part of them . 3. but still it is to be hoped , that where we have ideas , we may come to a certainty in discerning the connexion between them . no , you say , another cause of our ignorance is , the want of a discoverable connexion between those ideas we have . what! are we at a loss here too , and yet all our certainty depend no the perceiving the agreement and disagreement of ideas ? yes , you confess , that the mechanical affections of bodies having no affinity at all with the ideas they produce in us , we can have no distinct knowledge of such operations beyond experience . and the operations of our minds on our bodies is as unconceivable . 4. but by the help of intermediate ideas , may we not come to find out the certain agreement or disagreement of ideas , so there be due application of the mind to it ? yes , say you , this may be done , and this is that we call reasoning , and those intervening ideas are called proofs : and where the agreement or disagreement is clearly and plainly perceived , it is called demonstration . but how if this way of demonstration be made impossible ? what benefit can we have of it in the way of certainty : each step , you tell us , that reason makes in demonstrative knowledge must have intuitive evidence ; for else , you say , that intermediate idea would need a proof . and for want of this , men often embrace falshoods for demonstrations . but if there be no way of coming to demonstration but this , i doubt we must be content without it . 5. you give no reasonable satisfaction in the way of ideas , as to the plainest evidence of sense concerning the existence of external objects . for there is no intuition of the mind , nor demonstration in this case ; and all the evidence in your way must be from the ideas in our minds , which are supposed to arise from external objects ; but the question is , how from these ideas within our selves , we can prove the certain existence of objects without our selves . because men may have such ideas in their minds by the power of imagination , when there are no objects to produce them ? you say , a man is invincibly conscious to himself of a different perception , in seeing the sun in the day , and remembring it in the night , and tasting of wormwood and smelling of a rose , and thinking of it afterwards . but this doth not clear the main difficulty , which is , how from the idea of the tast of wormwood or smell of a rose i can prove the actual being of such things without me , since you grant , that there is no conceivable connexion in reason , between the powers in the objects and the ideas in us : and if there be not , how can we be certain in the way of ideas ? i do not speak , as to pain or pleasure , but as to the evidence from the ideas in our selves . for the most that you say is , that a man may perceive a very manifest difference between dreaming of being in a fire , and being actually in it , because of the pleasure or pain that follows the application of certain objects ; which certainty is as great as our happiness or misery , beyond which we have no concernment to know or to be . but the present difficulty is not merely about the difference between sleeping and waking ; and i grant you , that a man's being sensible of fire touching him , will effectually convince him that he is not in a dream : but the point before us is , when we are sensible we are awake , what it is in the way of ideas , which can satisfie us of the real existence of external objects . for you confess , that the having the idea of any thing in our mind , no more proves the existence of that thing , than the picture of that man evidences his being in the world , or the visions of a dream make a true history . how then can we come to any certainty in the way of ideas ? the account you give is this , that the actual receiving ideas from without , makes us know that something doth exist at that time without us , which causes that idea within us . which is in other terms to remove the certainty from the idea to the mere act of sensation : but all our dispute hath been not about the certainty either of sense or reason ; ( which i freely yield to ) but about a particular way of certainty by the agreement or disagreement of ideas ; and of this i shew that you give no satisfactory account , as to the existence of the plainest objects of sense . for you say , the certainty lies in perceiving the connexion between ideas ; and here you grant , that reason cannot perceive the connexion between the objects and the ideas , how then should we possibly attain any certainty in the way of ideas ? so that your self gives up the way of certainty by ideas . i might easily pursue this matter farther ; but i think this is sufficient to let you see , you have no such cause to be so well contented with this condemned way of ideas , as you are pleased to call it . and now to conclude , i am very far from being an enemy to any free enquiries into the nature and reasons of things , and would be glad to find any real discoveries that way . and i can easily bear the putting of philosophical notions into a modern and fashionable dress . let men express their minds by ideas if they please ; and take pleasure in sorting and comparing and connecting of them ; i am not forward to condemn them ; for every age must have its new modes , and it is very well if truth and reason be received in any garb. i was therefore far enough from condemning your way of ideas , till i found it made the only ground of certainty , and made use of to overthrow the mysteries of our faith , as i told you in the beginning . this was it which made me look more narrowly into it at first , and now to give you this trouble of an answer to your letter . i hope that in the managing this debate , i have not either transgressed the rules of civility , or mistaken your meaning , both which i have endeavourd to avoid . and i return you thanks for the civilities you have expressed to me through your letter ; and i do assure you , that it is out of no dis-respect , or the least ill will to you , that i have again consider'd this matter , but because i am farther convinced , that as you have stated your notion of ideas , it may be of dangerous consequence as to that article of christian faith , which i endeavour'd to defend . i am no lover of controversies , however i have been often engaged in them ; but i have that satisfaction in my mind , that my design was to promote that , which upon my best enquiries , i thought to be truth ; and by such means as were most sutable to the pursuit of it , without any bitterness against those i opposed . but of all truth , i am convinced , that it is fittest for me to employ the remainder of my days in what concerns the vindication of our holy religion contained in the scriptures , which gives us the only sure grounds to hope for a blessed immortality . and in the defence and practice of that , i hope , by the grace of god both to live and die . i am , sir , your real friend , and humble servant , edw. wigorn. worcester , march 27. 1697. postscript . i had no thoughts of adding a postscript to my answer , as you had done to your letter ; but before the sheets were wrought off , there was sent to me a new socinian pamphlet , wherein there are reflections ( and little more ) on my late treatise in vindication of the trinity . the reason i had to joyn my short animadversions on that to these papers , was the advantages he takes from the abstracted notion of nature against the doctrine of the trinity , which was the thing i told you , i apprehended to be of dangerous consequence in it . but before i come to that , i cannot but take notice of their very different way of writing from yours , which is grave and civil , but theirs is trifling , and too scurrilous in matters of religion , for which i had so justly rebuked them before , but it seems to very little purpose : which makes me apt to think , their greatest hopes still are in such readers , who love to see matters of religion ridiculed ; and the persons who are concerned to defend them exposed to scorn and contempt . this was that i told them , which gave such a relish to their late pamphlets , as though nothing would go down with such vitiated palats , that had not a mixture of this assa soetida with it . but because in the conclusion of his pamphlet , he charges me as well as others , with using them unjustly as well as roughly . i shall give a tast of this man's decent manner of writing . the first thing he insists upon against me , is , that i openly profess my method , that i will prove first , then secondly , then thirdly , then fourthly and fifthly . and what harm is there in using the plainest method in a nice and intricate subject ? should i go about to justifie this , by the rules of the ancient and best masters of writing in arguments of such a nature ? that would be shewing too much regard to such pitifull cavilling . but methinks these men should not object this method against us , of first , secondly and thirdly , who had before charged us with brutal and inexcusable ignorance in counting or numbring . but he goes on . and now beloved first of the first . have i any words like these ? no matter for that . but this serves well enough for the farce ; when the design is to ridicule the form and way of modern sermons ; which he knew was an acceptable subject to his men of wit , as he calls them . if they be really so , they cannot but despise such fooling in serious matters . and our modern sermons are such , both as to the structure and reason of them , as will bear the censures of men of judgment , ( as well it may be , as of any age ) but his men of wit , who love religion in no dress , will always have something or other in sermons to find fault with . and our author was hard put to it to bring in this smart reflection on modern sermons to please his friends , which was very remote from a debate about the trinity . the next thing is , ( for i must not say secondly ) that my way of writing is too obscure ; and that he could not take my meaning under two or three readings . which to please his men of wit , he facetiously expresses after this manner ; and when i have strained my iaws and hazarded my teeth to break the shell , most commonly it proves nothing but a shell , that i am tempted to renounce nuts for ever . and i think he will do wisely in it . i am certain , i was so far from affecting obscurity , that i endeavoured to put the darkest points into as good a light , as i could ; and i am afraid he sometimes shut his eyes , that he might complain of the darkness of the room . i dare not go so far as thirdly ; and therefore come to consider the main parts of his pretence to answer my book . as to the contents of my book , he saith . i shew , that neither antiquity , nor reason , nor scripture is at all for them , they are all against them . wherein he is very much in the right . and i shall now examine what he hath said , to take off any part of the charge . he begins with antiquity , and very fairly takes it for granted , that for 4000 years , the doctrine of the unitarians was the true doctrine : but he observes , that i make the doctrine of the trinity to have been a part of the cabala or oral tradition among the iews ; upon which he cries out , where is conscience , or is religion nothing but a name ? why , what 's the matter ? how comes conscience and religion to be so deeply concerned , whether the jews had any anticipation of the trinity among them ? but he saith , i do not believe the iewish cabala , no more than the alchoran , and yet i produce the authority of it : and he adds , that it was a fiction of the pharisees ; and that it is a prevarication in me to mention it as the unwritten word of god. i am afraid his cracking of nuts hath put him into some disorder , and made him cry out , without any other cause but the pain of his teeth . where did i ever give the least cause to suspect my owning the iewish cabala , as the unwritten word of god ? all that i said was this . the socinians had said , that christ was called the word , because he was the bringer or messenger of god's word . to which i answer'd , that the jews were to understand it in the sense it was known among them : which was for a divine subsistence , as i proved from the chaldee paraphrast , and the testimonies of philo the alexandrian iew , who lived so near our saviour's time . here is not a word of the pharisaical cabala , which every one knows to have been about traditional customs , which they laid as much weight upon , as upon the law of god , if not more . but the chaldee paraphrast was in very great esteem , as giving the true sense of the scripture , and for that only i produced it . and what answer doth he give to the testimonies out of it ? he saith , they relate either to the law , or to the command of god to moses , or to the power of god. but i shew'd that rittangel , who managed the debate on this argument with a learned vnitarian , proved to his plain conviction , that these places could be understood of nothing but a divine subsistence . but he mightily triumphs , that the most pertinent place is false printed ; for it is set down , gen. 20.21 . and he tells us , there are but 18 verses in that chapter ; but a man of common ingenuity would suspect an error in the press in such a case ; and if he had pleased to have look'd on gen. 28.21 . he might have have found 22 verses , and the words in the 21. therefore , saith he , so much for chaldee and cabala , despised by all learned men , iews as well as christians ; and never used but when the people are to be gulled with noisy nothings . one would hardly think it possible such mean stuff as this should pass for an answer , among any that pretend to sense or knowledge . for how can he deny the sense of the chaldee paraphrast , when philo the alexandrian iew concurs in that interpretation , as is evident by multitudes of places in him ? did i not expresly mention his testimony as concurring with the other ? why not a word said to it ? did i not add the consent of eusebius concerning the jews owning the divinity of the messias , till they fell off from it in opposition to the christians ? and are these but noisy nothings to gull people with ? let what will become of the dispute between the pharisaical jews and the karaites ; those who know any thing of these matters , do know that i went upon other grounds ; viz. whether the israelites did receive from god an oral law , which they are bound to observe as much as the written law , and to interpret the written law , and the force of its obligation by it . and this i never mention'd or intended to plead for it . and as to the 13 ways of cabalistical interpretations , i look on them as groundless and frivolous things ; but the thing i aimed at , was only this , there are certainly places of the old testament , which speak of the messias as the son of god ; thou art my son , &c. and call him lord , the lord said unto my lord. the question is , what the sense of these places was , and how they are to be applied to christ ? now if it appear , that the most ancient jews did understand them in such a manner , as to apply them to a second subsistence in the divinity , we have great reason to follow that sense , which is so agreeable to the new testament ; and about this we have no manner of reason to despise the sense of the ancient jews , and especially of the chaldee paraphrast , who asserts a second and a third subsistence in the divinity . and this he could not but find without any danger to his iaws , was the only thing i intended . the next thing in point of antiquity which he contests , is about the nazarenes : that name , i said , was at first common to all christians , as is plain from act. 24.5 . afterwards it was applied to the jewish christians at pella and decapolis ; and to such as admitted no gentiles to their communion , but kept to the ceremonies of the law ; and of these i said they might be all ebionites ; but i utterly denied it of such as were members of the catholick christian church , as it was made up of iews and gentiles . this distinction he calls a pure figment , but answers not one of the reasons i brought for it ; although i proved from uncontroulable evidence , that they made two different bodies , had different rules of faith ; and that the church of ierusalem did hold the divinity and pre-existence of our saviour . and is all this cabala too , and only to be used when people are to be gulled with noisy nothings ? i. e. with empty pleroma's , and silent thunder-claps . the alogians were theirs , for any thing i know in all respects ; and i will give them theodotion , and paulus samosatenus , and photinus . but i think not much to their comfort ; the two latter were most certainly condemned by the christian church ; and whether the former were a mere iewish proselyte , or an ebionite is not worth contending about ; since s. ierom makes him to translate the places about our saviour like a jew , and aquila like a christian ; which shews how mean an opinion he had of his sincerity . i proved the condemning paulus samosatenus while they were under the power of zenobia , to be a plain evidence of the sense of the christian church against his doctrine ; at a time when no interest could be supposed to sway them . to this he gives a twofold answer , ( 1. ) that be sure it is false , that they were then under the power of zenobia . but how can we be sure it is false , when i brought proof it was true , and he answers nothing at all to it ? but it seems , all is cabala and noisy nothings that stand in his way . ( 2. ) he saith , they were all hereticks . a very short answer . but how is this proved ? for a little proof looks well sometimes , and a man must not always say , be sure it is so . well , here is a plain proof ; they differ'd from the council of nice about homoousios . but i had before given a full answer to that , p. 42. to which he gives not the least reply , viz. that they took it in two different senses . as to lucian , i leave it to the readers judgment , if he compares what i have said , and what he answers together , and whether he thinks it probable that the arians should forge a creed under his name at antioch ; if he continued in the doctrine of paulus samosatenus , which was contrary to it . this is all , he saith , that seems considerable in point of antiquity ; and whether he hath said any thing really considerable about it , let the reader judge . come we now to the point of scripture , which is the main point in the case . for i had declared , p. 112. that our faith as to the trinity , is built upon that ; and that there are many places of scripture , of which no tolerable sense can be given without it . and therefore i examined the sense the vnitarians gave of the most remarkable places , and shew'd the weakness and inconsistency of it , and then in an entire chapter proved our doctrine from the form of baptism delivered by our saviour , as it was always understood in the christian church . this i think was a very plain and easie method of proving our doctrine . and what now saith our vnitarian to all this ? truely , i have met with few answers like it . in short , he saith , that for his part , he is enough perswaded without further arguing the matter , that i have spent my breath against a rock . this is just the popish way of answering by infallibility and super hanc petram . but in neither case can i see the least ground for such mighty confidence . alas for them ! they say , that if we write against their interpretations of scripture , they are not at leisure to wipe off every small soil that may happen to be scatter'd in their books . not at leisure ! whence have come all those swarms of pestilent books which have come abroad of late years among us , to spread their infectious doctrine over the nation ? and now are they not at leisure to defend them ? and at the same time have leisure enough to run into other matters , about which there may be more colour for cavilling . so that this cannot be the true reason , and i leave the reader to judge what it is . the last thing is the point of reason ; and here he finds leisure enough to expatiate . but i shall keep to that point , upon which he supposes the whole controversie to turn , which is , whether the difference between nature and person , which we observe in mankind , do so far hold with respect to the divine nature , that it is a contradiction to say , there are three persons and not three gods ? and there are several things i proposed , in order to the clearing of this matter , which i shall endeavour to lay down as distinctly as i can ; and i shall not be hector'd or banter'd out of that which i account the most proper method , although it happen to be too obscure for our men of wit to understand without hazard of their iaws . the principles or suppositions i lay down are these ; i. nature is one and indivisible in it self , whereever it is . ii. the more perfect any nature is , the more perfect must its unity be . iii. whatever is affirmed of a most perfect being , must be understood in a way agreeable to its perfection . iv. it is repugnant to the perfection of the divine nature , to be multiplied into such individuals as are among men ; because it argues such a dependence and separation , as is inconsistent with the most perfect unity . v. to suppose three distinct persons in one and the same indivisible divine nature , is not repugnant to the divine perfections ; if they be founded on such relative properties , which cannot be confounded with each other , and be in themselves agreeable to the divine nature . vi. whether there be three such distinct persons or not , is not to be drawn from our own imaginations , or similitudes in created beings , but only from the word of god , from whom alone the knowledge of it can be communicated to mankind . let us now see how he proves , that since there is no contradiction for three persons to be in one common human nature , it must be a contradiction to assert three persons in the same divine nature . he offers at no less than demonstrative reason , p. 58. c. 2. but i have always had the most cause to fear the men that pretend to infallibility , and demonstration . i pass over his mysterious boxes , as trifles fit only to entertain his men of wit , and come immediately to his demonstrative reason , is it be to be met with . it comes at last to no more than this , that human nature , and angelical nature , and camel nature have no existence but only in our conception ; and are only notions of our minds ; but the persons in the same rational being are not mere metaphysical persons or relative properties , but they are such as necessarily suppose distinct substances as well as distinct properties . but in the trinity , the nature is a really existing nature , 't is a spiritual substance , and endued with a great number of divine attributes , not an abstracted or mere notional imaginary nature ; and the divine persons are not distinct substances or real beings , but properties only in a real being and in an infinite substance . this is the force of the demonstration . but now if i can make it appear , that every nature is not only one and indivisible in it self , but endued with essential attributes and properties belonging to it as such , then it will be evident , that nature is not a mere abstracted notion of our minds , but something which really exists somewhere ; and then the foundation of this demonstrative reason is taken away . and i appeal to any persons that consider things , whether the human , angelical , and camel nature ( as he calls it ) do not really differ from each other , and have such essential properties belonging to them as cannot agree to any other nature ? for else it must be a mere notion and fiction of the mind , to make any real difference between them . but if human nature and camel nature do essentially differ from each other , then every nature hath its essential unity and properties which cannot belong to any other , and that without any act of our minds . and if every nature is really and essentially different from another , it must have an existence somewhere independent on our notions and conceptions . it may be said , that no such nature doth really exist by it self , but only in the several individuals . but that is not the present question , where or how it exists , but whether it depend only on our imaginations or the acts of our minds ; and if it doth so , then there can be no real and essential difference in the natures of men and beast , which i think none who have the understanding of a man can imagine . but really existing natures , he saith , are in such persons , as necessarily suppose distinct substances , as well as distinct properties ; and if they existed only in a common nature , as the humanity , and had not also distinct substances , they would never make distinct persons . i do allow , that in created and dependent beings , there must be distinct substances to make distinct persons ; but he ought to have given an account what that is which makes distinct persons ' necessarily to suppose distinct substances . for the nature is one and indivisible in them all ; or else every individual must make a new species , which is an absurdity i suppose he will not be fond of . if there be then one and the same nature in the individuals , whence comes the difference of substances to be so necessarily supposed ? if it be from diversity , dissimilitude , dependence and separate existence , as i asserted , then these reasons can hold only in created beings ; and where they cannot hold , as in the divine nature , why may there not be a distinction of persons founded on relative properties , without any distinction of substances , which is repugnant to the perfect unity of the godhead ? what demonstrative reason , nay , what probable argument hath he offer'd against this ? he takes notice p. 60. of what i had said about the distinction of personality and person ; and that personality is originally only a particular mode of subsistence ; and a person besides the relative property takes in the divine nature together with it . and what demonstration have we against this ? so far from it , that he falls to tristing again to keep his men of wit in good humour . so much for madam personality , now for sir person . is this a decent way of writing about these matters ; to begin with the talk of demonstrative reason , and to end with burlesquing , and turning them into ridicule ? if this be an agreeable entertainment for his men of wit , it shews that they deserve that character , as well as he doth that of a demonstrator . but this sportfull gentleman hath found something else to play with , viz. that my notion of three subsistences without three substances is really nothing but sabellianism . but i had already said so much for the clearing of this , both in the preface and the book it self , that i need not to add one word about it , unless he had suggested some new demonstrative reason to prove it . which he is far enough from . all that he saith , is , that they must be called fools as well as sabellius , if they asserted relative properties , or any properties that were in no essence . but the author of the discourse of real and nominal trinitarians , ( to whom he is no stranger ) had said that the sabellians held that the father , son and spirit are but only three names of god given to him in scripture by occasion of so many several dispensations towards the creature , and so he is but one subsisting person and three relative persons . if this be true , here are relative properties indeed relating to a divine essence : but how ? not as to any internal relations of father , son and holy ghost ; but as to external dispensations , which are another kind of relative properties . this is all that i can find in this last effort , that relates to my self : as to what concerns others , they are very able to defend themselves , and particularly as to dr. s. and dr. sh. i must still say i think them much his superiours as to wit and learning , ( for of them i spake without the least respect to my self , however he makes it a complement to my self and them , i know not for what reason , unless it be that i speak of those against whom they had written with insolence and scorn . ) but i hope they will shew themselves so much his superiours too in wisdom and discretion , as not to renew their quarrels upon his provocations , for he doth what in him lies to inflame them ; and he thought it , ( and i do not blame him for it ) the best service he could do to his sinking cause . worcester , april 26 , 1697. e. w. finis . errata . pag. 3.1 . an answer . p. 42. l. 4. for temerarian r. temerarious p. 63. l. 22. for diceret r. doceret . p. 82. l. 17. for preception r. perception . books published by the right reverend father in god , edw. l. bishop of worcester , and sold by h. mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . a rational account of the grounds of the protestant religion ; being a vindication of the lord archbishop of canterbury's relation of a conference , &c. from the pretended answer of t. c. 2d . edit . fol. origines britannicae , or the antiquities of the british churches , with a preface concerning some pretended antiquities relating to britain , in vindication of the bishop of st. asaph . fol. irenicum , a weapon-salve for the churches wounds . 4 to . origines sacrae , or a rational account of the grounds of christian faith , as to the truth and divine authority of the scripture and the matters therein contained . 4 to . a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it . 8 vo . an answer to several late treatises occasion'd by a book , entituled , a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it ; part i. 8 vo . a second discourse in vindication of the protestant grounds of faith , against the pretence of infallibility in the roman church , in answer to the guide in controversie , by r. h. protestancy without principles , and reason , and religion ; or the certain rule of faith , by e. w. with a particular enquiry into the miracles of the roman church . 8 vo . an answer to mr. cressy's epistle apologetical to a person of honour , touching his vindication of dr. stillingfleet . 8 vo . a defence of the discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , in answer to a book entituled , catholicks no idolaters . 8 vo . several conferences between a roman priest , a fanatick chaplain , and a divine of the church of england ; being a full answer to the late dialogues of t. g. 8 vo . a discourse concerning bonds of resignation of benefices in point of law and conscience , 8 vo . a discourse concerning the illegality of the ecclesiastical commission , in answer to the vindication and defence of it : wherein the true notion of the legal supremacy is clear'd ; and an account is given of the nature ▪ original and mischief of the dispensing power . the unreasonableness of separation , or an impartial account of the history , nature and pleas of the present separation from the communion of the church of england . 4 to . the grand question concerning the bishops right to vote in parliament in cases capital stated and argued , from the parliament rolls and the history of former times ; with an enquiry into their peerage , and the three estates in parliament . 8 vo . a discourse concerning the doctrine of christ's satisfaction ; or the true reasons of his sufferings ; with an answer to the socinian objections . to which is added , a sermon concerning the mysteries of the christian faith , preached april 7. 1691. with a preface concerning the true state of the controversie about christ's satisfaction . 8 vo . twelve sermons preached on several occasions , by the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester . the first volume . 8 vo . a second volume will speedily be publish'd . the effigies of the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester , engraven on a copper-plate by robert white . price 6 d. notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61522-e140 p. 6. p. 7. p. 8. p. 9. book 2. ch. 13. sect. 19. p. 14. ch. 23. sect. 2. p. 11. p. 12 ▪ p. 22. p. 35. p. 25. p. 38. p. 28 , 29. p. 32. book 2. ch . 23. sect. 6. p. 32. p. 33. p ▪ 40. p. 18 , 23 , 24 , 36 , 37. p. 8. essay , b. 2. ch . 8. sect. 25. ch. 9. sect. 8 , 9 , 10. p. 7 , 8 , 10 , 30. p. 6. p. 8. b 2. ch . 23. sect. 1. sect. 2 , 3 , 4. p. 22. p. 40. p. 40. b. 2. ch. 24. sect. 16. p. 43. p. 44. voss. etymol . in v. sto. thucyd. l. 6. p. 392. ed. ox. & l. 3. p. 184 acad. l. 1.8 . cicer. in lucul . c. 6. c. 24. p. 57. p. 226. book 4. ch. 6. sect. 3. ch. 4. sect. 18. christianity not myst. p. 10. p. 12. p. 13. b. 4. ch . 3. sect. 23. sect. 24 , &c. sect 28. sect. 30. book 4. ch. 17. sect. 1. sect. 9. sect. 10. sect. 11. sect. 12. b. 4. ch . 17. 1. sect. 23. b. 4. ch . 18. sect. 2. p. 59. p. 62. p. 65. p. 66. id. p. 74.82 . b. 2. ch. 23. sect. 15. sect. 17. sect. 22. sect. 30. sect. 31. p. 67. p. 68. leviath . ch . 34. leviath . ch . 38. vindicat. of leviath . p. 90 , 91. p. 69 p. 71. p. 72. p. 73. p. 74. p. 75. p. 81. p. 81. book 4. ch. 2. sect. 1. book 2. ch . 23. sect. 6.14 . sect. 7. sect. 8. sect. 12. book 4. ch. 4. sect. 18. b. 3. ch . 10. sect. 15. b 2. ch . 23. sect. 17. b. 2. ch . 23. sect. 15. b. 2 ch . 21. sect. 8. sect. 13. b. 2. ch . 8. sect. 11. sect 10. b. 2. ch . 27. sect 9. b. 2. ch . 11. sect. 9. sect. 10. letter , p. 27. de immort . animae . c. 9. let. p. 139. p. 73. p. 66. p. 87. p. 88. p. 101. p. 103. p. 106. p. 107. ib. p. 107. p. 110 p. 113. p. 114. b. 1. ch. 4 sect 8. ch. 4. sect. 12. p. 119. p. 123. p. 125. p. 121. p. 120 p. 128. p. 127. p. 132. p. 145. p. 136. p. 137. cum enim duo sint genera rerum quae sciuntur , unum earum quae per sensus corporis percipit animus , alterum earum quae per scipsum ▪ multa illi philosophi garrierunt contra corporis sensus ; animi autem quasdam firmissimas per seipsum perceptiones rerum verarum , quale est illud , scio me vivere , nequaquam in dubium vocare potuerunt . de trin. l. 15. c. 12. p. 139. p. 142 p. 157. p. 165. p. 216. p. 217. ● 2. ch . 1. sect. 5. ch. 2. sect. 1. sect. 2. ch. 11. sect. 9 ch. 12. sect. 1. sect. 3. sect. 6 ch ●● . sect. 3. sect. 6 , 14 sect. 33. b 3. ch . 3. sect. 2. sect. 6. sect. 9. sect. 11. sect. 12. sect. 14. sect. 15. sect. 16. leviath . ch . 4. b. 2. ch . 17. sect. 1. p. 169 p. 170. p. 171. b. 2. ch . 8. sect. 10 , 15 , 17 , 23. sect. 25. p. 174. p. 176. p. 178. p. 181. p. 190. p. 191. p. 193. p. 195. p. 197. p. 198. p. 199. p. 201. p. 20● . p. 203. p. 210. p. 212. book 4. ch. 1. sect. 1. ch. 3. sect. 23. sect. 27. sect. 24 sect. 26. sect. 27. sect. 25. sect. 28. b. 4. ch . 2. sect. 2. sect. 7. ch. 2. sect. 14 ▪ ●●●● sect. 1. sect. 2. the grand question, concerning the bishops right to vote in parliament in cases capital stated and argued, from the parliament-rolls, and the history of former times : with an enquiry into their peerage, and the three estates in parliament. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1680 approx. 278 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 97 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61556 wing s5594 estc r19869 12443099 ocm 12443099 62146 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61556) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 62146) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 948:15) the grand question, concerning the bishops right to vote in parliament in cases capital stated and argued, from the parliament-rolls, and the history of former times : with an enquiry into their peerage, and the three estates in parliament. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [4], 188 p. printed for m.p., and sold by richard rumball ..., london : 1680. reproduction of original in the university of illinois (urbana-champaign campus). library. attributed to edward stillingfleet. cf. nuc pre-1956. table of contents: p. [3] created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng england and wales. -parliament -rules and practice. church of england -bishops -temporal power. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2004-04 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the grand question , concerning the bishops right to vote in parlament in cases capital , stated and argued , from the parlament-rolls , and the history of former times . with an enquiry into their peerage , and the three estates in parlament . london , printed for m. p. and sold by richard rumball book-binder , at the ball and coffin in the old change , 1680. the contents . chap. i. the question stated ; and general prejudices removed . chap. ii. the right in point of law debated . concerning the constitution of clarendon , and the protestation 11. r. 2. chap. iii. the precedents on both sides laid down : those against the bishops examined and answered . chap. iv. the peerage of the bishops cleared ; how far they make a third estate in parlament . objections against it answered . chap. 1. the question stated ; and general prejudices removed . the question in debate , as it is stated by the authour of the letter , is , whether the bishops may be present and vote iudicially in capital cases , which come to be judged in parlament , either in giving the iudgment it self , or in resolving and determining any circumstance preparatory and leading to that iudgment ? for our better proceeding towards a resolution of this question , it will be necessary to take notice of some things granted on both sides , which may prevent needless disputes , and be of great use in the following debate . 1. it is granted , that the bishops do sit in parlament by virtue of their baronies , and are bound to serve the king there . and one part of the service due to the king there , is to sit in iudgment : for the authour of the book entitled , the iurisdiction of the house of peers asserted , proves at large , that the right of iudicature belongs to the barons in parlament ; and that the lords spiritual have a considerable share therein , appears by this passage , in the title-page of that book , translated into english. the iudgment of the lords spiritual and temporal is according to the vse and custom of parlament . the vse and custom of parlament is the law of parlament . the law of parlament is the law of england . the law of england is the law of the land. the law of the land is according to magna charta . therefore the iudgment of the lords spiritual and temporal is according to magna charta . some right then of iudicature in parlament the bishops have by magna charta : which , whatever it be , is as much theirs by that charter as any right of temporal persons ; and cannot be invaded or taken from them without breach of that charter , any more then the rights of the lords temporal , or of any other persons whatsoever . but how far that right doth extend , is now the thing in question . 2. it is not denied , that the bishops do sit in parlament by the same kind of writs that other barons do . they are summon'd to advise and debate about the great and difficult affairs of the kingdom ; cum praelatis , magnatibus & proceribus dicti regni nostri angliae colloquium habere & tractatum ; i. e. to joyn therein with the bishops and other lords of the kingdom . so that by the king 's writ of summons they are impower'd and requir'd to confer and treat of all the weighty affairs that shall be brought before them . and no instance is so much as offer'd to be produced of any writ wherein the king doth limit and restrain the bishops , any more then any other lords of parlament , as to any matter of consultation , or point of judicature , belonging to that house . they have then by their writ of summons as good right to sit in all cases , as in any : and since the other lords by their writs are summoned to advise with the prelates in all matters that shall come before them , without limitation , it is not to be conceived how this can be done , if the bishops in some of the most important debates be excluded . 3. it is yielded , that if the house proceeds in a legislative way by passing bills of attainder , the bishops have a right to sit and vote therein as well as other lords : at these it is said , that the bishops are or should be all present at the passing of them , for then they act as members of the house of lords in their legislative capacity . but men do as certainly die that are condemned in the legislative , as in the iudicial way . is not this then really as much a case of bloud as the other ? if the bishops should give their votes in the legislative way to condemn a person for treason , and yet think they had not voted in a case of bloud ; they would then indeed be like chaucer's frier , mention'd by the authour of the letter , that would have of a capon the liver , and of a pig the head , yet would that nothing for him should be dead . doth a bill of attainder cut of a man's head without making it a case of bloud ? there can be then no objection now made against the bishops right from any canons of the church ; for those allow no such distinction of proceeding in the legislative , or iudicial way . and the late authour of the peerage and iurisdiction of the lords spiritual doth grant , that the canons do prohibit the bishops voting in bills of attainder , as much as in any case whatsoever . but we are not to suppose a person of such abilities as the authour of the letter , would go about to exclude the bishops from their right of voting in a iudicial way in cases capital , unless there were some great appearance of law on his side ; because he professes so great a desire that right may prevail ; and that his design in writing was , to satisfy himself and others where that right is . the discovery whereof is our present business . yet before the authour of the letter comes to a close debate of the matter of right , he lets fall some general insinuations to create a prejudice in the reader 's mind , as to the bishops meddling at all in secular affairs , as though it were inconsistent with their function , and with some passages in the imperial law. and because men may sometimes doe more harm by what they tell us they will not say , then by what they do say ; it will be fit to prevent the danger of such insinuations , before we come to consider his arguments . 1. the first is , that meddling at all in secular affairs seems to be the doing that which the apostles declared they would not doe , viz. leave the word of god , and serve tables . but are all persons of estates now bound to part with them , as the christians then did ? the serving of tables was a full employment ; and they who attended that office were the treasurers of the church , to distribute to every one as they judged fit , out of the common stock . is it no service to god , to doe justice , and to shew mercy ? to attend upon the publick affairs of the kingdom , when they are called to it by their sovereign ? or are all bishops now in the same circumstances the apostles were when the christian church was to be planted in the world , and so few persons as the 12 apostles made choice of for that work ? is there no difference to be made between a church constituted and settled and incorporated into the commonwealth , and one not yet formed , but labouring under great difficulties , and making its way through constant persecutions ? may it not be as well argued , that bishops are not to stay in one countrey , nor to have any fixed habitation , because the apostles passed from place to place preaching the word of god ? doth not the authour of the letter himself confesse , that the clergy are one of the three estates of the kingdom ? and by the act 8 eliz. 1. the clergy are called one of the greatest states of this realm . and is there not then great reason , that those who are the chief part of it , as he confesseth the bishops to be , should have a share in affairs that concern the whole nation ? and would it not seem strange to the christian world , that we alone of all the kingdoms of europe should exclude the bishops from having an equal interest with the other estates in parlament ? for it were easy to prove from unquestionable testimonies , that as soon as the christian religion was well settled in any of these northern kingdoms , the bishops were admitted into all the publick councils : and have so continued to this day , where the convention of the estates hath been kept up ; bohemia onely excepted since the days of sigismond . i begin with france , where hincmarus saith , there were two great councils every year : one of the states of the kingdom , for ordering the affairs of the ensuing year , and redressing of grievances ; and in these the bishops were always present : and the other of the king's council , which managed the intervening affairs ; and into this the chief of the bishops were chosen . it were endless to repeat the several parlaments in france in the time of the merovingian and caroline race , wherein laws were passed , and the great affairs of the kingdom managed by the bishops , noblemen , and others . those who have looked into the ancient annals and capitulars of france , cannot be ignorant of this . there is one thing remarkable to our purpose in the famous council of frankford , which opposed the worship of images so stoutly , viz. that after the matters of religion were agreed , then , according to the custom of that age , the other estates being present , they proceeded to other matters : and then tassilo duke of bavaria was brought upon his knees for treason ; and the cause of peter bishop of verdun was heard , who was likewise accused of treason , and there purged himself . concerning both which cases there are 2 canons still extant among the canons of that council : and in another , the bishops are appointed , by consent of the king , to doe justice in their several dioceses . and that they had not onely a share in the legislative , but in the iudiciary part , appears by one of the ancient formulae in marculphus , where it is said , that the king sate in judgment unà cum dominis & patribus nostris episcopis , vel cum plurimis optimatibus nostris ; ( vel , in the language of that age , is the same with & . ) this was the palatine court , where bignonius saith the greater causes were heard , the king himself being present , ( or the comes palatii , ) episcopis & proceribus adsidentibus , the bishops and lords sitting in iudicature together with him . and this was not onely the original of the parlament of paris , as a standing court of iudicature ; but the like in england was the true foundation of the supreme court of iudicature in the house of peers . so that in the eldest and best times of france , after christianity had prevailed there , neither consultation about publick affairs , nor administration of justice were thought inconsistent with the function of bishops . in spain , during the gothick power , all the great affairs of the kingdom , and even the rights of their princes , were debated and transacted by the greatest of the clergy and nobility together ; as may be seen in the several councils of toledo in that time , in the case of suintilas , sisenandus and others . and in one of them it is said , that after they had dispatched matters of religion , they proceeded ad caeterarum causarum negotia , to the handling of other causes . in the 13. council of toledo , the case of impeachments of treason is brought in ; and rules set down for due proceedings therein . and yet from one of these councils of toledo it is , that all the stir hath been made in the canon-law about bishops not being present in cases of bloud . in germany , the first laws that were ever published were those by lotharius ii. in comitiis regni , saith goldastus ; and there were present 33 bishops , 34 dukes , 72 counts , besides the people . and by the matriculation-roll of the states of the empire , it appears what a great interest the clergy have preserved ther in from the first times of the prevalecy of christianity there . and arumaeus , a considerable protestant lawyer of the empire , saith , the bishops of germany sit in a double capacity in the diets , both as bishops , and as princes of the empire . and he commends the prudence of that constitution with respect both to iustice , and the honour and safety of religion . for the kingdom of bohemia , goldastus , a learned protestant , saith , that there , as in all other well-constituted kingdoms among christians , there were 3 estates , of prelats , nobles , and commons ; and this continued , he saith , from the time christianity was received , till the days of sigismond . no sooner was christianity received in hungary , but their princes , stephanus and ladislaus , called their great councils of their prelats and nobles : and the laws made in the concilium zabolchianum were passed by the king , with all his bishops and nobles , and with the consent of the whole clergy and people . in poland , starovolscius saith , that their ancestours , after they received christianity , out of regard to religion , gave the bishops the first place in the senate ; and admitted the clergy to the great offices of the kingdom . and sigismond in his constitution saith , the states of poland consist of the bishops , barons , and delegates , called nuntii terrestres . in the northern kingdoms , adamus bremensis saith , that the bishops , after the people received christianity , were receiv'd into their publick councils . and loccenius reckons up among the several estates , the bishops , nobles , knights , and deputies of the country and cities . and it appears by the hirdstraa , or the ancient laws of norway , the bishops as well as nobility were present in the convention of the states , and all publick councils . the like might be proved here in the saxon times , from the conversion of ethelbert downward . this is so very evident , that he must blind his eyes that doth not see it , if he doth but cast them on the history of those times . these things i have laid together with all possible brevity and clearness , that in one view we may see a consent of all these parts of the christian world , in calling bishops to their publick councils , and most solemn debates ; and how far they were from thinking such imployments inconsistent with their sacred function , and charging them , that thereby they left the word of god to serve tables . neither can this be looked on as any part of the degeneracy of the church , or the policy of the papacy ; since , as the fore-cited arumaeus saith , they were admitted to this honour before the papal power was advanced ; and were so far from carrying on the pope's designs , that they were , in most countries , the greatest opposers of them . and when the popes began to set up their monarchy , their business was , to draw them off from meeting in these councils , under several pretences of cases of bloud , and other things ; the better to keep them in a sole dependency on themselves . as will appear by the following discourse . 2. the next thing suggested is , that the imperial law doth forbid clergy-men having any thing to doe with secular matters . and for this a rescript of honorius and theodosius is mentioned , and a decree of iustinian . to which i answer , 1. the imperial edicts are not the law of england . our dispute is about a right by our own laws ; which a rescript of honorius and theodosius can neither give nor take away . what would become of the whole frame of our government , and of our just rights and properties , if the producing of imperial edicts would be sufficient to overthrow them ? when the bishops once pleaded hard in parlament in behalf of an imperial constitution , lately adopted into the canon-law , the answer given by all the temporal lords was , nolumus leges angliae mutare , quae huc usque usitatae sunt & approbatae . they did not mean , they would make no alterations in parlament , for that very parlament did so in several things : but their meaning was , as mr. selden observes , that they owned neither canon nor imperial laws here , any farther then they were agreeable to the laws of the land. 2. the imperial constitutions do give liberty to church-men to have to doe in secular affairs . the emperour constantine , whose constitutions deserve as great regard as those of honorius and theodosius , to shew his respect to the christian religion , permitted all men to bring their causes before the bishops , without ever going to the other tribunals , as sozomen , a lawyer of constantinople , relates . and this is the true foundation of the constitution de episcopali iudicio ; as gothofred confesseth . which is at large inserted into the capitulars , with a more then usual introduction ; and made a law to all the subjects of the empire , franks , saxons , lombards , britons , &c. and therefore is more considerable to these parts then a bare rescript of honorius and theodosius . and yet , these very emperours , in a constitution of theirs , do so far ratifie the judgment of bishops upon trial by consent before them , that no appeal doth lie from their decree . what rescript then is this of theirs which so utterly forbids clegy-men having any thing to doe with publick functions , or things appertaining to the court ? i suppose that constitution of honorius is meant , which confines the bishops power to what concerns religion ; and leaves other causes to the ordinary judges and the course of law. but two things are well observed by iac. gothofred concerning this rescript of honorius : 1. that it is meant of absolute and peremptory judgment without appeal ; 2. that whatever is meant by it , not many years after , this constitution was repealed by honorius himself , and the bishops sentence made as absolute as before . so that honorius is clearly against him , if a man's second judgment and thoughts be better . 3. the practice of the best men in those ages shews , that they thought no law in force to forbid church-men to meddle in secular affairs : as might be at large proved from the practice of gregory thaumaturgus and s. basil in the east ; of silvanus bishop of troas , of s. ambrose , s. augustine , and others of the greatest and most devout church-men of those times . and s. augustine was so far from thinking it unlawfull , that in his opinion s. paul commanded the bishops to doe it . constituit enim talibus causis ecclesiasticos apostolus cognitores . and the learned gothofred of geneva saith , mos hic frequens & legitimus eundi ad iudices episcopos . it was then a common and legal practice to go to bishops as to their iudges . which would never have been , if there had been a law in force to forbid bishops meddling in secular affairs . 4. the emperours still reserved to themselves the power of dispensing with their own rescripts , and the canons of the church . therefore the council of sardica , when it prohibits bishops going to court , excepts the princes calling them thither . upon which balsamon hath this note ; that although the canons prohibit , yet if the emperour commands , the bishops are bound to obey , and to doe what he commands them ; without any fault either in the emperour or them . and in other places he asserts the emperour's power of dispensing with the strictest canons against church-mens meddling in secular affairs : thence he saith , the metropolitan of side was chief minister of state under michael ducas ; and the bishop of neocaesarea made the laws of the admiralty for greece . and the glosse upon iustinian's novells observes , that bishops may meddle with the affairs of the commonwealth , when their prince calls them to it . and this is the present case ; for the bishops are summon'd by the king 's writ to serve him in the publick council of the nation : and therefore no imperial rescript , if it were of force in england , could have any in this case , which was allowed by the imperial laws themselves . 5. there is a great mistake about iustinian's decree . for the bishops are not so much as mention'd in it ; but the defensores ecclesiarum ; who were lawyers , or advocates of the church : as appears by a constitution of honorius ; where gothofred proves they were not so much as in orders . it is true , iustinian doth appropriate the probat of wills to the master of his revenue ; but the law and custom of england , as lindwood observes , hath alter'd that constitution : and which must we regard more , iustinian , or our own laws ? i find one thing more suggested by way of prejudice to the cause in hand , viz. the common law of england , which hath provided a writ upon a clergy-man's being chosen an officer in a mannor , saying it was contra legem & consuetudinem regni , & non consonum . the argument had been altogether as good , if it had been taken from a minister of a parish not being capable of the office of constable ; and it had as effectually proved that clergy-men ought not to meddle in secular affairs . chap. ii. the right in point of law debated . concerning the constitution of clarendon , and the protestation 11 r. 2. having removed these general prejudices , i now come to debate more closely the main point . for the authour of the letter undertakes to prove , that bishops cannot by law give votes in capital cases in parlament . which he doth two ways : 1. by statute-law ; 2. by use and custome , which he saith is parlament-law : and for this he produceth many precedents . i. for statute-law ; two ratifications , he saith , there have been of it in parlament ; by the constitutions of clarendon , and the 11 r. 2. 1. the constitutions of clarendon ; which he looks on as the more considerable , because they were not the enacting of new laws , but a declaration of what was before . and for the same reason i value them too , and shall be content this cause stand or fall by them . the constitution in debate is the 11 th , which is thus repeated and translated in the letter . archiepiscopi , episcopi , & universae personae regni qui de rege tenent in capite , habeant possessiones suas de rege , sicut baroniam , & inde respondeant iusticiariis & ministris regis , & sequantur & faciant omnes consuetudines regias : et sicut ceteri barones , debent interesse judiciis curie regis , quousque perveniatur ad diminutionem membrorum , vel ad mortem . the archbishops , bishops , and all the dignified clergy of the land that hold of the king in capite , shall hold their possessions from the king , as a barony , and answer for their estates unto the king's iustices and ministers , and shall observe and obey all the king's laws : and together with the other barons , they are to be present at all iudgments in the king's courts , till it come to require either losse of member or life . the argument from hence he enforceth from the solemn recognition and publick confirmation of these constitutions , and the oath taken to observe them ; from whence he concludes this to be testimonium irrefragabile , an irrefragable and invincible testimony . and so i foresee it will prove , but to a quite contrary purpose from what he intended it . the whole question depends upon the meaning of the latter clause of this constitution . the meaning he gives of it is this , that the prelats of the church should not be present at the iudgments given in the king's courts when losse of member or life was in question . the meaning of it i conceive to be this , that the bishops are required to be present in the king's courts as other barons are , till they come to give sentence as to dismembring , or loss of life . whether of these is the true meaning is now to be considered : and that will best be discovered these three ways . 1. by the occasion . 2. by the plain sense of the words according to their true reading . 3. by the subsequent practice upon this constitution in the parlament at northampton soon after . 1. by the occasion . the authour of the letter assigns that occasion for this constitution , for which there is not the least colour ; viz. that the prelats of that time were ambitious of a kind of omnipotency , ( in judicature i suppose he means , ) and that to restrain their power of judging capital cases this constitution was made : and because this seemed to be a diminution of their power , therefore matt. paris ranks it among the consuetudines iniquas , the wicked customs of the former times . for all which there is not the least shadow of proof ; besides that it is so repugnant to the history of those times , that i can hardly believe a person of so much learning and judgment , as is commonly said to be the authour of the letter , could betray so much unskilfulness in the affairs of those times . for this is so far from being true , that the bishops did then affect such a power of iudging in all secular causes , that they looked on their attendance in the king's court in the trial of causes , as a burthen which they would fain have been rid of ; because they accounted it a mark of subjection to the civil power , and contrary to that ecclesiastical liberty , or independency on princes , which from the days of gregory vii . they had been endeavouring to set up . which h. ii. being very sensible of , resolved to tie them to the service of their baronies , and to an attendance on the king's courts together with other barons . but lest they should pretend any force on their consciences , as to the canons of the church , this constitution doth not require , but suffers them to withdraw , when they came to sentence in matters of bloud . and that this was the true occasion , i prove by these two invincible arguments . 1. by the complaint which they made of the baronies , as too great a mark of subjection to the civil power . this is plain from matt. paris himself , to whom the authour of the letter refers : for when he speaks of william the conquerour's bringing the temporalties of the bishops into the condition of baronies , i. e. forcing them to hold them of him in chief upon certain duties and services , he calls it constitutionem pessimam , a most wicked constitution ; just as he calls the customs of clarendon consuetudines iniquas , wicked customs . and he adds , that many were banished rather then they would submit to that constitution . for their privileges were so great with the frank-almoign they enjoy'd in the saxon times , and their desires so hearty ( especially among the monks , who from edgar's time had gotten into most cathedral churches ) to advance the papal monarchy , that they rather chose to quit all , then to give up the cause of the churche's liberty by accepting of baronies . therefore matt. paris calls the rolls that were made of the services belonging to these baronies , rotulas ecclesiasticae servitutis , the rolls of ecclesiastical slavery ; then which nothing could be more contrary to that ecclesiastical liberty which was then setting up by pope hildebrand . and to put this out of all dispute , petrus blesensis , a name well known in this dispute , in that very book where he complains of the bishops hypocrisy about cases of bloud , in being present at hearing and trying causes , but going out at sentence , complains likewise of their baronies , as those which gave occasion to that hypocrisy , and as the marks of the vilest slavery . et in occasione turpissimae servitutis seipsos barones appellant . they may think it an honour to be called the king's barons , but he accounts it the greatest slavery ; and applies that place of scripture to them , they have reigned , but not by me ; they are become princes , and i know them not . now pet. blesensis lived in the time of h. ii. and knew the whole proceedings of the constitutions of clarendon , and was a zealous maintainer of becket's cause , or , which was all one , of the liberties of the church , as they call'd them , against the civil power . 2. by the fierce contest between the civil and ecclesiastical power , about the liberties of church-men . this was carried on from the time that william i. brought them into subjection by their baronies : his sons stood upon the rights of the crown ; whilst anselm and his brethren struggled all they could , but to little purpose , till after the death of h. i. then stephen , to gratifie the great prelates , by whose favour he came to the crown , yielded all they desired : but he soon repented , and they were even with him for it . malmsbury takes particular notice , that he yielded they should have their possessions free and absolute ; and they promised onely a conditional allegeance to him , as long as he maintained the liberties of the church . when k. stephen broke the canons , as they said , by imprisoning 2 bishops , the bishop of winchester and his brethren summon'd him to answer it before them in council ; and there declared , that the king had nothing to doe with church-men , till the cause was first heard and determined by themselves . all his time , they had no regard to his authority , when it contradicted their wills : and when the peace was made between him and h. ii. radulphus de diceto takes notice that the power of the clergy increased by it . in this state h. ii. found things , when gul. neuburgensis saith , the great business of the church-men was to preserve their liberties . upon this the great quarrel between him and becket began : this made the king search what the rights of the crown were which his ancestours challenged ; to these he was resolved to make becket and his brethren submit . for this purpose the parlament was called at clarendon , and after great debates the 16 constitutions were produced ; which were those the king was resolved to maintain , and he made the bishops as well as others swear to observe them . now when the rest of them relate to some exemptions and privileges which the church-men challenged to themselves , about their courts , excommunications , appeals , and such like , and which the king thought fit to restrain them in ; ( from whence in becket's epistles it is said , those constitutions were framed ad ancillandam ecclesiam , to bring the church in subjection , as baronius shews out of the vatican copy . and fitz-stephen saith , all the constitutions of clarendon were for suppressing the liberty of the church , and oppressing the clergy : i say , considering this , ) is there not then great reason to understand this 11 th . constitution after the same manner : viz. that notwithstanding k. stephen's grant , h. ii. would make them hold by baronies , and doe all the service of barons in the king's courts , as other barons did ; and he would allow them no other privilege , but that of withdrawing when they came to sentence in a case of bloud ? what is there in this sense , but what is easy and natural , and fully agreeable to the state of those times ? whereas there is not the least foundation for the pretence of the bishops affecting to be present in all causes , which the king must restrain by this constitution . this sense of it is not onely without ground , but is absolutely repugnant to all the history of that age. for if this constitution was intended to restrain the bishops from trying causes of bloud , then the bishops did desire to be present in those causes , and the king would not suffer them . whereas it is evident that the bishops pretended scruple of conscience from the canons , that they could not be present ; but in truth stood upon their exemption from the service of barons , which they call'd ecclesiastical slavery . and therefore that could not be the sense of the constitution , to restrain them in that which they desired to be freed from , and which by this constitution of clarendon was plainly forced upon them against their wills . for lanfranc had brought the canon of the 11 th . council of toledo into england , that no bishop or clergy-man should condemn a man to death , or give vote in the sentence of condemnation : at which council were present 2 archbishops , 12 bishops , and 21 abbots . and before h. ii ' s time this canon of toledo was received into the body of the canon-law , made by ivo , burchardus , regino , and gratian who lived in the time of k. stephen : and when they saw such a canon so generally received , is there not far greater reason to think they desired to withdraw , then that they should press to be present , and the king restrain them ? but the constitution is so framed on purpose , to let them understand , that the king expected in all iudgments they should doe their duty , as other barons : but lest they should think he purposely designed to make them break the canons , he leaves them at liberty to withdraw when sentence was to be given . so that i can hardly doubt but the authour of the letter , if he please calmly to reflect upon the whole matter , will see reason to acknowledge his mistake ; and that this constitution was so far from intending to restrain the bishops from all iudicature in cases of bloud , that , on the contrary , it was purposely framed to oblige them to be present , and to act in such causes as the other barons did , at least till the cause was ripe for sentence : which last point the king was content to yield to them , out of regard and reverence to the canons of the church . for the words of the law are not words of prohibition and restraint from any thing , but of obligation to a duty ; which was , to be present and serve in the king's courts of iudicature , in like manner as the other barons did . from all which it is evident , i think , beyond contradiction , that the occasion of this law was not the ambition of the prelates , ( as the authour of the letter suggests ) to thrust themselves into this kind of iudicature ; but an ambition of a worse kind , ( though quite contrary ) viz. under a pretence of ecclesiastical liberty and privilege , to exempt themselves from the service of the king and kingdom , to which by virtue of their baronies they were bound , sicut caeteri barones , as well as the other barons . and therefore it is so far from being true , that the bishops exercise of this iurisdiction together with the temporal lords is a relique of popery , and one of the encroachments of the clergy in those times of ignorance and usurpation , as some well-meaning protestants are now made to believe ; that , on the contrary , the exemption of the clergy from this kind of secular iudicature was one of the highest points of popery , and that which the pope and his adherents contested for with more zeal then for any article of the creed . this was one of those privileges which thomas becket said christ purchased for his church with his bloud , and in the obstinate defence whereof against the king he himself at last lost his life . and now to put the matter beyond all doubt , i appeal to any man skill'd in the history of those times , whether thomas becket opposed the constitutions of clarendon to the death , and broke the oath he had taken to observe them , because by them ( among other things ) the bishops were excluded from iudicature in cases of bloud ; or for the quite contrary reason , ( among others ) because this service of the king in his courts , impos'd on them by virtue of their baronies , was look'd upon by him as a violation of the privileges of the church , and a badge of ecclesiastical slavery , which by all means he desir'd to cast off . and if the latter be the true reason , i leave it to the impartial reader , and even to the authour of the letter himself upon second thoughts , whether he have not widely mistaken both the occasion and meaning of this law. 2. let us consider the plain sense of the words according to the true reading of them . the authour of the letter hath made use of the most imperfect copy , viz. that in matt. paris ; i cannot tell for what reason , unless it be that in the last clause [ in iudicio ] is there left out , which is put in in the copy extant in gervase , and in the vatican copy , and in several mss. in all which it runs thus , et sicut barones caeteri debent interesse judiciis curiae regis cum baronibus , usque perveniatur in judicio ad diminutionem membrorum , vel ad mortem . now here are two things to be distinguished . 1. something expresly required of the bishops as to their presence in the king's courts , viz. that they must attend as other barons , and sit together with them : and therefore it is expressed twice ; et sicut caeteri barones , in the beginning of that clause , and cum baronibus , again after , and debent interesse , in the middle . and can any one soberly think , that the meaning of all this is , they must not be present in cases of bloud ? no : the constitution saith , they ought to be present as other barons , and sit with other barons in the trials of the king's courts . and yet the authour of the letter doth ( to speak mildly ) very unfairly represent this constitution , as if it did forbid the prelats to be at all present in the iudgments of the king's courts in cases of bloud ; and that in express words . for , speaking of the constitutions of clarendon , he hath this passage , and one of these constitutions was , that the prelats of the church should not interesse iudiciis curie regis , be present at the iudgments given in the kings courts . whereas this constitution ( as he himself cites it afterwards ) runs thus , debent interesse iudiciis curie regis , quousque , &c. they ought to be present in the iudgments of the king's courts , till it come to loss of members or life . so that this law expresly says , that they ought to be present in the iudgments of the king's courts , till it come , &c. and when it comes to loss of members or life , it doth not say ( as the authour of the letter affirms ) that they should not be present then , nor do the words of the constitution imply any such thing ; but only require ( as i shall evidently make appear ) their presence so far ; and when it should come to sentence , leaves them at liberty to withdraw in obedience to the canons of the church , which they pretended themselves bound in conscience to observe . and this is the true reason why , among the 16 constitutions of clarendon , ( whereof 10 were condemned , 6 tolerated , but none approv'd , by pope alex. iii. ) this 11. was one of the 6 which escaped with an hoc toleravit , this the pope was content to tolerate ; because in the last clause of it there was regard had to the canons of the church . of this misrepresentation of the constitution under debate , though it might have deserved a more severe animadversion , i shall say no more , because i have no design to provoke the authour or any body else , but onely to convince them . 2. something allowed to the bishops as peculiar to themselves , viz. that when the court hath proceeded so far in judicio , in a particular trial , ( for before it is iudiciis in general ) that sentence was to be given either as to dismembring , or loss of life , then they are at liberty ; but till then they are required . as , suppose charles v. had required the protestant princes to attend him to masse , as other princes did ; onely when the mass-bell tinckled they might withdraw ; would not any reasonable man understand by this , that they were obliged to their attendance till then ? so it is here : the king commands their attendance till it comes to such a point ; therefore before it comes thither , their presence is plainly required by this constitution . and so in stead of there being a statute-law to exclude the bishops at such trials , there is one to require their presence in judicio , in the proceedings of such a trial , till it comes to sentence . all that can be said in this case is , that the last clause is not to be understood of the sentence , but of the kind or quality of the cause ; i. e. they are to be present in the king's courts , till they come to a cause wherein a man's life or members are concerned . but that this cannot be the meaning will appear . 1. there is a great deal of difference between quousque perveniatur ad judicium mutilationis membrorum , vel mortis , that might have been understood of a cause of bloud ; and quousque perveniatur in judicio ad mutilationem membrorum , vel ad mortem , for this supposeth a trial already begun , and the bishops present so far in it ; but when it comes to the point of mutilation or death , then they have leave to withdraw . so that this last clause must either be understood of execution , which no one can think proper for the king's courts ; or for the sentence given by the court , which is most agreeable . 2. the sense is best understood by the practice of that age. for , if the meaning of the constitution had been , they must not be present in any cause of bloud , and the bishops had all sworn to observe it ; can we imagine we should find them practising the contrary so soon after ? and for this i appeal to petrus blesensis , whose words are so material to this purpose , that i shall set them down . principes sacerdotum & seniores populi , licèt non dictent judicia sanguinis , eadem tamen tractant disputando & disceptando de illis ; séque ideo immunes à culpa reputant , quòd mortis aut truncationis membrorum judícium decernentes , à pronuntiatione duntaxat & executione poenalis sententiae se absentent . whereby it is evident that the bishops were present at all debates , and gave votes in causes of bloud ; but they absented themselves from the sentence , and the execution of it . it is true , pet. blesensis finds fault with them for this . but what is that to the law , or to the practice of that age ? i do not question , but pet. blesensis condemned the observation of the other constitutions of clarendon , as well as this ; and in all probability this passage of his was levelled at those bishops who did observe this 11. constitution . 3. we have a plain way to understand the meaning of this constitution , by what happen'd soon after in the parlament at northampton , which was summon'd upon becket's obstinacy and contempt of the king's authority : where fitz-stephen saith , he was accused of treason ; and the bishops sate together with other barons ; and because it did not come to a sentence of death , after great debate between the other lords and the bishops about pronouncing the sentence , the bishop of winchester did it . wherein we have as plain evidence as can be desired , that the bishops did sit with the other barons , and vote with them in a case of treason . to this precedent the authour of the letter answers several things . 1. that none of the ancient historians of those times say any thing of his being accused of treason : and therefore he thinks one may modestly affirm , that it was a mistake in fitz-stephen to say so . but what if h. ii. and becket himself both confess that he was charged with treason ? h. ii. in his letter to reginaldus saith , that by consent of his barons and clergy he had sent ambassadours to pope alexander , with this charge , that if he did not free him from that traitour becket , he and his kingdom would renounce all obedience to him . and becket did not think this a bare term of reproach ; for in one of his letters he saith , that defending the liberties of the church laesae majestatis reatus sub persecutore nostro est , was looked on as treason by the king. and even gervase himself , to whom the authour of the letter appeals , saith , some of his friends came to him at northampton , and told him , if he did not submit to the king , he would be proceeded against as a traitour , for breaking the allegeance he had promised to the king , when he did swear to observe the ancient customs at clarendon . and fitz-stephen saith , the king's council at clarendon said it was treason , or taking the king's crown from his head , to deny him the rights of his ancestours . 2. that it was a strange kind of treason becket was charged with at northampton , viz. for not coming when the king sent for him ; which at the most was onely a high contempt ; and fitz-stephen , who was a creature of the archbishop's , might represent it so , to draw an odium on the king. and therefore he looks on this as a weak precedent for the bishops to lay any weight upon , being at best out of a blind ms. of an authour justly suspected of partiality , against the tenour of all the ancient writers that give an account of the same business . what truth there is in this last suggestion appears in part already , and will do more by what follows . must all the unprinted records be answered with saying they are blind mss ? i cannot but take notice how unreasonable a way of answering this is . it is like turning of that pressing instance , of the bishops making a proctor in capital cases , by saying it was error temporis ; which because it will answer all instances whatsoever as well as that , is therefore an answer to none . just so it is equally an answer to all mss , to say they are blind ; and to all printed books too , because they were once mss , and , for any thing that appears to the contrary , as blind as fitz-stephen's . for surely no authority is added to a book by its being printed ; unless in the opinion of the common people , who are said to take all for true that is in print . i do not go about to parallel fitz-stephen with parlament-rolls ; but i say , his authority is very good , being present upon the place , and the best we have , of all the proceedings in the parlament at northampton . and if the authour of the letter had taken the pains to peruse him , he would not have contemned the precedent drawn from thence ; which being so near the parlament at clarendon , ( that , as himself confesseth , the one was in february , the other in october following , ) it gives the best light into this matter of any thing in that age ; and being not yet fully printed , it will be worth our while to set it down . mr. selden hath indeed printed very exactly the proceedings of the first iudgment upon becket , about the cause of contempt , for not coming upon the king's summons , at the complaint of iohn the marshall ; wherein the bishops did certainly sit in iudgment upon him with the other barons : but there is a farther strength in this precedent , not yet taken notice of . which is , that after this iudgment passed , becket behaved himself with so great insolency towards the king and the bishops , upon the king's calling him to farther account , for many other things laid to his charge , as diverting the king's treasure , and applying it to his own use , and great accounts to the king while he was chancellour , &c. that the king required him to stand to the iudgment of his court. becket gave a dilatory answer : the king summons the bishops , and earls and barons , to give iudgment against him : the bishops tell the king , becket had appealed to the pope , and prohibited them to give any farther judgment upon any secular complaint against him . whereupon the king sent some earls and barons to him , to expostulate the matter , since he was the king's subject , and had so lately sworn to the constitutions at clarendon ; and to know whether he would give security to the king about making up his accounts , and stand to the judgment of his court. becket refuseth to give answer to any thing , but the cause of iohn the marshall , for which he was summoned to appear ; slights his oath , as contrary to the rights of the church , and confirms his appeal to the pope . and such an owning of the pope's power , in derogation to the rights of the crown , sir edward cook saith was treason by the ancient common law , before any statutes were made . however , the king charges the bishops by virtue of their allegeance , that , together with the barons , they would give iudgment upon the archbishop . they excused themselves on the account of the archbishop's prohibition . the king replied , that had no force against the constitution of clarendon , so lately made and acknowledged by them . the words of fitz-stephen are these : rex , responso archiepiscopi accepto , instat episcopis , praecipiens & obtestans per homagium & fidelitatem sibi debitam & juratam , ut simul cum baronibus de archiepiscopo sibi dictent sententiam . illi se excusare coeperunt per interpositam archiepiscopi prohibitionem . rex non acquievit , asserens , quòd non teneat haec ejus simplex prohibitio contra hoc quod clarendonae factum & initum fuerat . so that h. ii. in the parlament at northampton declared , that bishops were bound , by virtue of the constitution of clarendon , to be present , and to give their votes in cases of treason . and the bishops ' did not deny this , but used prudential arguments to disswade the king from proceeding any farther , the appeal being made ; and that it was for the good of king and kingdom , for them to submit to the prohibition . and the bishop of chichester told becket , he made them go against the constitutions of clarendon , which they had so lately sworn to observe ; in these remarkable words ; quo contra nos venire compellitis , interdicendo , nè ei quod de nobis exigit adesse possumus iudicio . by which we see this constitution is indeed an irrefragable testimony ; but it is to prove that bishops are bound to be present even in cases of treason , when the king summons them . and as to the case of becket's treason , the same bishop told him , it lay in breaking his oath about those constitutions , wherein the rights of the crown were declared . and if this be not treason by the common law , sir edward cook 's preface to his fifth book of reports signifies nothing . the late authour of the peerage and iurisdiction of the lords spirituall takes it for granted , that by the constitution of clarendon the iurisdiction of bishops was limited , that it should not extend ad diminutionem membrorum , vel ad mortem . but the foregoing discourse hath , i suppose , made it evident , that those words contain no limitation , but a privilege or indulgence to them with respect to the canon-law . and he takes very needless pains to prove this to be declarative of the common law ; and that the meeting at clarendon was a full parlament : which are very much besides the business . all that looks towards this matter , is , that he saith , this statute was confirmed by a council at westminster ; for which he cites rog. hoveden's authority . but i wish he had produced the canon entire as he there found it ; for then the sense of it would have been better understood . in this synod at westminster , richard archbishop of canterbury produceth several ancient canons , which he thought fit to be observed here . among the rest , he mentions that of the council of toledo . the words are these : his qui in sacris ordinibus constituti sunt , judicium sanguinis agitare non licet ; here he makes his &c. and leaves out the prohibition which declares the meaning and extent of this canon : vnde prohibemus , nè aut per se membrorum truncationes faciant , aut inferendas judicent ; wherefore we forbid them , either to dismember any persons themselves , or to give iudgment for the doing of it . both which were practised in spain in the time of the council of toledo , which was the occasion of this canon . and then follows the sanction of deprivation if men did otherwise . and what now doth this signifie more to the constitution of clarendon , then that the same canons were now revived , which gave the occasion to that permission of withdrawing , when the sentence came to be pronounced as to dismembring , or loss of life ? but he urges farther about this constitution , that it must be so understood , as to exclude the bishops from all antecedent and praeliminary things which do relate or tend ad diminutionem , &c. or else , saith he , it must be onely the exemption of the prelats from doing the office of executioners , which is non-sense . why so ? though it be not the whole sense of the canon , yet surely it is sense . but he might have thought of giving sentence , which the canons forbid , and is different from execution , and doth not exclude the bishops presence at praeliminaries . the constitution of westminster , he saith , is plainer , non debent agitare judicium sanguinis ; which , he saith , excludes the exercise of any judicial power in cases of bloud . whereas it appears by the prohibition there extant , nothing is forbidden but giving sentence ; at which the constitution of clarendon allows them to withdraw . 2. the second time we are told that the exclusion of the bishops in cases capital rereived a confirmation in parlament , was the 11. of r. ii. when the archbishop and the other bishops , upon their withdrawing then from the parlament , in regard matters of bloud were there to be agitated and determined , in quibus non licet alicui eorum personaliter interesse , as they say , in which it was not lawfull for any of them to be present in person , did therefore enter a protestation , with a salvo to their right of sitting and voting in that and all other parlaments , when such matters were not in question : which protestation of theirs was at their desire enrolled in full parlament by the king's command , with the assent of the lords temporal and commons . so that it is here said to be a perfect and compleat act of parlament ; and if it had not been a law before , would then have been made one . this is the substance of what is more largely insisted on in another place ; and what strength is there added shall be duely considered . to understand this business aright , it will be necessary to set down the protestation it self at large , as it is taken out of courtney's register , and the parlament-rolls ; and then examine the points that do arise from thence . the protestation runs thus . in dei nomine amen . cùm de jure & consuetudine regni angliae , ad archiepiscopum cantuariensem , qui pro tempore fuerit , necnon caeteros suos suffraganeos , confratres & coëpiscopos , abbatésque & priores , aliosque praelatos quoscunque , per baroniam de domino rege tenentes , pertineat in parlamentis regis quibuscunque , ut pares regni praedicti , personaliter interesse , ibidémque de regni negotiis , & aliis ibidem tractari consuetis , cum caeteris dicti regni paribus , & aliis ibidem jus interessendi habentibus , consulere , tractare , ordinare , statuere , & diffinire , ac caetera facere quae parlamenti tempore ibidem imminent facienda ; in quibus omnibus & singulis , nos willielmus cantuar. archiepiscopus , totius angliae primas , & apostolicae sedis legatus , pro nobis , nostrisque suffraganeis , coëpiscopis , & confratribus , bus , nec non abbatibus , prioribus , ac praelatis omnibus supradictis , protestamur , & eorum quilibet protestatur , qui per se , vel per procuratorem hîc fuerit modò praesens , publicè & expressè , quòd intendimus , & intendit , volumus , ac vult quilibet eorum , in hoc praesenti parlamento , & aliis , ut pares regni praedicti , more solito interesse , consulere , tractare , ordinare , statuere , & diffinire , accaetera exercere , cum caeteris jus interessendi habentibus in eisdem , statu & ordine nostris & eorum cujuslibet in omnibus semper salvis . verùm quia in praesenti parlamento agitur de nonnullis materiis in quibus non licet nobis , aut alicui eorum , juxta sacrorum canonum instituta quomodolibet personaliter interesse , ea propter pro nobis & eorum quolibet protestamur , & eorum quilibet hîc praesens etiam protestatur , quòd non intendimus , nec volumus , sicuti de jure non possumus , nec debemus , intendit , nec vult aliquis eorundem , in praesenti parlamento , dum de hujusmodi materiis agitur , vel agetur , quomodolibet interesse ; sed nos , & eorum quemlibet , in ea parte penitùs absentare , jure paritatis & cujuslibet eorundem interessendi in dicto parlamento , quoad omnia & singula mihi exercenda , nostris & eorum cujuslibet statu & ordine congruentia , in omnibus semper salvo . ad haec insuper protestamur , & eorum quilibet protestatur , quòd propter hujusmodi absentiam , non intendimus , nec volumus , nec eorum aliquis intendit vel vult , quòd processus habiti & habendi in praesenti parlamento super materiis antedictis , in quibus non possumus , nec debemus , ut premittitur , interesse , quantum ad nos & eorum quemlibet attinet , futuris temporibus quomodolibet impugnentur , infirmentur , seu etiam infringentur . this protestation , setting aside the legal formalities of it , consists of 3 parts . 1. a declaration of their undoubted right as peers of the realm , by virtue of their baronies , to sit and vote in all debates of parlament . 2. of their intention to withdraw this parlament , because several matters were to be handled , at which it was not lawfull for them , according to the canons , to be present . 3. that by this absenting themselves they did not intend , as far as concerned them , to null the proceedings of that parlament . here now arise three main points to be discussed . 1. upon what grounds the prelats declared , it was not lawfull for them to be present in parlament , at such matters ? 2. how far the parlament's receiving that protestation makes it a law ? 3. whether on supposition it were a part of canon-law then in force , it continues so still since the reformation ? 1. upon what grounds they declared it unlawfull for them to be present in parlament , at such matters ? one would think the very reading the protestation were sufficient to convince any man ; for the bishops declare as plainly as men could do , that it was out of regard to the canons of the church , and not from any law of the land. for how was it possible that the same men should declare , that by reason of their baronies they had full right to be personally present in all debates of parlament , if there were some law in force which made it unlawfull for them to be personally present ? the greater force there is in the protestation 's being receiv'd in parlament , the greater strength there is in this argument . for if the protestation 's being allowed by king , lords and commons , make it ( as the authour of the letter affirms ) a perfect and compleat law , then their right to be present in all debates of parlament is a law ; and so much the more considerable , because it is no enacting law , making that to be so , which was not before , but declarative of what was confessed to be their undoubted right by king , lords and commons . and therefore i do not wonder , that the authour of the letter , so conveniently to his purpose , left out all the beginning of the protestation , which so fully clears the sense of the rest . for the very same thing which afterwards the bishops say they are forbid to doe by the canons , that is , personaliter interesse , to give their personal attendance , they say at first , by right of their peerage , as barons by tenure , did belong to them ; for there the words are personaliter interesse too . therefore that personal attendance in such matters which they said was unlawfull to them by the canons , they challenge to themselves as their just right by virtue of their baronies . but is it possible to imagine , if they had been precluded from sitting by any antecedent law , that ever such a publick avowing their right would have passed the king and both houses ? so unsuccessfull hath the authour of the letter been in his statute-laws , that there can be no stronger evidence of the bishops right to sit in such cases , then those which he produceth against them . but he goes about to prove this prohibition cannot be understood onely of the canon-law : for the canon-law , saith he , was to them above all laws ; and what was forbidden by that law , they could not have a thought , that it could in any sort be lawfull for them to challenge as their right , upon any account . i confess i can see no force in this reasoning : for when a thing is forbidden to men meerly by a positive law of the church , and the penalty of it is bare irregularity by the canons ; why may not such men challenge their own right notwithstanding those canons , because the irregularity might be dispensed with , when the pope saw convenient ? and by the constitutions of o●hobon , which were made in the time of h. iii. we find , that if an inferiour clergy-man transgressed this canon , it was in the power of the diocesan to absolve him from his irregularity . and this canon was receiv'd and inforc'd most here in england on the inferiour clergy , as appears by the canons of stephen langton in the council of oxford , and other synodall constitutions here . for it is a rule in lyndwood , clericus ex vi verbi non comprehendit episcopum , sed cum adjuncto , sic in quantum illud adjunctum potest concernere episcopum . that by clerici we are not to understand bishops , unless there be some adjunct that implieth it . and among the decretals there is one from alexander iii. to the archbishop of canterbury , under the title nè clerici , to the same purpose . where the glosse , i grant , comprehends prelats ; therefore i will not deny , but they were to be irregular by the canon-law , as well as others . but then , we are to consider , how far the legatine power vested in the archbishop of canterbury might extend in such a case ; and that there was the same severity in the canons against clergy-men's taking upon them any secular office : and yet in this very parlament , thomas arundell bishop of ely was lord chancellour , and after him william of wickham bishop of winchester , and before them r. baybroke bishop of london ; and the bishops of durham and exceter were lords treasurers under r. ii. and in h. iii's time we find 3 clergy-men lords chief iustices , pateshull , lovell and mansell , notwithstanding these canons ; and in edward iii's time almost all the great offices of the court were executed by clergy-men . by which we see they did not think themselves so strictly bound to observe those canons ; or it was so easy to be dispensed with , that they had great reason to insist upon the challenge of their own right , notwithstanding the canon-law . the truth is , the canon-law , as it was managed in those days , was one of the most mysterious pieces of ecclesiasticall policy : it was an engine , which the artificial church-men could screw up or let down as they pleased . if it were in a matter likely to be prejudicial to their interest , ( as it was most apparently the case in 11 r. ii. when matters grew so high between r. ii. and the powerfull lords , and so many favourites were to be impeached , and among them alexander archbishop of york , ) then it was a time to quote the canons , and to enter a protestation , and to withdraw : if the times were calmer and more settled , or some great reason moved them , then they could stick to their right of peerage , and make use of it , either in person , or by proxy , as they thought convenient . nor was it so easy a matter to resolve what was canon-law in england , but they might with some colour make use of either of these pleas. for in this very parlament 11 r. ii. the commons desire that those may be reputed traitours who brought in the pope's bulls of volumus & imponimus : which shews that they did not think all canon-law that passed for such at rome . and 15 r. ii. sir will. brian was sent to the tower , for bringing a bull from rome which was judged prejudicial to the king , and derogatory to his laws . and in 16 r. ii. will. courtney , archbishop of canterbury , ( the same who enter'd the protestation before mentioned , ) makes another of a different kind , owning the rights of the crown in opposition to the pope's encroachments . now , by the same reason , no canon made at rome , no legatine or synodal constitutions , could have any force against the king's authority . but the king himself being under a force at that time , as he alwaies declared afterwards , and that being , as knighton saith it was called , parlamentum sine misericordia , the king having tied himself up , not to pardon any without consent of the lords ; he might be willing to let the bishops excuse themselves ; because that might give some colour to call in question the proceedings then , as it did 21 r. ii. when all the acts of this parlament were nulled : and the lords and commons might be very willing to let the bishops withdraw , that their business might proceed with less difficulty against all the king's ministers . so that here was a concurrence of many circumstances , which made the bishops think fit not to appear in the house , this parlament ; and the king , lords and commons to be willing to receive their protestation . but in the anti-parlament to this , that i mean 21 r. ii. the commons pray the king , that since divers iudgments were undone heretofore , for that the clergy were not present , they might appoint some common proctor with sufficient authority to that purpose . this is a passage which deserves consideration , and tends very much to clear the whole matter . for the house of commons declare , that divers iudgments had been undone for want of the presence of the clergy . therefore their concurrence , in the judgment of the house of commons , was thought necessary to make a iudgment valid . a very late authour finds himself so perplexed with this , that he knows not how to get off from it . he cannot deny this to be in the rolls of parlament , and to be the first petition of the commons : but then he blames them for rashness and errour , and want of due examination of precedents . as though it were possible for any man now , to understand the law and practice better then the whole house of commons then did . he saith , they were mistaken palpably de facto , in saying that divers iudgments have been heretofore undone ; and yet presently confesseth , that the two iudgments against the two spencers were reversed for this cause ; but he saith , there are no more to be found . where doth he mean ? in his study ? or not now extant in the parlament-rolls ? but have we all the rolls of parlament that were then in being ? or must men so boldly charge the house of commons with ignorance , errour , breaking the laws , because they speak against their fancies ? but this gentleman very peremptorily concludes the house of commons then guilty of a very strange and unaccountable oversight . it is great pity , a certain gentleman had not been there to have searched records for them , and to have informed them better . but we think a iudgment of the whole house of commons in such a case , declared in so solemn a manner , without the least contradiction from the king or the lords , might deserve a little more respect ; and it had certainly had it , if it had made for the other side . but we see the house of commons it self is reverenced , or not , as the judgment of it serves mens purposes . and yet this was more then the bare iudgment of the house of commons : for a petition was made upon it , and that petition granted ; and consequently a common proctor appointed , and that proctor allowed by king , lords and commons . so that this was a judgment ratified by consent of the king and the whole parlament . for , if a petition were made on a false ground , what had been more proper , then for the lords to have open'd this to the commons , and to have told them how unadvised and false their iudgment was ? whereas the lords consented , and the proctor was admitted , and gave his vote in the name of the clergy . but there is something more to confirm this iudgment of the commons , and that is , the parlament 11 r. ii. making petition to the king , that all iudgments then given might be approved , affirmed and stablished , as a thing duely made for the weal and profit of the king our sovereign lord , notwithstanding that the lords spiritual and their procurators were absent at the time of the said iudgments given . what means this petition , if there had been no doubt at that time , that these judgments might be reversed , as not duely made , by reason of the absence of the prelats ? the onely answer in my mind is , that it was error temporis , they were of that mind then , but some are resolved to be of another now . but from hence we plainly see , that even in r. ii ' s time the concurrence of the bishops was thought so necessary , that one parlament declared iudgments had been reversed for want of it ; and that very parlament wherein they absented themselves , got a clause inserted on purpose to prevent the nulling of those iudgments : which signified nothing to the parlament 21 r. ii. which reversed them all . there is something more considerable to our purpose in this parlament ; viz. that the same authour produceth the testimony of a ms. chronicle , which largely handles the affairs of that parlament , wherein it is confessed , that the bishops , by concurring with the lords in the revocation of the earl of arundel's pardon , did give vote in a case capital : for so the words are there cited , dederunt ergo locum praelati judicio sanguinis in hoc facto . which shews that the bishops did then give their votes about the validity of the pardon : which the authour of that chronicle indeed condemns them for , and tells us some thought they incurred irregularity by it . from whence it follows , that all the penalty supposed to be incurred was onely canonical ; but he never charges them with going against the law or custom of parlament therein . but the authour of the letter saith , whatever was done this parlament signifies nothing , because the whole parlament stands repealed by 1 h. iv. and all done in it delcared null and void . yet , to our comfort , the same authour tells us , the three henry's were usurpers ; and therefore i desire to be satisfied , whether an vsurper , by a parlament of his calling , can null and repeal what was done by a king and his parlament . if he may , then the king lost his title to the crown by the late vsurpers ; if not , then the parlament 21 r. ii. could not be repealed by that 1 h. iv. if the authour of the letter had considered this , he is a person of too great judgment and loyalty , to have mention'd , more then once , the repeal of that parlament , by the subsequent parlament 1 h. iv. from all this we see , that by the judgment of the whole parlament , both 11 r. ii. and 21 r ii. the bishops had a right to sit , so far that iudgments were reversed where they were not present ; and therefore all the pretence they could have for withdrawing must be from the canon-law : which although not sufficient to bind them , if the matter had been contested , yet it served them for a very colourable pretence of absenting themselves in such dangerous times , as those of 11 r. ii. here the authour of the peerage and iurisdiction of the lords spiritual thinks he brings seasonable relief to the cause , when he undertakes to prove , that the bishops withdrawing was not meerly on the account of the canon-law . this , i confess , is home to the business , if he can make it out . ( 1. ) he saith , there was an act of parlament before , that did expresly prohibit them to excercise iurisdiction in those cases . this we utterly deny . and the constitution of clarendon , to which he refers , proves the contrary . ( 2. ) the bishops made bold with the canons when they thought fit , as 21 r. ii. but how could they doe that , unless they had a parlamentary right to be present ? he saith , the constituting a proxy was as great a violation of the canons , as being personally present : and what then ? therefore the parlament would not have suffered them to doe that , if there had been a law to exclude them . how doth this prove that the bishops did not withdraw on the account of the canons ii r. ii. because they made a proxie 21 r. ii ? but why did they not appear personally , if they had no regard to the canons ; when the receiving their proxie shewed they had a legal right to appear ? but he grievously mistakes the meaning of the canon of stephen langton in lyndwood , when he interprets literas pro poena sanquinis instigenda scribere vel dictare , against making of proxies ; which is onely meant of giving or writing the sentence for execution . ( 3. ) he saith , they were excluded by ancient custom ; which , by a very subtle way of reasoning , he proves to have been part of the fundamental contract of the nation , as he speaks . seeing then , saith he , it is without doubt that there was such a custom , that the prelats should not exercise iurisdiction in capital cases ; ( not so altogether without doubt , unless it were better proved then we have yet seen it ; ) and there is no record that doth mention when it did begin , nor any time when it could be said there never was such an vsage ; ( yes , before the council of toledo being published in spain , and receiv'd here ; ) it must of necessity be supposed , that it is as ancient as the government it self , and part of the fundamental contract of the nation . which looks so like a iesuitical argument , that one would have thought he had been proving transubstantiation by it . for just thus the argument runs at this day among that party ; there was a time when it was reciev'd , and no time can be instanced in wherein it was not , therefore it was a part of the fundamental religion of iesus christ. the plain answer in both cases is the same : if we can produce unquestionable authority to which a doctrine or practice is repugnant , we are not obliged to assign any punctual time in which it must first come in . but in this case , we do assign the very time and occasion of the bishops absenting themselves in capital iudgments , and that was from the receiving the canon of the council of toledo here : for no such practice can ever be proved before . and therefore this can never be proved to be any part of the ancient common law of england . and that this came in by way of imitation of other countries , appears by the citing the council of toledo both by lanfranc and richard in the council of winchester . ( 4. ) he saith , the practice is ancienter then any of the canons of the church . but how doth that appear ? the eldest canon he can find is that of stephen langton in lyndwood , which was made above 50 years after the parlament at clarendon . but we have made it evident , there was a canon receiv'd here in lanfranc's time , long before the constitution of clarendon . and so a full answer is given to these objections . but we are told , by the authour of the letter , that the bishops protestation being receiv'd and enter'd in the roll , or iournal-book , makes it to pass for a law , it being agreed to by the king and two houses ; so as whatever was the law before , if it were onely the canon-law , it is now come to be the law and rule of parlament , and the law of the land. 2. this is therefore the second point to be examined , whether the receiving this protestation amounts to a law of exclusion ? which it can by no means do for these two reasons : 1. from the nature of protestations in general , 2. from the particular nature of this protestation . 1. from the nature of protestations in general . for a protestation is onely a declaration of their minds that make it , and not of theirs who receive it , or suffer it to be enter'd in the acts or records of the court ; unless it be receiv'd in such a manner , as implies their consent . for , the very next parlament after this , 13 r. ii. the two archbishops , in the name of the whole clergy , enter a protestation , that they gave no assent to any law or statute made in restraint of the pope's authority ; and it is said in the rolls of parlament , that at their requests these protestations were enrolled . will any man hence inferre , that these protestations were made acts of parlament ? if the cause would have born any better , a person of so much skill in proceedings of parlament would never have used such an argument as this . besides , it is a rule in protestations , si protestatio in iudicio fiat , semper per contrarium actum tollitur , saith hostiensis ; a protestation , although allowed in court , is taken off by a subsequent act contrary to it . which shews , that a protestation can never have the force of a law ; because it may be destroy'd by the act of the parties themselves . if therefore the bishops did afterwards act contrary to this protestation , they took away all the force of it . 2. the particular nature of this protestation is such , as doth most evidently preserve their right to be personally present on the account of their peerage and baronies ; and the great design of a protestation is , to preserve a right notwithstanding some act which seems to destroy it ; as thier absenting themselves on the account of the canons might seem to doe . but of this already . 3. we are now to consider the third point , whether , on supposition that on the account of the canon-law , the bishops had always withdrawn in the time of popery , that had continued in force still since the reformation ? i think not , upon these reasons . 1. because the canon-law was founded upon a superstitious fancy , viz. that if clergy-men be present in causes of bloud , they contract irregularity ex defectu perfectae lenitatis , as the excellent canonist , navarr , saith , because it argues a want of perfect lenity . but if we consider the cases they allow , which do not incurre irregularity , and those they do not allow , which do incurre it , we shall find all this stir in the canon-law about this matter to be onely a superstitious kind of hypocrisy . 1. if a man in orders gives another man weapons , without which he could not defend himself , and by those weapons he maims him that assaulted him ; this doth not make him irregular : but if he kills him , it doth : and yet the canons make the case of dismembring and death the same . 2. it makes a man act against the law or nature to prevent irregularity . for they say , if it be for the defence of father or mother , or preventing the ruin of his country , although the cause be never so just , a clergy-man that dismembers , or takes away another's life , is irregular . 3. if a clergy-man discovers treason , or accuses another for treason , without a protestation , that he doth not doe it with a design to have him punished ; he is irregular : but if he makes that protestation , although death follows , he is not . 4. if a clergy-man be in an army , and perswades the souldiers to fight manfully , and kill as many as they can ; this doth not make him irregular ; ny , although he beats them , if they will not fight : but if he happens to kill an enemy himself , then he is . 5. if he gives a souldier a sword or a gun , by which he dispatches his enemies , if he did it with a particular intention that he should slay or maim them , he is irregular ; if onely with a general intention , that he should overcome , he is not . this being somewhat a nice case , the canonists take more then usual pains to prove it . and from hence they defend their priests and iesuits in the indies , who carry the cross before their armies into the field , and encourage them to kill all they can : and yet navarr saith , they are so far from being irregular , that they are regularissimi , as his word is . 6. if a man , to gain an indulgence , carries a faggot to burn an heretick , if it be with a design to take away his life , he is irregular : but if he be hanged first , or dead before it be thrown into the fire , then he is not . 7. if a man in orders helps a chirurgeon in cutting off a man's leg , he is not irregular : but if a man be justly condemned to have his leg cut off , if he then gives any assistence , he is irregular : because the one is moved out of mercy , and the other out of justice . 8. if the bishops sit and condemn a man for heresy , and deliver him over to the secular power for execution ; yet they free this from irregularity , or else the practice of the inquisition were lost . this seems a very difficult case : but the canonists salve this , by saying that the inquisitours , when they deliver them over to the secular power , do pray that they may not be hurt either wind or lim ; as it appears by the forms used in the directorium inquisitorum . and if this be not the height of hypocrisie , let the world judge . and therefore this part of the canon-law is not consistent with the sincerity of the reformation . 2. this part of canon-law is inconsistent with the king's power over ecclesiastical persons . for it supposeth them liable to the penalty of a law , which he hath no cognisance of , and derives no force or authority from him : which tends to the diminution of the king's prerogative royal , and therefore it is nulled by the stat. 25 ▪ h. viii . c. 19. i do very much question whether this ever were any part of the canon-law of england , notwithstanding the pope's decretals ; i. e. whether these canons ever received confirmation by the royal authority , either in synodal constitutions , or elsewhere . and it would be a very hard case , if our kings had not the same privileges which are allow'd in popish countries ; viz. that nothing passes for canon-law within their territories , till it pass the examination of the king's council , and approbation by his authority . thence in france nothing passes without the king's pareatis ; nor in spain or flanders , without the king of spain's placet ; no nor in the kingdom of naples , without the royal exequatur . it is well known , that the 6. book of decretals was not allowed in france , because of the quarrel between the king and boniface viii . and that even the council of trent it self was not allowed by philip ii. till it had been strictly examined by the king's council , that nothing might be allowed which tended to the diminution of his prerogative . how then will men justifie the making that a part of the canon-law of england , which was repugnant to the rights of the crown , and deprives the king of the power of taking advice of those of his subjects , whom he hath summon'd for that end ? 3. the sanction of this law is ceased , which was irregularity : and some of our most learned iudges have declared , that is taken away by the reformation . but in case any be of another opinion , i shall urge them with this inconveniency ; viz. that the great instrument of discovering the plot falls under irregularity by it . for it is most certain , by the canon-law , that a man in orders accusing others of treason , without making his due protestation in court , is irregular . but if this be now thought unreasonable , as it is , in the person of an accuser , why should it not be so in the case of iudges ? and if the irregularity be taken away , then the sanction is gone : and if the sanction be taken off in a meer positive law , the force of the law is gone too . and therefore this canon-law , which forbids clergy-men being present in capital cases , and giving votes therein , is wholly taken away by the reformation . and we do not find any mention of it for 80 years and more after the reformation ; till about the time of the earl of strafford's trial , a book being printed about the privilege of peers , wherein this protestation was mention'd , hold was presently taken of it , by men who thought they could not compass their ends without removing the bishops out of the house : and when the bishops insisted on their right , and could not be heard , but at last were willing to salve their right by proxies ; the lords of the cabal prevailed with their friends , to declare they would use no proxies themselves , and so by that artifice shut the bishops out of doors . 4. the practice hath been so contrary , since the reformation , that i find no manner of regard hath been shewed to it . for the archbishop of canterbury was the first nominated in the commission for the trial of the queen of scots ; as appears by the commission it self in camden ; which is directly contrary to the canon-law . some distinguish the bishops acting by commission , from their being iudges in parlament . for which there is no manner of reason with respect to the canon-law , which is rather more express against any kind of commissions in cases of bloud ; as appears by the council of toledo , the synodal constitution , and the pope's decretals . and there hath never been any scruple about divines sitting on the crown-side as iustices of the peace , when sentence of death is pronounced ; nor in the ordinary's declaring legit , or non legit , when a man's life depends upon it . but , which is yet more to our present purpose , in the parlament 22. may 1626. upon the impeachment of the earl of bristol of high treason , 10 bishops , 10 earls , 10 barons , were appointed to examine the evidence ; and upon their report he was sent to the tower by the whole house . all which shews , that there hath been no regard had to the force of the canon-law in this matter since the reformation : that being a spirit lay'd long since by the principles of our church ; and it would be strange , if some mens zeal against popery should raise it again . chap. iii. the precedents on both sides laid down : those against the bishops examined and answered . ii. i now come to examine the precedents , and shall proceed therein according to due order of time. and so the first is taken from the saxon times ; viz. from brompton's relation about edward the confessour's appealing to the earls and barons about earl godwin's murthering of his brother alfred . here we see , saith the authour of the letter , it was onely ad comites & barones that he appealed , and they were onely to judge of it , and not bishops or prelates . i have 2 things to answer to this precedent . 1. that we have great reason to suspect the truth of it . 2. that if it were true , we have no reason to suspect the bishops to be excluded . 1. for the truth of the story . that there is great reason to suspect it , appears , in that it is the single relation of brompton , against the consent of the other historians , ( and some of them much ancienter , and nearer to that time , ) who mention k. edward's charging earl godwin with the death of his brother , not in parlament , but as they were at table together at winchester , upon the occasion of a saying of earl godwin's , upon the king 's cup-bearer's stumbling with one foot , and recovering with another ; see , saith he , how one brother helps another . upon which matt. westminster , knighton , and others say , that the king charged him about the death of his brother alfred . whatever the occasion was , our best historians of that time , malmsbury and ingulphus , say , it was at an entertainment at winchester , and that earl godwin died upon the place ; being choaked , as they say , with a morsel of bread he took with a great execration upon himself if he were not innocent . knighton saith , he was question'd for the death of his brother by hardecnute , and that he cleared himself , by saying he did nothing but by the king's command . but suppose edward to be never so weak a prince , is it likely this should be done by an appeal in parlament by the king himself ; and that afterwards , by the judgment of his earls and barons , he and his sons and 12 kinsmen should make the king amends , by as much gold and silver as they could carry between their arms ? besides , brompton saith , this was done by godwin when he returned to england , after king edward's coming to the throne ; whereas malmsbury shews , that it was through earl godwin's interest , that ever he came to it ; and so the marrying his daughter would make any one believe . 2. but suppose it true . what reason is there to conclude the bishops not present , who were never absent through all the saxon times , after ethelbert's conversion , in any publick councils of the nation ? they had no canon then to be afraid of ; for that of the council of toledo was brought in by lanfranc . and it was not against the practice of those times . for if we believe as true a story as this of brompton , the archbishop of canterbury himself condemned king edward's mother emma to a trial by hot irons , which was present death without a miracle : and this it is said was done by the consent of the king and the bishops ; which is as good a precedent against temporal lords , as the other is against the bishops . however , this is certain , that the bishops then sate in the county-court at all iudgments . and whereas the authour of the letter would avoid this , by saying that no capital crimes were tried there ; the contrary is most certainly true . for the laws of king edward , as they were set forth by h. i. c. 31. mention the capitalia placita that were there held . and the authour of the ms. life of s. cuthbert saith , that when one of earl godwin's sons was earl of northumberland , and one hamel , a very bad man , was imprison'd by him , his friends interceded earnestly with him , nè capite plecteretur , that he should not lose his head . by which it appears , that cases capital were heard and determin'd in those courts , the bishop and earl sitting together in iudgment . and here the point is plainly gain'd , because the authour of the letter grants that the bishops sate in all iudgments in the county-courts , and then puts the matter upon this issue , whether capital crimes were there tried or not ; which i have clearly proved that they were . but i shall make another advantage of this against the authour of the peerage , &c. for it plainly overthrows that confident assertion of his , that without doubt there was a negative custom , that the prelates should not exercise iurisdiction in capital cases , so ancient as to be part of the fundamental contract of the nation . it were a thousand pities that such well-sounding words , so handsomely put together , should signifie nothing . i dare not be so positive as he is , but am of opinion , that if he could be perswaded to produce this fundamental contract of the nation , which i perceive he hath lying by him , it would not amount to so much as a blind manuscript . if it be said , that brompton onely mentions earls and barons , and bishops were not then made barons ; i answer , that baronies were brought into england by the conquerour , and therefore brompton must speak improperly , and consequently , taking it onely for a title of honour , he means no more then those who were the great men of that time , and so may take in the bishops too : of which more afterwards . but there is one thing more in the laws of h. i. ( which were onely a restoring k. edward's laws ) that implies that bishops had then a power of judging in cases capital ; which is c. 58. qui occiderit episcopum sit in arbitrio principis & episcoporum , he that killed a bishop was to be left to the will of the king and the bishops . which shews that they were to hear and examine the whole evidence , and to give judgment according to it . after the saxon times , the first precedent produced is of the 33 edw. i. concerning nicolas segrave , who was summon'd to appear in parlament , and after his offences were open'd , the king advises onely with the temporal lords , who declared , such a man deserved to lose his life . but is he sure the bishops were not present ? no : he saith , that doth not appear by the record ; but it appears clearly they were not to meddle with it . how so ? the king declares , that he would have the advice comitum , baronum , magnatum , & aliorum de consilio suo . but is he sure they are not comprehended under magnates , and that there were no clergy-men at that time of the king's counsel ? what thinks he is william de hamilton , dean of york ▪ who was made lord chancellour ian. 16. 33 edw. i. and this parlament was held the next sunday after s. matthias , which was the latter end of february ? and in the 35. year , ralph de baldock , bishop of london , was made lord chancellour : and scarce any other but church-men had that office all his days . the bishop of bath and wells was chancellour near twenty years of his reign ; after him the bishop of ely ; after him the dean of chichester ; and then comes the dean of york . and among the lords treasurers of his time ; were the archdeacon of dorset , the abbot of westminster , two bishops of bath and wells , whereof one was treasurer at this time . these two , i hope , we may suppose to be of the king's counsel in this business ; who we are certain were both church-men . and if they adjudged nic. de segrave worthy of death , who so likely to deliver that judgment as the chancellour ? but suppose these were not there , whom doth he mean by the magnates then distinct from earls and barons , who were of the house of peers ? mr. selden will inform him , if he needs it , that there were no dukes till the ii. of edw. iii. nor the title of marquess till r. ii. nor of vicount till h. vi. and yet here were magnates in parlament , who were neither earls nor barons : and therefore we must in all reason understand the great church-men , who were not so nice of meddling with criminal causes in parlament of the highest nature in the time of edw. i. as appears by the great cause so much agitated in parlament 20 edw. i. concerning the earls of hereford and gloucester ; where this latter is charged with raising arms without commission , and committing murthers and horrible devastations in the lands belonging to the other ; and the king in parlament appoints the bishop of ely with others to be a committee for examination of this matter . and when they had both submitted to the king's pleasure , we have these remarkable words in the placita parlamentaria . per consilium archiepiscoporum , episcoporum , comitum , baronum , ceterorumque de consilio suo existentium , facere volens in premissis , & ut voluntas sua justa sit & rationabilis , prout decet , eorumque assensum in premissis petiit , & consilium . propter quod , habito tractatu diligenti coram ipso domino rege & consilio suo super predictis , tam ipsi domino regi quam ceteris prelatis & magnatibus , & singulis de consilio suo , videtur quoad comit. gloucestr . and then follows the sentence ; which i confess did not extend to life , but to a forfeiture of his estate to the king. however , we see hereby that the bishops were present at all the praeliminary debates , and the king asked their advice ; so that they had their votes in the sentence , whether it should extend to life or not . in the reign of edw. ii. we meet with a remarkable precedent in behalf of the bishops right , which is of a iudgment reversed made by the lords without the prelats viz. , the iudgment against the two spencers 15 e. ii. which iudgment is said to be passed at oxford that year , but in the parlament at york , the same year , it was nulled and made void before the king , lords and commons ; and one of the reasons given for it is , because the lords spiritual , who were peers , assented not to it . this precedent had been cited and allowed by mr. pryn , in his plea for the lords ; and therefore it is to be wonder'd the authour of the letter takes no notice of it . but the later authour of the discourse about the bishops peerage and iurisdiction , owns the truth of the thing , saying , that the two iudgments aganst the two spencers were reversed 15 edw. ii. for this cause , through the great favour and interest they then had at court. but then he thinks he hath taken off the force of this precedent , by saying that 1 edw. iii. c. 1. this iudgment is declared good , and therefore the said reversal null and void ; and the two spencers upon this affirmance of the iudgment were executed . this last assertion every one knows to be a grievous mistake , that hath but looked into our history : for the spencers were executed before edw. iii. came to the crown ; the elder in october 19 edw. ii. the other the latter end of november 20 edw. ii. and whereas he insists upon the affirmance of the iudgment 1 edw. iii. he had done well to have look'd a little farther , and then he would have found that act also repealed 21 r. ii. so that if the act of 1 ed. iii. which affirms the first judgment , may seem to take off the force of this precedent , the repealing of that act in the 21 r. ii. restores it again , and leaves it in its full force . especially if it be considered , that the act of 1 ed. iii. was not barely repealed , but declar'd in parlament to be unlawfull , because ed. ii. was living , and true king , and imprison'd by his subjects at the time of that very parlament of 1 ed. iii. thus far this precedent is good . but i will conceal nothing that may with any colour be objected against it . and i cannot deny but what the authour of the letter objects , against the bishops constituting a proctor to represent them in capital causes , seems to be of equal force against this precedent , viz. that this parlament of the 21 r. ii. and all that was done in it , was repeal'd in the 1 h. iv. and if that be so , ( and those acts of state which then passed had not again been repealed 1 ed. iv. ) then the repealing of that of 1. ed. iii. signifies nothing , and consequently the affirmance of the first iudgment against the two spencers is good notwithstanding that repeal . and therefore that we may examine this matter to the bottom , i shall set down the very words of the authour of the letter concerning it . speaking of the declaration made by the lawyers in the 10 ed. iv. concerning the bishops making a procurator in capital causes , he hath these words : it is true , here is mention made of their making a proctor , which was error temporis , the errour of those times , grounded upon what was so lately done , ( as they looked upon it ) though irregularly done , in the last parlament of r. ii. whom they consider'd as their lawfull king ; and in truth he was so , the three henry's that came between being but vsurpers . and again , speaking of the same business of a proctor in the 21 r. ii. he hath this remarkable passage : i have already shewed , that this whole parlament was repeal'd for the extravagant things that were done in it , of which this was one . and therefore nothing that was then done can signifie any thing to a leading case any ways to be followed ; and this as little as any : except it could be made appear , which i am confident it cannot , that some iudgment had been reversed upon that account , because the prelats were not present , and had not given their assent to it . now if i can make out these two things , 1. that the parlament of r. ii. was not legally repeal'd ; 2. that the iudgment against the two spencers was revers'd , and that the repeal of that reversal in 1 ed. iii. was revok'd in 21 r. ii. upon this very account , because the prelats were not present , and had not given their assent to it ; i hope the authour of the letter will be satisfy'd , that both this precedent , and the case of a proctor , are very significant in this cause ; and that there is a great difference between being confident , and certain of any thing . 1. that the parlament of 21 r. ii. was not legally repeal'd . and for this i take the authour 's own acknowledgment , that r. ii. was in truth lawfull king , and that h. iv. was but an vsurper : nay , i add farther , that r. ii. was alive and in prison when h. iv. repeal'd the parlament of 21 r. ii. for so it is said in the very act of repeal , that r. ii. late king of england was pursued , taken , put in ward , and yet remaineth in ward . and now i leave it to the authour of the letter , whether a parlament call'd by a lawfull king , and the acts of it , ought to be deem'd legally repeal'd by a parlament that was call'd by an usurper , and held whilst the lawfull king was alive , and detain'd in prison . 2. that the iudgment against the two spencers was revers'd , and the repeal of the reversal of it in 1 ed. iii. revok'd in 21 r. ii. and that upon this very account , because the prelats were not present , and had not given their assent to it ; which the authour of the letter is confident cannot be made appear . that this iudgment was reversed for this reason i have already shewn , viz. in the parlament at york 15 ed. ii. and i shall now shew , that the repeal of that reversal in 1 edw. iii. was revok'd in 21 r. ii. and that upon the account mentioned . for in this parlament tho. le despenser , earl of gloucester , exhibited two bills , in which he prayeth that the revocation of the exile of the two spencers in 15 ed. ii. might be brought before the king and confirmed , and that the repeal of the same made in the 1 ed. iii. might be revoked . of which act of repeal these errours are assigned , among others : because the prelats , who are peers of the realm , did not assent to the iudgment ; and because it was made onely by the earls and barons , peers of the realm , &c. and because it was made against the form of the great charter of england , in which it is contain'd , that no man shall be exil'd , or otherwise destroyed , but by the lawfull iudgment of his peers , or by the law of the land. so that it seems it was look'd upon as a breach of the great charter , for the temporal lords to condemn a peer without the assent of the bishops , and that such a iudgment was not esteem'd a lawfull iudgment by his peers . and those errours of the first iudgment assign'd in the revocation of it in 15 ed. ii. are allowed in this parlament of 21 r. ii. and that revocation confirm'd , and the repeal of it in 1 ed. iii. revok'd upon the same account . i shall onely observe , that in this parlament ( as before in 15 ed. ii. ) the bishops are declared to be peers ; peers of the realm , rot. 55. peers in parlament , rot. 56. & 61 ; but most fully and distinctly in the roll last cited , peers of the realm in parlament . of which farther use may be made in the last chapter concerning the peerage of the bishops . and now to sum up the force of this precedent for the iurisdiction of the bishops in cases of treason . here is a reversal of a iudgment , because made without the assent of the prelats , by the parlament at york in 15 ed. ii. and whereas it is said this reversal was repeal'd , and the first iudgment affirm'd in 1 ed. iii. i have shew'd , that this was no legal repeal , because ed. ii. was alive , and lawfull king , ( or else ed. iii. could never have been so ) in the time of that first parlament of ed. iii. and consequently ed. iii. at that time was an usurper , and the proceedings of that parlament null and void . so that the reversal in 15 ed. ii. stands good , notwithstanding the repeal in 1 ed. iii. besides that this repeal ( whatever it was ) is solemnly revok'd in 21 r. ii. and h. iv. who revers'd all the proceedings of the parlament of 21 r. ii. during the life of r. ii. is acknowledg'd by the authour of the letter to have been an vsurper , and r. ii. to have been a lawfull king. and now i think that this precedent hath all the advantage that can be , and that the iurisdiction of the bishops in cases of treason could not have been asserted in a higher manner , then to have a iudgment in case of treason solemnly revers'd in two parlaments for this very cause , because the bishops , who are peers , assented not to it : and this precedent own'd by the house of commons , in their petition to have a common proctor appointed by the clergy , in this very parlament of 21 r. ii. as is acknowledg'd by the authour of the letter . to conclude this matter ; whether the acts of parlament which contain this declaration of the peerage of bishops , and their iurisdiction in cases of treason , were sufficiently repeal'd or not ; this solemn assertion of it in two several parlaments , together with the petition of the commons mentioned before , are a most clear evidence , that in the general opinion of the king , lords , and commons , this iurisdiction did of right belong to the bishops . and i am sure they are a demonstration against the authour of the peerage his assertion , of a negative custome , ancient as the constitution of the nation , that prelats should not exercise iurisdiction in capital cases . for had this been a clear and undoubted custom from the first original of this nation , it is morally impossible it could have entred into the minds of two parlaments , solemnly to have raised this doubt , whether a judgment given in a case of treason by the temporal lords without the assent of the bishops were valid , and to have determin'd that it was not ; when yet there was no manner of reason to imagine that the bishops ever had any jurisdiction in such cases , nay , when there was an immemorial custome and usage to the contrary , namely , that the temporal lords had in all times exercised this jurisdiction alone , and the bishops had been excluded from any share in it . and in the apology of adam d'orleton , bishop of hereford , and after of winchester , for his imprisoning r. de baldock , a great confident of hugh despencer's , he declares , that the reason why he was carried to newgate was through the violence of the people ; although , saith he , the parlament then sitting , there was no cause of fear but justice would be done . his words are , domino rege , praelatis , comitibus , ac aliis terrae optimatibus lundoniae tunc congregatis & praesentibus , pro iustitia ibidem in parlamento convocatis omnibus exhibenda . which shews that the prelats then did sit in matters of justice in the house of lords , and in cases capital ; for this r. de baldock was arraigned at hereford for the same crimes that hugh despencer was . but the main strength of the cause is supposed to lie in the precedents produced out of the rolls of parlament from the 4 edw. iii. to the 38 h. vi. the force of these precedents will be better understood , if we consider these things . i. that many of them are meer negative testimonies . so 4 edw. iii. at the trial of roger mortimer , it is said , the earls , barons and peers of the realm were present , therefore the bishops were not ▪ 5 edw. iii. onely the great ones returned , therefore the bishops did not . so in the case of sir iohn grey . from whence he inferrs , that the bishops were not to iudge so much as of a battery . 25 edw. iii. in sir william thorp's case , the grantz de parlament were asked their advice , therefore not the bishops . 1 r. ii. in the case of weston and gomenitz , the bishops not mention'd ; but other lords , barons and bannerets . sir ralph de ferrer's case 4 r. ii. the bishops not present , because not comprised under les seigneurs de parlament . the like in sir iohn oldcastle ' s case 5 h. v. the question , he saith , is , whether bishops be comprehended under les seigneurs de cest present parlament . in the earl of devonshire ' s case 31 h. vi. the strength lies in this , that the peers are onely mention'd ; and he supposes no man will say , the bishops were his peers or lords of the realm . so that here are eight precedents , that are no more then negative testimonies : concerning which in general , the authour of the iurisdiction of the house of peers asserted hath a good observation ; viz. that one , or two , or twenty precedents in the negative , nay , i say more , were the number equal as many in the negative as in the affirmative , yet it could not disprove their iurisdiction : it would onely shew , their lordships were free agents , to doe it , or not to doe it , as they saw cause ; but their iurisdiction remained entire still , to doe it whensoever they would . so i say here ; supposing that the spiritual lords were not present in these cases , it onely shews , that they were free agents , and might withdraw at some times , and be present at others : which cannot overthrow their right , for these reasons . ( 1. ) several of his negative precedents , if they prove any thing , prove the bishops were not there , when he confesses they might have been there . as , 1. in cases of misdemeanours . at the trial of sir iohn de lee , 42 ed. iii. being charged with several misdemeanours , the record saith , the prelats were present . 50 edw. iii. several persons were accused by the commons for misdemeanours , and the bishops he confesseth were present ; as rich , lions , iohn lord latimer , william ellis , iohn peecher , lord iohn nevil : at all these trials the bishops , saith he , were present ; and no body says but they might . so in the case of alice perrers , 50 edw. iii. the record saith , the prelats were present , and gave iudgment as to banishment , and forfeiture of her estate . 10 r. ii. mich. de la pool , lord chancellour , was accused by the commons for several misdemeanours before the king , prelats , and the lords . here he yields the prelats were iudges of misdemeanours together with other lords . and yet if several of his negative precedents do prove any thing , they prove too much , viz. that the bishops ought not to be present at the trial of misdemeanours : for , he saith , the bishops were not present at the trial of weston and gomenitz , 1 r. ii. nor at the trial of the bishop of norwich 7 r. ii. nor at such iudgments as that of sir william de thorp 25 edw. iii. who was condemned for bribery : and yet he yields they were at the trial of mich. de la pool 10 r. ii. but if they ought not to be present at those of 25 ed. iii. and 1 r. ii. and 7 r. ii. neither ought they to have been present at the trial of mich. de la pool . either therefore his argument doth not prove they were not present at the former , being onely from general words ; or they ought not to have been present at the latter , which he confesses they were . this will best appear by comparing the cases together . 1 r. ii. the commons deliver in a schedule to the lords of their demands , before they would proceed to a subsidy ; among which one was , that all such who without cause had lost or given up any castle , or town , or fortress , to the dishonour of the king , or dammage of the people , may be put to their answer before the lords and commons that parlament . here was no particular impeachment of these persons ; but upon this the lords sent for these two persons who were prisoners in the tower upon this account ; and the charge against them was , delivering two towns in flanders without commission . weston made a long and plausible defence , to which no answer was given ; yet both were condemned to die . the bishop of norwich was charged with several miscarriages and misdemeanours , saith he : why might not the bishops be present at this trial ? to that he saith , he was charged with one capital crime , viz. betraying graveling to the french : but he confesseth , he cleared himself of this , before they came to iudgment : and yet he would have the bishops excluded at this iudgment ; and that of sir william elmham , sir thomas trivet , and others ; but confesses they were present at the trial and iudgment of mich. de la pool . let us then see , what kind of trial this was . he was impeached in the name of the commons of england , and 6 articles were exhibited against him . the main were , concerning defrauding the king , and misimploying the aids granted to the king last parlament , whereby much mischief happen'd to the kingdom : as may appear by the rolls , and the articles printed in knighton . upon these articles , the record saith that the commons prayed that iudgment of death might pass upon him , as it did upon sir william de thorp for receiving 20 li. by way of bribery . and yet this iudgment of sir william de thorp is one of the precedents against the bishops being present ; when he allows that they were present at the whole trial of this mich. de la pool , when a great minister of state was so hotly charged by the commons , for offences of so great a nature , and which in their judgment deserved no less then death . from whence it follows , by his own confession , that the bishops may be present , when the ministers of state are impeached by the commons of such crimes which in their iudgment deserve no less then death . 2. in acts of attainder , when the houses proceed in a legislative way , he grants the bishops may be present ; and yet if some of his precedents signifie any thing , they prove they ought not to be present at the passing of them . as , 1. in the case of roger mortimer and others accused and tried in parlament 4 ed. iii. he confesseth the roll cannot be read , and therefore referrs to 28 ed. iii. where roger of wigmore desires that the attainder may be examin'd : which was reversed by act of parlament , and therefore we may justly suppose the iudgment given against him was ratified in parlament . and some of our historians say , he was condemned judicio parlamenti . and in the petition of roger wigmore , he prays that the said statute and iudgment may be reversed and annulled . if therefore the prelats could not be present here , then they are not to be present in the legislative way : if they were present in acts of attainder , then this general negative way of arguing proves nothing ; for then the bishops were comprehended under the name of peers : which , without any reason , he saith , the bishops cannot pretend to be ; when it is notorious that they challenged it in parlament 11 r. ii. and it was then allowed , as well as their protestation . 2. in the case of the murther of iohn imperial , 3 r. ii. an act of parlament passed to make it treason : and he proves the bishops had no vote in it , nor were present at the preparing it . and yet he confesses , that the bishops have a right to sit in all acts of attainder , because they sit then in their legislative capacity . therefore these negative precedents prove nothing . ( 2. ) the insufficiency of these negative precedents appears by this , that we can make it appear by good testimonies , that the bishops have been often comprehended under the general titles of grantz , peers , and lords of parlament , without any express mention made of them . and because the great force of many of his testimonies lies wholly in this , that the bishops are not comprehended under the names of grantz , seigneurs , and peers , i shall endeavour to make it clear beyond exception , that if the precedents must be determined by the general words , all the advantage lies on the bishops side . it is certain that in elder times the baronagium anglie did take in all the lords of parlament , both spiritual and temporal . but i betake my self to the expressions used in the records ; and because the matter of the debate is confined within the times of ed. ii. and iv. i shall take notice of the language of parlament within that time ; reserving that of their peerage to the proper place for it . i begin , as the authour of the letter doth , with 4 edw. iii. and in that year n. 6. the record runs thus ; et est assentu & accorde per nostre seigneur le roi , & tout le grantz en plcyn parlement : where a law was passed concerning trial by peers ; and in the passing of a law our authour allows the bishops to be present . but it is more plain n. 12. accorde per nostre seigneur le roi , & les grantz de mesinme le parlement it is agreed by the king , and the great ones in parlament . but that the bishops are comprehended under thesegrantzis evident ; for it is there said , that the petitions of edmund earl of kent and margaret countess of kent , to which that agreement referrs , were read before the king , the prelats , the counts , the barons , and other grantz of the parlament . in the same year , n. 14. we meet with les preres des prielatz & autres grantz , the petition of the bishops and other great men : and then it follows , nostre seigneur le roi en pleyn parlement , per assent , accord , prieres & conseal des ditz prelatz & autres grantz our lord the king in full parlament , by the assent , accord , petition and advice of the said prelats and other grantz . which shews that they are some of the grantz of parlament . ; ; 5 ed. iii. n. 3. touz les prelatz & autres grantz : n. 13. grantz in general is used in the debate between the abbot of crowland and sir thomas wake : and n. 15. le roi & as autres grantz en pleyn parlement : n. 16. item fu accorde per le roi & touz le grantz en mesme le parlement , auxibien per prelatz come per autres ; it was agreed by the king and the great men of the parlament , as well by the prelats as others . nothing can be plainer then that here the bishops are called grantz , as well as the other lords of parlament . 6 ed. iii. n. 1. devant nostre seigneur le roi , & touz le prelatz , & autres grantz : the articles were read before the king , the prelats , and other great men . if the bishops had not been comprehended under grantz , the record would have onely used grantz , and not autres grantz . but the same expression is again used n. 5. in the second part of the rolls of that year , n. 1. we find three several ways of expressing the persons then present : the first , les prelatz , countes , baronns , & autres grantz du parlement ; the next is , queux prelatz , & autres grantz ; the third is , touz le grantz en mesme le parlement : and all these are used to express the same persons . and again n. 3. touz les grantz du dit parlement ; which are there opposed to chivalers des countez ; and are more distinctly mention'd before in these words , les ditz prelatz , countes , barouns , & autres grantz , & les chivalers des countes , & tote la conumune . sometimes the grantz are taken in general , for all of the house of peers ; and the commons for the lower house . so 21 ed. iii. n. 63. il assentuz per lui , les grantz , & la dit comunalte a son parlement : and again , ditz grantz & de tote la com̄e susditz : and , le roi per assent des grantz commanda a la ditz com̄e . from these examples , and many more which might , if it were needfull , be produced , it evidently appears that the bishops were grantz in parlament , according to the language of that time : and therefore the precedents produced wherein onely the grantz are mention'd , are of no force at all against the presence of the bishops . and that assertion of the authour of the peerage , &c. appears to be without any ground , viz. that the bishops are never spoken of in any record but by the name of bishops or prelats , or some such name , to distinguish them from the laiety . these general negatives are very bold and dangerous things ; and one affirmative overthrows them . but i have produced many instances to the contrary , and might do many more . such men who dare venture upon such bold sayings , must be presumed to have read over all the records themselves ; and must presume that none else ever so much as looked into them . but that authour discovers too much his second-hand learning in these matters ; and we might have wanted several of his precedents , had it not been for mr. selden's baronage . as to the title of seigneurs du parlament , being common to the bishops , i am prevented by another hand . i shall onely adde two precedents more , not taken notice of by others . the one 7 r. ii. the answer of mich. de la pole is said to becoram magnatibus & communitate in parlamento ; where the authour of the letter confesseth the bishops were present , and therefore comprehended under themagnates . the other 15 h. vi. one philipps complained against the bishop of london to the house of commons : they sent the complaint up to the lords : the bishop asks the advice of the house ; who gave this answer , non consentancum fuit aliquem procerum alicui in eo loco responsurum . which had signified nothing , if the bishops had not been allowed to be proceres regni . so much for his negative precedents . ii. some of his precedents were condemned in parlament to be irregular and erroneous in other respects ; and therefore it is no wonder if they should be so in this . 1. the iudgment upon roger mortimer , earl of march , 4 ed. iii. was reversed in parlament 28 ed. iii as defective and erroneous in all points ; being without any proof or witnesses , or bringing the person to answer for himself . and therefore it was an honour for the bishops not to be present . 2. the iudgment upon haxey , 20 r. ii. is confessed by the authour to be most unjust , and would not onely have shaken , but wholly destroyed the very foundation of parlament ; and reversed 1 h. iv. as against right and course of parlaments . and he confesseth the bishops were present at condemning it , but not at passing it . which also makes much for their honour . iii. some of his precedents prove that when the bishops did withdraw , they did it voluntarily , and took care to preserve their right , either by protestation , or appointing a proxy . [ 1. ] that they withdrew voluntarily . so 5 ed. iii. it is said , that the bishops did withdraw at that time , being of opinion that it did not properly belong to them to give counsel about keeping the peace , and punishing of malefactours : and so , saith he , they went away by themselves , and returned no more . but although this proves nothing but a voluntary act of the bishops in withdrawing ; yet the representation made of this matter is so partial , and different from the record , that i cannot but take a little more notice of it . 1. he saith , that the prelats being of opinion that it belonged not properly to them to give counsel about keeping the peace , or punishing such evils , they went away by themselves , and returned no more . thereby insinuating , that they looked on this matter as wholly unfit for them to meddle in , and thereupon left the house . whereas the words of the record are , si alerent mesmes les prelatz & les procurators de la clergie per eux mesmes a conseiler de choses susdites , & les ditz countes , barons & autres grantz per eux mesmes : so the prelats and proctors of the clergy went by themselves toconsult about the aforesaid matters , and the earls , barons and other great men by themselves . so that this withdrawing was but into several committees , as was usual at that time , by which the sense of the 3 estates was best understood ; and then they met together , and agreed upon what was fit to be made a law. this appears by 6 edw. iii a quen jour de ioedi eu ont trete & deliberation , cest assavoir les ditz prelats per eux mesmes , & les ditz countes , barons , & autres grantz , per eux mesmes ; & auxint les chivalers des countes per eux mesmes : upon which thursday they enter'd upon debate , ( concerning the news from scotland ) the prelats by themselves , the lords and other great men by themselves ; and so the knights of counties by themselves . the houses being then not wholly separate , nor always together ; but dividing into committees , and not into houses , as occasion required ; and then joyning together to express their common sense . so 40 ed. iii. when the occasion of their meeting was deliver'd , which was an extraordinary message from rome , the pope sending for tribute and homage , it is said , the bishops went by themselves , and the other lords by themselves , and the commons by themselves ; and then met together , and declared their unanimous resolution to oppose to the uttermost any such demand . such a withdrawing of the bishops it was in this case . for they and the proctors of the clergy ( whether by them we understand the procuratores cleri , who , according to the modus tenendi parlamentum , made a part of the parlament ; or the proxies of the absent bishops , who were allowed to supply their places , as appears by 35 ed. i. and the case of the bishops of durham and carlile in the parlament at westminster ed. ii. and 17 r. ii. and many other instances afterwards ) thought fit to consider in this matter what was most proper for them . and accordingly we find ecclesiastical censures added to the civil sanctions , and brought in by the prelats at that time , which are still extant in the record . 2. whereas he saith , the bishops returned no more , the record saith the contrary . for it expresly saith , that the orders for keeping of the peace agreed on by the committee of lords were read before the king , the bishops , the knights of counties , and the commons , and did please them all ; & per nostre seigneur le roi , prelatz , countes , baronns , & autres grantz , & auxint per les chivalers de countez & gentz de commun , furent pleynment assentuz & accordez . and the same is immediately said of the censures brought in by the bishops . which made me extremely wonder at his saying that the bishops returned no more ; whereas it is very plain , they did not onely return , but the orders were read before them , and they did give their assent to the passing of them . in the parlament 11 r. ii. that it was onely a voluntary withdrawing , i prove from the concessions of the authour of the letter ; viz. that they might be present in all acts of attainder . for it is evident from the printed statutes , that they proceeded by way of attainder against the ministers of state ; and therefore they might have been present , if they pleased , upon the authour 's own grounds . how is it then possible for him to understand de iure non possumus , in their protestation 11 r. ii. of the law of the land , when he grants that in all acts of attainder , they may de jure be present and give their votes ? [ 2. ] when they did solemnly withdraw , they took care to preserve their right two ways ; ( 1. ) by protestation , ( 2. ) by proxie . 1. by protestation , saving their right ; which was receiv'd by the house , and enter'd : of which before . the late authour of the peerage and iurisdiction of the lords spiritual will not allow the protestation to be an argument of any right ; neither , saith he , doth the permission or allowance of any protestation yield the right which the protester is desirous to save , but onely saves the right which he had before , if he had any . whereas the authour of the letter makes it as good as a law , being entred in the iournal-book , that such a thing was agreed by the king and the two houses . i will not deny that the former authour speaks more reasonably in this matter , when he saith , that the utmost a protestation can doe is , to anticipate a conclusion , or estoppell ; i.e. to provide that the doing of any such act as is contained in the protestation , shall not be construed to the prejudice of the party , so as to bar or conclude him from claiming afterwards that which in truth is his right . it is true , this protestation passed with greater solemnity then usually ; for it was with the consent of the king and both houses : but however it retained the nature of a protestation . and there was no distinction at that time between a iournal-book and the rolls of parlament . for a good authour assures us , the iournals of the vpper house began 1 h. viii . and therefore the authour of the peerage , &c. deserved no such severe reproof on that account . but this is all i plead for , viz. that this protestation was a salvo to their right ; which meeting with no contest or opposition in the houses , but passing with unanimous consent , is a certain argument the houses did not think there was any law to exclude them . and therefore the authour of the iudicature very well saith , that had it not been for the canon-law , ( for which he referrs to the synodal constitutions at westminster 21 h. ii. which is onely reviving the council of toledo's canon , ) they might have been present both by common law , and by the law of god. 2. by proxie , or one common procurator to appear in parlament for them , and to vote in the name of the whole body . this was receiv'd and allow'd 21 r. ii. upon the petition of the house of commons , because iudgments had been reversed without their concurrence . against this the authour of the letter objects many things which are easily answer'd . 1. that hence it appears they could not be personally present . on the contrary , from hence it follows they had a parlamentary right to be present ; although they said by canon-law they could not . 2. that it was never practised but in this one parlament . that is strange , when himself confesseth , that it passed for good law 10 ed. iv. term. pasch. n. 35. and the same is cited by stamford placit . cor. l. 3. f. 153. to which judgment of the lawyers , and the greatest of their time , ( for littleton was then judge 10 ed. iv. ) we have a very extraordinary answer called error temporis ; which will equally make void the law or iudgment of any age. but is it possible , that should pass for law 10 ed. iv. which was never practised but once 21 r. ii. and the contrary practice had been onely allowed all the intermediate times ? thus a short answer may be given to the constitution of clarendon , it was error temporis ; to the allowing the protestation 11 r. ii. it was error temporis ; and so on to the end of the chapter . if there were any error temporis in this matter , it lay in this , that they took this precedent 21 r. ii. for a sufficient ground , that the bishops should onely appear by proxy in such cases ; whereas the canon-law being taken away since the reformation as to these matters , their right of personal appearing doth return to them of course . 3. that this parlament was repealed 1 h. iv. but this i have answer'd already from his own words , wherein he acknowledges him to be an vsurper , and consequently the repeal not made by a legal parlament . and this repeal was again taken off 1 ed. iv. 4. that it is not at all parlamentary , for one or two men to represent a whole body . the consequence then is , that they ought to enjoy their own personal right . all that we urge from hence is , that the bishops kept up their right still by their proxies , when they thought the canons would not allow voting in their own persons . iv. some of his precedents do prove , that after the protestations and proxies , they did assert their own personal right , and were present both at examinations , and at the whole proceedings . 1. at examinations . as in the case of sir william rickill 1 h. iv. who was brought to parlament before the king and the two houses , the lords spiritual and temporal and the commons then assembled together . and he grants the bishops were present at his examination . 2. at the whole proceedings , 28 h. vi. where he confesseth the bishops were not onely personally present , but did act and bear a principal part in aiudicialproceeding in parlament , in a case that was in it self capital , viz. of william de la pole , duke of suffolk . which is very fully related by the authour , and needs no repetition . all that he hath to say to this , is , that the whole proceedings were irregular , and not to be drawn into precedent . whereas a great lawyer in his time , sir e. c. made use of this as a sufficient precedent in a case of great moment , about commitment upon a general accusation . but there is not any irregularity expressed or intimated in the bishops appearing , and judging as other lords did ; and the judgment was not reversed because of their being there , as we have shewed others have been for their being absent . v. none of all his precedents do prove that the bishops were ever excluded from sitting , by any vote of the house of lords or commons . that they might voluntarily withdraw , we deny not ; or not be present at giving of iudgment out of regard to the canons : which is all that is proved by the precedent of iohn hall 1 h. iv. of the earls of kent , huntington , &c. 2 h. iv. of sir iohn oldcastle 5 h. v. and of sir iohn mortimer 2 h. vi. and this we have made appear was done by them out of regard to the canon-law ; the force of which being taken away by the reformation , the bishops are thereby restored to their just parlamentary right . neither can any disusage be a bar to that right , since the ground of that disusage was something then supposed to be in force , which is now removed by the reformation . and i fear , if this kind of arguing be sufficient to overthrow the bishops right , much stronger of the same kind may be used to overthrow the king's supremacy in mattters of religion . so great care ought men to have , lest under the colour of a mighty zeal against popery , they do overthrow the very principles of our reformation . vi. there are precedents upon record in the rolls of parlament , which are not mention'd by the authour of the letter , which do prove that the bishops were present at the examination of treason and capital offences in parlament . and that within the time , wherein he pretends to give an account of all the trials recorded in the rolls . which shews how easily men pass by those things they have no mind to see . i begin with 4 ed. iii. and i must doe him that right , as to say , that he doth not onely mention the trial of roger mortimer , but of sir simon bereford and others who were accused and tried in parlament . but pretending , that the roll of that parlament is so defaced that it cannot be read , he runs to that of 28 ed. iii. and so gently passes over all the other trials which are in the record , and are more plain and express as to this matter . among the articles against roger mortimer , ed. l of march , one is , that after he knew certainly the death of edw. ii. he made use of instruments to perswade edward earl of kent , that king's brother , that he was still living , and so drew him into a design for his rescue ; for which he was attainted at winchester , and there suffer'd death for it . among these instruments the chief was one mautravers , who for that reason was attainted this parlament : and the words of the record are , trestouz les pieres , counts & barons assemblez a cest parlement a west . si ont examine estraitement , & sur ce sont assentuz & accordez , que john mautravers si est culpable de la mort esmon count de kent , &c. all the peers , counts and barons assembled in this present parlament , upon strict examination do assent and agree , that john mautravers is guilty of the death of edmund earl of kent . here we have the strict examination of a capital case in parlament , and all the peers are said to be present at it . it is used as an argument by the authour of the letter , that in the case of roger mortimer , the bishops could not be comprized under the general name of peers , since the barons are first in rank . but here the peers are mentioned before counts and barons ; and it will be impossible for him to assign any other peers at that time , that were named before them , but the prelats ; who frequently are so put in the records of that time : as in the same parlament n. 12. prelatz , countes , barons ; n. 13. et per assent des ditz prelatz , countes , barons ; so again n. 14. 15. 17. 24. 25. but the authour of the letter saith , they cannot pretend to be peers of the realm . let him name then other peers of the realm at that time , who were neither counts nor barons , and were before them . but if we are to judge who are peers of the realm by the records of parlament , i do not question but i shall make it evident , that the bishops were so esteemed ; and that some persons , who pretend to great skill in records , either have not searched so diligently , or have not observed so carefully about this matter as they might have done . but of this afterwards . in the same parlament judgment was passed upon boges de boyons , iohn deveril , thomas gurnay , william ocle ; but being by way of attainder , and not upon particular examination , which is mentioned in the case of mautravers , i pass them over . in the pleas of the crown held before the king in this parlament , we find another case which relates to our present debate ; viz. of thomas lord berkely and knight , who was arraigned for the death of king ed. ii. who came before the king in pleno parlamento , in full parlament , and there pleaded not guilty ; and declared he was ready to clear himself as the king's court should advise . then they proceeded to particular examination of him , how he could acquitt himself , being lord of the castle where the king was murthered , he being committed to his custody and john matravers . he pleaded for himself , that he was then sick at bradley , and knew nothing of it . they charged him , that the keepers of the castle were of his own appointing ; and therefore he was bound to answer for them . he answer'd , that they with matravers having receiv'd the king into their custody , he was not to be blamed for what they did : and for this he put himself upon his country . at the day appointed for his trial , he appears again coram domino rege in pleno parlamento ; and the iury returned him not guilty . but because he appointed gurney and ocle to keep his castle of berkely , by whom the king was murthered , the king appoints him a day the next parlament to hear his sentence ; and in the mean time he was committed to the custody of ralph nevil steward of the king's house . in the next parlament 5 edw. iii. n. 18. the prelats , earls and barons petition the king , that he might be discharged of his mainprisors : the which was granted , and a farther day given him to appear next parlament . but we reade no more of him , till the summons he had 14 ed. iii. as one of the lords in parlament . the great force of this precedent lies in understanding what is meant by appearing before the king in full parlament . if under this the bishops be comprehended , then this will be an uncontroulable precedent of the presence of the bishops in the examination of a case capital . what the importance of this phrase of full parlament is , will best appear by the use of it in the records of that time . 4 ed. iii. n. 6. et est assentu & accorde per nostre seigneur le roi , & touz les grantz en pleyn parlement . where it was agreed , that the procedings at that time by the lords against those who were not peers should not be drawn into consequence ; and that the peers should be charged onely to try peers . which hath all the formality of an act of parlament : and therefore all the estates were present , n. 8. accorde est per nostre seigneur le roi & son conseil en pleyn parlement . which was an act of pardon concerning those who followed the earl of lancaster . 5 ed. iii. n. 10. we have the particular mention of the bishops , as some of those who do make a full parlament . accorde est per nostre seigneur le roi , prelatz , countes , barons , & autres grantz du roialm en pleyn parlement : and n. 17. en pleyn parlement si prierent les prelatz , countes , barons , & autres grantz de mesme le parlement , a nostre seigneur le roi , &c. 6 ed. iii. n. 5. the archbishop of canterbury made his oration en pleyn parlement , which is explained by en la presence nostre seigneur le roi , & de touz les prelatz , & autres grantz . n. 9. si est accorde & assentu per touz en pleyn parlement : who those were , we are told before in the same number , viz. les prelatz , countes , baronns , & touz les autres somons a mesme le parlement . which is the clearest explication of full parlament , in the presence of all those who were summon'd to parlament . from whence it follows , that where a full parlament was mention'd at that time , the bishops were certainly present ; and consequently did assist at the trial of thomas lord berkely , who appeared before the king in full parlament : as nich. de segrave did 33 ed. i. and there the bishops are expresly mention'd as present ; as appears by what hath been said before concerning his case . 5 h. iv. henry hotspur , son to the earl of northumberland , was declared a traitour by the king and lords in full parlament ; and the same day , the father was , upon examination , acquitted of treason by the peers . it is not said that this was done in full parlament , as the other was : but there are several circumstances which make it very probable the bishops were then present . ( 1. ) when the earl of northumberland took his oath of fidelity to the king , he did it , saith the record , upon the cross of the archbishop ; which was to be carried before him , if he went out of the house . ( 2. ) the archbishop of canterbury pray'd the king , that forasmuch as himself and other bishops were suspected to be in piercie's conspiracy , that the earl might upon his oath declare the truth : who thereupon did clear them all . which shews that the archbishop was then present in the house . and for the same reason that he was present , we may justly suppose the other bishops to have been so too . ( 3. ) the earl of northumberland beseeched the lords and earls and commoners , that if he brake this oath , they would intercede no more with the king for him . now the better to understand this , we are to consider , that h. iv. takes notice in his declaration upon the rebellion of sir henry piercy , that the earl of northumberland and his son gave out , that they could have no access to the king , but by the mediation of the bishops and earls , and therefore did beseech them to intercede with the king for them . it is not then probable , that those should be now left out , when the words are large enough to comprehend them , and no one circumstance is brought to exclude them . for that general one , of their not being peers , will be fully refuted afterwards . but that which puts this out of dispute is , ( 4. ) that the record saith , n. 17. the commons not onely gave the king thanks for the pardon of the earl of northumberland , but the lords spiritual and temporal , in these remarkable words ; et au●i mesmes les cōes remercierment les seigneurs espirituelx & temporelx de lour bon & droiturell judgment quils avoient fait come piers du parlement : and likewise the commons gave thanks to the lords spiritual and temporal for the good and right iudgment which they had given in this case as peers of parlament . which is a clear precedent of the bishops judging in a capital case , and that as peers . 2 h. vi. n. 9. iohn lord talbott had accused iames boteler , earl of ormond , of sundry treasons before the king and his great council ; and after , before iohn duke of bedford , constable of england . the king takes advice of his parlament about it ; and then it is expresly said in the record , de avisamento & assensit dominorum spiritualium & temporalium ac communitatis regni anglie , in eodem parlamento existent ' , facta fuit quedam abolitio delationis , nuntiationis , & detectionis predict , &c. here the king adviseth with the lords spiritual in an accusation of treason ; and therefore they must be present in the debates concerning it . i leave now any considerate person to judge impartially on which side the right lies . for on the one side , 1. there is the constitution of clarendon interpreted by h. ii. and the bishops at northampton . 2. a protestation of their right enter'd , and allowed by king , lords and commons , 11 r. ii. 3. a reversing of iudgments owned by parlament for want of their presence , 21 r. ii. 4. a preserving of their right by proxie , when they thought their personal attendance contrary to the canons . 5. a bar to a total discontinuance of their personal right , by an allowed precedent 28 h. vi. 6. a restoring them to their former right , by removing of the force of the canon-law upon the reformation . 7. no one law or precedent produced for excluding them , even in those times , when they thought the canons did forbid their presence . 8. several precedents upon record , wherein they were present at examinations and debates about cases capital . on the other side , 1. the precedents are general , and negative . 2. or relating to such cases wherein they are allowed to be present . 3. or of iudgments condemned as erroneous by parlament . 4. or of voluntary withdrawing , with protestation of their right , and making of proxies . 5. or of not being present at the passing of iudgment out of regard to the canon-law . and now on which side the right lies , let the authour of the letter himself judge . chap. iv. the peerage of the bishops cleared ; how far they make a third estate in parlament . objections against it answered . there remain two things to be considered , which are put in by way of postscript by the authour of the letter : the one concerns the peerage of the bishops , the other their being a third estate in parlament . 1. concerning their peerage . to prove this two statutes had been alledged , 25 ed. iii. c. 6. and 4 h. v. c. 6. and the opinion of iudges and lawyers out of the year-books . but although these had been very significant , if they had been against them ; they have the hard fortune to signify nothing , when they are for them . a meer protestation becomes good law , very substantial law , if it be supposed to make against the bishops ; and yet in that very protestation the right of peerage is expresly challenged , ( as well as it is asserted and taken for granted in the statutes mention'd . ) is that part of the protestation invalid ? and must nothing pass for law but what is against them ? is it credible that a right of peerage should be owned and received in acts of parlament , in protestations , in year-books , time after time ; and no opposition made against it by the temporal lords all that time , in case they believed the bishops had challenged that which by no means did belong to them ? did not the temporal lords understand their own privileges ? or were they willing to suffer the bishops to assume their titles to themselves without the least check or contradiction , and let their protestations be enter'd in the rolls of parlament without any contrary protestation ? i do not question but the authour of the letter did reade the bishops protestation at large in the parlament-rolls 11 r. ii. and can any thing be plainer , then that therein they challenge a right of peerage to themselves , ut pares regni — cum caeteris regni paribus , & c. ? and this protestation , he saith , was enter'd by consent of the king , lords temporal , and commons ; as is expressed in the rolls . were the temporal lords awake ? or were they mean and low-spirited men ? no ; they were never higher then at this time , when the king himself durst not withstand them . what could it be then , but meer conviction of their just right of peerage , which made them suffer such a protestation as that to pass , after so solemn and unusual a manner , and to be enrolled par commandment du roy , & assent des seigneurs temporels & communs ; as it is in the rolls ? was all this onely a complement to the potent clergy at that time ? but who can imagine that king , lords and commons should complement at that rate , as to suffer the bishops to challenge a peerage to themselves in parlament , if they had not an undoubted right to it ? this one argument is sufficient to convince any reasonable man. especially when we consider , that in the same parlament , before the protestation was brought in , a motion was made n. 7. by all the lords spiritual and temporal , which they claimed come leur libertez & franchise , as their liberty and privilege , that all weighty matters moved in this parlament , or to be moved in any to come , touchant pieres de la terre , concerning the peers of the realm , should be determin'd , adjudged and discussed by the course of parlament ; and not by the civil , nor by the common law of the land , used in inferiour courts of the realm . the which claim , liberty and franchise , the king most willingly allowed and granted in full parlament . from whence it is evident , that the king and parlament did allow the right of peerage in the lords spiritual ; for it is said expresly in the record , that all the spiritual as well as temporal lords joyned in this claim : which being allowed them in full parlament , is an evidence beyond contradiction of their right of peerage . but against this no less is pretended then magna charta , viz. that every man who is tried at the king's suit must be tried by his peers . now if a bishop be tried for any capital offence , he is tried by the commoners , and that is the common law of england ; it hath ever been so , never otherwise : then must commoners be his peers , and he and commoners must be pares . to this argument , how strong soever it appears , these two things may be justly answer'd . 1. that the matter of fact cannot be made out , that a bishop hath always been tried by commoners . 2. that if it could , it doth not overthrow their peerage in parlament . ( 1. ) that the matter of fact cannot be made out , viz. that if a bishop be tried for a capital offence , he is tried by the commoners ; that it hath ever been so , never otherwise . for in 15 ed. iii. iohn stratford , archbishop of canterbury , was at the king's suit accused of capital crimes , viz. of no less then treason , and conspiracy with the french king. he put himself upon his trial in parlament . a parlament was called ; and he at first refused admission into the house ; which he challenged tanquam major par regni post regem , & uocem primam in parlamento habere debens , as the first peer of the realm after the king , and having the first uote in parlament . upon which , and the intercession of his friends , he is admitted into the house ; and there he put himself upon the triall of his peers . at which time a great debate arose in the house , which continued a whole week ; and it was resolved , that the peers should be tried onely by peers in parlament . whereupon the archbishop had 12 peers appointed to examine the articles against him : 4 bishops , viz. london , hereford , bath , and exceter ; 4 earls , arundel , salisbury , huntingdon , and suffolk ; and 4 barons , percy , wake , basset , and nevil . here we have all that can be desired in the case . here is a bishop tried at the king's suit , and for a capital crime ; and yet not tried by commoners , but by his peers , and that after long debate in the house concerning it . if it be said , that he was tried by the lords as iudges in parlament , and not as his peers ; it is answer'd , 1. then bishops are iudges in parlament in cases capital : for so this was , and 4 bishops appointed to examine it . 2. the debate in the house was about trial of peers by their peers ; and upon that it was resolved , that the archbishop should be tried by the house . for the king designed to have him tried in the exchequer for the matters objected against him , and the steward of the king's house and lord chamberlain would not suffer him to enter into the house of lords , till he had put in his answer in the exchequer . upon which the great debate arose ; and therefore the resolution of the house is as full a precedent in this case as can be desired . i do not deny , that the rolls of parlament of that year seem to represent the 12 peers , as birchington calls them , not as appointed to examine the particular case of stratford ; but to draw up in form the desire of the peers as to a trial by their peers , in parlament : the which is extant in the record 15 ed. iii. n. 7. however , this argument doth not lose its force as to the peerage of the bishops ; but it is rather confirmed by it . for there they pray the king , by the assent of the prelats , counts and barons , that the peers of the realm may not be judged but in parlament , & per lour piers , and by their peers : and after it follows , that they may not lose their temporalties , lands , goods and chattels , &c. who were capable of losing their temporalties , but the prelats ? therefore this law must respect them as well as others . as farther appears not onely by the occasion , but by the consequent of it . for it follows , n. 8. that the archbishop of canterbury was admitted into the king's presence , and to answer for himself in parlamentdevant les piers , before his peers : which the king granted . so that the rolls of parlament put this matter beyond contradiction . in 21 r. ii. thomas arundel , archbishop of canterbury , was impeached of high treason before the king and lords in parlament . the king ' s answer was , that forasmuch as this impeachment did concern so high a person , & pier de son roialm , ( it is in the record , but left out in the abridgment ) and a peer of the realm , the king would be advised . but soon after he was condemned for treason by the house , theproxie of the bishops , sir tho. percy , giving his vote . the force of this doth not lie barely in his being impeached before the house of peers in time of parlament ; but that the king called him in his answer a peer of the realm . and because two laws were already passed , the one , that peers were to try none but peers , 4 ed. iii. n. 6. the other , that peers were to be tried onely by their peers , 15 ed. iii. n. 7. the former of these , the authour of the iurisdiction of the house of peers asserted ( one well known to the authour of the letter ) would have onely looked on as a temporary order of the house . but our greatest lawyers are of another opinion . and an eminent lawyer still living urged this as an act of parlament , because it is said , that the king in full parlament assented to it : and he added , that the words are both affirmative and negative ; they shall not be bound , or charged to try any other then peers , but be thereof discharged ; and that therein they declare it to be against law for them to exercise iurisdiction on those who were not their peers . from whence it follows , that since stratford and arundel , archbishops of canterbury , were allowed to be tried by the house of peers , ( without impeachment from the commons ) they were looked on as peers by the whole house . the latter act , the same authour cannot deny to be a binding law ; but he hath a strange fetch to avoid the force of it ; viz. that this law was made with respect to the case of roger mortimer 4 ed. iii. and not to the case of stratford then in agitation : which is without all colour of reason . for the case then was of a different nature , viz. about the peers trying those who were not peers , as sir simon bereford , &c : but here the case was , whether peers should be tried by any others then their peers ; and the king granted they should not . now upon this stratford was allowed to be tried by his peers in parlament ; and therefore this trial upon these acts is an invincible argument of the peerage of the bishops . in 28 h. vi. when william de la pole , duke of suffolk , waved being tried by his peers , and submitted to the king's mercy ; the record saith , ( as the authour of the letter himself confesseth ) that viscount beaumont , on the behalf of the lordsspiritualand temporal , and by their advice , assent and desire , moved the king , that a protestation might be enter'd in the parlament-roll , that this should not be , nor turn in prejudice nor derogation of them , their heirs , ne of their successours in time coming ; but that they may have and enjoy their liberties and freedoms as largely as ever their ancestours and predecessours had or enjoy'd them before this time . which sir r. cotton more briefly expresseth , n. 52. that neither they nor their heirs should by this example be barred of their peerage . the authour of the letter more fully puts in successours , as well as heirs ; for this protestation was made in behalf of the lords spiritual as well as temporal . but very unfairly leaves out the most material words in the record , viz. [ after freedoms , ] in case of their peerage . and i appeal to the authour himself , whether these words be not in the record ; and with what ingenuity they are left out , i cannot understand . i do not charge the authour of the letter himself with this ; but whosoever searched the records for him , hath dealt very unfaithfully with him . and i suppose , if he had seen this passage himself , he would never have so peremptorily denied the peerage of the bishops ; nor asserted with so much assurance , that they are onely to be tried by commoners , and that it was always so , and never otherwise . ( 2. ) suppose the bishops have been tried by commoners out of parlament , this doth not take away their right of peerage in parlament . for all our dispute is concerning the right of their peerage in parlament ; and if that be allowed , we are not to dispute concerning the difference that in some respects may arise by custom , or practice of common law , between peers by descent , and peers by tenure in right of their baronies . and therefore the authour of the peerage of the lords spiritual might have spared all the needless pains he takes about this : for we do not contend that they have an inheritable peerage , but that they are peers in parlament , having a right to sit and judge there by virtue of their baronies . but from hence he undertakes to prove , that by magna charta they cannot be iudges of such who are ennobled in bloud . this comes home to our present business , and therefore must be considered . 1. he saith , that he who hath onely a praedial or feudal , and not personal , peerage , can have no iurisdiction but such as is suitable to the nature of his peerage ; and therefore can onely extend to matters of property and possession , and not to matters of bloud . but that this is a very trifling and ill-consider'd argument appears by this , that he grants a lord keeper , lord privy seal , lord treasurer , to be peers by their offices ; for , as he speaks , after regradation their peerage is ended : and he will not deny that these may sit as iudges in capital cases , although they be peers onely by their offices . those that are peers in parlament have right to judge in all cases that belong to the iudicature of parlament . 2. he saith , that the reason of magna charta is , that the iudges and prisoner may be under the same circumstances . but this kind of arguing as well excludes a lord keeper , who is no baron , as a bishop ; and supposes that mens capacity for judgment depends upon perfect equality of circumstances : whereas knowledge and integrity go farther towards constituting one that is a peer but in one respect , a just judge , then bare inheritance of honour can do . but to give a full answer to this argument , on which that authour lays so much weight , and challenges any person , to give a rational account wherein the advantage of a man's being tried by his peers doth consist ; i shall ( 1 ) shew that this was not the reason of trial by peers ; ( 2 ) give a brief account of the true and original reason of it . [ 1. ] that this was not the reason . 1. not in the judgment of the peers themselves , as that authour hath himself sufficiently proved , when he takes so much pains to prove p. 3. that a writ of summons to parlament doth not ennoble the bloud ; and consequently , doth not put persons into equality of circumstances with those whose bloud is ennobled : and yet he grants , that those who sate in the house of peers by virtue of their summons did judge as peers ; as is manifest from his own precedents p. 15. from the 4 edw. 3. from whence it follows , that this was not thought to be the reason by the peers themselves in parlament . 2. that this was not the reason in the judgment of our greatest lawyers ; because they tell us , that where this reason holds , yet it doth not make men judges . as for instance , those who are ennobled by bloud , if they be not lords of parlament , are not to be judges in the case of one ennobled by bloud . onely a lord of the parlament of england , saith coke , shall be tried by his peers being lords of parlament ; and neither noblemen of any other country , nor others that are called lords , and are no lords of parlament , are accounted pares peers within this statute . therefore the parity is not of bloud , but of privilege in parlament . 3. the practice it self shews that this was not the reason . for this reason would equally hold whether the trial be at the king's suit , or the suit of the party : but in the latter case , as in an appeal for murther , a man whose bloud is ennobled must be tried by those whose bloud is not ennobled ; even by an ordinary iury of 12 men . and i desire our authour to consider what becomes of the inheritable quality of bloud in this case , when life and fortune lies at the mercy of 12 substantial free-holders ? who , it is likely , do not set such a value upon nobility as noble-men themselves do : and yet our law , which surely is not against magna charta , allows an ordinary iury at the suit of the party to sit in judgment upon the greatest noble-men . therefore this reason can signifie nothing against the bishops , who are lords in parlament , as i have already proved . [ 2. ] i shall give a brief account of the true and original reason of this trial by peers ; without which , that authour it seems is resolved to conclude , that the iurisdiction of the bishops in capital cases is an abuse of magna charta , and a violation offer'd to the liberties of english subjects . as to the general reason of the trial by peers , it is easie to conceive it to have risen from the care that was taken , to prevent any unfair proceedings in what did concern the lives and fortunes of men . from hence tacitus observes of the old germans , that their princes , who were chosen in their great councils to doe justice in the several provinces , had some of the people joyned with them , both for advice and authority . these were assessours to the judges ; that mens lives and fortunes might not depend on the pleasure of one man : and they were chosen out of the chief of the people , none but those who were born free being capable of this honour . in the latter times of the german state , before the subduing it by charlemagn , some learned men say , their iudges were chosen out of the colleges of priests , especially among the saxons . after their being conquer'd by him , there were 2 courts of judicature established among them , as in other parts of the german empire . 1. one ordinary and popular , viz. by the comites , or great officers sent by the emperour into the several districts ; and the scabini , who were assistants to the other , and were generally chosen by the people . the number of these at first was uncertain ; but in the capitulars they are required to be seven , who were always to assist the comes in passing judgments . but ludovicus pius , in his second capitular , a. d. 819. c. 2. enlarged their number to 12. and if they did not come along with him , they were to be chosen out of the most substantial free-holders of the county : for the words are , de melioribus illius comitatûs suppleat numerum duodenarium . this i take to be the true original of our juries . for our saxon laws were taken very much from the laws of the christian emperours of the caroline race , as i could at large prove , if it were not impertinent to our business ; and thence discover a great mistake of our lawyers , who make our ancient laws and customs peculiar to our selves . as in this very case of trial by peers , which was the common practice of these parts of the world. therefore otto frisingensis takes notice of it as an unusual thing in hungary ; nulla sententia à principe , sicut apud nos moris est , per pares suos exposcitur — sola sed principis voluntas apud omnes pro ratione habetur : that they were not judged by their peers , but by the will of their prince . which shews , that this way of trial was looked on as the practice of the empire , and as preventing the inconveniences of arbitrary government . and it was established in the laws of the lombards , and the constitutions of sicily . in the one it is said to be iudicium parium ; in the other , proborum virorum . in the saxon laws of king ethelred at wanting , c. 4. 12 freemen are appointed to be sworn to doe iustice among their neighbours in every hundred . those in the laws of alfred are rather 12 compurgators then iudges ; however some make him the authour of the trial by peers in england . but by whomsoever it was brought into request here , it was no other way of trial , then what was ordinary in other parts of europe ; and was a great instance of the moderation of the government of the northern kingdoms . 2. there was an extraordinary or royal court of iudicature : and that either by way of appeal , which was allowed from inferiour courts ; or in the causes of great men , which were reserved to this supreme court. in which either the king himself was present , or the comes palatii , who was lord high steward ; and all the great persons were assessours to him . in such a court brunichildis was condemned in france ; and tassilo duke of bavaria in the empire ; and ernestus , and other great men , a. d. 861 ; and erchingerus and bartoldus under conradus , the last of the french race . and among the causes expresly reserved for this supreme court , were those which concerned the prelats as well as the nobles . vt episcopi , abbates , comites , & potentiores quique , si causam inter se habuerint , ac se pacificare noluerint , ad nostram jubeantur venire praesentiam : neque illorum contentio aliubi judicetur . but in this court they challenged that as their privilege to be tried by their peers ; who were called pares curiae . so the emperour sigismund , in his protestation before the states of the empire ; cùm secundùm juris communis dispositionem , nec non usum , morem , stylum & consuetudinem sacri romani imperii , feudalis contentio per dominum feudi , ac pares curiae terminanda sit , &c. and again , nisi parium nostrae curiae arbitrio . so likewise in france , as tilius saith , haec judiciorum ratio , ut de causis feudalibus judicent feudales pares , in gallia est perantiqua . so in fulbertus one count sends word to another , that their cause should not be determin'd , nisi in conventu parium suorum . and many other examples might be produced : but these are sufficient to make us understand the true original of this right of peerage ; which was from the feodal laws ; and all those who held of the same lord , and by the same tenure , were said to be pares peers . and therefore since the bishops in england were barons by tenure ever since william i. by consequence they were peers to other barons ; and had the same original right of trial by other barons as their peers , holding by the same tenure , and sitting in the same court. and thus i hope i have given ( what that authour so impatiently desired , viz. ) a rational account of the trial by peers ; and have thereby shewed , that this is so far from being any disadvantage to the bishops cause , that it adds very much to the iustice of it . and that this is so far from being a violation of magna charta , that it is within the intention and meaning of it , i thus prove . in the 14. ch . of magna charta we read , comites & barones non amercientur nisi per pares suos : but by the common law the amerciament of a bishop is the same with that of a lay-baron ; and therefore in the sense of the law , they are looked on as peers . and all the parlamentary barons , whether bishops or abbots , were amerced as barons . thence 15 edw. 2. a writ was directed to the justices of the common pleas , that they should not amerce the abbot of crowland tanquam baro , because he did not hold per baroniam aut partem baroniae . and it is confessed by the most learned lawyers , that the lords spiritual do enjoy the same legal privileges , in other respects , which the temporal barons do ; as in real actions to have a knight returned in their iury ; as to a day of grace ; hunting in the king's forests ; scandalum magnatum , &c. now since the law of england allows onely a double parity , viz. as to lords of parlament , and commons , whether knights , esquires , gentlemen , or yeomen , without any consideration of the great inequality of circumstances among them ; ( yeomen having as little sense of gentility , as commons can have of the privileges of nobles ; ) it is apparent that this trial by peers was not founded upon equality of circumstances ; and that in all reason , those who do enjoy the legal privileges of peers , are to be looked on as such by magna charta . but the great objection is , that the lawyers are of another opinion , as to this trial by peers ; and not onely the common sort , who take all upon trust which they find in the modern law-books , but those who have searched most into antiquity , such as mr. selden and sir edw. coke . to this therefore i answer . 1. the authour of the peerage , &c. proves the bishops are not peers , because not to be tried by peers . this consequence mr. selden utterly denies ; for he saith , it is true and plain that the bishops have been peers . for which he quotes the bishop of winchester's case , who was question'd in the king's bench for leaving the parlament at salisbury in the beginning of ed. iii. and he pleaded to the declaration , quod ipse est unus e paribus regni , that he was one of the peers of the realm : which , he saith , was allowed in court. and from other book-cases and parlament-rolls he there evidently proves , that the bishops were peers : which he not onely asserts in that confused rhapsodie , which went abroad under his name ; but in his elaborate work of the last edition of his titles of honour , in which he corrected and left out the false or doubtfull passages of his first edition . and among the rest , that passage wherein this authour triumphs , a bishop shall not be tried by peers in capital crimes . the same thing i confess is said in the privileges of the baronage ; which he there calls a point of common law as it is distinguished from acts of parlament ; i. e. the custom and practice hath been so . and the onely evasion he hath for magna charta is this ; that it is now to be interpreted according to the current practice , and not by the literal interpretation of the words . which is an admirable answer , if one well considers it , and justifies all violations of magna charta , if once they obtain and grow into custom . for then , no matter for the express words of magna charta , if the contrary practice hath been received and allowed in legal proceedings . this is to doe by magna charta , as the papists doe by the scriptures , viz. make it a meer nose of wax , and say it is to be interpreted according to the practice of the church . 2. some things are affirmed about this matter with as great assurance as this is , which have not been the constant practice . coke is positive , that bishops are not to be tried by their peers ; but so he is in the same page , that a nobleman cannot wave his trial by his peers , and put himself upon the trial of the countrey : whereas it is said in the record 4 ed. iii. that thomas lord berkely , ponit se super patriam , put himself upon his countrey , and was tried by a jury of 12 knights . and 28 h. vi. the duke of suffolk declined the trial of his peers , and submitted to the king's mercy . by which it appears , that this was a privilege which was not to be denied them , if they challenged it ; but , at least before 15 ed. iii. they might wave it if they pleased ; and after that too , if they were tried out of parlament . for this trial by peers was intended for a security against arbitrary power in taking away mens lives ; and therefore it was allowed at the king's suit , but not at the suit of the party . but if bishops were tried out of parlament , and did voluntarily decline the challenge of this privilege , this is no argument at all against their right of peerage : and so i find some say it was in the case of fisher , bishop of rochester , in h. viii ' s time ; which is the great precedent in the law-books . 3. the method of proceeding as to the trial of bishops by common iuries , while the pope's power continued in england , is not so clear , that any forcible argument can be drawn from thence . because the bishops then looked on themselves as having no peers , out of parlament , in point of judgment , but bishops . as in the famous case of adam bishop of hereford , under edw. ii. who was rescued from the king's bench by his brethren the bishops , because they looked on his appearing there as a violation of the liberties of the church . i do not go about to defend these proceedings ; but i am sure the authour of the peerage , &c. very much misrepresents this business : for he makes it as if the bishop were legally convicted in court by a common iury , and that after conviction he was deliver'd to the archbishop , to the intent , as he supposes , that he should be degraded . whereas , in truth , the bishops carried him out of the court , without his giving any answer to the endictment ; and when he was absent , the king commanded the iury to bring in their verdict ; and without ever being heard to make any defence for himself , they found him guilty in all the articles laid to his charge . that authour very freely bestows the terms of impudence on the bishops of that time , and ignorance on those who go about to defend them : but i desire to know whether of these two makes a man thus misrepresent a matter of fact ? for it was so far from being true , that upon conviction he was deliver'd to the archbishop to be degraded ; that he never appeared in court after , but continued under the archbishop's care , till , after a while , he fully reconciled him to the king ; notwithstanding the jury found him guilty of treason . i desire to be informed , whether we are to understand magna charta by such a trial as this ? whether he were judged by his peers , i know not ; but i am sure he was not by the law of the land ; which i think is as good a part of magna charta as the other . and this , our historians tell us , is the first instance of any trial of this kind , of any bishop in england : which hath too much of force and violence in it , to be a good interpreter of magna charta . the second precedent is verbatim out of mr. selden concerning iohn de isle , and the bishop of ely his brother ; which concerns such matters , wherein himself confesses the privilegium clericale was allowed ; and the record saith , the archbishop entering his plea , that he was to be deliver'd to him as a member of his church , he was accordingly deliver'd , after the jury had given in their verdict . which shews , indeed , the good will that was then used , to take away even the allowed privileges of the clergy by common juries . and this is another stout interpreter of magna charta ; when bracton , briton , fleta , stat. west . 1. articuli cleri c. 15. are confessed , even by sir edw. coke , to be so clear in the clergie's behalf in these matters . the third precedent , which is likewise out of the same authour , is of thomas merks , bishop of carlisle ; who , for his fidelity to r. ii. and the true heirs of the crown , against the usurpation of h. iv. was found guilty of treason by a common iury. but mr. selden is so ingenuous as to take notice , that the writ directed to the justices had in it a non obstante to a statute lately made at westminster ; licèt in stat. apud westm. nuper edito inter caetera continetur , quòd nullus archiep. nec episcopus coram iusticiariis nostris occasione alicujus criminis impetatur , absque speciali praecepto nostro , quousque , &c. which was read in court : but the judges urging , that the liberties of the church did not extend to high treason , then it is said , he did ponere se super patriam ; just as thomas lord berkely did 4 ed. iii. this is the onely precedent that proves that a bishop , before the time of h. viii . did put himself upon a common iury : and yet we find as good a precedent of this sort , concerning an allowed peer of the realm . and whether this single precedent be sufficient to interpret magna charta , against the plain sense of the words , and to make a constant practice , i leave any rational man to judge . but if this were yielded in cases of high treason , wherein the privilege of clergy holds not ; ( especially since the statutes 25 ed. iii. c. 4. and 4 h. iv. c. 2 , 3. ) mr. selden tells them , that there is no consequence from hence , because they are not to be tried by peers , therefore they are not peers : since the common law may limit this privilege of peers in one particular case , which may hold in all others . as it is no diminution to the peerage of the temporal lords , to be tried by a common iury at the suit of the party . i conclude the answer to this argument , as mr. camden doth his discourse about this subject ; who having proved that the bishops do enjoy all other privileges of peers , except this of being tried by them , ( which he seems to attribute to a kind of revenge upon them , for pleading such exemptions by the canon-law ) after all , he leaves it to the lawyers to determine , whether this be juris explorati . the meaning of which i am sure is not , as the authour of the letter expresseth it , that it was always so , and never otherwise . but the great difficulty to some is , that a praedial or feudal barony doth not ennoble the bloud ; and therefore can give no right of peerage . whereas it is well known , that all the baronies of england were such from the conquerour's time , till after the barons wars , when , for reason of state , it was thought necessary to make the nobility more dependant on the crown . and all that were barons were pares , i. e. peers . so du fresn quotes an old poem of the common laws of england , barons nous appellons les piers del realm . in france , from whence our baronies first came , ecclesiastical persons with praedial baronies are thought as capable of peerage as any . for , there at first all the barones regni ( who both in france and england were the same with the barones regis , however some of late have distinguished them ) sate in the great council , and all publick affairs passed through them ; and they were judged by their own order : and these were called pares regni , among whom the bishops were comprehended . at last lewis vii . a. d. 1179. ( as most authours agree ) chose twelve out of the great number of the peers of france ; of which half the number were bishops who held feudal baronies of the king ; and the archbishop of rheims is the first of the whole number . and because these enjoy'd greater privileges then other peers , their number was increased by particular favour ; but the ancient right of peerage remained to all the barons of the realm . in scotland , when they appointed twelve peers for the king's council , they were 4 bishops , 4 earls , 4 barons . so that in the neighbour nations feodal baronies were never thought inconsistent with peerage : and we have as little reason to think them so with us ; since to this day , the bishops do enjoy not onely the great right of peerage , of sitting and voting in the house of peers , but have some personal privileges of peers allowed them by the common law , as is already shewed . ii. the last thing to be considered is , the capacity in which they sit in the house , whether as a third estate or not ? the authour of the letter not onely denies it , but opposes it with great vehehemency , and offers many authorities and reasons against it . all which must be weighed with the same calmness and impartiality , which hath been hitherto used in this discourse . and there are three things to be distinctly handled for the clearing of this matter : 1. his foundation ; 2. his authorities ; 3. his reasons . ( 1. ) his foundation whereupon he builds ; which is , that the bishops sit in the house onely in the capacity of temporal barons ; william the conquerour having brought the temporalties of bishops under the condition of baronies . that they do sit there in the right of their baronies , was yielded at first ; but whether they sit there onely in that capacity , is the thing in question . and here i crave leave to make use of this authour's distinction , and to apply it to this purpose ; viz. of the bishops sitting in the house in a iudicial way , and in the legislative way . when they sit in the iudicial way , as members of the supreme court of iudicature , i grant that they sit onely in the capacity of temporal barons ; as appears by the constitution of clarendon , where the king requires their attendance in iudicature as his barons : but that in the legislative way they have a farther capacity , as representing a third estate in parlament , i prove by these arguments . [ 1. ] during the vacancy of bishopricks , writs were sent to the guardians of the spiritualties , to attend the parlament . which mr. selden , who cannot be suspected for partiality in this matter , saith , is obvious in the rolls of parlament ; and which he cannot deny to be an evidence of the bishops sitting in parlament as bishops , and as spiritual onely , as they did in the saxon times , in the wittena gemot . so likewise , the vicars-general had writs when the bishops were beyond sea. but neither of these could sit in parlament as temporal barons . but because so much depends on the proof of this , and no man hath yet undertaken it , i shall bring clear testimonies of the constant practice of it , from the records of the tower. 24 edw. i. writs were directed custodi archiepiscopatûs eborum , sede vacante ; & electo menevensi , vel ejus vices gerenti , ipso agente in partibus transmarinis . 27 ed. i. custodibus episcop . lincoln . sede vacante ; & capitulo eccles. b. p. eborum , custodibus spiritual . ejusdem dioces . sede vacante . 5 ed. ii. vicario generali archiep. eborum , ipso archiepiescopo in remotis agente . 6. ed. ii. custodi archiepiscopatûs cantuar . sede vacante . 7 ed. ii. to the same , & custodi episcop . london . sede vacante . 1 ed. iii. custodi spiritualitatis archiep. cantuar. sede vacante : and twice the same 2 ed. iii. 7 ed. iii. rex dilecto sibi in christo priori eccles. christi cantuar. custodi spiritualit . archiep. cantuar. sede vacante . 10 ed. iii. custodi spirit . episcop . norwic . sede vacante . 11 ed. iii. custodi spirit . episcop . cicestr . sede vacante ; & h. episcopo lincoln . vel ejus vicario generali , ipso episcopo in remotis agente . 12 ed. iii. a more general writ to the archbish. &c. vel vicariis vestris generalibus , vobis in partibus transmarinis agentibus . 14 ed. iii. t. episcop . hereford . vel ejus vicario generali , ipso episcopo in remotis agente . 20 ed. iii. custodi spiritualit . episcop . assaphensis , &c. the like we find 20 e. ( 3. ) 34. 36. 38. 44. 5 r. ( 2. ) 6. 7. 9. 10. 12. 13. 18. 20. 7 h. ( 4. ) 8. 2 h. ( 5. ) 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. 9. 2 h. ( 6. ) 4. 5. 9. 10. 11. 15. 18. 20. 25. 29. 12 edw. 4. in all these years , there are writs directed , either to the guardians of the spiritualties in the vacancies of the sees , or to the vicars-general or chancellours in their absence beyond the seas . which are sufficient to prove this to have been the constant practice of parlaments in those times . [ 2. ] some church-men were summon'd to parlament who could have no pretence to sit there as temporal barons . for 49 h. iii. the deans of york , exceter , wells , salisbury and lincoln were summon'd with the like writ as the rest . and mr. selden observes , that in the times of edw. i. edw. ii. edw. iii. where the clause praemunientes is omitted in the writ to the bishops , there particular and several writs were sent to some deans and priors of cathedral churches , to appear in parlament . but to prove more fully the interest the clergy had then in parlaments , it is worth our observing , that in the ancient records there are 4 several sorts of writs wherein the clergy were concerned . 1. in the common writs of summons to parlament sent to the archbishops and bishops , with the clause of praemunientes , which runs thus ; premunientes priorem & capitulum , or decan . & capit. ecclesie vestre , archidiaconos , totumque clerum vestre dioces . facientes , quod iidem prior & archidiaconi in propriis personis suis , ac dictum capitulum per unum , idemque cierus per duos procuratores idoneos , plenam & sufficientem potestatem ab ipsis capitulo & clero habentes , predictis die & loco intersint , ad consentiendum hiis que tunc ibidem de communi consilio ipsius regni nostri , divina favente clementia , contigerint ordinari . so mr. selden represents it from the 50 ed. iii. membr . 6. and with him sir edw. coke agrees ; who saith , by this clause in the writ of summons to the bishops , they are required to summon these persons to appear personally at the parlalament : but he proves they had no voices there , because they are required onely ad consentiendum , &c. which is a very weak argument . for , ( 1. ) his own great authority , modus tenendi parlamentum , saith expresly , they were called ad tractand . & deliberand . and that their names were called over in the beginning of parlament ; and that they had a voice there , and did make up part of the commons of england . not that the procuratores cleri did sit together with them , after they had a speaker of their own ▪ of which i find no precedent : but they sate by themselves , having a prolocutor of their own : which is the very same name used in the rolls for the speaker of the house of commons . ( 2. ) these words do not exclude them from being part of the commune concilium regni , but onely shew , that their consent was required , according to the custom of that time . and 23 ed. i. the clause is more full , ad tract and. ordinand . & faciend . the like 24 ed. i. but in 27 ed. i. the words are , ad faciend . & consentiend . ( 3. ) the same argument would exclude the commons from any voices : for in 23 ed. i. the writ for chusing knights and burgesses ran after the same manner ; ita quod dicti milites plenam & sufficientem potestatem pro se & commun ' comit ' predict ' & dicti cives & burgenses pro se & communit civit ' & burg ' tunc ibidem habeant , ad faciend ' tunc quod de communi consilio ordinabitur in premissis . would any man be so unreasonable to infer from hence , that the house of commons have no votes ? the same form is used 26 ed. i. — 30 of the same . in 5 ed. ii. it is , ad consentiendum , &c. 6 ed. ii. it is , ad faciend . quod de communi consilio contigerit ordinari . 7 ed. ii. ad faciendum & consentiend . and so it continued to the 26 ed. iii. when first came in , ad tract and. consulend . faciend . but 44 ed. i. it was onely , ad consulend . & consentiend . 46 ed. iii. it was , ad faciendum & consentiendum his quae tunc de communi concilio regni contigerit ordinari : so 47 edw. iii. which hath been the general form , ever since observed , and would exclude the house of commons from any votes in parlament , as well as the clergy . 2. there were other writs of summons to parlament wherein the clause praemunientes was left out ; and then particular writs were sent to such deans and dignified clergy-men as the king thought fit . so it was not onely 49 h. iii. but there were two summons 23 ed. i. and in one of them the clause praemunientes was inserted , in the other not . it was left out 25 ed. i. and in one 27 ed. i. and put in another , and left out again 28. and 30. of ed. i. inserted 1 ed. ii. in one writ , and omitted in others ; and so in the 3 following years : but afterwards generally inserted , except 6 ed. ii. 13. 16. 18. in 5 ed. iii. it was omitted , and so in 6. and some few years afterwards : but then it generally obtained , that the clause praemunientes was put into the writs of the bishops summons to the parlament . 3. there were writs of summons to great councils , which were no assemblies of the estates ; and then onely some great bishops and lords , or other great men were summon'd , without any writs to others , or any notice taken of them . in such a summons 2 ed. ii. onely 4 bishops are named ; 18 ed. ii. onely 6 ; 19 onely 5 ; 2 ed. iii. onely 2. and the guardian of the spiritualties of the see of canterbury : and so 4 ed. iii. and in another the same year , 3 besides the archbishop of canterbury . 5 ed. iii. summons were sent to the archbishop of york , and 19 bishops more . 11 ed. iii. the writ was directed to the archbishop of york , and such bishops , earls , and great men as were of the king's council : and two more were summon'd the same year . the form of the writ differs little from that to the parlament , onely the clause praemunientes is always left out , and onely some particular bishops and nobles are called , and no writs for elections of knights or burgesses . in the 16 ed. iii. the writ is sent to the archbishop and 7 bishops more ; but none to abbots , priors , sheriffs , &c. which shews that this was magnum concilium , as it is sometimes called , but no parlament . 4. there were writs to summon a convocation distinct from the writ of summons to the parlament with the clause praemunientes . this will appear by the first writ of summons to a convocation , which i have seen ; which bears date at lincoln 17. feb. 9 ed. ii. but the parlament was summon'd 16. of october before , to meet at lincoln in quindenâ s. hilarii ; with the clause praemunientes in the writ to the bishops . in which summons to convocation it is expressed , that those bishops and others of the clergy , who were summon'd to parlament , did , as far as they were concerned , unanimously yield to a subsidy ; but so , that others of the clergy who were not summon'd to parlament should meet in convocation , and consent thereto . therefore the king sends his writ to the archbishop to summon all the prelats , whether religious or others , and others of the clergy of his province , to meet at london post 15. pasch. ad tractand . & consentiend . &c. here we have the plain difference between the writs to parlament , and to convocation . the writs to the parlament were sent to the archbishops and all the bishops , with the clause praemunientes , &c. summoning those of the clergy who were then thought necessary to the assembly of the three estates in parlament : but when a convocation was called , then the writs were onely directed to the two archbishops , who were to summon the rest of the clergy , and not onely those who held by baronies , but others of the dignified clergy , tam exemptos quàm non exemptos , with the proctors of the chapters and clergy of the diocese , ad tractand ' & consulend ' super premissis una vobiscum & aliis per nos tunc mittendis . so it is expressed in the writ for convocation 11 ed. iii. 29 ed. iii. 31 ed. iii. 7 r. ii. 28 h. vi. 23 ed. iv. onely these two last have this difference , ad tractand ' , consentiend ' , conclud ' super premissis , & aliis que sibi clarius exponentur tunc ibidem ex parte nostra . these things i have laid together , not barely to clear this intricate matter , ( as it hath been made ) of the interest the clergy then had in parlaments as well as convocations ; but chiefly to prove from hence , that all the interest they had in parlaments was not meerly on the account of the temporal baronies which the bishops and many of the abbots then had . which is the great , but common mistake of the authour of the letter . [ 3. ] after the bishopricks were made baronies , the distinction even in parlament is kept up between the several estates of the clergy and laiety . for although baronagium doth often take in all ; yet sometimes they are so remarkably distinguished , that we may see they were looked on as two distinct estates in parlament . so eadmerus , ( speaking of what passed in the parlament 3 h. i ) saith , it was done utriusque ordinis concordi curâ & solicitudine , by the consent of both estates . so matt. paris , speaking of the summons to appear in the beginning of h. i. comprehends all under those 2 estates , clerus angliae , & pop. universus : and again , respondente clero , & magnatibus cunctis . speaking of a parlament under h. ii. he saith , convocato clero regni , ac populo . in 39 h. iii. describing a parlament , he calls those assembled nobiles angliae , tam viri ecclesiastici quàm seculares . and in the writs of summons the distinction hath been always preserved between the praelati and the magnates : for in those to the bishops it is , cum caeteris praelatis , magnatibus , &c. in those to the temporal lords , cum praelatis , magnatibus , &c. in those to the bishops they were commanded , in fide & dilectione quibus nobis tenemini : in those to the temporal lords , in fide & homagio ; or , since ed. iii. in fide & ligeancia . which shews that they were not summon'd meerly as temporal barons . [ 4. ] the authour of the letter confesseth the clergy to be one of the three estates of the kingdom ; but denies them to be one of the three estates in parlament . from whence i argue thus . either the clergy must be represented in parlament , or one of the estates of the kingdom is not at all represented there . and if one of the estates of the kingdom be not there represented , how can it be a perfect representative ? so that this distinction of the three estates of the kingdom , and the three estates in parlament , unavoidably overthrows the parlament's being a compleat representative . but in 23 h. viii . n. 33. as mr. petyt observes , there is this passage in the parlament-rolls . it is considered and declared by the whole body of this realm , now represented by all the estates of the same assembled in this present parlament . therefore all the estates of the kingdom must be represented in parlament . and 1 eliz. c. 3. the lords spiritual and temporal and the commons are said to represent in parlament the three estates of the realm . from whence it follows , that , according to the sense of the parlament , if the clergy be an estate of the kingdom , as he saith they are , they must be represented in parlament , or the whole body of the realm cannot be there represented . ( 2. ) we now come to consider the weight of authority in this matter . for which i shall premise two things . 1. that the whole parlament assembled are the best judges , which are the three estates in parlament ; and their authority is more to be valued , then that of any particular persons , whether lawyers , or others . 2. that no parlaments can give better testimony in this matter , then those which have assumed most to themselves . for if there be three estates in parlament , and the bishops be none , then the king must be one of the three ; as the authour of the letter insinuates , throughout this discourse : and the natural consequence from hence seems to be a co-ordination ; or that two joyning together may over-rule the third . therefore in all reason , if any parlaments would have made the king one of the three estates , it would have been either the parlament 1 h. iv. which deposed one king , and set up another ; or that 1 r. iii. which disinherited the children of ed. iv. and set up their uncle . i shall therefore first from the rolls of these two parlaments shew , which are the three estates in parlament ; and from them , evidently prove that the king is none , but the bishops are the third estate . i begin with the parlament 1 h. iv. by the rolls it appears , ( 1. ) that r. ii. appointed two procurators to declare his resignation of the crown , coram omnibus statibus regni , before all the states of the kingdom . from whence it unavoidably follows , 1. that the king was none of them ; 2. that the estates of the kingdom and the estates in parlament are the same thing . ( 2. ) among the articles against r. ii. one is concerning the impeachment of tho. archbishop of canterbury coram rege & omnibus statibus regni , before the king and all the estates of the realm . the king then was none of the estates . ( 3. ) the commissioners for the sentence of deposition are said to be appointed per pares & proceres regni anglie spirituales & temporales , & ejusdem regni communitates , omnes status ejusdem regni representantes ; by the peers and lords spiritual and temporal , and the commons of the kingdom , representing all the states of the kingdom . where observe , 1. the bishops are called peers , as well as the temporal lords . 2. the estates of the parlament are to represent all the estates of the kingdom . 3. the three estates in parlament are the lords spiritual , the lords temporal , and the commons of the realm ; and fabian expresly calls them the three estates of this present parlament , representing the whole body of the realm . in the rolls of parlament 1 r. iii. it is recorded , that before his coronation , certain articles were deliver'd unto him in the name of the three estates of the realm of england , that is to say , of the lords spiritual and temporal and of the commons by name , &c. now forasmuch as neither the said three estates , neither the said persons which in their name presented and deliver'd ( as it is afore said ) the said roll unto our said sovereign lord the king , were assembled in form of parlament , divers doubts have been moved , &c. now by the said three estates assembled in this present parlament , and by authority of the same , be ratified , and enrolled , &c. upon which mr. pryn himself makes this marginal note , the three estates must concurr to make a parlament ; no one or two of them being a full or real parlament , but all conjoyned . but lest i should seem to take advantage onely of these two parlaments , i shall now shew this to have been the constant sense of the parlaments ; as will appear by these following records . in 1 h. vi. n. 12. all the estates of the realm are said to be assembled in parlament . 3 h. vi. n. 19. the three estates assembled in this present parlament . 6 h. vi. n. 24. the duke of gloucester desired an explanation of his power as protector : in the answer , drawn up by the lords appointed for that purpose , it is alledged that h. v. could not by his last will , nor otherwise , alter , change , or abroge , without the assent of the three estates nor commit or grant , to any person , governance or rule of this land , longer then he lived . ; nevertheless they adde , it was advised and appointed by the authority of the king , assenting the three estates of this realm . which shews how far the king was from being thought one of the three estates in parlament at that time . 10 h. vi. n. 17. ralph lord cromwell put in a petition to the parlament , that he was discharged the office of king's chamberlain in a way contrary to the articles for the council sworn 8 h. vi. coram tribus regni statibus , before the three estates of the realm , as they were assembled in parlament : which appears by the record 8 h. vi. n. 27. 11 h. vi. n. 10. the duke of bedford appeared in parlament , and declared the reasons of his coming coram domino rege & tribus regni statibus , before the king and the three estates of the realm ; as it is in the record , but not mention'd in the abridgment . n. 11. domino rege & tribus regni statibus in presenti parlamento existentibus , the king and the three estates of the realm being present in parlament . nothing can be plainer , then that the king is none ; and that the three estates of the kingdom are the three estates in parlament . 11 h. vi. n. 24. lord cromwell treasurer exhibits a petition in parlament , wherein he saith , the estate and necessity of the king and of the realm have been notified to the three estates of the land assembled in parlament . in an appendix annexed to the rolls of parlament that year , the duke of bedford saith , in his petition to the king , how that in your last parlament yit liked your highness , by yadvis of three estates of his land , to will me , &c. 23 h. vi. n. 11. presente domino rege , & tribus regni statibvs in presenti parlamento existentibus , &c. 28 h. vi. n. 9. domino rege & tribus regni statibus in pleno parlamento comparentibus , &c. after these i shall insist upon the precedents cited by the authour of the letter himself ; viz. the ratification of the peace with france by the thrée estates 9 h. v. and 11 h. vii . which he alledges as an extraordinary thing , that the three estates joyned in these transactions : whereas in truth it was nothing but a ratification of the peace in parlament ; and consequently , those three estates of the kingdom , are the three estates of parlament . for the parlament was then sitting at both these ratifications ; and no other assembly of the thrée estates was ever known in england . walsingham saith , that h. v. called aparlament , which was sitting at that time : for the king kept s. george's feast at windsor that year , from thence he went to the parlament at london , which ended within a month ; and the ratification of the peace bears date may 2. judge then , whether these were not the three estates in parlament ? but to prove this more fully . it seems by 23 h. vi. n. 24. that a statute was made in the time of h. v. that no peace should be made with france without the consent of the three estates of both realms ; which was then repealed . but whom they meant by the thrée estates here in the time of h. vi. appears by 28 h. vi. n. 9. when the chancellour , in the presence of the king , gave thanks to the three estates , and prorogued the parlament : where it is plain , the three estates in parlament were meant , and that the king could be none of them . in 38 h. vi. n. 38. . the chancellour again , in the presence of the king and of the three estates , having given thanks to all the estates , dissolved the parlament . but that which puts this matter out of doubt is , that in the parlament 1 h. vi. the queen dowager in her petition mentions the ratification made in parlament 9 h. v. and saith , it was not onely sworn by the king , but by the thrée estates of the kingdom of england : cest assavoir , les prelatz , nobles , & grands , & per les comuns de mesm le roialm dengleterre ; that is to say , by the prelats , nobles , and other grandees , and by the commons of the realm of england : as appears more fully , saith that petition , by the records and acts of the said parlament . and the king there declares in four several instruments , that the said articles of peace were approved and ratified by authority of parlament , in these words ; qui quidem pax , tractatus , conclusio & concordia , omnesque articuli contenti in eisdem , in parlamento dicti patris nostri apud westm. 2 0 die maii a. r. 9. tento , auctoritate ejusdem parlamenti approbati , laudati , auctorizati & acceptati . nothing can be plainer from hence , then that the three estates of the kingdom were no other then the three estates in parlament . and the same appears by another petition of the same queen , 2 h. vi. n. 19. for latter times i shall instance onely in the parlament 1 eliz. c. 3. wherein the lords spiritual and temporal and commons declare , that they do represent in parlament the thrée estates of the realm . from whence it follows , 1. that the three estates of the kingdom must be represented in parlament . 2. that the lords spiritual and temporal and the commons do represent those three estates of the kingdom , and therefore are the three estates in parlament . 3. that the king can be none of the estates in parlament , because he doth not represent any of the estates of the kingdom . and it is a wonder to me , that any man , who considers the constitution of the government of europe , and how agreeable it was in all the kingdoms of it , as to the assemblies of the three estates , could ever take the king to be one of the three estates in parlament . for the question would seem ridiculous to persons of any other nation , if we should ask them whether the king was reckon'd among the tres ordines regni ? for by the three estates they all mean the three ranks of men , the clergy , nobility , and commonalty . but the authour of the letter could not deny that these were the three estates of the kingdom ; but he saith , the three estates of parlament are clean another thing : which i may reasonably suppose , is sufficiently disproved by the foregoing discourse . but he quotes several authorities for what he saith , which must now be examined , and will appear to be of no weight , if compared with the evidence already given on the other side . the first authority is of king iames , in his speech at the prorogation of the parlament 1605. wherein he saith , the parlament consists of a head , and a body ; the king is the head , the body are the members of the parlament . this body is subdivided into two parts , the vpper , and the lower house . the vpper consists of the nobility and the bishops ; the lower of knights and burgesses . the force of the argument lies in king iames his making the bishops but a part of the vpper house : but that this doth not exclude their being a third fstate , i prove by a parallel instance . in 5 h. iv. the bishop of london , being chancellour , compared the parlament to a body , as king iames did ; but he made the chùrch the right hand , the temporal lords the left hand , and the commonaltie the other members ; yet presently after , he calls these , the several estates which the king had called to parlament . but that the bishops sitting in the same house with the temporal lords doth not hinder their being a distinct estate , will appear , when we come to answer his reasons . and for king iames his sense as to this matter , we may fully understand it by this passage in his advice to his son. as the whole subjects of our countrey ( by the ancient and fundamental policy of our kingdom ) are divided into three estates , &c. these words are spoken of the kingdom of scotland ; but the ancient and fundamental policy of that is the same with england ; and he that believed the subjects made the three estates there , could never believe the king to be one of them here . the next authority is of king charles i. in his answer to the 19 propositions iune 2. 1642. wherein he tells the two houses , that neither one estate should transact what is proper for two , nor two what is proper for three . to which i answer , that the penner of that answer was so intent upon the main business , viz. that the two houses could doe nothing without the king , that he did not go about to dispute this matter with them , whether the king were one of the three estates or not ; but taking their supposition for granted , he shews that they could have no authority to act without the king's concurrence . but the unwary concessions in that answer were found of dangerous consequence afterwards , when the king's enemies framed the political catechism out of them ; which is lately reprinted , no doubt , for the good of the people . in 2 h. iv. n. 32. he makes the house of commons to declare to the king and lords , that the three estates of the parlament are the king , the lords spiritual , and temporal . whereas the truth of that matter is this : a difference had happen'd in the house of lords , between the earl of rutland and lord fitz-walter ; whereupon the house of commons go up to the king and the lords , and having , it seems , an eloquent speaker , who ventured upon dangerous metaphors , he makes bold with the similitude of the trinity ; because that would help him to perswade them to vnity : but if he had left the king out , he might have been suspected to have set up an independent power in the three estates : therefore lest he should lose his similitude , ( which goes a great way with an eloquent man ) he strains another point , and draws the king into his trinity . and is such an expression to be mention'd in comparison with the express declaration but the year before , 1 h. iv. of both houses concerning the three estates in parlament ? next to this similitude , that of stephen gardiner ought to be mention'd ; who compared faith , hope , and charity , concurring to iustification , to the concurrence of the three estates in parlament , i.e. the king and two houses , to the making of laws . but i wonder the authour of the letter , who expresseth so much dislike of his divinity , would take his iudgment in politicks . but this notion of making the king one of the three estates , how valuable soever it be to some men , is , it seems , onely to be met with in some grave ancient similitudes . but of what authority these are , against the constant sense of parlaments so fully declared , i leave any man of understanding to judge . for the judgment of eminent lawyers , he quotes but one in king iames his time , viz. finch in his book of law , l. 2. ch . 1. who doth indeed , in the words quoted by him , make the king , lords and commons to be the three estates . but i can hardly imagine how a learned lawyer could fall into such a gross mistake , unless the modus tenendi parlamentum should give the occasion to it ; which was accounted no blind ms. in those days , but a very great treasure , as appears by sir e. coke , who cites it on all occasions . and very few lawyers had the judgment in antiquity which mr. selden had , who first discovered the just age and value of that ms. this authour indeed , towards the conclusion of his treatise , makes the king the first of the estates : but then he makes six estates in parlament , or degrees , as he calls them ; and delivers this for good doctrine at the very end of his treatise , that if any one of all these be summon'd , and do not appear , yet , with him , it is notwithstanding a full parlament : nay , he expresly saith , the king may hold a parlament without a house of lords . but there are so many other such positions discover'd by others in that treatise , that i need to say no more of it . and as to this point of the king 's being one of the estates in parlament , sir ed. coke , who otherwise too much admired that treatise , declares against it , in the very beginning of his treatise of the parlament . this court , saith he , consisteth of the king's majesty , sitting there as in his royal politick capacity ; and of the three estates of the realm ; viz. of the lords spiritual , archbishops and bishops , the lords temporal , and the commons of the realm . and however the authour of the letter may slight mr. selden's judgment in this matter ; yet these two may be sufficient to weigh down the scales against any one lawyer 's authority to the contrary ; especially , since they were never suspected , i dare say , for any partiality towards the clergy . ( 3. ) but the authour of the letter thinks to carry this point by meer strength of reason . we must therefore diligently consider the force of his arguments . 1. if bishops were one of the estates in parlament , reason would they should vote by themselves separately from other lords , which would make another estate : but they do not onely not vote apart by themselves , the whole body of them together ; but that body is divided and separated within it self , one part from another . if both houses ever sate together , as some imagine , ( and as they do in a neighbour kingdom , ) this way of reasoning will make but one estate in parlament all that time . but to give a clear answer to this objection ; i distinguish two things in the bishops , their spiritual capacity , by which they represent ; and their civil capacity as barons , in which they vote , according to the rules of the house . for , the manner of giving their votes is a thing under the regulation of the house , and depends upon custom ; but their spiritual capacity as bishops , in which they represent , doth not . and the reason of their sitting together with other lords , is upon the account of their writs of summons ; which , as mr. selden confesseth , ever since the latter end of edw. iii. hath been , for the bishops cum ceteris prelatis , magnatibus & proceribus , colloquium habere & tractatum : and therefore they are bound to sit together in the same place with the temporal lords , or else they cannot advise and confer together . and i leave the authour of the letter to consider , whether his reason , or the king 's writ , ought to take place . 2. if the bishops were a third estate , they must have a negative voice to all that passeth there : but the bishops are intermingled with the temporal lords in making up the majority , as a part of it . since i have evidently proved the clergy to be one of the three estates in parlament , if he be sure that every estate ought to have a negative voice , then i am sure that this objection lies more upon him to answer , then upon the bishops . but to prevent any new disputes , i shall return this answer to it . since it is agreed on both sides , that the bishops do sit in the house as temporal barons , and in that respect do make up the majority of votes in the house of lords ; it could not but seem unreasonable , that they who voted as barons in the house should have a negative voice in another capacity : and by this means they lost their distinct negative voice , because by the king's writs they were to sit and vote with the temporal lords . just as it is in the diets of germany : since the distribution of that assembly of the estates of the empire into the several chambers , the prelates vote according to their ranks : the three electors in the electoral college ; the other bishops , that are princes of the empire , in the chamber of princes ; and those who are not princes , with the counts and barons . so that here the votes of the bishops are mingled with the rest , without a distinct negative voice ; and yet no one questions but the bishops do represent a distinct estate of the empire . 3. this is a disparagement to the house of lords , that another estate must be joyned with them to make up their negative . no more , then to the princes of the empire , to have the bishops joyned with them , when the imperial cities vote by themselves . but what disparagement is this , for those to make up the majority of the votes of the baronage , who sit there as barons by tenure , by a right as ancient as will. the conquerour , by the authour 's own confession ? 4. if the bishops make a third estate , then a parlament could not be held without them : but a parlament hath sate excluso clero , as that of ed. i ; and that it may do so in point of law , appears by the resolution of the iudges in keilway's reports , because the bishops sit in parlament by reason of their baronies . this is the great objection , to which i shall give a full answer . [ 1. ] it is dangerous arguing from extraordinary cases to the excluding any one of the estates of the kingdom from being represented in parlament : because no one can tell where this way of arguing will stop . if a parlament may be good without one estate , why not without another ? and we have seen an house of lords excluded as unnecessary , upon such kind of arguments ; because they sit in their own persons , and represent none but themselves . if we once depart from the ancient and legal constitution of parlaments , there will be no end of alterations . every new modeller of government hath something to offer that looks like reason , at least to those whose interest it is to carry it on . and if no precedents can be found , then they appeal to a certain invisible thing called the fundamental contract of the nation : which being a thing no where to be found , may signify what any one pleaseth . suppose one extraordinary case happens through the disorder of times , that the clergy have been left out in a parlament ; what doth this signify towards altering the legal constitution and constant course of parlaments , which from the beginning of parlaments in this nation , have had the estate of the clergy represented in them ? as sufficiently appears by mr. petyt's learned preface to his late discourse of the ancient right of the commons . the first after king ethelbert's conversion was , commune concilium tam cleri quàm populi . that under ina was , omnium episcoporum , & principum , procerum comitum , & omnium sapientum seniorum & populorum totius regni . that under edmund the elder was , concilium magnum episcoporum , abbatum , fidelium procerum & populorum . i might adde many more : as that at becanceld under king withred a. d. 694. episcopis , &c. ducibus & satrapis in unum glomeratis . at clovesho under kenulphus of mercia ; at calecyth , at london , at kingston . nay , not one can be found by me in the saxon times , wherein the bishops are not expresly mention'd . so that if there be such a thing to be found as the fundamental contract of the nation about the constitution of parlaments , i do not question but they have their share in it . insomuch that sir h. spelman makes it his description of the wittena-gemot , that in it , as mr. petyt observes , convenêre regni principes , tam episcopi quàm magistratus , liberique homines ; i.e. it was an assembly of the three estates . so that before there were any such things as baronies , they were an essential part of the english parlament . and must all this clear and undoubted evidence from the first mention of parlaments be rejected , because once upon a time , a certain king called a certain parlament , wherein , upon some distast between the king and the clergy , the other estates continued sitting without them ? [ 2. ] this single instance about the parlament under ed. i. is much misunderstood , as will appear by these considerations . 1. that the clergy excluded themselves , and were not shut out by the act of the king and the other estates . for upon the bull of pope boniface viii . forbidding the clergy giving any more subsidies , ( which was procured by archbishop winchelsee , as our historians relate ) a parlament being called by ed. i. at saint edmondsbury on purpose for subsidies , the clergy refuse , upon the pope's prohibition , till they had consulted the court of rome ; and go away every one to their own homes : notwithstanding which , the king proceeds with the other two estates , and gets subsidies from the laiety . so that the exclusion of the clergy came from their own voluntary act ; when the king desired no such thing , nor the other two estates , but were all extremely provoked at this withdrawing of the clergy . that this parlament was called purposely for the subsidy , appears by the writ still upon record ; wherein the archbishop is summon'd to appear , ad ordinandum de quantitate & modo subsidii memorati . 2. whereas it is insinuated , that great matters were done , and good laws passed , when the clergy were excluded ; i find no such thing . it is true , the confirmation of magna charta by ed. i. ( which was a great thing indeed ) is said , in the statute-books , to be done the same year , viz. 25 ed. i. but that it could not be done in that parlament , i thus prove . that parlament was called crast . animarum ; the king appoints another at london crast . hilarii : where the difference still continuing , he appoints a new parlament on the day of s. peter ad vincula , or lammas-day , wherein he was reconciled to the archbishop and clergy . then fealty is sworn to his son , before his going into flanders ; and the king excused himself as to the great taxes and subsidies , on the account of his wars . while he was about winchelsea , a remonstrance is sent to him of the grievances of the nation , in the name of the archbishops , bishops , earls , barons , and the whole commons of england , wherein they complain of illegal taxes , and the breach of magna charta . the king gives a dilatory answer , and passes over into flanders . in his absence the people refuse to pay the taxes , and the lords combine together , and all things tend to an open rebellion . his son ed. ii. calls a parlament at london , and promises a confirmation of the charter , and that no taxes should hereafter be raised , either on clergy or laiety , without their consent . which being sent over , edw. i. confirmed it with his own seal : which was all done within the compass of this year . but he again ratified it in the parlament 27 ed. i. so that nothing was done in that parlament at s. edmondsbury , but granting a 12 th of the laiety to the king. and when the great laws were passed , the king and clergy were reconciled , and they sate in parlament . and the archbishop of canterbury fell into the king's displeasure afterwards , for being so active a promoter of them . the summe then of this mighty argument is , that the lords and commons once granted their own subsidies , without the concurrence of the clergy ; therefore the clergy are no essential part of the parlament . 3. the reason assigned in keilway's reports , why the king may hold a parlament without the bishops , is very insufficient : viz. because they have no place in parlament by reason of their spiritualty , but by reason of their temporal possessions . the insufficiency of which reason will appear by two things . 1. that it is not true : as appears by this , that the clergy are one of the estates of the kingdom ; and all the estates of the kingdom must be represented in parlament . 2. were it true , it is no good reason . for why may they be excluded because they sit on the account of their baronies ? where lies the force of this reason ? is it because there will be number enough without them ? that was the rump's argument against the secluded members . and i hope the authour of the letter will not justify their cause . or is it because they hold their baronies by tenure ? so did all the ancient barons of england : and why may the king hold his parlament with the other barons , without the bishops ; and not as well with the bishops , without the other barons ? which i do not see how it can be answer'd upon those grounds . suppose the question had been thus put , since all the ancient lords of parlament were barons by tenure , and parlaments were held for many ages without any barons by patent or by writ , why may not the king hold his parlament after the ancient way , onely with barons by tenure ? i do not see , but as good a reason may be given for this , as that in keilway's reports . all that i plead for is , that our good ancient and legal constitution of parlament may not be changed for the sake of any single precedents , and rare cases , and obscure reports built upon weak and insufficient reasons . for , as the authour of the letter very well saith , consuetudo parlamenti est lex parlamenti , the constant practice of parlaments ( and not one single instance ) is the law of parlaments . and suppose that precedent of 25 ed. i. as full as could be wished in this case ; yet i return the answer of the authour of the letter in a like case , this is but one single precedent , ( of a parlament without bishops , ) against multitudes wherein they were present : it was once so , and never but once . and can that be thought sufficient to alter and change the constant course and practice of parlaments , which hath been otherwise ? nothing now remains , but a severe reflexion on the popish bishops for opposing the statute of provisors , and the several good acts for the reformation . but what this makes against the votes of protestant bishops is hard to understand . if he thinks those could not make a good third estate in parlament , who took oaths to the pope contrary to their allegeance , and the interest of the nation , so do we . if he have a great zeal for the reformation , so have all true members of the church of england , who , we doubt not , will heartily maintain the cause of our church against the vsurpations of rome , though the heat of others should abate . for did not our protestant bishops seal the reformation with their bloud , and defend it by their admirable writings ? what champions hath the protestant religion ever had to be compared in all respects with our cranmer , ●idley , iewel , bilson , morton , hall , davenant , and many other bishops of the church of england ? and notwithstanding the hard fortune archbishop laud had in other respects , not to be well understood in the age he lived in ; yet his enemies cannot deny his book to be written with as much strength and judgment against the church of rome , as any other whatsoever . i shall conclude with saying , that the clergy of the church of england have done incomparably more service against popery , from the reformatition to this day , then all the other parties among us put together : and that the papists at this time wish for nothing more , then to see men , under a pretence of zeal against popery , to destroy our church ; and while they cry up magna charta , to invade the legal rights thereof , and thereby break the first chapter of it ; and from disputing the bishops presence in cases capital , to proceed to others ; and so by degrees to alter the ancient constitution of our parlaments , which will unavoidably bring anarchy and confusion upon us : from which , as well as popery , good lord , deliver us . the end . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61556-e360 letter p. 1. lett. p. 93. lett. p. 3. 118. lett. p. 66. p. 21. lett. p. 2 , 3. lett. p. 5. lett. p. 86. hincmar . epist . de ordine lalatii . concil . franc. c. 3. & 9. marculph . form. l. 1. c. 25. not. in marc. p. 287. concil . tolet . 4. c. 75. 5. c. 7. 6. c. 17. 8. in praef. 12. c. 1. 17. c. 1. 17. c. 1. cont l. tolet . 13. c. 2. rer. aleman . to. 2. cod. leg. antiq. b. 362. arumae . de comitiis ● . 35. c. 4. ● . 98. goldast . bohem . l. 5. c. 1. bonfin . dec . 2. l. 1. decret . ladiss . p. 12. starovolse . ●olon . p. 2●5 . herburt . stat. regni pol. p. 263. adam . brem . de situ dan. n. 85. loccen . antiq . s●eco . goth. c. 8. ius aulicum n●rveg . c. 3. c. 36. lett. p. 3 , 4. stat. merton c. 9. 20 h. 3. dissert . ad flet. c. 9. § 2. soz. hist. l. 1. c. 9. capitul . carol . & ludov . l. 6. c. 281. ed. lindenb . c. 366. ed. baluz . cod. just. de epise . audient . l. 1. tit . 4. c. 8. cod. theodos . l. 16. tit . 11. c. 1. greg. nyss . vit . greg. basil. in ep . socr. l. 7. c. 37. ambros. de offic. l. 2. c. 24. aug. ep . 147. in ps. 118. conc . 24. jac. goth. in cod ▪ theod. ad extrav . de episc. judicio . concil . sardic . c. 7. balsam . in can. 4. concil . chalced. auth. collat . 1. tit . 6. novell . 6. c. 2. justin. cod. l. 1. tit . 3. c. 41. cod. theod. l. 16. tit . 2. n. 38. lindwood l. 3. de testam . lett. p. 4. notes for div a61556-e4660 lett. p. 68. lett. p. 69. lett. p. 71 , 72. lett. p. 61. lett. p. 73. matt. paris ad a. d. 1070. pet. bles. de institut . episc . p. 451. malmsbur . hist. novell . p. 100. b. rad. de diceto imag. histor . p. 509. 528. gul. neuburg . l. 2. c. 16. bar. ad a. d. 1164. n. 3. fitz-stephen vit . th. beck . m s. spelm. concil . to. 2. p. 8 , 9 , 11. p. 73. pag. 61. baronius ad ann. 1164. pet. bles. de instit. episc. p. 454. lett. p. 60. pag. 62. vol. epistol . becket in bibl. cotton . ms. l. 1. ep . 65. ep. 52. gervas . chronic . p. 1391. fitz-stephen vit. th. becket . de concilio apud clarendon . lett. p. 63. pag. 79. pag. 61. titles of honour , p. 2. c. 5. n. 20. pag. 14. pag. 18. lett. p. 73. ● . 19 ▪ &c. rot. parl. 11 r. 2. n. 9. lett. p. 21 , 22. const. othob . c. nè clerici . spelman . conc. to. 2. p. 183. p. 451. lyndwood ad tit . de loc. & cond . c. vendentes . si quis clericus . decretal . l. 3. tit . 50. c. 5. rot. parlam . 11 r. 2. p. 1. n. 26. knighton p. 2701. a discourse of the peerage and jurisdiction of the lords spiritual , p. 26. discourse of the peerage , &c. p. 20. lett. p. 30. p. 79. lett. p. 8● . pag. 115. pag. 19. p 20. p. 21. pag. 23. sum. l. 1. de constit. n 18. pag. 24. man●al . c. 27. covarruv . ad clem. fi surios . p. 2. § 5. n. 6. camden . annal. a. d. 1586. vid. lyndwood in constit . othob . c. nè clerici . v. in eisdem . notes for div a61556-e18790 lett. p. 57. pag. 59. lett. p. 110. lett. p. 21. lett. p. 55. claus. 15 ed. 2. n. 23 , 24. & dors . 13. 32. plea for the lords , p. 193. discourse of the bishops peerage , pag. 20. rot. 64. 21 r. 2. pag. 79. pag. 115. pag. 115. kot . 55 , 56. 21 r. 2. r. 2. 21. pag. 115. lett. p. 6. pag. 8 , 9. pag. 10. pag. 13. pag. 16. pag. 37. pag. 51. jurisdiction of the house of peers asserted , p. 91. lett. pag. 11. p. 12. pag. 14. pag. 18. lett. p. 10. pag. 17. knighton de event . p. 2684. lett. pag. 6. cestrens . l. 7. c. 44. knighton , p. 2558. pag. 15. pag. 3. 118. pag. 15 ▪ rights of the bishops , p. 56 , 57 , &c. lett. p. 24. lett. p. 8. pag. 24. lett. p. 23. selden's bar. pag. 6. rights of the bishops , pag. 76. lett. p. 28. pag. 78. pag. 79. lett. p. 79. lett. p. 31. pag. 41. to pag. 48. pag. 32. pag. 34. pag. 37. pag. 39. pag. 5. 51. pag. 6. rot. parl. 4 ed. 3. n. 3. pag. 7. pag. 7. walsingh ▪ hist. angl. pag. 366. notes for div a61556-e31000 lett. pag. 85. antiq. brit. pag. 223. pag. 192. coke 2. inst. c. 29. p. 50. sir j. m. arg. concerning the iurisdiction of the peers , in skinners case . pag. 193. pag. 47. pag. 3 , 4 , &c. pag. 4. pag. 5. 2 instit. p. 48. coke 2 instit . p. 49. selden's titles of honour , 4to . pag. 347. de morib . germ. c. 12. h. mei●om . de i●mensulâ . ● . 4. otto frising . de gestis fred. l. 1. c. 31. leg. longobard . l. 3. tit . 8. § 4. constit. sicil . l. 1. tit . 44. alfred . vit . l. 2. p. 72. aimoin . l. 4. c. 1. rhegin . l. 2. capit. l. 3. c. 77. sigism . orat. a. d. 1434. tilius de rebus gal●icis . fulbert . ep . 96. claus. 15 e. ● . m. 12. selden of baron . p. 152. titles of hon. 4 to . p. 347. pag. 6. privil . of baronage , pag. 143. titles of honour , sec. part. ch . 5. § 32. in marg. pag. 153. 3. instit. pag. 30. godwin . vit . rich. scroop archiep . eborac . pag. 7. walsingh . pag. 119. pag. 7. 14. antiq. cantuar . in walt. raynolds pag. 215. ed. han. 2. instit. ● . 633 , &c. camden . brit. pag. 123. glossar . v. pares . walsingh . ad a. d. 1296. mat. westm. a. 1295. pag. 93. titles of honour , p. 2. ch . 5. n. 17. 23. ib. n. 22. titles of honour , p. 595. 4 instit. p. 4. eadmer . l. pag. 67. matt. paris pag. 55. pag. 143. pag. 86. the ancient right of the commons , pag. 61. fabian . 7. par . r. 2. s●l . 158. abridgment of records , pa. 710. 714. pag. 86. bacon h. 7. pag. 144. hist. angl. pag. 404. pag. 88. pag. 98. basilic . dor. l. 2. p. 159. of his works . pag. 100. pag. 101. pag. 103. pag. 86. pag. 89. pag. 89. pag. 90. pag. 91. pag. 7 , &c. concil . brit. p. 182. 189. 318. 327. 336. 340. 344. 428. 534. claus. 24 ed. 1. m. 7. dorso . walsingh . pag. 18. thorn. ad a. 1296. knighton , p. 2491. matt. west . pag. 428. pag. 92. pag. 68. pag. 49. pag. 96. the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared as to scripture, reason, and tradition. the first part in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist : wherein an answer is given to the late proofs of the antiquity of transubstantiation in the books called consensus veterum and nubes testium, &c. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1688 approx. 200 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 49 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61550 wing s5589 estc r14246 13589094 ocm 13589094 100628 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61550) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100628) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 851:31) the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared as to scripture, reason, and tradition. the first part in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist : wherein an answer is given to the late proofs of the antiquity of transubstantiation in the books called consensus veterum and nubes testium, &c. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. the second edition. 48, [1] p. printed for w. rogers ..., london : 1688. written by edward stillingfleet. cf. wing. advertisement on p. [1] at end. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng gother, john, d. 1704. -nubes testium. sclater, edward, 1623-1699? -consensus veterum. transubstantiation -early works to 1800. trinity -early works to 1800. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 jonathan blaney sampled and proofread 2004-04 jonathan blaney text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared , as to scripture , reason , and tradition . in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist . the first part . wherein an answer is given to the late proofs of the antiquity of transubstantiation , in the books called consensus veterum , and nubes testium , &c. the second edition . imprimatur . ex aedib . lambeth . jan. 17. 1686. guil. needham rr. in christo pat. ac d. d. wilhelmo archiep. cant. à sacris . london , printed for w. rogers at the sun over against st. dunstan's church in fleet-street . m dc lxxx viii . the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared , as to scripture , reason , and tradition . in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist . pr. i remember your last words at parting were , farewel ; and god give his holy spirit to instruct you . which have run much in my mind : for if the holy spirit instruct us , what need is there of an infallible church ? i hope those were not only words of course with you . pa. no ; but i meant that the holy spirit should instruct you about the authority of the church . pr. was this indeed your meaning ? then you would have me believe the church infallible , because the holy spirit which is infallible will instruct me about it , if i seek his directions . p. yes . pr. but then i have no reason to believe it ; for the holy spirit after my seeking his instructions , teaches me otherwise . and if the holy spirit is infallible which way soever it teaches , then i am infallibly sure there is no such thing as infallibility in what you call the catholick church . p. come , come ; you make too much of a sudden expression at parting ; i pray let us return to our main business , which is to shew , that there is the same ground from scripture , reason , and tradition , to believe transubstantiation , as there is to believe the trinity . and this i affirm again , after reading the answers to the former dialogue ; and i now come somewhat better prepared to make it out . pr. so you had need . and i hope i shall be able not only to defend the contrary , but to make it evident to you , that there is a mighty difference in these two doctrines , as to scripture , reason , and tradition . but i pray keep close to the point : for i hate impertinent trifling in a debate of such consequence . p. i must confess , i over-shot my self a little in the former dialogue , when i offer'd to prove the doctrine of the trinity unreasonable and absurd : for no church can make such a doctrine , which is unreasonable and absurd in it self , not to be so to me ; no church can make three and one to be the same , if they be repugnant in themselves . but my meaning was , that mens disputes about these things will never be ended , till they submit to the authority of the church . pr. and then they may believe three , or three hundred persons in the trinity , as the church pleases . is that your meaning ? p. no. but i said to my carnal reason it would appear so ; but not to my reason as under the conduct of an infallible guide . pr. then an infallible guide can make three hundred to be but three ; which is a notable trick of infallibility . p. no ; i tell you i meant only that we are not to follow carnal reason , but the church's authority , i. e. we are not to search into mysteries above reason , but only believe what the church delivers . and i intend now to argue the point somewhat closely with you . do you believe that there are any mysteries in the christian doctrine above reason , or not ? if not , you must reject the trinity ; if you do , then you have no ground for rejecting transubstantiation , because it is above reason . pr. you clearly mistake us ; and i perceive were very little acquainted with our doctrine : for we do not reject any doctrine concerning god , meerly because it is above our reason , when it is otherwise clearly proved from scripture . for then we own our selves bound to submit in matters of divine revelation concerning an infinite being , though they be above our capacity to comprehend them . but in matters of a finite nature , which are far more easie for us to conceive , and which depend upon the evidence of sense , we may justly reject any doctrine which overthrows that evidence , and is not barely above our reason , but repugnant to it . p. i do not well understand you . pr. so i believe ; but i will endeavour to help your understanding a little . and i pray consider these things : 1. that there is a great difference in our conceptions of finite and infinite beings . for , whatsoever is infinite , is thereby owned to be above our comprehension , otherwise it would not be infinite . the attributes of god which are essential to him , as his wisdom , goodness and power , must be understood by us , so far as to form a true notion of that being which is infinite ; but then the infinity of these attributes is above our reach . and so his infinite duration , which we call eternity ; his infinite presence which we call his immensity ; the infinite extent of his knowledg , as to future contingencies ; all these must be confessed to be mysteries , not above our reason , but above our capacity . for we have great reason to own them , but we have not faculties to comprehend them . we cannot believe a god , unless we hold him to be infinite in all perfections : and if he be infinite , he must be incomprehensible ; so that religion must be overthrown , if something incomprehensible be not allowed . and as to finite beings , so far as they run into what we call infinite , they are so far out of our reach ; as appears by the insuperable difficulties about the infinite divisibility of quantity . 2. that we have certain notions of some things in the visible world ; both that they are , and that they have some attributes essential to them . we daily converse with things visible and corporeal ; and if we do not conceive something true and certain in our minds about them , we live in a dream and have only phantasms and illusions about us . if we are certain that there are real bodies , and not meer appearances , there must be some certain way of conveying such impressions to our minds , from whence they may conclude , this is a horse , and this a man , and this is flesh , and this blood , and this is wood , and this stone ; otherwise all certainty is gone , and we must turn meer scepticks . 3. that in examining the sense of scripture we may make use of those certain notions of visible things which god and nature have planted in us ; otherwise we are not dealt with as reasonable creatures . and therefore we must use those faculties god hath given us , in reading and comparing scriptures , and examining the sense that is offered by such notions which are agreeable to the nature of things . as for instance , the scripture frequently attributes eyes and ears and hands to the almighty : must we presently believe god to have an human shape because of this ? no ; we compare these with the necessary attributes of god , and from thence see a necessity of interpreting these expressions in a sense agreeable to the divine nature . so if other expressions of scripture seem to affirm that of a body which is inconsistent with the nature of it ; as , that it is not visible , or may be in many places at once , there is some reason for me to understand them in a sense agreeable to the essential properties of a body . 4. there is a difference between our not apprehending the manner how a thing is , and the apprehending the impossibility of the thing it self . and this is the meaning of the distinction of things above our reason , and contrary to our reason . if the question be , how the same individual nature can be communicated to three distinct persons ? we may justly answer , we cannot apprehend the manner of it , no more than we can the divine immensity , or an infinite amplitude without extension . but if any go about to prove there is an impossibility in the thing , he must prove that the divine nature can communicate it self no otherwise than a finite individual nature can : for all acknowledg the same common nature may be communicated to three persons , and so the whole controversie rests on this single point as to reason ; whether the divine nature and persons are to be judged and measured as human nature and persons are . and in this , i think we have the advantage in point of reason of the anti-trinitarians themselves , although they pretend never so much to it . p. good night , sir ; i perceive you are in for an hour ; and i have not so much time to spare , to hear such long preachments . for my part , talk of sense and reason as long as you will , i am for the catholick church . pr. and truly , she is mightily obliged to you for oppoposing her authority to sense and reason . p. call it what you will , i am for the churches authority ; and the talk of sense and reason is but canting without that . pr. the matter is then come to a fine pass ; i thought canting had rather been that which was spoken against sense or reason . but i pray , sir , what say you to what i have been discoursing ? p. to tell you truth , i did not mind it ; for as soon as i heard whither you were going , i clapt fast hold of the church , as a man would do of a mast in a storm , and resolved not to let go my hold . pr. what! altho you should sink together with it . p. if i do , the church must answer for it ; for i must sink or swim with it . pr. what comfort will that be to you , when you are called to an account for your self ? but if you stick here , it is to no purpose to talk any more with you . p. i think so too . but now we are in , methinks we should not give over thus ; especially since i began this dialogue about the trinity and transubstantiation . pr. if you do , we know the reason of it . but i am resolved to push this matter now as far as it will go ; and either to convince you of your mistake , or at least to make you give it over wholly . p. but if i must go on in my parallel , i will proceed in my own way . i mentioned three things , scripture , reason , and tradition . and i will begin with tradition . pr. this is somewhat an uncouth method ; but i must be content to follow your conduct . p. no , sir , the method is very natural ; for in mysteries above reason , the safest way is to trust tradition . and none can give so good account of that as the church . pr. take your own way : but i perceive tradition with you is the sense of the present church ; which is as hard to conceive , as that a nunc stans should be an eternal succession . p. as to comparing tradition , i say , that the mystery of the trinity was questioned in the very infancy of the church , and the arians prevail'd much against it in the beginning of the fourth age ; but transubstantiation lay unquestion'd and quiet for a long time ; and when it came into debate , there was no such opposition as that of arius , to call in question the authority of its tradition ; the church received it unanimously , and in that sense continued till rash reason attempted to fathom the unlimited miracles and mysteries of god. pr. i stand amazed at the boldness of this assertion : but i find your present writers are very little vers'd in antiquity ; which makes them offer things concerning the ancient church , especially as to transubstantiation , which those who had been modest and learned , would have been ashamed of . p. i hope i may make use of them to justify my self , tho you slight them , i mean the consensus veterum , the nubes testium , and the single sheet about transubstantiation . pr. take them all , and as many more as you please , i am sure you can never prove transubstantiation to have been , and the trinity not to have been the constant belief of the primitive church . p. let me manage my own argument first . pr. all the reason in the world. p. my argument is , that the doctrine of the trinity met with far more opposition than transubstantiation did . pr. good reason for it , because it was never heard of then . you may as well say , the tradition of the circulation of the blood lay very quiet , from the days of hippocrates to the time of parisanus . who was there that opposed things before they were thought of ? p. that is your great mistake ; for transubstantiation was very well known , but they did not happen to speak so much of it , because it was not opposed . pr. but how is it possible for you to know it was so well known , if they spake not of it ? p. i did not say , they did not speak of it , but not so much , or not half so express ; because it is not customary for men to argue unquestionable truths . pr. but still how shall it be known that the church received this doctrine unanimously , if they do not speak expresly of it ? but since you offer at no proof of your assertion , i will make a fair offer to you , and undertake to prove , that the fathers spake expresly against it . p. how is that ? expresly against it ? god forbid . pr. make of it what you please , and answer what you can : i begin with my proofs . p. nay , then , we are in for all night . i am now full of business , and cannot hearken to tedious proofs out of the fathers , which have been canvassed a hundred times . pr. i will be as short as i can ; and i promise you not to transcribe any that have hitherto written , nor to urge you with any spurious writer , or lame citation at second or third hand ; and i shall produce nothing but what i have read , considered , and weighed in the authors themselves . p. since it must be so ; let me hear your doubty arguments , which i cannot as well turn against the trinity ; for that is my point . pr. i leave you to try your skill upon them . the first shall be from the proofs of the truth of christ's incarnation ; and i hope this will not hold against the trinity . and those arguments which they brought to prove christ incarnate , do overthrow transubstantiation effectually . so that either we must make the fathers to reason very ill against hereticks ; or , if their arguments be good , it was impossible they should believe transubstantiation . for can you suppose that any can believe it , who should not barely assert , but make the force of an argument to lie in this , that the substance of the bread doth not remain after consecration ? and this i now prove , not from any slight inconsiderable authors , but from some of the greatest men in the church in their time . i begin with st. chrysostom , whose epistle to coesarius is at last brought to light by a learned person of the roman communion ; who makes no question of the sincerity of it , and faith , the latin translation which only he could find entire , was about five hundred years old ; but he hath so confirm'd it by the greek fragments of it , quoted by ancient greek authors , that there can be no suspicion left concerning it . p. what means all this ado before you come to the point ? pr. because this epistle hath been formerly so confidently denied to be st. chrysostom's ; and such care was lately taken to suppress it . p. but what will you do with it now you have it ? pr. i will tell you presently . this epistle was written by him for the satisfaction of caesarius a monk , who was in danger of being seduced by the apollinarists . p. what have we to do with the apollinarists ? do you think all hard words are akin , and so the affinity rises between apollinarists and transubstantiation ? pr. you shall find it comes nearer the matter than you imagined . for those hereticks denied the truth of the human nature of christ after the union , and said that the properties of it did then belong to the divine nature ; as appears by that very epistle . p. and what of all this ? do we deny the truth of christ's human nature ? pr. no ; but i pray observe the force of his parallel . he is proving that each nature in christ contains its properties ; for , saith he , as before consecration we call it bread , but after it by divine grace sanctifying it through the prayer of the priest , it is no longer called bread , but the body of our lord , altho the nature of bread remains in it ; and it doth not become two bodies , but one body of christ ; so here the divine nature being joyned to the human , they both make one son , and one person . p. and what do you infer from hence ? pr. nothing more , but that the nature of bread doth as certainly remain after consecration , as the nature of christ doth after the union . p. hold a little . for the author of the single sheet , saith , that the fathers by nature and substance do often mean no more than the natural qualities , or visible appearances of things . and why may not st. chrysostom mean so here ? pr. i say , it is impossible he should . for all the dispute was about the substance , and not about the qualities , as appears by that very epistle ; for those hereticks granted , that christ had all the properties of a body left still ; they do not deny that christ could suffer , but they said , the properties of a body after the union belonged to the divine nature , the human nature being swallowed up by the union . and therefore st. chrysostom , by nature , must understand substance , and not qualities ; or else he doth by no means prove that which he aimed at . so that st. chrysostom doth manifestly assert the substance of the bread to remain after consecration . p. but doth not st. chrysostom suppose then , that upon consecration , the bread is united to the divinity , as the human nature is to the divine ; else what parallel could he make ? pr. i will deal freely with you by declaring , that not st. chrysostom only , but many others of the fathers , did own the bread after consecration to be made the real body of christ ; but not in your sense , by changing the substance of the elements into that body of christ which is in heaven ; but by a mystical union , caused by the holy spirit , whereby the bread becomes the body of christ , as that was which was conceived in the womb of the blessed virgin. but this is quite another thing from transubstantiation ; and the church of england owns , that after consecration , the bread and wine are the body and blood of christ. p. but altho this be not transubstantiation , it may be something as hard to believe or understand . pr. by no means . for all the difficulties relating to the taking away the substance of the bread , and the properties of christ's body , are removed by this hypothesis . p. let us then keep to our point : but methinks this is but a slender appearance yet ; st. chrysostom stands alone for all that i see . pr. have but a little patience , and you shall see more of his mind presently . but i must first tell you , that the eutychians afterwards were condemned in the council of chalcedon for following this doctrine of apollinaris ; and that council defines , that the differences of the two natures in christ were not destroyed by the union ; but that their properties were preserved distinct and concur to one person . and against these , the other fathers disputed just as st. chrysostom had done before against the apollinarists . theodoret brings the same instance , and he affirms expresly , that the nature of the elements is not changed , that they do not lose their proper nature , but remain in their former substance , figure and form , and may be seen and touched as before . still this is not to prove any accidental qualities , but the very substance of christ's body to remain . p. but was not theodoret a man of suspected faith in ●he church ? and therefore no great matter can be made of his testimony . pr. yield it then to us ; and see if we do not clear theodoret ; but your own learned men never question him , as to this matter ( at least ) and the ancient church hath vindicated his reputation . and he saith no more than st. chrysostom before him , and others of great esteem ●fter him . p. who were they ? pr. what say you to a pope , whom you account head of the church ? pope gelasius writing against the same hereticks , produces the same example ; and he expresly saith , the substance of the bread and wine doth not cease . p. i thought i should find you tripping . here you put a fob-head of the church upon us . for the author of the single sheet saith , this was another gelasius , as is prov'd at large by bellarmin . pr. in truth , i am ashamed of the ignorance of such small authors , who will be medling with things they understand not . for this writer , since bellarmin's time , hath been evidently proved from testimonies of antiquity , such as fulgentius and john the second , to have been pope gelasius , and that by some of the most learned persons of the roman communion , such as cardinal du perron , petavius , sirmondus , and others . p. have you any more that talk at this rate ? pr. yes . what think you of a patriarch of antioch , who useth the same similitude for the same purpose ; and he affirms , that the sensible substance still continues in the eucharist , tho it hath divine grace joyned with it ? and i pray , now tell me seriously , did the tradition of transubstantiation lie unquestion'd and quiet all this while ? when we have three patriarchs , of constantinople , rome , and antioch , expresly against it ; and one of them owned by your selves , to be head of the church ; and held by many to be infallible , especially when he teaches the church ; which he doth , if ever , when he declares against hereticks . p. i know not what to say , unless by nature and substance they meant qualities and properties . pr. i have evidently proved that could not be their meaning . p. but i am told monsieur arnaud in his elaborate defence against claude goes that way , and he saith , the eutychians and apollinarists did not absolutely deny any substance to remain in christ's body , but not so as to be endued with such properties as ours have . pr. i grant this is the main of his defence ; but i confess , monsieur arnaud hath not so much authority with me , as a general council which declared the contrary ; viz. that the eutychians were condemned for not holding two substances or natures in christ after the union . and domnus antiochenus , who first laid open the eutychian heresie , saith , it lay in making a mixture and confusion of both natures in christ , and so making the divinity passible ; and to the same purpose others . there were some who charged both apollinaris and eutyches with holding , that christ brought his body from heaven , and that it was not con-substantial with ours ; but apollinaris himself , in the fragments preserved by leontius , not only denies it , but pronounces an anathema against those that hold it . and vitalis of antioch , a great disciple of his , in discourse with epiphanius , utterly denied a coelestial body in christ. vincentius lerinensis saith , his heresie lay in denying two distinct substances in christ. st. augustin saith , he held but one substance after the union ; so that he must deny any substance of a body to remain after the union , which he asserted to be wholly swallowed up , and the properties to continue : which was another kind of transubstantiation ; for no more of the substance of christ's body was supposed to remain after the union , than there is supposed to be in the elements after consecration . but in both cases the properties and qualities were the same still . and it is observable , that in the acts of the council of chalcedon , eutyches rejected it , as a calumny cast upon him , that he should hold that christ brought a body from heaven . but the eutychian doctrine lay in taking away the substance of the body , and making the divinity the sole substance , but with the accidents and properties of the body . and for this they produced the words of saint john , the word was made flesh ; which they urged with the same confidence that you now do , this is my body . and when they were urged with difficulties , they made the very same recourse to god's omnipotency , and the letter of scripture , and made the same declamations against the use of reason that you do ; and withal , they would not have the human nature to be annihilated , but to be changed into the divine ; just as your authors do about the substance of the bread. so that it is hard to imagin a more exact parallel to transubstantiation than there is in this doctrine ; and consequently there can be no more evident proof of it , than the fathers making use of the instance of the eucharist , to shew , tha● as the substance of bread doth remain after consecration ; so the substance of christ's body doth continue after the union . and when the fathers from the remaining properties do prove the substance to remain , they overthrow the possibility of transubstantiation . for , if they might be without the substance , their whole argument loses its force , and proves just nothing . p. but all this proves nothing as to the faith of the church ; being only arguments used by divines in the heat of disputes . pr. do you then in earnest give up the fathers as disputants to us ; but retain them as believers to your selves ? but how should we know their faith but by their works ? p. i perceive you have a mind to be pleasant ; but my meaning was , that in disputes men may easily over-shoot themselves , and use ineffectual arguments . pr. but is it possible to suppose they should draw arguments from something against the faith of the church . as for instance ; suppose now we are disputing about tran substantiation , you should bring an argument from the human nature of christ , and say , that as in the hypostatical union the substance is changed , and nothing but the accidents remain ; so it is in the elements upon consecration . do you think i should not presently deny your example , and say , your very supposition is heretical ? so no doubt would the eutychians have done in case the faith of the church had then been , that the substance of the elements was changed after consecration . and the eutychians were the most sottish disputants in the world , if they had not brought the doctrine of transubstantiation to prove their heresy . p. methink you are very long upon this argument ; when shall we have done at this rate ? pr. i take this for your best answer ; and so i proceed to a second argument , which i am sure will not hold against the trinity ; and that is from the natural and unseparable properties of christ's body ; which are utterly inconsistent with the belief of transubstantiation . and the force of the argument in general lies in this , that the fathers did attribute such things to the body of christ , which render it uncapable of being present in such a manner in the sacrament as transubstantiation supposes . and no men who understand themselves , will assert that at one time , which they must be bound to deny at another ; but they will be sure to make an exception or limitation , which may reconcile both together . as if you should say , that the body of christ cannot be in more places than one at once , upon the doctrine of st. thomas ; ye would presently add , with regard to the sacrament , i. e. not in regard of its natural presence , but in a sacramental it may : so , if the fathers had an opinion like yours as to the body of christ , they would have a reserve , or exception , as to the sacrament . but it appears by their writings , that they attribute such properties in general to the body of christ , as overthrow any such presence , without exceptions or limitations . but that is not all : for i shall now prove , 1. that they do attribute circumscription to christ's body in heaven , so as to exclude the possibility of its being upon earth . 2. that they deny any such thing , as the supernatural existence of a body after the manner of a spirit . p. what do you mean ? i am quite tired already ; and now you are turning up the other glass . pr. since you will be dabling in these controversies , you must not think to escape so easily . i have been not a little offended at the insolence of some late pamphlets upon this argument ; and now i come to close reasoning , you would fain be gone . p. i am in a little haste at present ; i pray come quickly to the point . pr. as soon as you please . what think you , if a man now should bring an argument to prove a matter of faith from hence , that christ's body could not be in heaven and earth at once , would this argument hold good ? yet thus vigilius tapsitanus argues against those who denied two natures in christ ; for , saith he , the body of christ when it was on earth , was not in heaven ; and now it is in heaven , it is not upon earth ; and it is so far from being so , that we expect him to come from heaven in his flesh , whom we believe to be now present on earth by his divinity . how can this hold , if the body of christ can be in heaven and earth at the same time ? p. he speaks this of the natural presence of christ's body , and not of the sacramental . pr. the argument is not drawn from the manner of the presence , but from the nature of a body , that it could not be in heaven and earth at the same time . and so st. augustin said , that christ was every where present as god ; but confined to a certain place in heaven according to the measure of his true body . p. this is only to disprove the ubiquity of christ's body ; and not his being in several places at the same time . pr. then you yield it to be repugnant to the nature of a body to be every where present . p. yes . pr. but what if there be as great a repugnancy from st. augustin's argument , for a body to be present in several places at once ? p. i see no such thing . pr. no ? his argument is from the confinement of a true body to a certain place . and if it be in many places at once , it is as far from being confined , as if it took up all places . and there are some greater difficulties as to a body's being distant from it self , than in asserting its ubiquity . p. i perceive you are inclined to be a lutheran . pr. no such matter . for i think the essential properties of a finite and infinite being are incommunicable to each other , and i look on ubiquity as one of them . p. then the same argument will not hold as to presence in several places , for this is no infinite perfection . pr. you run from one argument to another . for these are two distinct ways of arguing ; and the argument from the repugnancy of it to the nature of a body , doth as well hold against ubiquity , as that it is a divine perfection . and st. augustin in that excellent epistle doth argue from the essential properties and dimensions of bodies , and the difference of the presence of a spirit , and a body . i pray read and consider that epistle , and you will think it impossible st. augustin should believe transubstantiation . p. st. augustin was a great disputant , and such are wont while they are eager upon one point , to forget another . but st. augustin elsewhere doth assert the presence of christ's real body in the sacrament . pr. then the plain consequence is , that he contradicted himself . p. but he doth not speak of a sacramental presence . pr. what again ? but st. augustin makes this an essential difference between a divine and corporal presence ; that the one doth not fill places by its dimensions as the other doth ; so that bodies cannot be in distant places at once . what think you of this ? p. i pray go on . pr. what think you of the manichees doctrine , who held that christ was in the sun and moon when he suffered on the cross ? was this possible or not ? p. what would you draw from hence ? pr. nothing more , but that st. augustin disproved it , because his body could not be at the same time in the sun and moon , and upon earth ? p. as to the ordinary course of nature , st. augustin's argument holds , but not as to the miraculous power of god. pr. there is a difference between the ordinary course of nature , and the unchangeable order of nature . p. let me hear this again ; for it is new doctrine to us . pr. that 's strange ! those things are by the ordinary course of nature , which cannot be changed but by divine power ; but imply no repugnancy for god to alter that course ; but those are by the unchangeable order of nature , which cannot be done without overthrowing the very nature of the things ; and such things are impossible in themselves , and therefore god himself cannot do them . p. it seems then you set bounds to god's omnipotency . pr. doth not the scripture say , there are some things impossible for god to do ? p. yes ; such as are repugnant to his own perfections ; as it is impossible for god to lye . pr. but are there no other things impossible to be done ? what think you of making the time past not to be past ? p. that is impossible in it self . pr. but is it not impossible for the same body to be in two different times ? p. yes . pr. why not then in two or more different places ; since a body is as certainly confined , as to place , as it is to time ? p. you are run now into the point of reason , when we were upon st. augustin's testimony . pr. but i say , st. augustin went upon this ground , that it was repugnant to the nature of a body to be in more places than one at the same time . and so likewise cassian proves , that when christ was upon earth he could not be in heaven , but in regard of his divinity . is there not the same repugnancy for a body in heaven to be upon earth , as for a body upon earth to be in heaven ? p. these are new questions , which i have not met with in our writers , and therefore i shall take time to answer them . but all these testimonies proceed upon a body considered under the nature of a body ; but in the sacrament we consider christ's body as present after the manner of a spirit . pr. that was the next thing i promised to prove from the fathers , that they knew of no such thing , and therefore could not believe your doctrine . have you observed what the fathers say about the difference of body and spirit ? p. not i ; but i have read our authors , who produce them for our doctrine . pr. that is the perpetual fault of your writers , to attend more to the sound of their words , than to the force of their reasonings . they bring places out of popular discourses intended to heighten the peoples devotion , and never compare them with those principles which they assert , when they come to reasoning ; which would plainly shew their other expressions are to be understood in a mystical and figurative sense . but i pray tell me , do you think the fathers had no distinct notion of a body and spirit , and the essential properties of both ? p. yes doubtless . pr. suppose then they made those to lye in such things as are inconsistent with the presence of christ's body in the sacrament after the manner of a spirit ; do you think then they could hold it to be so present ? and if they did not , they could not believe transubstantiation . p. very true . pr. what think you then of st. augustin , who makes it impossible for a body to be without its dimensions and extension of parts ? but you assert a body may be without them ; or else it cannot be after the manner of a spirit , as you say it is in the sacrament . p. i pray shew that st. augustin made it inconsistent with the nature of a body to be otherwise . pr. he saith , that all bodies how gross or subtle soever they be , can never be all every where ( i. e. cannot be indivisibly present after the manner of a spirit ) but must be extended according to their several parts , and whether great or little , must take up a space , and so fill the place , that it cannot be all in any one part. is this possible to be reconciled with your notion of a body being present after the manner of a spirit ? p. to be present after the manner of a spirit , is with us , to be so present , as not to be extended , and to be whole in every part . pr. but this st. augustin saith , no body can be ; and not only there , but elsewhere he saith , take away dimensions from bodies , and they are no longer bodies . and that a greater part takes up a greater space , and a lesser a less ; and must be always less in the part than in the whole . p. but he speaks of extension in it self , and not with respect to place . pr. that is of extension that is not extended ; for if it be , it must have respect to place ; but nothing can be plainer , than that st. augustin doth speak with respect to place . and he elsewhere saith , that every body must have place , and be extended in it . p. but he doth not speak this of the sacrament . pr. but he speaks it of all bodies wheresoever present ; and he doth not except the sacrament , which he would certainly have done , if he had believed as you do concerning it . p. st. augustin might have particular opinions in this , as he had in other things . pr. so far from it , that i shall make it appear , that this was the general sense of the fathers . st. gregory nazianzen saith , that the nature of bodies requires , that they have figure and shape , and may be touched , and seen , and circumscribed . st. cyril of alexandria saith , that if god himself were a body , he must be liable to the properties of bodies , and he must be in a place , as bodies are . and all those fathers , who prove , that god cannot be a body , do it from such arguments as shew , that they knew nothing of a bodies being after the manner of a spirit : for then the force of their arguments is lost , which are taken from the essential properties of a body , such as extension , divisibility , and circumscription . but if a body may be without these , then god may be a body after the manner of a spirit ; and so the spirituality of the divine nature will be taken away . p. i never heard these arguments before , and must take some time to consider . pr. the sooner the better ; and i am sure if you do , you will repent being a new convert . but i have yet something to add to this argument ; viz. that those who have stated the difference between body and spirit , have made extension , and taking up a place , and divisibility , necessary to the very being of a body ; and that what is not circumscribed , is incorporeal . p. methinks your arguments run out to a great length . i pray bring them into a less compass . pr. i proceed to a third argument from the fathers , which will not take up much time ; and that is , that the fathers knew nothing of the subsistence of accidents without their substance , without which transubstantiation cannot be maintained : and therefore in the roman schools , the possibility of accidents subsisting without their subjects , is defended . but on the contrary , maximus , one of the eldest of the fathers , who lived in the second century , affirms it to be of the essence of accidents to be in their substance . st. basil saith , nature doth not bear a distinction between body and figure , altho reason makes one . isidore p●lusiota , saith , that quality cannot be without substance . gregory nyssen , that figure cannot be without body , and that a body cannot be conceived without qualities : and that if we take away colour , and quantity , and resistance , the whole notion of a body is destroy'd . take away space from bodies , saith st. augustin , and they can be no where ; and if they can be no where , they cannot be : and so he saith , if we take away bodies from their qualities . and in plain terms , that no qualities , as colours , or form , can remain without their subject . and that no accidents can be without their subject , is in general affirmed by isidore hispalensis , boethius , damascen , and others , who give an account of the philosophy of the ancients . p. all this proceeds upon the old philosophy of accidents : what if there be none at all ? pr. what then makes the same impression on our senses when the substance is gone , as when it was there ? is there a perpetual miracle to deceive our senses ? but it is impossible to maintain transubstantiation , as it is defined in the church of rome , without accidents : they may hold some other doctrine in the place of it , but they cannot hold that . and that other doctrine will be as impossible to be understood . for if once we suppose the body of christ to be in the sacrament , in place of the substance of the bread , which appears to our senses to be bread still : then suppose there be no accidents , the body of a man must make the same impression on our senses , which the substance of bread doth , which is so horrible an absurdity , that the philosophy of accidents cannot imply any greater than it . so that the new transubstantiators had as good return to the old mumpsimus of accidents . p. i suppose you have now done with this argument . pr. no : i have something farther to say about it , which is , that the fathers do not only assert , that accidents cannot be without their subject , but they confute hereticks on that supposition ; which shew'd their assurance of the truth of it . irenoeus overthrows the valentinian conjugations , because truth can no more be without a subject , than water without moisture , or fire without heat , or a stone without hardness ; which are so joined together , that they cannot be separated . methodius confutes origen's fancy about the soul having the shape of a body without the substance , because the shape and the body cannot be separated from each other . st. augustin proves the immortality of the soul from hence , because meer accidents can never be separated from the body , so as the mind is by abstraction . and in another place he asserts it to be a monstrous absurd doctrine , to suppose that , whose nature is to be in a subject , to be capable of subsisting without it . claudianus mamertus proves , that the soul could not be in the body as its subject ; for then it could not subsist when the body is destroy'd . p. i hope you have now done with this third argument . pr. yes ; and i shall wait your own time for an answer . i go on to a fourth : and that is from the evidence of sense asserted and allowed by the fathers , with respect to the body of christ. p. i expected this before now . for , as the author of the single sheet observes : this is the cock-argument of one of the lights of your church ; and it so far resembles the light , that like it , it makes a glaring shew , but go to grasp it , and you find nothing in your hand . pr. then it 's plain our senses are deceived . p. not as to transubstantiation : for he believes more of his senses than we do : for his eyes tell him there is the colour of bread , and he assents to them ; his tongue , that it has the taste of bread , and he agrees to it : and so for his smelling and feeling : but then he hath a notable fetch in his conclusion : viz. that his ears tell him from the words spoken by christ himself , that it is the body of christ , and he believes these too . is not here one sense more than you believe ? and yet you would persuade the world , that we do not believe our senses . pr. this is admirable stuff ; but it must be tenderly dealt with . for i pray what doth he mean when he saith , he believes from christ's own words , that it is the body of christ ? what is this it ? is it the accidents he speaks of before ? are those accidents then the body of christ ? is it the substance of bread ? but that is not discerned by the senses , he saith : and if it were , will he say , that the substance of bread is the body of christ ? if neither of these , then his believing it is the body of christ , signifies nothing ; for there can be no sense of it . p. however , he shews , that we who believe transubstantiation , do not renounce our senses , as you commonly reproach us : for we believe all that our senses represent to us , which is only the outward appearance . for , as he well observes , if your eyes see the substance of things , they are most extraordinary ones , and better than ours . for our parts , we see no farther than the colour or figure , &c. of things which are only accidents , and the entire object of that sense . pr. is there no difference between the perception of sense , and the evidence of sense ? we grant , that the perception of our senses goes no farther than to the outward accidents ; but that perception affords such an evidence by which the mind doth pass judgment upon the thing represented by the outward sense . i pray tell me , have you any certainty there is such a thing as a material substance in the world ? p. yes . pr. whence comes the certainty of the substance , since your senses cannot discover it ? do we live among nothing but accidents ? or can we know nothing beyond them ? p. i grant we may know in general that there are such things as substances in the world. pr. but can we not know the difference of one substance from another , by our senses ? as for instance , can we not know a man from a horse , or an elephant from a mouse , or a piece of bread from a church ? or do we only know . there are such and such accidents belong to every one of these ; but our senses are not so extraprdinary to discover the substances under them ? i pray answer me one question , did you ever keep lent ? p. what a strange question is this ? did you not tell me , you would avoid impertinencies ? pr. this is none , i assure you . p. then i answer , i think my self obliged to keep it . pr. then you thought your self bound to abstain from flesh , and to eat fish. p. what of all that ? pr. was it the substance of flesh you abstained from , or only the accidents of it ? p. the substance ? pr. and did you know the difference between the substance of flesh and fish by your tast ? p. yes . pr. then you have an extraordinary tast , which goes to the very substance ? p. but this is off from our business , which was about the fathers , and not our own judgment about the evidence of sense . pr. i am ready for you upon that argument . and i only desire to know whether you think the evidence of sense sufficient , as to the true body of christ , where it is supposed to be present ? p. by no means ; for then we could not believe it to be present , where we cannot perceive it . pr. but the fathers did assert the evidence of sense to be sufficient , as to the true body of christ ; so irenoeus , tertullian , epiphanius , hilary , and st. augustin . i will produce their words at length , if you desire them . p. it will be but lost labour , since we deny not , as cardinal bellarmin well saith , the evidence of sense to be a good positive evidence , but not a negative , i. e. that it is a body , which is handled , and felt , and seen ; but not , that it is no body which is not . pr. very well ! and i pray then what becomes of your single sheet man , who so confidently denies sense to be good positive evidence as to a real body ; but only as to the outward appearance ? p. you mistake him ; for he saith , we are to believe our senses , where they are not indisposed , and no divine revelation intervenes , which we believe there doth in this case ; and therefore , unless the fathers speak of the sacrament , we have no reason to regard their testimonies in this matter . but we have stronger evidence against you from the fathers , for they say we are not to rely on the evidence of sense , as to the sacrament . so st. cyril , st. chrysostom , and st. ambrose . pr. i am glad you offer any thing which deserves to be considered . but have you already forgot bellarmin's rule , that sense may be a good positive evidence , but not a negative , i. e. it may discover what is present as a body , but not what is not , and cannot be so present , viz. the invisible grace which goes along with it ; and as to this the fathers might well say , we are not to trust our sense . p. this is making an interpretation for them . pr. no such matter . it is the proper and genuine sense of their words ; as will appear from hence . ( 1. ) they assert the very same , as to the chrism and baptism , which they do as to the eucharist . ( 2. ) that which they say , our senses cannot reach , is something of a spiritual nature , and not a body . and here the case is extremely different from the judgment of sense , as to a material substance . and if you please , i will evidently prove from the fathers , that that wherein they excluded the judgment of sense in the eucharist , was something wholly spiritual and immaterial . p. no , no , we have been long enough upon the fathers , unless their evidence were more certain one way or other . for my part , i believe on the account of divine revelation in this matter , this is my body ; here i stick , and the fathers agreed with us herein , that christ's words are not to be taken in a figurative sense . pr. the contrary hath been so plainly proved in a late excellent discourse of transubstantiation , that i wonder none of your party have yet undertaken to answer it ; but they write on , as if no such treatise had appear'd : i shall therefore wave all the proofs that are there produced , till some tolerable answer be given to them . p. methinks you have taken a great liberty of talking about the fathers , as tho they were all on your side ; but our late authors assure us to the contrary ; and i hope i may now make use of them , to shew that transubstantiation was the faith of the ancient church . pr. with all my heart , i even long to hear what they can say in a matter , i think , so clear on our side . p. well , sir , i begin with the consensus veterum , written by one that professed himself a minister of the church of england . pr. make what you can of him , now you have him ; but i will meddle with no personal things , i desire to hear his arguments . p. what say you to r. selomo , interpreting the 72. psal. v. 16. of wafers in the days of the messias ; to r. moses haddarsan , on gen. 39. 1. and on psal. 136. 25 , to r. cahana , on gen. 49. 1. who was long before the nativity of christ ; r. johai , on numb . 28. 2. and to r. judas , who was many years before christ came . pr. can you hold your countenance when you repeat these things ? but any thing must pass from a new convert . what think you of r. cahana , and r. judas , who lived so long before our saviour , when we know that the jews have no writings preserved near to our saviour's time , besides the bible , and some say the paraphrasts upon it . i would have been glad to have seen these testimonies taken from their original authors , and not from galatinus , who is known to have been a notorious plagiary , as to the main of his book , and of little or no credit as to the rest . but it is ridieulous to produce the testimonies of jewish rabbins for transubstantiation , when it is so well known that it is one of their greatest objections against christianity , as taught in the roman church , as may be seen in joseph albo , and others . but what is all this to the testimony of the christian fathers ? p. will not you let a man shew a little jewish learning upon occasion ? but if you have a mind to the fathers , you shall have enough of them ; for i have a large catalogue of them to produce , from the consensus veterum , nubes testium , and the single sheet , which generally agree . pr. with coccius or bellarmin , you mean ; but before you produce them , i pray tell me what you intend to prove by them ? p. the doctrine of our church . pr. as to what ? p. what have we been about all this while ? pr. transubstantiation . will you prove that ? p. why do you suspect me before i begin ? pr. i have some reason for it . let us first agree what we mean by it . do you mean the same which the church of rome doth by it , in the council of trent ? p. what can we mean else ? pr. let us first see what that is . the council of trent declares , that the same body of christ , which is in heaven , is really , truly and substantially present in the eucharist after consecration , under the species of bread and wine . and the roman catechism saith , it is the very body which was born of the virgin , and sits at the right hand of god. ( 2. ) that the bread and wine after consecration , lose their proper substances , and are changed into that very substance of the body of christ. and an anathema is denounced against those who affirm the contrary . now if you please , proceed to your proofs . p. i begin with the ancient liturgies of st. peter , st. james , and st. matthew . pr. are you in earnest ? p. why ; what is the matter ? pr. do not you know , that these are rejected as supposititious , by your own writers ? and a very late and learned dr. of the sorbon , hath given full and clear evidences of it . p. suppose they are , yet they may be of antiquity enough , to give some competent testimony as to tradition . pr. no such matter : for he proves st. peter 's liturgy , to be later than the sacramentary of st. gregory ; and so can prove nothing for the first 600 years ; and the aethiopick liturgy , or st. matthew's , he shews to be very late . that of st. james , he thinks to have been some time before the five general councils ; but by no means to have been st. james's . p. what think you of the acts of st. andrew , and what he saith therein , about eating the flesh of christ ? pr. i think he saith nothing to the purpose . but i am ashamed to find one , who hath so long been a minister in this church , so extreamly ignorant , as to bring these for good authorities , which are rejected with scorn by all men of learning and ingenuity among you . p. i am afraid you grow angry . pr. i confess , ignorance and confidence together , are very provoking things ; especially , when a man in years pretends to leave our church on such pitiful grounds . p. but he doth produce better authorities . pr. if he doth , they are not to his purpose . p. that must be tried ; what say you to ignatius ? i hope you allow his epistles ? pr. i see no reason to the contrary . but what saith he ? p. he saith , that some hereticks then would not receive the eucharist and oblations , because they will not confess the eucharist to be the flesh of our saviour christ. and this is produced by both authors . pr. the persons ignatius speaks of , were such as denied christ to have any true body , and therefore did forbear the eucharist , because it was said to be his body . and in what ever sense it were taken , it still supposed that which they denied , viz. that he had a true body : for , if it were figuratively understood , it was as contrary to their doctrine , as if it were literally . for a figure must relate to a real body , as tertullian argued in this case . and ignatius in the same epistle , mentions the trial christ made of his true body , by the senses of his disciples , take hold of me , and handle me , and see , for i am no incorporeal doemon ; and immediately they touched him , and were convinced . which happen'd but a few days after christ had said , this is my body ; and our saviour gave a rule for judging a true body , from an appearance , or spiritual substance ; a spirit hath not flesh and bones , as ye see me have . therefore it is very improbable that ignatius so soon after , should assert that christ's true and real body was in the eucharist , where it could be neither seen nor felt : for then he must overthrow the force of his former argument . and to what purpose did christ say , that a spirit had not flesh and bones , as they saw him to have ; if a body of christ might be so much after the manner of a spirit , as tho it had flesh and bones , yet they could not possibly be discerned ? but after all , suppose ignatius doth speak of the substance of christ's flesh , as present in the eucharist ; yet he saith not a word of the changing of the substance of the bread into the substance of christ's body ; which was the thing to be proved . p. but justin martyr doth speak of the change , and his words are produced by all three . and they are thus rendred in the single sheet . for we do not receive this as common bread , or common drink , but as by the word of god , jesus christ our redeemer being made man , had both flesh and blood for our salvation ; so also , we are taught that this food , by which our blood and flesh are by a change nourished , being consecrated by the power of the word , is the flesh and blood of jesus christ incarnate : what say you to this ? pr. i desire you to consider these things . ( 1. ) that justin martyr doth not say , that the bread and wine are by consecration changed into the individual flesh and blood , in which christ was incarnate ; but that , as by the power of the word , christ once had a body in the womb of the virgin ; so by the power of the same word , upon consecration , the bread and wine do become the flesh and blood of christ incarnate ; so that he must mean a parallel , and not the same individual body , i. e. that as the body in the womb became the body of christ by the power of the holy spirit ; so the holy spirit after consecration , makes the elements to become the flesh and blood of christ , not by an hypostatical union , but by divine influence , as the church is the body of christ. and this was the true notion of the ancient church , as to this matter , and the expressions in the greek liturgies to this day confirm the same . ( 2. ) he doth not in the least imply that the elements by this change do lose their substance ; for he mentions the nourishment of our bodies by it ; but he affirms , that notwithstanding their substance remain , yet the divine spirit of christ , by its operation , doth make them become his body . for we must observe , that he attributes the body in the womb , and on the altar , to the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or divine word . for he did not think hypostatical union necessary , to make the elements become the body of christ , but a divine energy was sufficient , as the bodies assumed by angels are their bodies , tho there be no such vital union , as there is between the soul and body of a man. p. i go on to irenoeus , from whom two places are produced , one by the consensus veterum , where he saith , that which is bread from the earth , perceiving the call of god , now is not common bread , but the eucharist , consisting of two things , one earthly , and the other spiritual . pr. very well ! then there is an earthly , as well as a spiritual thing in the eucharist , i. e. a bodily substance , and divine grace . p. no ; he saith , the earthly is the accidents . pr. doth irenoeus say so ? p. no ; but he means so . pr. there is not a word to that purpose in irenoeus ; and therefore this is downright prevarication . i grant irenoeus doth suppose a change made by divine grace ; but not by destroying the elements , but by super-adding divine grace to them ; and so the bread becomes the body of christ , and the wine his blood. p. the other place in irenoeus is , where he saith , that as the bread receiving the word of god , is made the eucharist , which is the body and blood of christ , so also our bodies being nourished by it , and laid in the earth , and there dissolved , will arise at their time , &c. pr. what do you prove from this place ? p. that the same divine power is seen in making the eucharist the body and blood of christ , which is to be in the resurrection of the body . pr. but doth this prove , that the substance of the bread is changed into the substance of christ's body ? p. why not ? pr. i will give you a plain argument against it ; for he saith , our bodies are nourished by the body and blood of christ. do you think that irenoeus believed the substance of christ's body was turned into the substance of our bodies , in order to their nourishment ? no ; he explained himself just before in the same place ; de calice qui est sanguis ejus , nutritur ; & de pane qui est corpus ejus ; augetur : so that he attributes the nourishment to the bread and wine ; and therefore must suppose the substance of them to remain , since it is impossible a substantial nourishment should be made by meer accidents . and withal , observe , he saith expresly , that the bread is the body of christ ; which your best writers ( such as bellarmin , suarez and vasquez ) say , is inconsistent with transubstantiation . p. my next author is tertullian , who is produced by the consensus veterum , and the single sheet , but omitted by the nubes testium ; but the other proves , that bread which was the figure of christ's body in the old testament , now in the new , is changed into the real and true body of christ. pr. this is a bold attempt upon tertullian , to prove , that by the figure of christ's body , he means his true and real body . for his words are , acceptum panem & distributum discipulis corpus illum suum fecit , hoc est corpus meum dicendo , id est , figura corporis mei . he took the bread , and gave it to his disciples , and made it his body , saying , this is my body ; i. e. this is the figure of my body . how can those men want proofs , that can draw transubstantiation from these words , which are so plain against it ? p. you are mistaken ; tertullian by figure meant , it was a figure in the old testament , but it was now his real body . pr. you put very odd figures upon tertullian : i appeal to any reasonable man , whether by the latter words he doth not explain the former ? for he puts the sense upon corpus meum , by adding dicendo to them ; i. e. this is the meaning of that speech , when he calleth the bread his body . p. doth not tertullian say , that it had not been the figure , unless it had been the truth ? pr. this is again perverting his words , which are , figuratum non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus ; i. e. there had been no place for a figure of christ's body , unless christ had a true body . for he was proving against marcion , that christ had a true body ; and among other arguments he produces this from the figure of his body , which he not only mentions here , but in other places ; where he saith , that christ gave the figure of his body to the bread ; which cannot relate to any figure of the old testament . p. but doth not tertullian say afterwards , that the bread was the figure of christ's body in the old testament ? pr. what then ? he had two designs against marcion ; one to prove , that christ had a true body , which he doth here from the figure of his body : and the other , that there was a correspondency of both testaments : and for that purpose he shews , that the bread in jeremiah , was the figure of christ's body . p. but the author of the single sheet , cites another place of tertullian , where he saith , that our flesh feeds on the body and blood of christ , that our soul may be filled with god. pr. by the body and blood of christ , he means there , the elements , with divine grace going along with them ; as appears by his design , which is , to shew how the body and soul are joyned together in sacramental rites . the flesh is washed , and the soul is cleansed ; the flesh is anointed , and the soul consecrated ; the flesh is signed , and the soul confirmed ; the flesh hath hands laid upon it , and the soul enlighten'd ; the flesh feeds on the body and blood of christ , that the soul may be filled with god. now unless tertullian meant the elements , the parallel doth not proceed ; for all the rest are spoken of the external symbols ; and so this doth not at all contradict what he saith elsewhere , no more than the passage in the second book aduxorem doth . for there he speaks of christ , with respect to the invisible grace , as he doth here , as to the outward symbols . p. clemens alexandrinus saith , that melchisedeck gave bread and wine in figure of the eucharist . pr. and what then ? what is this to transubstantiation ? p. origen saith , when you eat and drink the body and blood of our lord , then our lord enters under your roof , &c. pr. are you sure that origen said this ? but suppose he did , must he enter with his flesh and bones , and not much rather by a peculiar presence of his grace ? for is it not origen who so carefully distinguishes the typical and symbolical body of christ , from the divine word , and so expresly mentions the material part of the elements after consecration , which pass into the draught , &c. is all this meant of the accidents only ? p. what say you to st. cyprian de coena domini ? pr. i beg your pardon , sir ; this is now known and acknowledged to be a late author , in comparison , and cannot come within your 600 years ; and therefore is not ancient enough to be considered . p. but in his genuine writings he speaks of those who offer'd violence to the body and blood of our lord in the eucharist . pr. and i pray what follows ? that the substance of the elements is gone : where lies the consequence ? but st. cyprian saith , the bread was his body , and the wine his blood ; therefore their substance must remain . p. what say you to eusebius emesenus ? pr. that he is not within our compass ; and withal , that he is a known counterfeit . p. i perceive you are hard to please . pr. you say very true , as to supposititious writers . p. i hope you have more reverence for the council of nice . pr. but where doth that speak of transubstantiation ? p. it calls the eucharist the body of christ. pr. and so doth the church of england ; therefore that holds transubstantiation . i pray bring no more such testimonies , which prove nothing but what we hold . p. i perceive you have a mind to cut me short . pr. not in the least , where you offer any thing to the purpose . but i pray spare those who only affirm , that the eucharist is the body and blood of christ after consecration . for i acknowledg it was the language of the church , especially in the fourth century , when the names of the elements were hardly mention'd to the catechumens ; and all the discourses of the fathers to them , tended to heighten the devotion and esteem of the eucharist . by which observation you may easily understand the meaning of the eloquent writers of that age , who speak with so much mystery and obscurity about it . if you have any that go beyond lofty expressions , and rhetorical flights , i pray produce them . p. i perceive you are afraid of s. greg. nazianzen , and s. basil , but especially s. chrysostom , you fence so much beforehand against eloquent men. pr. as to the other two , there is nothing material alledged by any to this purpose ; but s. chrysostom , i confess , doth speak very lofty things concerning the sacrament in his popular discourses , but yet nothing that doth prove transubstantiation . p. what think you of his homilies , 51 and 83. on s. mat. 46. homily on s. john 24. homily on 1st to the corinth . the homilies on philogonius and the cross ? are there not strange things in them concerning the eucharist ? about eating christ , and seeing him lie before them slain on the altar ; about touching his body there , and the holy spirit , with an innumerable host , hovering over what is there proposed , with much more to that purpose . pr. you need not to recite more ; for i yield that st. chrysostom delighted in the highest flights of his eloquence , on this subject , in his homilies ; and he tells for what reason , to excite the reverence and devotion of the people . but yet himself doth afford us a sufficient key to these expressions , if we attend to these things concerning his manner of speaking : ( 1. ) that he affirms those things which no side can allow to be literally understood . as when he so often speaks of our seeing and touching christ upon the altar , which is inconsistent with the doctrine of transubstantiation : for christ is utterly invisible on the altar , even by divine power , saith suarez . he is invisible in the sacrament . saith bellarmin ; and he saith also , that he cannot be touched . what then is to be said to such expressions of s. chrysostom ? behold thou seest him , thou touchest him , thou eatest him . it is not his sacrament only which is offer'd us to touch , but himself . what if you do not hear his voice , do you not see him lying before you ? behold christ lying before you slain . christ lies on the holy table , as a sacrifice slain for us . thou swearest upon the holy table where christ lies slain . when thou seest our lord lying on the table , and the priest praying and the by-standers purpled with his blood. see the love of christ ; he doth not only suffer himself to be seen by those who desire it , but to be touched and eaten , and our teeth to be fixed in his flesh. now these expressions are on all sides granted to be literally absurd and impossible ; and therefore we must say of him as bonaventure once said of s. augustin , plus dicit sanctus & minus vult intelligi ; we must make great allowance for such expressions , or you must hold a capernaitical sense . and it is denied by your selves , that christ is actually slain upon the altar ; and therefore you yield , that such expressions are to be figuratively understood . ( 2. ) that he le ts fall many things in such discourses which do give light to the rest : as , ( 1. ) that flesh is improperly taken when applied to the eucharist . ( 2. ) he calls the sacrament the mystical body and blood of christ. ( 3. ) that the eating of christ's flesh is not to be understood literally , but spiritually . ( 4. ) he opposes christ's sacramental presence , and real corporal presence to each other . ( 5. ) he still exhorts the communicants to look upwards towards heaven . and now if you lay these things together , this eloquent father will not , with all his flights , come near to transubstantiation . p. no! in one place he asserts the substance of the elements to be lost . pr. thanks to the latin translators , for the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the criticks observe , doth not signify to destroy , but to refine , and purify a substance . but i do not rely upon this ; for the plain answer is , that s. chrysostom doth not there speak of the elements upon consecration , but what becomes of them , after they are taken down into the stomach . st. chrysostom thought it would lessen the peoples reverence and devotion , if they passed into the draught , as origen affirmed ; and therefore he started another opinion ; viz. that as wax , when it is melted in the fire , throws off no superfluities , but it passes indiscernably away ; so the elements , or mysteries , as he calls them , pass imperceptibly into the substance of the body , and so are consumed together with it . therefore , saith he , approach with reverence , not supposing that you receive the divine body from a man , but as with tongs of fire from the seraphims : which the author of the consensus veterum translates , but fire from the tongues of seraphims . s. chrysostom's words are , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and the sense is , that the divine body ( i. e. the eucharist , after consecration , being by the divine spirit made the divine body , as in st. chrysostom's liturgy , there is a particular prayer for the holy ghost to come , and so make the bread to be the divine body , or the holy body of christ ) , is to be taken , not with our mouths , which can only receive the elements , but after a divine manner , as with tongs of fire from seraphims ; by which he expresses the spiritual acts of faith and devotion , as most agreeable to that divine spirit which makes the elements to become the holy body of christ. but that st. chrysostom did truly and firmly believe the substance of the bread to remain after consecration , i have already proved from his epistle to coesarius . p. i pray let us not go backward , having so much ground to run over still . pr. i am content , if you will produce only those who speak of the change of substance , and not such as only mention the body and blood of christ after consecration , which i have already told you , was the language of the church ; and therefore all those testimonies are of no force in this matter . p. then i must quit the greatest part of what remains , as optatus , gaudentius , s. jerom , and others ; but i have some still left which will set you hard . what say you then to gregory nyssen , who saith , the sanctified bread is changed into the body of the word of god. and he takes off your answer of a mystical body ; for he puts the question , how the same body can daily be distributed to the faithful throughout the world , it remaining whole and entire in it self ? pr. gregory nyssen was a man of fancy , and he shewed it in that catechetical discourse : however , fronto ducoeus thought it a notable place to prove transubstantiation , which i wonder at , if he attended to the design of it ; which was to shew , that as our bodies , by eating , became subject to corruption , so by eating they become capable of immortality ; and this he saith , must be by receiving an immortal body into our b dies , such as the body of christ was : but then , saith he , how could that body , which is to remain whole in it self , be distributed to all the faithful over the whole earth ? he answers , by saying , that our bodies do consist of bread and wine , which are their proper nourishment ; and christ's body being like ours , that was so too ; which by the uni●n with the word of god , was changed into a divine dignity . but what is this to the eucharist , you may say ? he goes on therefore , so i believe the sanctified bread , by the power of the word of god , to be changed into the body of god the word . not into that individual body , but after the same manner , by a presence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or god the word in it ; and that this was his meaning , doth evidently appear by what follows . for , saith he , that body , viz. to which , he was incarnate , was sanctified by the inhabitation of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , dwelling in the flesh ; therefore , as the bread was then changed into a divine dignity in the body , so it is now ; and the bread is changed into the body of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( not of jesus christ ) as it was said by the word , this is my body . and so by receiving this divine body into our bodies , they are made capable of immortality . and this is the true account of gregory nyssen's meaning , which if it prove any thing , proves an impanation , rather than transubstantiation . p. but hilary's testimony cannot be so avoided ; who saith , that we as truly eat christ's flesh in the sacrament , as he was truly incarnate ; and that we are to judg of this ; not by carnal reason , but by the words of christ , who said , my flesh is meat indeed , and my blood is drink indeed . pr. i do not deny this to be hilary's sense . but yet this proves nothing like to transubstantiation . for it amounts to no more than a real presence of the body of christ in the sacrament ; and you can make no argument from hence , unless you can prove that the body of christ cannot be present , unless the substance of the bread be destroy'd , which is more than can be done , or than hilary imagined . all that he aimed at , was to prove a real union between christ and his people , that christ was in them more than by meer consent ; and to prove this , he lays hold of those words of our saviour , my flesh is meat indeed , &c. but the substantial change of the bread into the substance of christ's body , signifies nothing to his purpose ; and bellarmin never so much as mentions hilary in his proofs of transubstantiation , but only for the real presence . but i must add something more , viz. that hilary was one of the first who drew any argument from the literal sense of john 6. i do not say , who did by way of accommodation , apply them to the sacrament , which others might do before him . but yet , there are some of the eldest fathers , who do wholly exclude a literal sense , as tertullian look'd on it , as an absurdity that christ should be thought truly to give his flesh to eat . quasi vere carnem suam illis edendam determinasset . and origen saith , it is a killing letter , if those words be literally understood . but this is to run into another debate , whereas our business is about transubstantiation . if you have any more , let us now examine their testimonies . p. what say you then to st. ambrose , who speaks home to the business , for he makes the change to be above nature , and into the body of christ , born of the virgin ? there are long citations out of him , but in these words lies the whole strength of them . pr. i answer , several things for clearing of his meaning . ( 1. ) that st. ambrose doth parallel the change in the eucharist , with that in baptism ; and to prove regeneration therein , he argues from the miraculous conception of christ in the womb of the virgin ; but in baptism no body supposes the substance of the water to be taken away ; and therefore it cannot hold as to the other , from the supernatural change ; which may be only with respect to such a divine influence , which it had not before consecration . ( 2. ) he doth purposely talk obscurely and mystically about this matter , as the fathers were wont to do to those , who were to be admitted to these mysteries . sometimes one would think he meant that the elements are changed into christ's individual body born of the virgin : and yet presently after , he distinguishes between the true flesh of christ , which was crucified and buried , and the sacrament of his flesh. if this were the same , what need any distinction ? and that this sacramentum carnis , is meant of the eucharist , is plain by what follows ; for he cites christ's words , this is my body . ( 3. ) he best explains his own meaning , when he saith , not long after , that the body of christ in the sacrament , is a spiritual body , or a body produced by the divine spirit ; and so he parallels it with that spiritual food , which the israelites did eat in the wilderness : and no man will say , that the substance of the manna was then lost . and since your authors make the same st. ambrose , to have written the book de sacramentis , there is a notable passage therein , which helps to explain this ; for there he saith expresly , non iste panis est qui vadit in corpus , sed ille panis vitoe eternoe qui animoe nostroe substantiam fulcit . it is not the bread which passes into the body , but the bread of eternal life , which strengthens the substance of our soul. where he not only calls it bread after consecration , which goes to our nourishment ; but he distinguishes it from the bread of eternal life , which supports the soul , which must be understood of divine grace , and not of any bodily substance . p. i perceive you will not leave us one father of the whole number . pr. not one . and i hope this gives an incomparable advantage to the doctrine of the trinity in point of tradition , above transubstantiation : when i have not only proved , that the greatest of the fathers expresly denied it , but that there is not one in the whole number who affirmed it . for altho there were some difference in the way of explaining how the eucharist was the body and blood of christ ; yet not one of them hitherto produced , doth give any countenance to your doctrine of transubstantiation , which the council of trent declared to have been the constant belief of the church in all ages ; which is so far from being true , that there is as little ground to believe that , as transubstantiation it self . and so much as to this debate , concerning the comparing the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation , in point of tradition ; if you have any thing to say further , as to scripture and reason , i shall be ready to give you satisfaction the next opportunity . finis . books lately printed for w. rogers . the doctrines and practices of the church of rome , truly represented ; in answer to a book , intituled , a papist misrepresented , and represented , &c. quarto . third edition . an answer to a discourse , intituled , papists protesting against protestant popery ; being a vindication of papists not misrepresented by protestants 4to . second edition . an answer to the amicable accommodation of the differences between the representer and the answerer . quarto . a view of the whole controversie , between the representer and the answerer ; with an answer to the representer's last reply . 4to . the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared as to scripture , reason , and tradition ; in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist , the first part ; wherein an answer is given to the late proofs of the antiquity of transubstantiation , in the books called , consensus veterum , and nubes testium , &c. quarto . the doctrine of the trinity , and transubstantiation , compared as to scripture , reason , and tradition , in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist , the second part ; wherein the doctrine of the trinity is shewed to be agreeable to scripture and reason , and transubstantiation repugnant to both . quarto . a discourse concerning the nature of idolatry ; in which the bishop of oxford's true and only notion of idolatry is considered and confuted . 4to . the absolute impossibility of transubstantiation demonstrated . 4to . a letter to the superiours , ( whether bishops or priests ) which approve or license the popish books in england , particularly to those of the jesuits order , concerning lewis sabran a jesuit . a preservative against popery ; being some plain directions to unlearned protestants , how to dispute with romish priests . the first part. the fourth edition . the second part of the preservative against popery ; shewing how contrary popery is to the true ends of the christian religion . fitted for the instruction of unlearned protestants . the second edition . a vindication of both parts of the preservative against popery ; in answer to the cavils of lewis sabran , jesuit . a discourse concerning the nature , unity aed communion of the catholick church ; wherein most of the controversies relating to the church , are briefly and plainly stated . the first part. 4to . these four last by william sherlock , d. d. master of the temple . imprimatur , guil. needham rr. in christo p. ac d. d. wilhelmo archiep. cant. a sac. dom. ex aedib . lambeth , feb. 4. 1686. the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared , as to scripture , reason , and tradition , in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist . the second part . wherein the doctrine of the trinity is shewed to be agreeable to scripture and reason , and transubstantiation repugnant to both . london : printed for william rogers at the sun in fleet-street , over against st. dunstan's church . mdc lxxx vii . the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared , &c. pr. i hope you are now at leisure to proceed with your parallel between the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation , as to scripture and reason . p. yes , and am resolved to make good all that i have said , as to both those . pr. and if you do , i will yield the cause . p. i begin with scripture . and the whole dispute as to both , depends on this : whether the scripture is to be understood literally or figuratively . if literally , then transubstantiation stands upon equal terms with the trinity ; if figuratively , then the trinity can no more be proved from scripture , than transubstantiation . pr. as tho there might not be reason for a figurative sense in one place , and a literal in another . p. it seems then , you resolve it into reason . pr. and i pray , into what would you resolve it ? into no reason ? p. into the authority of the church . pr. without any reason ? p. no : there may be reason for that authority , but not for the thing which i believe upon it . pr. then you believe the doctrine of the trinity , meerly , because the church tells you it is the literal sense of scripture which you are to follow . but suppose a man sees no reason for this authority of your church ; ( as for my part , i do not ) have you no reason to convince such a one that he ought to believe the trinity ? p. not i. for i think men are bound to believe as the church teaches them , and for that reason . pr. what is it , i pray , to believe ? p. to believe , is to give our assent to what god reveals . pr. and hath god revealed the doctrine of the trinity to the church in this age ? p. no ; it was revealed long ago . pr. how doth it appear ? p. by the scripture sensed by the church . pr. but whence come you to know that the church is to give the sense of the scriptures ? is it from the scripture , or not ? p. from the scripture doubtless , or else we could not believe upon the churches testimony . pr. but suppose the question be , about the sense of these places which relate to the churches authority , how can a man come to the certain sense of them ? p. hold a little , i see whither you are leading me ; you would sain draw me into a snare , and have me say , i believe the sense of scripture from the authority of the church , and the authority of the church from the sense of scripture . pr. do you not say so in plain terms ? p. give me leave to answer for my self . i say in the case of the churches authority , i believe the sense of scripture without relying on the churches authority . pr. and why not as well in any other ? why not as to the trinity , which to my understanding , is much plainer there , than the churches authority ? p. that is strange : is not the church often spoken of in scripture ? tell the church . upon this rock will i build my church , &c. pr. but we are not about the word church , which is no doubt there , but the infallible authority of the church ; and whether that be more clear in the scripture than the doctrine of the trinity . p. i see you have a mind to change your discourse , and to run off from the trinity to the churches authority in matters of faith ; which is a beaten subject . pr. your church doth not tell you so ; and therefore you may upon your own grounds be deceived ; and i assure you that you are so ; for i intended only to shew you , that for points of faith we must examine and compare scripture our selves , and our faith must rest on divine revelation therein contained . p. then you think the trinity can be proved from scripture ? pr. or else i should never believe it . p. but those places of scripture you go upon , may bear a figurative sense , as john 10. 30. i and my father are one ; and 1 john 5. 7. and those three are one ; and if they do so , you can never prove the trinity from them . pr. i say therefore , that the doctrine of the trinity doth not depend merely on these places , but on very many others , which help to the true sense of these ; but transu●stantiation depends upon one single expression , this is my body , which relates to a figurative thing in the sacrament ; and which hath other expressions joined with it , which are owned to be figurative ; this cup is the new testament in my blood ; and which in the literal sense cannot prove transubstantiation , as your own writers confess , and which is disproved by those places of scripture , which assert the bread and the fruit of the vine to remain after consecration . p. shew the literal sense as to the trinity to be necessary ; for i perceive you would fain go off again . pr. will you promise to hold close to the argument your self ? p. you need not fear me . pr. i pray tell me , were there not false religions in the world when christ came into it to plant the true religion ? p. yes ; but how far is this from the business ? pr. have a little patience ; did not christ design by his doctrine to root out those false religions ? p. that is evident from scripture and church history . pr. then christs religion and theirs were inconsistent . p. and what then ? pr. wherein did this inconsistency lie ? p. the gentiles worshipped false gods instead of the true one. pr. then the christian religion teaches the worship of the true god instead of the false ones . p. who doubts of that ? pr. then it cannot teach the worship of a false god instead of the true one. p. a false god is one that is set up in opposition to the true god , as the gods of the heathens were . pr. is it lawful by the christian doctrine to give proper divine worship to a creature ? p. i think not ; for christ said , thou shalt worship the lord thy god , and him only shalt thou serve : which our church understands of proper divine worship . pr. but the scripture requires proper divine worship to be given to christ ; which is to require proper divine worship to be given to a creature , if christ be not true god by nature . p. may not god communicate his own worship to him ? pr. but god hath said , he will not give his glory to another , isa. 42. 8. and the reason is considerable , which is there given ; i am the lord , that is my name ; which shews that none but the true jehovah is capable of divine worship : for adoration is done to god only on the account of his incommunicable perfections , and therefore the reason of divine worship cannot reach to any creature . p. not without gods will and pleasure . but may not god advance a mere creature to that dignity , as to require divine worship to be given to him by his fellow-creatures ? pr. wherein lies the nature of that which you call proper divine worship ? p. in a due esteem of god in our minds , as the first cause and last end of his creatures , and such acts as are agreeable thereto . pr. then proper divine worship doth suppose an esteem of god as infinitely above his creatures ; and how then is it possible for us to give the same worship to god , and to a creature ? for if the distance be infinite between god and his creatures , and we must judg of things as they are , then we must in our minds suppose a creature to be infinitely distant srom god ; and if we do so , how is it possible to give the same divine worship in this sense to god , and to any creature ? p. and what now would you infer from hence ? pr. do not you see already ? viz. that god cannot be supposed to allow divine worship to be given to christ , if he were a mere creature ; and therefore since such divine worship is required by the christian doctrine , it follows , that those expressions which speak of his being one with the father , cannot be figuratively understood . p. but where is it , that such divine worship is required to be given to christ in scripture ? for , according to my principles , the church is to set the bounds and measures of divine worship , and to declare what worship is due to god ; what to christ ; what to saints and angels ; what to men upon earth ; what to images , sacraments , &c. and if we depart from this rule , i know not where we shall fix . pr. i pray tell me , doth the difference between god and his creatures , depend on the will of the church ? p. no. pr. is it then in the churches power to give that to a creature , which belongs only to god ? p. i think not . pr. who then is to be judg what belongs to god , and what not ? god or the church ? p. god himself , if he pleases . pr. then our business is to search what his will and pleasure is in this matter , by reading the scriptures , wherein his will is contained : and there we find it expressed , that all men should h●nour the son , even as they honour the father , john 5. 23. let all the angels of god worship him , heb. 1. 6. blessing , and honour , and glory , and power be unto him that sitteth on the throne , and to the lamb for ever and ever , revel . 4. 13. that at the name of jesus every knee should bow , of things in heaven , and things in earth , &c. phil. 2. 9. if it were gods great design , by the christian doctrine , to restore in the world a due sense of the infinite distance between god and his creatures ; could any thing be more repugnant to it , than in the same doctrine to advance a creature to a participation of the same divine honour with himself ? so that in plain truth , the idolatry of the world lay only in a bad choice of the creatures they were to worship , and not in giving proper divine worship to a creature ; for that christianity it self not only allows , but requires , on supposition that christ were god merely by office , and was originally a creature , as we are . but i pray observe the force of the apostles argument , speaking of the gentile idolatry ; he saith it lay in this , that they did service unto them , which by nature are no gods , gal. 4. 8. p. you know , i must now personate the anti-trinitarian ; and he answers , that by nature no more is implied , than truly and really , i. e. god did not advance those creatures among the gentiles to that worship and honour , which he hath done christ. pr. then you make it lawful by the gospel to believe christ to be a mere creature , and at the same time to give him divine worship , which supposes him not to be a creature ; and so you must believe him to be a creature , and not to be a creature , at the same time . p. how do you make that appear ? pr. from your own words ; for you say , proper divine worship lies in a due esteem of god in our minds , as the first cause and last end , and in actions agreeable thereto ; then to give divine worship to god , we must believe him to be above all creatures as to his nature and being ; and theresore to give christ divine worship , must imply our believing him not to be a creature , and to be a creature at the same time . p. but the meaning of divine worship here must not then relate to acts of the mind , but to outward acts of adoration in the church . pr. were the gentiles guilty of idolatry in that respect , or not ? p. yes ; but not those , whom god requires to worship in such a manner . pr. then the sin of gentile-idolatry lay only in giving divine worship to a creature without gods command ; which lessens it to that degree , as to make will-worship and idolatry the same ; and to blame the apostles , for making such a dreadful sin of it , and disswading christians so much from returning to the practice of it : for they had the priviledg of giving divine worship to a creature by gods command , which others were damned for doing without a command ; which makes the christian religion not to appear so reasonable , as the anti-trinitarians contend it is . but here are four foul mistakes in point of reason , which they are guilty of . ( 1. ) in making the sin of idolatry so arbitrary a thing ; which depends not on the nature of the object which is worshipped , but on the will and pleasure of god. ( 2. ) in making the gentiles guilty of a great sin , meerly in wanting a divine command , which was out of their power . ( 3. ) in making the christian religion to set up the worship of a creature , when its design was to root out idolatry . ( 4. ) in making a fictitious god , or a creature to be advanced to the throne of god. which i think is far more contradictious to reason , than a trinity of persons in the unity of the same nature . for nothing can be more absurd than to make that to be god , which wants all the essential attributes and perfections of god ; as every creature must do : such as self-existence , eternity , independency , immensity , omnipotency , &c. what a contradiction is it , to suppose a weak , impotent , depending , confined , created god ? and such every creature must be in its nature , or else it is no creature . i do not at all wonder to find the socinians after this , to lessen the natural knowledg of god , and his infinite perfections , both as to power and knowledg ; for it was their concernment to bring the notion of god as low as possible , that a creature might be in the nearer capacity of being made god. but those who consider and know what god is , and what he must be , if he be god , will find far greater difficulty in making man to be god , than in believing god to be made man. for this implies no greater difficulty , than meerly as to our conception , how an infinite being can be so united to a finite , as to become one person ; which implies no repugnancy , but only some thing above our capacity to comprehend . and we confess our selves puzled in the manner of conceiving how a finite spitit , which can pass through a body , can be so united to it , as to make a man by that union ; yet we all acknowledg the truth of this . but to suppose a creature capable of being made god , is to overthrow the essential difference between god and his creatures , and the infinite distance between them . which is of very pernicious consequence , as to the great ends of the christian religion , which were to reform the world , and to restore the distinction between god and his creatures ; which by the prevalency of idolatry was almost lost in the world : the supreme god being hardly discerned in such a croud of created and fictitious gods. and this very argument is enough to turn my stomack against socinianism or arianism . p. i had thought all men of sense among you , had been socinians ; i have often heard them charged with being so . pr. you see how grosly you are deceived , notwithstanding your pretence to infallibility . i do not pretend to any deep reach , but i see reason enough to be no socinian . p. let us return to our matter in hand . what say you to those texts which are said to be inconsistent with the literal sense of those before mention'd , which relate to the unity between father and son ? pr. what texts do you mean ? p. what say you to joh. 10. from the 30. to the 39 ? pr. i wonder what it is produced for . p. it is said , joh. 10. 30. i and my father are one ; now it is highly unreasonable to interpret these words literally , because of those which follow . pr. how doth that appear ? for v. 31. it is said , that the jews took up stones to stone him : which shews , that they look'd on him as speaking blasphemy . but what blasphemy was it for christ to declare an unity of consent between him and his father ; which in truth is nothing , but doing his father's will ? therefore it is plain that the jews did apprehend more in those words of our saviour . and they explain themselves , v. 33. what they understood by them , because that thou being a man , makest thy self god. which shews that they thought not an unity of consent , but of nature , was meant . p. but christ's answer shews , that he speaks only of a god by office , and not by nature , v. 34. jesus answered them , is it not written in your law , i said ye are gods ? pr. i pray go on , and see how christ argues , v. 35 , 36. if he called them gods , unto whom the word of god came , and the scripture cannot be broken ; say ye of him , whom the father hath sent into the world , thou blasphemest , because i said i am the son of god ? p. this only shews that christ had greater reason to be called god , but not that he was so by nature . pr. i pray go on still , v. 37 , 38. if i do not the works of my father , believe me not . but if i do , tho ye believe not me , believe the works , that ye may know and believe that the father is in me , and i in him . p. is it not said elsewhere , that he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him , and he in him ? 1 joh. 3. 24. would you hence infer an unity of nature between christ and believers ? pr. i do not lay the weight on the phrase , but as it is the conclusion of the dispute between christ and the jews . and it ought to be observed , that this was the end of the third conference between christ and the jews upon this argument . the first was john 5. and then from christ's saying , the father worketh hitherto , and i work , v. 17. the jews infer'd v. 18. that he made himself equal with god. in the second conference , john 8. he said , before abraham was , i am , v. 58. and then the jews took up stones to cast at him . after this followed this third conference , john. 10. and this runs again into the same point , that he being a man , made himself god. and these conferences were all publick , in or near the temple , and this last was in solomons porch , john 10. 23. a place of great resort , and near the place where the sanhedrim sate , who were the judges in the case of blasphemy . now the force of my argument from hence , lies in these things : ( 1. ) that christ certainly knew , that the jews did think by his discourse , that he made himself equal with god. 2. that if it were not true , it was notorious blasphemy , and so esteemed by the jews . 3. that such a mistake ought to have been presently corrected , and in the plainest manner ; as we find it was done by st. paul , when the men of lystra said , the gods are come down to us in the likeness of men ; for he ran in presently among them , and said , we are men of like passions with you , acts 14. 11 , 15. it is impossible for me to think , that if christ had known himself to be a meer man , he would have suffered the jews to have run away with such a mistake as this , without giving them the clearest and plainest information ; whereas in all his answers he vindicates himself , and endeavours rather to fasten those impressions upon them , as appears by this conclusion of the last conference , that ye may know and believe , that the father is in me , and i in him . doth this look like correcting a dangerous mistake in the jews ? and is it not rather a justification of that sense , which they took his words in ? and in the first conference , john 5. our saviour is so far from doing as st. paul did , that he challenges divine honour as due to himself , that all men should honour the son , as they honour the father , v. 23. from whence it follows , that christ must be charged as one , who being a meer man , did affect divine honour ; or else , that being god as well as man , he looked on it as justly due to him . i pray tell me what sense do your friends the socinians make of those words of st. paul , phil. 2. 6 , 7. who being in the form of god , thought it not robbery to be equal with god , but made himself of no reputation , &c. p. the sense they give , is this , that he did not make a shew or ostentation of his own greatness , but studiously concealed it , and therein shewed his great humility . pr. but is there any greatness like that of divine honour ? and yet this he challenged to himself . p. but he knew what the father designed him for , and so spake those things by way of prediction . pr. he knew no creature could deserve divine worship , and he deliver'd that as part of his own doctrine ; and therefore those words , where he is said , to make himself equal with god , must be understood of nature , and not of office. p. but st. john 17. 22. saith , that christ prayed to his father , for his disciples , that they may be one , as we are one ; and that is not by unity of nature . pr. i grant it . but our saviour there speaks of a true , but a lower kind of unity ; or else the socinians must think every believer as capable of divine honour , as christ himself , if they take those words strictly , that they may be one , as we are one . p. st. paul saith , he that planteth , and he that watereth , is one , 1 cor. 3. 8. pr. who doubts but there are other sorts of unities , besides that of nature ? but , doth this prove that there is no unity of nature between the father and the son ? if we have no better arguments against transubstantiation , we will give over disputing . p. i know you have other arguments for the trinity , but they prove as little without the authority of the church ; as from those places where christ is called god , as joh. 1. 1 , 2. rom. 9. 5 , &c. pr. and i think the argument from those places , very good and strong , especially from john 1. 1 , 2 , 3. and it seems directly contrary to the whole design of scripture to call any one god over all , blessed for evermore , as christ is called , rom. 9. 5. but he that is god by natuce . p. how do you prove that john 1. 1. relates to any thing beyond the beginning of the gospel , and that christ the word , was before john the baptists preaching ? pr. i desire any one to read the text impartially , and he will find the socinian sense to be unnatural , forced , obscure and jejune , proving a thing of no moment at that time ; but the sense we give , to be strong , weighty , consistent , and of very great consequence at that time , when the cerinthians denied the divinity of christ. the sentences are short , the words lofty and significant , the manner of beginning unusual ; so that any one would expect some great and extraordinary matter to be said in these few verses ; but what a frustration were this , if after all , they intended no more , than that altho john baptist preached in publick before christ , yet that christ was in being before that ? which is a sense so mean , so remote from the occasion of his writing , as it is deliver'd by the ancients , that nothing but a miserable necessity could make men of wit and subtilty to put such a sense upon st. john's words . p. but they deny there was any such occasion of st. john's writing , as the cerinthians heresy at that time . pr. i know socinus doth so ; but he might as well have denied that there was any such person as cerinthus . and i think the cerinthian heresy not only to have been the occasion of st. john's writing , but that the understanding of it , gives the greatest and truest light to the words of the evangelist , shewing the force and importance of them . p. wherein i pray , did that heresy consist ? pr. i shall not meddle with other parts of it , but only what relates to the present subject ; and that lay in these things . ( 1. ) that there was a supreme and unknown father , who was before the beginning , and therefore they called him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , who was the fountain of all emanations . iren. l. 1. c. 1. 19. ( 2. ) that the world was not made by him , but by a power at a distance from him , called demiurgus , iren. l. 1. c. 25. and in the egyptian school where cerinthus was educated , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 word , was one of the intermediate emanations between the father , and the demiurgus , iren. l. 1. c. 23. ( 3. ) that this world was in a state of darkness and confusion , as to the supreme father of all ; only some few had some beams of light from him , by which they knew him . ( 4. ) that jesus was a mere man , born as other men are , of joseph and mary , but of extraordinary goodness , wisdom , and sanctity . ( 5. ) that the supreme father at his baptism did send down a divine power upon him , in the shape of a dove , which enabled him to declare the unknown father , and to work miracles , which returned to its own 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or fulness above , when jesus suffer'd . this is a short scheme of that heresy , as delivered by the ancient fathers . and now let any one compare st. johns words with it ; and he will find his design was to countermine this heresy by two things . ( 1. ) that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 word , was eternal . for the cerinthians said , the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not in the beginning , but made a great space of time between the eternal being of the father , and the emanation of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , wherein he was in perfect silence , as irenoeus expresses it ( l. 1. c. 1. ) and so in the beginning , doth imply the eternity of the word . but that is not all , for he saith , it was with god , and was god , and was the demiurgus , or the maker of the world , and the revealer of god to mankind , joh. 1. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 , 10. and so there was no place for those several emanations between god and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and demiurgus , as the cerinthians said . ( 2. ) that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or word , was incarnate , which he affirms , v. 14. and the word was made flesh , and dwelt among us , &c. and was the only begotten son of the father ; and so he not only cuts off the other emanations , but declares that jesus was far from being a mere man. and to this purpose he brings in the testimony of john baptist , v. 15. and applies what he had said to the person of jesus christ , v. 17. now this being st. johns design , his words afford a demonstration to us of the union of the divine and human nature in christ , when he saith , the word was made flesh. p. but doth not the scripture in other places imply that there is a subordination in christ to his father , which is not consistent with such an equality of nature ; see heb. 1. 8 , 9. 1 cor. 8. 4 , 5. — 15. 27 , 28. rev. 3. 12. pr. the first place is a proof for the divinity of christ ; for the words are ; but unto the son , he saith , thy throne , o god , is for ever and ever , &c. it is true , in the next verse , it is said with respect to his office , therefore god , even thy god hath anointed thee , &c. but we do not deny that christ was anointed as mediator , and in that respect , god was his god ; but doth this prove that he that is mediator , cannot have a divine nature in conjunction with the human ? the second place , i suppose , is mistaken , 1 cor. 8. not 4. and 5. but 6 verse , but unto us , there is but one god the father , of whom are all things , and we in him ; and one lord jesus christ , by whom are all things , and we by him . and this is one of the strongest holds of the socinians . but two considerations will take off the seeming force of it . ( 1. ) that the apostle in his disputes with the gentile idolaters , concerning whom he speaks , v. 4 , 5. doth utterly deny any divinity in the beings they worshipped instead of god , when he saith , an idol is nothing in the world , and that there is none other god but one . he knew very well that they worshipped many , v. 5. as there be gods many , and lords many among them ; but unto us ( christians ) there is but one god , and one lord : i. e. we have but one supreme god , to whom we give divine worship ; and instead of the multitude of mediators , we have but one mediator ; and so his design is in opposition to their many gods , to assert the unity of the divine nature , ( not so as to exclude a distinction of persons , but thereby to exclude other gods as the proper object of worship ) , and the unity of a mediator , in opposition to their many lords . ( 2. ) that if this place excludes christ from the unity of nature with god , it doth exclude him from being the object of divine worship ; for it saith , that there is no other god , but one ; therefore no creature can be made god : and to us there is but one god , the father ; therefore the son cannot be god. if therefore the name lord be taken in opposition to god , then christ cannot be god in any sense ; for we must have but one god : but the plain meaning of the apostle was , that by one lord he meant one mediator , by whom alone we have , in this new frame of things by the gospel , access unto god the father . the third place , 1 cor. 15. 27 , 28. speaks plainly of christs kingdom , as mediator . the fourth place , rev. 3. 12. where christ speaks several times of my god , proves no more than his words on the cross , my god , my god , why hast thou forsaken me : for surely christ might own a particular relation to god , and interest in him , as he was in human nature , without overthrowing the divine nature in him . p. but he owns , that though he is to be our judg , he knows not the time , mark 13. 32. which seems inconsistent with the divine nature , which knoweth all things . pr. the son there spoken of , was christ , as endued with a human soul , when he was upon earth ; which could not understand a secret so much out of the reach of mans understanding , without immediate revelation . but it was not necessary by virtue of the union of both natures , that the divine nature should communicate to the human soul of christ all divine mysteries : but as the human body was notwithstanding subject to passions and infirmities incident to it , so the human soul might continue ignorant of the day of judgment in this state ; both to let us know how great that secret is , and that christ had the proper capacity of a human soul , which could not extend to such things without divine revelation . p. there is one argument more , which seems to prove christs divinity , and doth not ; viz. the making of all things visible and invisible , being attributed to him , john 1. 3. heb. 1. 10. col. 1. 16 , 17 , 18 , 19. pr. now i confess this doth more than seem to me to be a very strong argument ; and that for this reason , the apostle saith , the invisible things of him from the creation of the world , are clearly seen , being understood by the things which are made , even his eternal power and godhead , rom. 1. 20. was this argument of the apostle good or not ? p. no doubt it was . pr. then the creation of the world is an invincible proof of the true god. p. what follows ? pr. then if the making of all things be attributed to christ , he must be true god ; but this is plain in the new testament , in which the making of all things is as clearly attributed to the son , as it is to the father ; all things saith st. john , were made by him , and without him was not any thing made , that was made , john 1. 3. for by him were all things created , saith st. paul , that are in heaven , and that are in earth , visible and invisible , whether they be thrones , or dominions , or principalities , or powers , all things were created by him , and for him , col. 1. 16. thou , lord , in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth , and the heavens are the work of thy hands , heb. 1. 10. now compare these expressions with those wherein the creation is attributed to the father , the world is said to be made by bim , rom. 1. 20. that he hath created all things , rev. 4. 11. that of him , and for him , and to him , are all things , rom. 11. 36. and let any impartial mind discern the difference . therefore we have as much reason from scripture to believe christ to be god , as we have from the creation of things to believe a god. p. but you do not take notice of the different expressions in scripture , concerning the father and the son ; all things are said to be of the father , and by the son , 1 cor. 8. 6. and that the father created all things by jesus christ , eph. 3. 9. which proves no more , than that the son was gods instrument in the creation . pr. what do you mean by gods instrument in the creation ? do you think one creature can create another ? how then can the creation prove an infinite power ? if you believe the instrument uncreated , then you must assert him to be true god by nature ; and then we have all we desire . p. but the socinians do not like this answer of the arians , and therefore they interpret these places , of the state of things under the gospel , and not of the creation of the world. pr. they have not one jot mended the matter ; for , ( 1. ) where the new creation is spoken of , some circumstances are added , which limit the sense to it , as when st. paul saith , we are created in christ jesus unto good works that we shoul walk in them . eph. 2. 10. vvho could possibly understand this of the old creation ? and so , if any man be in christ jesus , he is a new creature , 2 cor. 5. 17. but in the other places the same expressions are used , which are attributed to the old creation , without limitation from circumstances , or from the context and occasion of them . ( 2. ) there are some things said to be created by christ jesus , which cannot relate to the new creation ; for by him were all things created , that are in heaven , and that are in earth , visible and invisible , whether they be thrones , or dominions , or principalities or powers . col. 1. 16. how are these created by preaching the gospel , when they are uncapable of the proper means of it , which are the doctrine of the remission of sins upon repentance , and the renewing and sanctifiing grace of god ? p. but st. paul doth not mention the heaven and earth , but only intellectual beings , angels , and men , and therefore he speaks of the new creation . pr. a mighty argument indeed ! do not all things comprehend the heaven and earth ? and the particular enumeration of angels by several denominations , shews that he speaks of another creation distinct from that by the gospel preached to the vvorld ; for the apostles were christs instruments in this new creation , which they could not be to the invisible powers above . p. we have now gone through the true and only grounds of the doctrine of the trinity . pr. you are extreamly mistaken . for we have other grounds besides these , although these may be sufficient . p. name one more . pr. i will name several , which you cannot disallow . p. what are they ? pr. the several heads of arguments made use of by cardinal bellarmin , to prove the divinity of christ : who alone is a convincing evidence of the vast disparity between the proofs of this doctrine , and of transubstantiation from scripture . for , 1. he proves christ's divinity from those places of the old testament , which are expounded in the new ; being in the old testament , spoken of the true god ; and in the new applied to christ. as numb . 21. 5 , 6. compared with 1 cor. 10. 9. exod. 20. 2. with jude 5. psal. 68. 18. with eph. 4. 8 , 9. psal. 97. 7. & 102. 25 , 26. with heb. 1. 6 , 10 , 11. isa. 6. 1 , 3. with john 12. 41. and revel . 4. 8. isa. 8. 14. with luke 2. 34. and rom. 9. 33. isa. 40. 3. with mat. 3. 3. mark 1. 3. luke 1. 76. john 1. 23. — isa. 45. 23. with rom. 14. 11. — isa. 44. 6. with revel . 1. 8 , 17. mal. 3. 1. with mat. 11. 10. 2. from the places of the old testament , which attribute to christ those things which belong to god ; as power and adoration , psal. 2. 7 , 8 , 12. being the first and last , isa. 48. 1. 12 , 16. working miracles , isa. 35. 5. being the god of israel , isa. 52. 5 , 6. the only god , isa. 45. 5 , 6. the lord of hosts , zach. 2. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. jehovah , zach. 3. 2. pouring out of the spirit , zach. 12. 10. 3. from the places of the new testament , which attribute divinity to christ. as when he is called , the son of the living god , mat. 16. 16. the only begotten son of god , john 3. 16. his own son , rom. 8. 32. his true son , 1 joh. 5. 20. his dear son , col. 1. 13. his son above all others , heb. 1. 5. the express image of his person , heb. 1. 3. making himself equal with god , john 5. 18. being one with the father , joh. 10. 30. lord and god , john 20. 28. god blessed for ever , rom. 9. 5. who thought it no robbery to be equal with god , phil. 2. 6. one with the father and spirit , 1 john 5. 7. the true god , 1 john 5. 20. 4. from the proper names of god , isa. 9. 6. john 20. 28. acts 20. 28. rom. 9. 5. revel . 4. 8. 1 john 3. 16. the name jehov●● , jer. 23. 5 , 8. isa. 40. 3. the lord , by which the lxx render jehovah , mat. 21. 3. joh. 13. 13. the most high , psal. 87. 5. a name above every name , phil. 2. 9. the invisible one , 1 tim. 1. 17 , & 6. 16. the god of glory , act. 7. 2. 1 cor. 2. 8. psal. 24. 7 , 8 , 9. king of kings and lord of lords , 1 tim. 6. 15. revel . 17. 14. & 19. 16. the one lord , 1 cor. 8. 6. the true god , john 5. 20. the only lord , jud. 4. the great god and our saviour , titus 2. 13. 5. from the proper attributes of god ; as eternity , prov. 8. 22 , 23. mic. 5 , 2. joh. 1. 1 , — 17. 5. immensity , john 3. 13. mat. 18. 20. omnipotency , rev. 1. 8. — 4. 8. — 11. 17. wisdom , colos. 2. 3. joh. 21. 17. majesty and adoration , heb. 1. 6. mal. 3. 1. invocation , joh. 14. 13. acts 7. 59. & 9. 14. 2 cor. 12. 8. 1 cor. 1. 3. 2 joh. 3. 6. from the proper works of god : as not only creation , ( of which already ) but conservation , heb. 1. 3. colos. 1. 17. salvation , matth. 1. 21. foretelling future events , joh. 13. 19. 1 pet. 1. 11. rev. 2. 23. working miracles by his own power , mark. 4. 39. and giving power to others to work them , mat. 10. 1. what think you now of the proofs of the trinity in scripture ? do you think bellarmin could produce any thing like this for transubstantiation ? no ; so far from it , that where he sets himself in a whole chapter to prove it from scripture , he produces a first without a second . the first argument , saith he , is taken from christ's words , this is my body . very well ! but where is the second ? for no more could be produced , but this one single passage , about which he spends his whole chapter , and then betakes himself presently to the fathers . p. but one plain and clear place is sufficient , if we be certain of the sense of that one ; for we are as much bound to believe god when we are sure he speaks it once , as an hundred times . pr. we have been all this while comparing these two doctrines as to scripture , and now you see the disproportion so very great , as to number and variety , you say , one is as good as an hundred ; but that one had need to be wonderfully clear , which this is very far from , since many of your own writers do confess transubstantiation cannot be drawn from it ; as bellarmin himself owns , and he affirms it not to be improbable , that no place of scripture is so clear and express for transubstantiation , but learned and acute men may doubt whether it can be drawn from it , setting aside the churches declaration . but neither bellarmin , nor any one who attends to the force of the former proofs of the divinity of christ , can say , that any reasonable man can doubt of it ; and that he must at last resolve all into the church's authority . p. have not learned and acute men doubted of the divinity of christ , as of transubstantiation ? and therefore in that respect they are both alike . pr. we do not insist upon men's bare doubting , but on the reason of their doubting . and when but one single place is produced , which is yeilded not to be sufficient of it self to prove the doctrine ; there is much more cause of doubting , than where such multitudes of places are produced ; and no doubt is made by those who favour transubstantiation , but that they do fully prove the divinity of christ. p. it seems then we must come to reason at last . and for my part , i must tell you , i i think that parallel much the easiest . for , that three distinct persons should be in one individual nature , and that the most pure and simple being , seems to me to be more absurd than transubstantiation . pr. let us set aside the comparing absurdities at present , and only examin in point of reason , the great absurdity of three persons being in one individual divine nature . p. i did hardly believe you would have the courage to defend the doctrine of the trinity in point of reason ; but i see you are a bold man , and will venture farther than wiser men. pr. it may be others have not had the leisure or curiosity to examine a mystery believed to be so much out of the reach of our understanding ; or have confounded themselves and others so much with school-●erms , as to leave the matter rather more obscure than it was before . but i shall endeavour to make things as clear as they will bear . and that which i insist upon is , that the absurdities are not to appearance so great as those of transubstantiation . and therefore i desire you to produce those which appear the most dreadful . p. i shall reduce all to these two , which comprehend the rest . 1. how there can be three persons and but one god. 2. how these can agree in a third , and not agree among themselves . for the first , it seems very absurd , that there should be three persons really distinct , whereof every one is god , and yet there should not be three gods ; for nothing is more contradictions than to make three not to be three , or three to be but one . pr. i hope now you will give me leave to make an answer to your difficulty , as distinct as possible . we do not say , that three persons are but one person , or that one nature is three natures ; but that there are three persons in one nature . if therefore one individual nature be communicable to three persons , there is no appearance of absurdity in this doctrine . and on the other side , it will be impossible there should be three gods , where there is one and the same individual nature ; for three gods must have three several divine natures , since it is the divine essence which makes a god. but to make this more plain , do you make any difference between nature and person ? p. yes . pr. wherein lies it ? p. excuse me , sir , for you have undertaken to explain these things . pr. i will begin with person . which name was originally taken among the romans from some remarkable distinction of one from another ; either by some outward appearance , as a vizard or habit , or some particular quality or disposition . and from hence it came to be applied to those inward properties , whereby one intelligent being is distinguished from another ; and from those properties , to the person who had them . thus person is used even by tully himself , at least twenty times in his books of rhetorick : and the old civil law speaks of personal rights and personal actions . so that the criticks , such as valla , and others , had no cause to find fault with boethius , for applying the notion of a person , to an intelligent being subsisting by it self , ( and so the soul is no person in men , but the man consisting of soul and body ) having some incommunicable properties belonging to him . therefore i cannot but wonder at the niceness of some late men , who would have the names of person , and hypostasis , and trinity , to be laid aside ; since themselves confess boëthius his definition of a person to be true enough ; but they say , it belongs to the creatures , and not to god , for it would make three gods. which is to suppose , without proving it , that the divine nature can communicate it self after no other manner than a created nature can . this is now to be more strictly enquired into . and it is very well observed by boëthius , de trin. l. 1. principium pluralitatis alteritas est : that diversity is the reason of plurality : and therefore in the trinity , so far as they are different , they are three , i. e. in regard of personal properties and relations ; but so far as they agree , they are but o n e , that is , as to the divine nature . it is very true , that according to arithmetick , three cannot be one , nor one three ; but we must distinguish between the bare numeration , and the things numbred . the repetition of three units , certainly makes three distinct numbers ; but it doth not make three persons to be three natures . and therefore as to the things themselves , we must go from the bare numbers to consider their nature . where-ever there is a real distinction , we may multiply the number , tho the subject be but one. as suppose we say the soul hath three faculties , understanding , will and memory ; we may , without the least absurdity say , there are three and one ; and those three not confounded with each other , and yet there is but one soul. p. but the socinians object , that there is a difference between three properties , and three distinct persons ; because a person is an individual being ; and so three persons must be three individual beings ; and therefore as there is but one divine being , there can be but one person . pr. this is the main strength of the cause ; to which i answer , that altho a person be an individual being , yet it implies two things in it ; ( 1. ) something common with others of the same nature ; as three men have one and the same nature , tho they be three persons . ( 2. ) something peculiar and incommunicate to any other ; so that john cannot be peter , nor peter , james . p. but what is it which makes one not to be the other , when they have the same common nature ? pr. you ask a hard question , viz. about the principle of individuation ; but if it be so hard to resolve it , as to created beings , there is certainly far less reason for us to be unsatisfied , if it appear difficult to clear the difference of nature and person in an infinite being . yet all mankind are agreed in the thing , viz. that there is a community of the same nature , and a real distinction of persons among men , tho they cannot tell what that is which discriminates the humane nature in john , from the same humane nature in peter and james . and it is observable , that as beings arise in perfection above each other , it is still so much harder to assign that which is called the principle of individuation . in gross and material beings we can discern a number of accidents , or peculiar modes and properties , which distinguish them from each other ; but it is much harder to assign it in spiritual and intellectual beings , whose natures and differences lie not so open to our understandings . if so be then it appears more difficult in an infinite and incomprehensible being , what cause have we to wonder at it ? but we must always make a difference between what we have reason to believe , and what we have a power to conceive . altho we have all the reason in the world to believe that there is a god , i. e. a being infinite in all perfections ; yet we must yield that his essential attributes are above our comprehension . as for instance ; ( 1. ) we must believe god to be eternal , or we cannot believe him to be god. for , if he once were not , it is impossible he should ever be . and therefore we conclude necessary existence to be an essential attribute of the divine nature . but then , how to conceive that a being should be from it self , is at least as hard , as how one and the same individual nature should be communicated to three distinct persons ; nay , it is somewhat harder , since we see something like this in other beings ; but we can see no manner of resemblance of a thing that hath its being wholly from it self . ( 2. ) we must allow god to be omnipresent , or else we must suppose him so confined and limited to a certain place , as to be excluded from any other ; and if he can act in all places , he must either be present in them , or his power must be larger than his being , which is infinite ; but after this , we have not a power to conceive how a being should be present in the whole world , and not to be extended ; and if it be extended , how it should be uncapable of being divided into parts ; which is certainly repugnant to the divine nature . i therefore produce these two instances , to let the antitrinitarians see , that what they object in point of reason as to the incomprehensibility of the mystery of the trinity , will in consequence overthrow the divine nature . but as there is the highest reason to believe there is a god , tho we cannot comprehend his perfections ; so there may be great reason to believe the doctrine of the trinity , tho we cannot comprehend the manner of it . p. i had thought you intended to explain the mystery of it , and now you tell us it is incomprehensible . pr. it is a good step to our believing it , to make it plain , that the difficulty of our conception ought not to hinder our faith. and i have made some advance towards the explication of it , by shewing , that since mankind are agreed about the difference between nature and person , the whole difficulty comes to this , that the same common nature in mankind makes three persons ; but that it is the same individual nature in all the persons of the trinity . and now let us consider the infinite perfection and simplicity of the divine nature ; and we shall think it unreasonable that it should be so bounded as to the manner of its communication , as the nature of man is . every individual man hath not only individual properties , but an individual nature , i. e. the common nature of man , limited by some unaccountable principle , that doth make him different from all other men having the same nature with himself . the difficulty then doth not lie in a community of nature , and a distinction of persons , for that is granted among men , but in the unity of nature with the difference of persons . and supposing the divine nature to be infinite in its perfection , i do not see how it is capable of being bounded , as the common nature of man in individuals is ; and if it be not capable of being bounded and limited , it must diffuse it self into all the persons in the same individual manner ; and so this doctrine of the trinity is not repugnant to reason . p. but what say you to the athanasian creed ; is not that repugnant to humane reason ? pr. i think not ; but that it is a just explication of the doctrine of the trinity rightly understood . p. i see now you are upon hard points , you will stick at nothing , and transubstantiation it self will down with you anon . pr. i doubt that ; but at present we are upon the athanasian creed . and i desire but one principle to clear it , which follows from what is said already , viz. that what is affirmed of the divine nature , as such , must be common to all three persons ; but whatever is affirmed of the several persons , as such , must be peculiar to themselves . now this is a clear principle of reason , and hath no appearance of absurdity in it . and from hence the athanasian creed will easily be cleared . for eternity , incomprehensibility , omnipotency , belonging to the divine nature , as such , we ought to say , that they are not three eternals , three incomprehensibles , three almighties , but one eternal , one incomprehensible , one almighty . because the attributes belonging to the persons , by reason of the divine nature , and the attributes being really the same with it , the nature is the proper subject of them ; which being but one , we are not to distinguish them as to essential attributes , but only as to personal relations and properties . p. but if the three persons be coëternal , how is it possible to conceive there should not be three eternals ? pr. this seems the hardest expression in the whole creed ; but it is to be interpreted by the scope and design of it : which is , that the essential attributes are not to be distinguished , though the persons be . and so eternity is not taken as a personal attribute , but as essential ; and so they are not three eternals , but one eternal . and the great design of the creed was , to shew , that the christian church did not believe such a trinity as consisted of three persons , unequal and different in nature , and substance , and duration . p. but what say you to the damning all those who do not believe it , in the beginning and end of it ? pr. this is off from our business . but to let you see i will not avoid the difficulties you offer , i will give an answer even to this . the meaning is not , that every one is damned who doth not conceive aright of the difference of nature and person in the trinity , or of the essential and personal attributes ; but that those who set up in opposition to it the worship of a meer creature as god , or the worship of more gods than one , or who wilfully reject this article of the christian faith , when it is duly proposed to them , are guilty of a damning sin. for even the disbelief of christianity it self , is not supposed to be the cause of mens damnation , but where the doctrine of the gospel hath been proposed in a way of credibility . if when this doctrine of the trinity is proposed to mens minds , they will not consider it , nor weigh the arguments on both sides impartially , but with scorn and contempt reject it , and endeavour to bring reproach upon christianity for the sake of it , and disturb the peace of the church about it ; such cannot be said to receive or believe it faithfully , and by such sins they do run the hazard of perishing everlastingly . p. i see you have a mind to smooth every thing relating to the trinity , i wish you would do the same about transubstantiation . but yet you have not answer'd the other great difficulty in point of reason , viz. that those things which agree or disagree in a third , must agree or disagree one with the other . and therefore if the father be god , the son god , and the holy ghost god ; then the father must be son and holy ghost , and the son and holy ghost must be the father . if not , then they are really the same , and really distinct ; the same as to essence , distinct as to persons ; and so they are the same , and not the same , which is a contradiction . pr. and now i think you have drawn out the most refined spirits of socinianism , to make the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation parallel , because you say , it implies a contradiction ; which is the nearest parallel you have yet offered at . but this terrible argument is grounded on the same supposition , viz. that the divine essence is no more capable of communicating it self to three distinct persons , than any created being is . the reason of that axiom being , that created things , by reason of their finite nature , cannot diffuse or communicate themselves to more than one ; and therefore those which agree in a third , must agree together ; but supposing it possible that the same finite nature could extend it self to several individuals , it would be presently answered , the axiom did hold only , where they did adequately and reciprocally agree , and not where they did agree only in essence , but differ'd in the manner of subsistence . for where a different manner of subsistence is supposed possible , in the same individual nature , the agreement in that cannot take away that difference which is consistent with it ; which we attribute to the unlimitedness and perfection of the divine nature . p. but you can bring no other instance but the thing in question ; and therefore this is a petitio principii , or taking that for granted which is in dispute . pr. i do not think it to be so , where the reason is assigned from the peculiar properties of the divine nature , to which there can be no parallel . and i think it very unreasonable in the socinians , to send us to created beings for the rules and measures of our judgment concerning a being acknowledged to be infinite . p. are not the divine persons infinite , as well as the divine nature ? and therefore as created persons do take in the whole nature , so infinite persons will do the infinite nature . pr. no question , but the persons are infinite in regard of the nature which is so ; but if an infinite nature be communicable to more persons than one , every such person cannot appropriate the whole nature to it self . p. if the difference be on the account of infinity , then there must be an infinite number of persons in the divine essence . pr. i answer , that infiniteness of number is no perfection ; and as to the number of persons , we follow not our own conjectures , nor the authority of the church ; but divine revelation , which hath assured us , that there is but one god , and yet there are three that are one . which depends not meerly on the place of st. john , but the form of baptism is remarkable to this purpose , which joyns together the father , the son , and the holy ghost ; without any other distinction besides that of order and relation . and it is against the fundamental design of christianity , to joyn any created beings together with god in so solemn an act of religion . and st. paul joyns them together in his benediction : the grace of our lord jesus christ , and the love of god , and the communion of the holy ghost be with you all . amen . 2 cor. 12. 14. from whence the christian church hath always believed a trinity of persons in the unity of the divine nature . p. you have taken a great deal of pains to clear the doctrine of the trinity from any absurdity in point of reason , why should you not do as much now as to transubstantiation ? pr. in plain truth , because i cannot ; for here lies a vast difference between them . in the trinity we consider'd an infinite being , to which no bounds can be set without destroying its nature ; but in transubstantiation , we suppose a true finite body , which hath its natural bounds and limits to one certain place , and yet you will and must suppose this body to be equally present in many thousand distant places at the same time ; which implies so great a repugnancy to the very nature of a body , that i can by no means give my assent to it . p. alas ! is this it which chokes your reason , so that you cannot swallow the doctrine of the church in this matter ? you do not consider , that tho we allow nothing infinite in the body it self ; yet we suppose an infinite power to be imploy'd about it : and an infinite power may produce things above our comprehensions , about bodies in themselves finite . pr. this is the utmost your cause will bear ; but i pray tell me , is there any such thing as a repugnancy in the nature of things or not ? i. e. are there not some things which are endued with such properties , that if you alter them , you destroy their very nature ; as , to suppose an indivisible line , a triangle without lines , a body without dimensions ? p. hold a little ; a body must have dimensions belonging to it , but it is not necessary it should have those dimensions where-ever it is present . for it may be present in one place as a body , and in another after the manner of a spirit . pr. you might as well have said , a body may be consider'd two ways ; as it is a body , and as it is not a body : for there can be no body , where there are no dimensions proper to it . p. see how you are mistaken ; for it is 〈…〉 the dimensions which seem to hinder a body being in 〈◊〉 places at once , but its unity ; as bellarmin well observe● . pr. i say both of them 〈◊〉 . for 〈◊〉 body can no more be without it● dimensions , than a line without divisibility . p. i grant , that naturally it cannot , but by divine power it may . pr. will you make the power of god to change the essential properties of things , while the things themselves remain in their true nature ? you may as well say , that naturally man is a reasonable creature ; but by divine power he may be a true man , and yet want the faculty of reasoning : that naturally two and two make four , but god can make two and two to be joyned together in a supernatural manner , so as that four shall not result from them ; that tho , naturally speaking , white-washing a wall makes it look white , yet by an extraordinary power , there may be the presence of all things which make a wall white , yet it shall not do so ; just so it is to make a body present , and yet to have no dimensions of a body . is there any real difference between the nature of a body and spirit ? wherein lies it ? is it not as repugnant for a body to be after the manner of a spirit , as for a body and spirit to be the same ? p. all this proceeds upon not considering the difference between the essential extension of a body , and that which is quantitative , and hath relation to place . pr. the essential extension of a body without quantity , is non-sense , and a contradiction . for it is to make a body extended and not extended , at the same time . i pray tell me what you mean by a body , as it is opposed to a spirit ? p. i mean as all mankind do , such a substance which consists of parts extended and divisible . pr. then being extended and divisible , are the natural and essential properties of a body . and therefore , to suppose a body not to be extended and divisible , is to suppose it not to be a body , which is a plain contradiction . p. you are to distinguish between the intrinsecal quantity , which is an inseparable property of a body , and the extrinsecal relation it hath to a place . pr. intrinsecal quantity without relation to place , is intrinsecal non-sense . for , how is it possible for extended parts to have no relation to place ? p. by relation to place , i mean , when the parts of a body answer to the parts of a place : but by intrinsecal quantity , i mean , that there is the real order and proportion of parts in the body it self , but it doth not fill up the place . pr. then you do suppose the body of christ in the eucharist , to have all the distinct parts of a body , with their due order and proportion , but to be in the sacrament after an indivisible manner . p. why not ? pr. do you think it possible for the real and entire body of a man to be crouded into the compass of a wafer , with all the difference of its parts , so that no true part of the body be missing ? p. yes , by divine power . pr. do you think a far less thing possible than that , viz. that a man's head , and shoulders , and arms , should be contained entire and distinct under the nail of his little finger ? p. why not ? pr. then why may not the greatest body be within the least ? why may not an elephant be caught in a mouse-trap , and a rhinoceros be put into a snuff-box ? for either there is a repugnancy in the nature of the thing , for a greater body to be within a less , or there is not ; if not , then these mentioned instances are possible ; if there be , then the supposition of divine power can give no relief , unless you suppose , that god can do things repugnant in themselves , i. e. that he can do things which cannot be done . but i pray tell me , if the very body of christ be by transubstantiation in the wafer , with all its parts in their due order , then the head must be distant from the feet , and all other organs in their proper places ; but this cannot possibly be supposed , where there is no measure of distance as place is , and the whole body is in a point . p. i say again , there is the just order of parts considered in themselves , but not with respect to place . pr. then it is impossible there should be any distance ; without which it is impossible there should be the order of parts in a human body . thus , there is a repugnancy in the very supposition of christ's body being in the wafer , tho there were but one single wafer ; but when to this we add , that it is equally thus present in thousands of wafers at what distance of place soever , the absurdities do increase and multiply so fast upon us , that it is hardly possible to imagin any thing concerning a body , which doth imply more than this doth . as that one and the same body should be indivisibly present in many places , where it must be divided from it self , by so many bodies interposing : so that it is impossible to apprehend how two bodies can be divided from one another more effectually , than such a body must be from it self , if it be present in many places at once . p. i pray stop here ; for reckon up as many absurdities as you will , they are all but the effects of carnal reason , and we must captivate our understanding to the obedience of faith. pr. then it is to no purpose to argue any farther , on the point of reason ; and i thought you designed this for one part of your parallel . p. so i did ; and i still say , there are things as hard to make out about the trinity , which you have not yet taken notice of . pr. i pray let us hear them , that we may put an end to this discourse . p. what say you then to one and the same nature being in three distinct persons , which bellarmin saith , is more wonderful , than that one body should be in many places ; because the nature is identified with the persons , but the body is not so with the places in which it is present . if therefore the same nature be not divided from it self in the persons of the trinity , how much more easily may one body be present in several places , and not be divided from it self ? pr. it is strange neither bellarmin nor you should discern the difference . for the reason why a body must be divided from it self , being in several places , is , because it is finite ; and there being no penetration of dimensions in bodies , the interposing of other bodies must needs divide the same body in distant places ; but the reason why the same divine nature may be in several persons , is , because it is infinite ; and therefore nothing can bound or discontinue it . p. you have talked much of contradictions ; is there any greater about transubstantiation , than that of eternal generation of the son in the mystery of the trinity ? for , if it be not proper generation , then you cannot infer from it , that the son is of the same substance with the father ; if it be , then it must be a proceeding from not being to being , and so an eternal generation is a contradiction . pr. it is a rule in common reason , that all attributes must be understood according to the nature of the subjects . and therefore , if the subject here spoken of , be of such a nature , as to be uncapable of proceeding from not being to being , then whatever is affirmed of it , must be so understood , as not to destroy its nature . the term of generation alone is not , it may be , sufficient to prove the son co-essential with the father , because it might have been used improperly and metaphorically . but when from the scripture , it otherwise appears that the son of god being the word , was in the beginning with god , and was god , john 1. 1. and we soon after find him called the only begotten of the father , ver. 14. and the only begotten son , ver. 18. we have reason to infer from hence his eternal generation . which must not be understood in such a mean sense as is agreeable to creatures , but as it is consistent with the essential attributes of god , of which necessary existence is one . so that by eternal generation , no more can be meant , than such an emanation of the son from the father , as doth suppose them to have the same nature and co-existence : which is best represented by the rays of the sun coming from the fountain of light , if they were permanent , and not successive . p. what say you then to the mystery of the incarnation ? is it not more wonderful , as bellarmin observes , that there should be one hypostasis in two natures , than one body in two places ? since the union is greater between the hypostasis and the natures , than between the body and the places it is in ; the one being intrinsecal and substantial , the other extrinsecal and accidental . and that hypostasis is the same with the divine nature , and yet is most closely united with the human nature , which is so different from the divine ; so that it is incomprehensible by us , how in that union the natures are not confounded , or the hypostasis divided . pr. suppose now we grant all this , that there is an incomprehensible mystery in the incarnation , what follows from thence ? have i not hitherto owned , that there must be something incomprehensible by us , in what relates to the divine nature ? and it is the less wonder it is so in the incarnation , wherein an union is implied between an infinite and finite nature ; when the union of the soul and body , though both finite , is above our comprehension , though we our selves consist of souls and bodies so united ? but what consequence is it , if we are not able to explain this , that then we must admit that the same body may be not meerly in two , but in ten thousand places at the the same time ? i. e. if we cannot explain the hypostatical union , then all manner of absurdities must go down with us , that relate to things of a very different nature from it . p. i am glad to find you are set at last , and that now you have a difficulty before you which you can never get through . pr. be not too confident ; i have only hitherto denied the consequence as to the difficulties of transubstantiation . but it is possible , that setting aside the confusion of school-terms , i may be able to give a far more intelligible and reasonable account of the incarnation it self , than you can ever do of transubstantiation . p. first shew that it is possible , and then explain the manner of it . pr. but let us in the first place agree what we mean by it . p. by the incarnation , i mean , the union of the divine and humane nature , so as to make one person in christ. pr. if this be not possible , it must either be , 1. because two natures different from each other , cannot be united to make one person : the contrary whereof appears in the union of soul and body to the person of a man. or , 2. because it is impossible that an infinite nature should be united to a finite . p. how can there be an union possible , between two beings infinitely distant from each other ? pr. not in that respect wherein the distance is infinite ; but if there be nothing destructive to either nature in such an union , and the infinite nature do condescend to it , why may it not be so united to an intelligent finite being , as to make one person together with it ? for in respect of union , the distance is not so great between finite and infinite , as between body and spirit . p. the distance is infinite in one case , but not in the other . pr. i do not speak of them , with respect to perfections , but to union ; and an infinite distance in that must imply an absolute repugnancy , which you can never prove : for , since body and spirit may be united to make one person , an infinite spirit may be united to a finite nature . p. but the manner of the hypostatical union is impossible to be conceived . pr. let the thing be granted possible , and the difficulty of conceiving the manner may be as great in the union of soul and body . will you undertake to explain that to me ? and yet i hope you believe it . but , let us hear your difficulties again , which you object from bellarmine . p. that there should be but one hypostasis in two natures ; and that in the union the natures should not be confounded , nor the hypostasis divided . pr. all these difficulties arise from the sense of the word hypostasis . which originally signifies a real being , and not such which depends only on fancy and imagination ; from thence its signification was enlarged , not only to things real , ( in opposition to meer appearances , and creatures of the mind ) but to such a thing which did subsist of it self , and had not its subsistence in another , as accidents had . so that an hypostasis was a real substance which had subsistence in it self . but such are of two kinds , as the greek fathers observe . ( 1. ) such as are real substances in themselves , but yet are capable of being joined with another , to make up a person ; thus the soul and body have two different hypostases , and make up but one person of a man. ( 2. ) it is taken , for a compleat individual subsistence , which is not joined with any other as a part ; and so hypostasis is the same with a person , which is nothing else but a compleat , intelligent , individual hypostasis . and in this sense there can be but one hypostasis in christ , i. e. one person , tho there be two natures . p. but our divines say , that the humane nature after the union hath no hypostasis , it being swallowed up by the divine . pr. i know they do ; but if they mean that the humane nature , after the union , loses that subsistence which is proper to the humane nature , it is impossible for them to avoid the eutychian heresy , condemned by the council of chalcedon ; but if they mean no more than that there is a true nature , but no person , save only that which results from both natures ; they then agree with the sense of the church , which condemned the eutychians . for as much as the heresies of nestorius and eutyches differ'd in themselves , they were both built on the same ground , viz. that there could be no true nature , but there must be a person ; and that two natures could not make one person . from whence nestorius asserted there were two persons in christ ; and eutyches denied that there were two natures . p. what doth all this signify , but that the authority of the church must determine whether there be two natures , or two persons in christ ? pr. it seems then , the whole business wherein the general councils were so warmly concerned , was only to make an ecclesiastical dictionary , and to appoint what words are to be used , and what not . do you think then , there were no such real heresies as nestorianism and eutychianism , but only they happened to take the words nature and person in another sense than the church would have men use them ? p. i trust the church for all these things . pr. then if the church would have you affirm two persons and one nature , or two natures and one person , it were all one to you . p. why not ? since the church must determine . pr. what if you had been to dispute with nestorius and eutyches ? p. i would have told them , they must submit to the church about the use of words . pr. and they would have laughed at you for your pains : for the controversy was really about the truth of christ's incarnation , ( as the fathers proved , and the councils determined ) which in consequence was rejected by both of them ; as i will evidently prove , if you have any longer patience . p. i beg your pardon , sir , i have heard enough of all conscience already . pr. i think so too , to make you ashamed of your parallel between the doctrine of the trinity , and transubstantiation . and methinks , for the sake of our common christianity , you should no more venture upon such bold and unreasonable comparisons . do you in earnest think , it is all one , whether men do believe a god , or providence , or heaven , or hell , or the trinity and incarnation of christ , if they do not believe transubstantiation ? we have heard much of late about old and new popery ; but if this be the way of representing new popery , by exposing the common articles of faith ; it will set the minds of all good christians farther from it than ever . for upon the very same grounds , we may expect another parallel between the belief of a god and transubstantiation ; the effect of which will be , the exposing of all religion . this is a very destructive and mischievous method of proceeding ; but our comfort is , that it is very unreasonable ; as i hope , hath fully appeared by this discourse . finis . errata omitted in the former dialogue . page 10. line 25 , dele not . 18. l. 2 , dele not . 14. marg. l. 8. read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . in this dialogue . page 4. line 5. read viz. the sacrament . 5. l. 19. for done , r. due . 8. l. 30. for fictitious , r. factitious . 23. l. 22. r. doubted as well . books printed for william rogers . the doctrines and practices of the church of rome truly represented ; in answer to a book intituled , a papist mis-represented and represented , &c. quarto . an answer to a discourse intituled , papists protesting against protestant popery ; being a vindication of papists not misrepresented by protestants : and containing a particular examination of monsieur de meaux , late bishop of condom , his exposition of the doctrine of the church of rome , in the articles of invocation of saints , and the worship of images , occasioned by that discourse . quarto . an answer to the amicable accommodation of the difference between the representer and answerer . quarto . a view of the whole controversy between the representer and the answerer , with an answer to the representer's last reply ; in which are laid open some of the methods by which protestants are misrepresented by papists . quarto . a discourse against transubstantiation , in octavo . price 3d. sermons and discourses , some of which never before printed ; the third volume . by the reverend dr. tillotson dean of canterbury . 80. a manuel for a christian soldier . written by erasmus , and translated into english. twelves . the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation , compared as to scripture , reason , and tradition . in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist . the first part. wherein an answer is given to the late proofs of the antiquity of transubstantiation , in the books called consensus veterum , & nubes testium , &c. quarto . the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared , as to scripture , reason , and tradition . in a new dialogue between a protestant and a papist . the second part. wherein the doctrine of the trinity is shewed to be agreeable to scripture and reason , and transubstantiation repugnant to both . quarto . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61550-e340 sicut enim antequam sanctificatur panis , panem nominamus , divinâ autem illum sanctificante grati● , mediante sacerdote , liberatus est quidem ab appellatione panis , dignus autem habitus est dominici corporis appellatione , etiamsi natura panis in ipso permansit , & non duo corpora , sed unum corpus filii praedicatur , sic & hic divina 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in graec. exemplar . ep bigot . ) id est inundante corporis natura unum filium , unam personam utraque haec fecerunt . papist misrepresented , and represented , 2 part. ch . 3. p. 23. concil . chalced . act. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . dial. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . dial. 2. certè sacramenta quae sumimus corporis & sanguinis domini divina res est , propter quod & per eadem divinae efficimur consortes naturae , & tamen esse non desinit substantia vel natura panis & vini . gelas. in biblioth . patr. to. 4. pag. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ephraem . antioch . ap . phot. cod. 229. tom. 3. 1. 5. c. 1 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. ap. facund . 1. 8. c. 5. ap. canis . antiq . lection . to. 4. p. 112 , 114 , 127. epiph. haer . 77. vincent . common . aug. de haeres . c. 55. concil . chal. . ced . act. 1. theodor. dial. 1. & 2. nam quando in terra fuit , non erat ubique in coelo . et nunc quia in coelo est , non est ubique in terra , & in tantum non est , ut secundum ipsam ( carnem ) christum spectemus esse venturum de coelo● quem secundum verbum nobiscum esse credimus in terra . cont. eutych . l. 4. n. 14. et ubique totum praesentem esse non dubites tanquam deum — & in loco aliquo coeli propter veri corporis modum . ad dardan . non enim corpora sunt quorum amplior sit in tribus quam in singulis magnitudo , nec loca suis molibus tenent , ut distantibus spatiis simul esse non possint . ad dardan . secundum praesentiam verò coporalem simul & in sole & in luna & in cruce esse non posset . c. faust. l. 20. c. 11. et cum in terra loquitur in coelo utique nisi per dei infinitatem esse non possit . de incarn . l. 4. c. 6. sive ista crassiora , sivesubtiliora , sed tamen corpora , quorum nullum potest esse ubique totum , quoniam per innumerabiles partes aliud alibi habeat necesse est . et quantumcunque sit corpus , seu quantulumcunque corpusculum , loci occupet spatium , eundemque locum sic impleat , ut in nullâ ejus parte sit totum . ad volusian , quanquam si hoc demas corporibus , quantum mea opinio est , neque sentiri possunt , neque omnino corpora esse rectè existimarem . de quant . animae , c. 4. quod per loci spatium aliqua longitudine , latitudine , altitudine ita sistitur vel movetur , ut majore sui parte majorem locum occupet , & breviore breviorem , minusque sit in parte quam in toto . ad hieron . ep. 166. non omnino potest esse aliquod corpus , sive coeleste , sive terrestre , sive aereum , sive humidum , quod non minus sit in parte quam in toto , neque ullo modo possit in loco hujus partis simul habere aliam partem , sed aliud hic , aliud alibi habens per quaelibet spatia locorum distantia & dividua , vel potius ut ita dicam , sectili more distenditur . c. epist. manich. c. 16. omne corpus locale est , & omne locale corpus est . 63. quaest. c. 35. corpus quodlibet per localia spatia porrectum est . 83. quaest. c. 51. orat. 34. & in ep ad cledon . dial. 2. de trin. claud. mamert . de statu animae , l. 1. c. 5 , 17 , 18. l. 3. c. 14. apud euseb. de praep. evangel . l. 7. c. 22. basil. epist. 43. isidor . epist. l. 2. ep. 72. greg. nyssen . in hexaem . p. 13 de hom. opificio . c. 24. aug. ep. ad dardanum . cont . julian . l. 5. c. 9. isid. origin . l. 2. c. 26. boeth . de praedic . damascen dial. c. 1. alcuin . dial. c. 5 , 12. iren. l. 2. c. 14. apud . phot. cod. 234. aug. de immort . anim. c. 10. soliloq . l. 2. c. 13. de statu animo . l. 3. c. 3. iren. l. 3. 20. 5. 7. tertul. decarne christi , c. 5. advers . marc. l. 4. c. 43. l 3. c. 8 , 11. epiphan . haer . 42 , 64. hilar. in psal. 137. aug. c. faust. l. 29. c. 2. l. 14. c. 10. 83. quaest. c. 14. serm. 238. de euch. l. 1. c. 14. cyril . mystag . 3 , & 4 , 5. catech. 3. chrysost. in matt. hom 83. ambros. de his qui initiantur , c. 9. consensus veterum , p. 21 , 22 , 23. consens . vet. p. 27. nouvelle biblioth . des antienes ecclesiastiques par ellies du pin. 1686. p. 22. p. 23. consens . p. 30. consens . veter p. 30. nubes testium , p. 109. tertull. c. marcion . l. 4 , c. 40. apol. 2. p. 31. iren. l. 4. c. 34. iren. l. 5. c. 11. con. marcion . l. 4. c. 40. con. marcion . l. 3. c. 19. l. 5. c. 8. de resur . c. 8. strom. 4. hom. 5. in divers . loc . comment . in matth. 15. cypr. de lapsis . epist. 63. n. 6. nubes testium . p. 120. &c. consens . vet. p. 54 , &c. disp. 53. sect. 4 de euch. l. 1. c. 2. hom. 83. in mat. hom. 51. in mat. in heb. hom. 14. in rom. hom. 8. ad pop. antioch . hom. 15. de sacerd. l. 3. in joh. hom. 45. hom. in gal. c. 5. hom. de resur . to. 5. hom. 46. in joh. hom. 28. in 1. ep. ad corinth . hom. 24. in 1. ad corinth . hom. 22. in hebr. hom. de poenit . to. 6. p. 56. eucholog . p. 77. greg. nyssen . orat. catech. 37. nubes testium , p. 124. tertul de resur . carn . c. 37. orig. hom . 7. in levit. ambros. de his qui initiantur , c. 9. c. 3. de sacram. l. 5. c. 4. notes for div a61550-e21120 rom. 1. 21 , 23 , 24. 1 cor. 10. 7 , 14. 1 joh. 5. 21. bell. de christo . l. 1. c. 4 , &c. bell. de euch. l. 3. c 19. cap. 23. a discourse concerning the nature and grounds of the certainty of faith in answer to j.s., his catholick letters / by edw. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1688 approx. 234 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 66 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-03 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61545 wing s5582 estc r14787 12719427 ocm 12719427 66277 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61545) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 66277) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 369:12) a discourse concerning the nature and grounds of the certainty of faith in answer to j.s., his catholick letters / by edw. stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [8], 116, [2] p. printed for henry mortlock ..., london : 1688. a reply to john sergeant's letter, 1687, and others of his works. half-title: dr. stillingfleet's answer to j.s.'s catholick letters. another copy bound with stillingfleet's a letter to mr. g., 1687. errata: p. [8]. advertisements: p. [2] at end. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng sergeant, john, 1622-1707. -second catholick letter. faith -early works to 1800. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-11 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-11 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-01 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion dr. stillingfleet's answer to j. s's catholick letters . imprimatur , liber cui titulus , a discourse concerning the nature and grounds of the cerrainty of faith , &c. jan. 5. 1687. h. maurice , rmo in christo , p. d. wilhelmo archiep. cantuariensi , a sacris . a discourse concerning the nature and grounds of the certainty of faith , in answer to j. s. his catholick letters . by edw. stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. pauls . london : printed for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , mdclxxxviii . the contents the title of catholick letters examin'd page 1 how j. s. comes to be concerned in this debate 3 his doctrine denied to be catholick by the sorbon doctors and others 5 his self-contradiction about it in seven particulars 7 the state of the present controversie about the certainty of faith 15 how it is altered by j. s. 25 of the certainty of particular points of faith 27 the grounds of the certainty of faith laid down by the general consent of the school-divines 31 j. s's main argument against our certainty of faith answer'd and retorted 34 an evident proof of the certainty of faith without infallibility 37 the notion of a rule of faith explained 38 the sense of tradition may be mistaken as well as scripture 43 the instances of it defended 44 the second argument , about fallible certainty , answer'd . 49 the third , about our rule of faith , being common to all heresies , answer'd 50 the fourth , about making our private judgment our rule , answer'd 53 the fifth , about judgment of discretion consider'd and answer'd 54 how far the scripture is a rule to our people 55 what certainty they have as to things necessary to salvation 61 what judgment of discretion allowed by him 62 that it doth not serve only to find an infallible authority proved at large 64 his severe conclusion of his third letter answer'd 69 the answer to the argument summ'd up 71 the sixth argument about the apostles not using a written rule in their preaching , answer'd 73 the seventh , about points necessary to salvation , answer'd 74 the similitude of the purse defended 76 scripture owned to be a rule of faith ( though not complete ) by the divines of the church of rome 78 and that all points simply necessary are therein contained 81 j. s. his concession that all points are not necessary to all persons 83 some mens vncertainty overthrows not the certainty of others 85 the eighth argument about the certainty of the letter of scripture 86 j. s. overthrows it , by allowing it to be corrected by the sense of the faithful 87 the grounds of our certainty laid down 89 of human and divine faith 91 the last argument , about the number of canonical books , answer'd 92 no books of the new testament lost 93 how the canon was entire in the first ages 95 of the vniversal consent of all christian churches 97 the demonstration for oral tradition laid down 100 the instance of the greek church not answer'd 101 the argument it self consider'd 104 a clear and distinct answer given to it , and its notorious fallacy laid open 105 how errors might come into the church 109 the late instance of molinos produced 109 , 110 many other causes of errors besides forgetfulness and malice set down ibid. the charge of pelagianism defended against j. s. 113 of the council of trents proceeding on tradition 115 the proof that it did not , referr'd to another discourse 116 errata . page 16. line 9. for as mr. g. read as mr. s. p. 32. marg. for 9.6 . times , r. q. for 19.9 . r. 1 , 2. q. ibid. marg. l. 9. for the 2 d. 13. r. a. 10. p. 62. l. 23. r. and how far , and. p. 105. l. 15. blot out not before really , l. 16. add not after are . a discourse concerning the nature & grounds of the certainty of faith , &c. when i published my two letters to mr. g. i had good reason to expect an answer from him , who began the controversie . but it seems he had better reason to forbear ( and it is not hard to guess at it ) and i am turned over to one , who pretends to write catholick letters against me . i have a great and just reverence for some catholick epistles , and believe them written by an infallible spirit ; but for these catholick letters , though their whole design be infallibility , yet i cannot find so much as a fair probability in them . but why must these be call'd catholick letters ? are they written by some catholick bishop , to give an account of his faith , according to the custom of the antient church ? is it , that the doctrine contained in them is undoubtedly catholick ? so far from it , that i shall make it appear , that no one church of the christian world ever own'd it . but , suppose , it had been the doctrine of the roman church , how could this make them catholick letters , unless so great a logician had first proved , that a part may assume the denomination of the whole ? but then , why not , roman catholick letters according to the new style ? there was a reason for this . j. s. hath not forgotten , how hardly he had lately escaped censure at rome , for the principles contained in them ; and therefore though he hopes they may pass for catholick here , yet he durst not joyn roman to catholick in the title of his letters . but how comes j. s. to be concerned in this controversie with mr. g. ? the account he gives of it in the beginning of his first letter is very pleasant . he saith , he accepted a commission from mr. g. to hold his cards , while he is not in circumstances to play out his game himself . i will not examine mr. g's . circumstances , nor the game he plays at ; but methinks , this is no very decent way of expressing the undertaking a debate about matters of faith and salvation . but in truth , he makes the business of infallibility , as he handles it , to be a matter of sport and diversion ; notwithstanding all his grimaces and tragical expressions about it . it is hard to be severe upon a metaphor ; but , suppose it be allowed ; yet i wonder , of all men , he should pitch upon j. s. to hold his cards for him , who had plaid his own so ill , and so much to the dissatisfaction of the leading men of his own church . yet he now appears as brisk and confident , as if he were some new gamester ; although he produces his old sullied cards , ( a little wiped ) over again ; and seems to have forgotten the answer to his sure footing , and the accompt he still owes to the world for it . i know not , how far it agrees with the laws of ecclesiastical chivalry , for one , who hath not defended himself , to appear a champion for another , especially in the same cause ; but there is no great reason to apprehend he should do much for another , who hath done next to nothing for himself . the main subject of the debate is , about the nature and grounds of the certainty of faith ; and the method i think most natural and effectual to proceed in , is , i. to shew how unfit j. s. of all men , is to undertake this cause . ii. to settle the true state of the controversie between us . iii. to examine the reasons he produces against our grounds of certainty . iv. to lay open the weakness of his arguments , on behalf of the infallibility of oral and practical tradition . i. as to j. s. his appearing in this cause again , we are to consider , that in his catholick letters , he frequently owns faith vindicated , reason against raillery , and errour nonplust ; and even sure footing it self . but i shall now shew , that he disowned the main principles in those books , when he was in great danger of being censured at rome for them ; and therefore is not to be allow'd to produce them again . the account of this matter will give great light into the state of the present controversie , and is therefore necessary to be premised to it . out of those books of j. s. a considerable person in the church of rome , selected three propositions about the grounds of his infallible certainty , which were these ; i. that he who is obliged to profess faith propositions true , must see the connexion between their terms , and consequently , that they cannot be unconnected , or false . ii. if the two terms be not seen to be connected , these propositions may , nay ought to be denyed by the respondent , whose office and right it is to grant nothing but what is evident , lest he ensnare himself . iii. 't is requisite and necessary , that the assent of faith in divers particular believers be formally infallible , or that those persons be infallibly certain by evident reasons , that the authority or rule of faith they rely on , cannot herein deceive them . else great wits , and acute reflecters , whose piercing vnderstandings require convictive grounds for their faith , would remain for ever unsatisfied : nor would the wisest christians sincerely and heartily assent to , nor with honesty profess the truth of their faith , nor could any prove it true , or establish rational doubters in it , or convert men of exact knowledge to it , or convince hereticks , calling the truth of it in question . nor could governors and leading persons with any conscience or credit propose and preach the truth of faith to the generality . these propositions were tender'd to two doctors of the sorbon , who declared , the first could not be explained in a catholick sense ; and therefore very unfit for catholick letters . for if ( say they ) a person sees the connexion between the terms , it would be science , and not faith ; it is enough to see them not to be contradictory , or that the connexion is not repugnant to reason . divine faith is above , not contrary to reason . as to the second , they agreed , that neither could that be explained in a catholick sense , because it is destructive of faith , and a proposition ought not , cannot be denied , although the respondent hath not evidence of the terms of which it consists ; when he otherwise knows the church ( which faith [ not demonstration ] teaches to be infallible in matters of faith ) to propose as a truth revealed by god. to the third , they say , that it cannot be explained in a catholick sense : because it is sufficient that the church be believed by faith to be infallible , and it is not requisite that the infallibility of the church be proved by evident reason . see here the main design of his catholick letters declared to be no catholick doctrine ; which is to prove that there must be infallible certainty by conclusive evidence of the churches infallibility . and if this be not catholick doctrine , i am infallibly certain his letters are far from being catholick in their sense . one of these doctors writes to the a. b. of d. that the natural sense of the propositions could not be catholick ; and that all bishops were bound to suppress this doctrine , lest it did mischief to the flock of christ. and that the a. b. of paris would revoke his licence , if the author did not retract them , as he hoped he would . what ? retract the substance of his catholick letters ! is this possible ? and yet again publish the same doctrine as catholick ! this is indeed very surprising . but so it was . for the a. b. of d. averrs , that j. s. confessed the propositions to be heretical , yea very heretical ; but he said , they were not taken in his sense ; which the other said , was a ridiculous plea. he granted , that j. s. might contradict himself , but there was no colour for saying the propositions were not taken in their true sense . and mr. s. being requir'd by the a. b. of paris to anathematize these propositions , and to subscribe to the censure that they could not be explained in a catholick sense ; he did it . and yet the sense of them is maintained by him in his catholick letters . is not such a man fit to hold the cards for mr. g. ? who makes the same doctrine to be heretical and catholick , as his circumstances require . and in his own language , he goes backwards and forwards , blows and sups , declares for and against the same principles . this doctrine of j. s. was complained of at rome , and a congregation of cardinals was appointed to examine it , and they sent their instructions about it to the popes nuncio at paris , where j. s. then was . and therein they took notice , that in his vindication sent to them , he detested that doctrine as heretical , viz. that the evidence of the connexion of predicate and subject , and the evidence of the rule of faith by which the believer may be infallibly certain he cannot be deceived , is necessary in order to faith. i desire the reader to mark this declaration which j. s. sent to rome , and to compare it with the doctrine of his catholick letters : but of that hereafter . but it is worth our while to shew with what a double face i. s. appeared in his vindication and complaint , sent to rome , and in his books which he published here . and by that , the reader may judge of the catholick sincerity of the writer of these letters . i. about the faith he designs to demonstrate . faith vindicated , preface . i declare then , that my chief end in this treatise , is to settle christian faith , or to demonstrate , that it must be truly or absolutely certain , and that my applying it now and then to my opposers , is only a secondary intention , and meerly occasional . querimonia advers . lominum . p. 49. he saith , he speaks not of faith in itself , but as it is controverted among us . the same he affirms p. 145 , 146. that he meddles not with faith , but with respect to his adversaries ; or as it is disputed between catholicks and those he calls hereticks , p. 148. if it were his design to settle christian faith , and to make it truely and absolutely certain , and only secondarily applying it to his opposers ; how is it possible that at the same time , he should not meddle with faith in itself , but meerly with respect to his opposers ? is not this a brave undertaker , to make faith infallibly certain , who so evidently contradicts himself as to his own design ? but it seems , to us he must pretend to make faith certain in itself ; but at rome , he meant no more by it , but only to perplex and confound us . as though his demonstrations were only intended for a sort of metaphysical traps to catch hereticks with . but we are glad to see by his own confession , that faith in itself is not made absolutely certain by them . ii. about the objects of faith , and the evidence of them . reason against raillery , pag. 55. the strangest and wisest souls are unapt to assent but upon evidence : hence , unless such men see proofs absolutely concluding those points true , they are unapt to be drawn to yield to them , and embrace them as certain truths — nothing can rationally subdue the faculty of suspending , in such men at least , but true evidence had from the object working this clear sight in them , either by itself , or by effects or causes necessarily connected with it . other evidences i know none . faith vindicated , p. 12 , 13. the truth of propositions of faith consists in the connexion of those notions which make the subject and predicate . whoever therefore sees not the connexion between those notions in the principle of faith , sees not the truth of any of those propositions — it follows , that he who is obliged to profess faith-propositions true , must see the connexion between those terms . in his declaration sent to rome , p. 11 , 13. he not only expressed his assent to these propositions , but that the contrary to them were false , destructive of faith , and heretical , viz. i. that the objects of faith are not to be evident or demonstrable by natural reasons in order to believing them . ii. that in order to the believing such objects of faith , conveyed down to us , either by scripture or tradition , it is not necessary to know evidently the connexion of predicate and subject , but it is sufficient if they be proposed by the catholick church . now let any man try how he can reconcile these things ; ( 1 ) nothing can subdue rationally the faculty of suspending but true evidence had from the object ; and yet it is destructive to faith , and heretical to say ; that the objects of faith are demonstrable by natural reasons , in order to believing them . is not true evidence from the object a natural reason in order to believing ? ( 2 ) he that sees not the connexion between predicate and subject , sees not the truth of faith-propositions ; and he who is obliged to profess them , must see it ; and yet , in order to believing objects of faith , it is not necessary to see it , nay it is heretical to assert it . iii. about infallible assent . reason against raillery , p. 113. 't is most evident therefore and demonstrable , that there is no certainty , but where there is infallibility ; and that we can never be said to be truly certain of any thing , till , all circumstances consider'd , we see ourselves out of possibility of being deceived hic & nunc in that very thing . in his declaration , p. 11 , 13. he owns this proposition to be true , and the contrary to be heretical , viz. that it is not necessary , in order to believing the objects of faith , that he that believes , should know evidently his assent to be supernatural and infallible . but if there can be no certainty of faith , till we see ourselves out of possibility of being deceived , i should think it very hard to say it was heretical to assert it was necessary for him that believes to know his assent to be infallible . for what difference is there between knowing we cannot be deceived in our assent , and that it is infallible ? but here he will hope to escape , by joyning supernatural to infallible ; and so he over-reached the cardinals by putting those together ; for his is nothing but a pure natural infallibility . iv. about the mediums of faith used by him . sure footing , p. 172. he rejects extrinsecal mediums as insufficient , and requires intrinsecal . faith vindicated , preface , at the end . he owns his discourses to be built on intrinsecal mediums . errour nonplust , p. 169. he requires clear evidence from the object , to ground a firm assent . page . 170 , 171. he makes it necessary to true certainty , that it be taken from the thing or object . and true certainty ( he saith ) is built on the things being as it is , and nothing can ever be truly known to be otherwise than it is . in his subscription to the instructions from rome , p. 12. he denies that he spake of intrinsecal requisites to faith ; but only of extrinsecal . and this he goes about to prove against his own plain words , in his declaration , sect. 3. pag. 34 , &c. how can intrinsecal mediums , and evidence from the object , be only extrinsecal pre-requisites ? v. about human and divine faith. faith vindicated , p. 73. divine faith ought to have a far greater degree of firmness in it , than any human faith whatsoever : wherefore since human faith can rise to that degree of stability — divine faith being supernatural , ought to be more firmly grounded ; and consequently more highly impossible to be false . errour nonplust , p. 143. he speaks expresly of divine faith. in his vindication , p. 97. he saith , it is evident that he spake of faith , formally as human , and not as formally divine . what evidence can there be like a man's plain words ? is not that divine faith which he goes about to demonstrate the infallible certainty of ? it seems we are all this while to seek for the certainty of faith formally divine ; and all this mighty noise about the necessity of infallibility , reaches no farther than a faith formally human. and yet j. s. affirms that he undertook to prove the impossibility of falshood in divine and supernatural faith. and so it seems divine and supernatural faith must derive its infallible certainty from a meer natural infallibility . or if it be but human faith he means , then he falls short of what he promised , which was to shew the infallible certainty of divine faith. and thus the trap-maker is catch'd himself . vi. about particular points of faith. errour nonplust , p. 161. i thought he had meant certainty of the points of his faith. what we are then in reason to expect from dr. st. is , that he would bring us grounds for the certainty of his faith , as to determinate points , viz. christ's godhead , a trinity , &c. reason against raillery , p. 167. seeing then christians are bound to profess their faith true , as to those points of a trinity , for example , or incarnation , &c. it follows , that it must be affirm'd and held that a trinity or incarnation absolutely is , and consequently , that it is impossible not to be . declaration , p. 50. he peremptorily asserts ( and challenges his adversaries to shew the contrary ) that he produced not one argument to prove any points of doctrine to be divine , or supernatural ; but only , that such a doctrine was delivered by christ or his apostles . and this he frequently insists upon , and is the main of his defence . but why then doth he urge us to produce our grounds of certainty as to particular points , if himself doth not ? if he pretends no more than to prove them in general , why may not we be allowed to do the same ? he that calls upon others to do it , in such an insulting manner , is presumed to do it himself , and if he doth not , he only banters and abuses his reader . and after all this mighty pretence to demonstration and infallibility , the whole dispute comes to this , whether men may attain to greater certainty of christ's doctrine by oral and practical traditions than we can do by scripture , reason and tradition ? but this is against his words , where he saith , seeing then christians are bound to profess their faith true , as to those points of a trinity , for example , or incarnation , &c. it follows , that it must be affirm'd and held that a trinity or incarnation absolutely is , and consequently , that it is impossible not to be . vii . about moral certainty . his whole book called faith vindicated was written against it . and in the preface to it , p. 3. he opposes absolute certainty to moral ; and he saith , those who have it not , have no true faith. page 17. true faith by reason of its immoveable grounds , can bear an asserting the absolute impossibility of its falshood . and without this , he makes faith absurd , preternatural and irrational . page 34. moral certainty is in reality uncertainty ; and the highest degree of moral certainty is the lowest degree of vncertainty , truly so called . the same he asserts , pag. 36 , 86 , 93. error nonplust . pag. 195. fallible certainty destroys all efficacy , all defence , and even essence of faith. when i read in lominus , pag. 43. that i. s. in his vindication pleaded , that he required no more than moral evidence for the assent and profession of faith , i could hardly believe him ; and therefore i was earnest to see what he would say in answer to this ; but even there , pag. 23. he owns it , and saith expresly , that moral evidence is absolutely sufficient to faith : but withal he saith , there is more than moral evidence in tradition . let now any indifferent person compare those assertions together : if moral certainty be vncertainty , and destroy the essence of faith , how can it be absolutely sufficient to faith ? but besides the contradiction ; he hath by this one assertion overthrown the whole design of his catholick letters . for , if true faith may be had without infallible certainty , what need any such contending about it ? for the ground of the dispute is about such faith as is necessary to salvation ; and if true faith , as j. s. grants , which is necessary to salvation , may be had without their pretended infallibility ; there is no colour left for pressing persons of our communion to forsake our church , because we cannot have infallible certainty of faith , when themselves grant that we may be saved without it . and what sincerity is to be expected from such a man , who makes such out-cries upon us , for want of infallible certainty for faith , when himself confesses , that moral certainty is sufficient to faith ? what ever becomes of moral certainty , i love moral honesty ; and i cannot see how it is consistent with it , to make such mighty pretences to the necessity of infallible certainty for faith , even in his catholick letters ( which seems to be the chief design of them , ) when himself had declared to the cardinals at rome , that less than that is sufficient for true faith. but the secret of it is , he knows well enough , there is no such necessity for infallible certainty ; and when it will bring him off , he can own it ; but among us hereticks , they must bluster and make a mighty noise about it ; because it startles weak and injudicious people ; and they find nothing so apt to terrifie and confound them like infallibility ; which like a flash of lightning doth not help them to see better , but strikes them down with horror and astonishment . and here i might fairly stop and send the reader to j. s. for an effectual answer to his own letters ; or at least to shew ; how very unfit he was after such going forward , and backwards in this matter , to undertake this cause . 2. but lest i should seem to decline any thing which may seem material , i shall now proceed to state the controversie , as it lies between mr. s. and me . for , what concerns another person , i shall leave it to himself , as not standing in need of any assistance from me . the occasion of the conference was set down by mr. m. to have been , that mr. g. affirmed in some companies , that no protestant could shew any ground of absolute certainty for their faith ; and that mr. s. had promised him , that if i were not able to manifest the contrary , he would forsake our communion . so that mr. g. was the aggressor by laying this charge upon us , that we could shew no ground of absolute certainty for our faith. and therefore when in the conference i assigned the scripture for the ground and rule of our faith , and universal tradition for the proof of the books of scripture , i had reason in my expostulatory letter to mr. g. , to desire of him to shew , that we have no absolute certainty of the rule of our faith , viz. the scripture , although we have a larger and firmer tradition for it , than you can have for the points in difference between us . this plainly relates to the conference , wherein scripture was own'd to be our rule , and vniversal tradition , the evidence on which we receive the books . and to any man of sense , this is not shifting and tricking off the proof to mr. g. as mr. g. often calls it ; but it is a plain and evident proof of our certainty upon their own grounds . for , if tradition be such a ground of absolute certainty , as they assert , and we have a larger and firmer tradition for scripture , than they can produce for the points of faith in difference between us ; then it is evident we must have , upon their own principles , a ground of absolute certainty for our faith ; which was the main point of the conference . if he will answer the argument , he must either deny that we have vniversal tradition for the books of scripture , or that vniversal tradition is a ground for the absolute certainty of faith ? either of these ways he had said something to the purpose ; but he found this way of reasoning too hot for him ; and therefore , he calls it shifting and tricking off the proof to mr. g. and so falls into a tragical declamation against my not proving , and making a secret of the ground of our certainty ; as if a man intended to make a secret of a horse he had lost , when he published his marks in the gazett . here is the ground of our certainty laid down in that very place , where he saith , i shift off the proof to mr. g. but alas for him ! he cannot see any thing like a proof , unless it be serv'd up , with all its due formalities of major , minor and conclusion . must i be forced to tell him , as the painters did by ill pictures , this is a horse , and this a wolf ? this is an argument , and this an answer ? it is a hard case if a man cannot understand reason , unless like scaliger's jests against cardan , there be something in the margin to direct where they are to be found . all men of sense understand the force of an argument , though it be not dressed up after the way of the schools ; and to tye men up to those methods of reasoning in our age in books of controversie , is like trammelling a horse , when he is to go a journey ; it might do well to teach him to pace , but it would be ridiculous , when he is upon service . upon this he runs out into a very eloquent piece of trifling , making sad moans and complaints with many exaggerations , and great variety of phrases , as if i offer'd no kind of certainty to mens souls , but only that i bid those that doubt prove the contrary ; and so brings notable parallels of peters having twenty pounds in his purse , because paul cannot prove he hath it not ; or his having the more title to an estate , because an adversary may have the ill luck to be nonsuited . i know not how mr. g. will take these things ; for they do not seem much to his advantage . if i were as he , i would never trust him to play my cards more ; for what means this insinuation of nonsuiting , & c ? but mr. s. is plainly mistaken , for the force of it doth not depend upon his bare nonsuiting ; but upon the goodness of the deeds , and the strength of the evidence , which himself relied upon , and appear much stronger for us than for him . it is not pauls not proving , but peters producing the twenty pounds , and laying it before him , which is the argument to prove he hath it . suppose he did not produce it in specie , but shewed good security for it , such as paul could not deny , had he not reason to believe he was owner of it ? there being so little colour in the reasoning part , i pass over the declamatory , as fitter for the school at the savoy , than a writer of controversies . but here comes in , among his flowers , a very notable point of divinity . truth is therefore truth , because it is built on intrinsecal grounds which prove it to be such ; and not on private mens abilities , or their saying this or that . this latter is undoubtedly true , and is universally believed , since the school of pythagoras was broken up : wherefore till those grounds be produced , it cannot be with reason held truth . this is great ; and becoming the scientifical i. s. but will he hold to this ? will he own it to the cardinals of the inquisition ? i find a certain gentleman with the very fame letters , j. s. writing two whole sections , wherein he denies that ever he medled with intrinsic mediums , or that it was possible that he should . but p. t. was then living , and followed him close at rome ; now that fright is over , out come intrinsic grounds again ; and no man can hold any thing as truth , till those grounds be produced . suppose a man assents to the doctrine of faith , as true and divine on meerly extrinsecal grounds , or motives of credibility ; hath this man true faith or not ? is he bound to hold and profess it to be true , though he doth not see the intrinsecal grounds which prove truth to be truth ? doth that man sin , who professes to believe a thing to be true , though he doth not see the intrinsic grounds for it ? what kind of sin is it , mortal , or venial ? how far may a man safely deny that which he cannot with reason hold to be true ? how many thousand martyrs lives , might this doctrine have saved in the primitive times ? how might the poor innocent christians have pleaded for themselves ; that they could see no intrinsic grounds , which made truth to be truth ; and they understood from a deep divine , that till those grounds be produced , it cannot with reason be held truth ; and if it cannot with reason be held , it may surely in our very hard circumstances , with reason , be denied , or at least concealed and dissembled . there seems to be more danger in professing the faith without it ; than in not owning it , being not able to produce intrinsic grounds for it . and these are far above our reach and capacity ; and if it cannot with reason be held truth without it , it seems very unreasonable to require us to dye for it . what saith j. s. to the case of the jews , who heard our saviours doctrine , and saw his miracles , did they sin in their infidelity or not ? it will be very hard for him prove , that they saw intrinsic grounds for what they were required to believe ; and yet our saviour charges them with very great sin in their infidelity . i hope mr. s. will not answer me , about these things , as he did some in the conference at paris , with , tace , tace , interrumpis & confundis me . this very instance of the jews was then brought against him by dr. g. and he said , that only those jews sinned , who had clear evidence that christs miracles were true and supernatural . but a. b. of d. then urged , that if they had such evidence , they could not have inward vnbelief , nor call in question the truth or divinity of christ and his miracles . to which j. s. replied , tace , nolo tibi respondere . i hope he is better provided of an answer now , and that he will shew , wherein the sin of the jews lay , who did not profess christ's doctrine to be true , because they could not produce any intrinsic grounds for the truth of it . but to return to our first controversie , about the certainty of faith to be proved by us . he tells me , that i know well enough , that to prove protestants have no absolute certainty of their faith is no hard task even for a weak man ; i know , he saith , that any man may find it confessed to his hands by protestants ; and in the margin he cites , dr. tillotsons rule of faith , pag. 117 , 118. i wonder at mr. s's . courage , that he dares mention that book , to which he hath so many years been indebted for an answer , and what he hath offer'd towards it in faith vindicated , and reason against raillery , he hath again retracted as to the main principles of them , for fear of a censure at rome ; and which he advanced out of opposition to those of that book which he quotes here . so that j. s. by disowning those principles of his , hath justified dr. t. and hath overthrown the absolute certainty of his own faith. for i have already proved from his own words , that he owns moral evidence to be absolutely sufficient for faith ; and yet this is the very thing from whence he proves that protestants have confessed that they have no absolute certainty of their faith. but if this matter were to be decided by the confession of parties , what thinks he of those of the church of rome , who have charged his doctrine about infallible certainty , with downright heresie and impiety , and that it leads to atheism and infidelity , and overthrows the christian faith ? this we are told is the sense of all the learned and orthodox men of your church . let the reader judge what j. s. hath gotten by the confession of parties . i hope now we shall come to the state of the question ; for he charges me with perverting it : the first question ( he saith ) at the conference , was , whether protestants are absolutely certain , that they hold now the same tenets in faith and all that our saviour taught to his apostles . and my answer , he saith , was , they are . by his favour , my answer was not in those words , but that we are absolutely certain that we now hold all the same doctrine that was taught by christ and his apostles . and for a certain reason , i desire my own words may express my mind ; for i do not find oral tradition infallible ; and where words are varied , the sense may be so too . but he observes , that i trick it off again , as he calls it , ( i suppose it is gamesters language , ) from the point of absolute certainty of faith , to absolute certainty of the rule of faith , viz. the scripture ; but our saviour and protestants believe more than that the book so called , is scripture . is certainty of this more , and certainty of this book , all one ? here is then an enquiry after one thing , plainly turned off to another . it seems mr. g. is quite gone for a gamester ; for he discerned no tricking in this matter , nor can i. it is very true , we do believe more , than that the book so called is scripture ; for we believe all the matters of faith contained in that book . and what then ? if by his more , he means articles of faith not contained in scripture ; then i tell him plainly , we believe no more . and therefore when mr. g. put his next question , as he thought very pertinently , by what certain rule do you hold it ? my answer was , by the divine revelation contained in the writings of the new testament : whereby i excluded his more , if it be not contained in scripture . but if by more , he means our assent to the points of faith contained in scripture , i shall give a full answer to it afterwards . then he asked , by what certain rule do you know that the new testament , which we now have , does contain all the divine revelations of christ and his apostles ? and if he puts such questions concerning the rule , what tricking was it in me , to give a direct answer to them ? how did i turn off the enquiry from one thing to another , when i only answered the questions he proposed ? this is not playing mr. g 's cards , but condemning him for playing unskilfully ; and desiring to begin a new game ; for mr. g. had a bad hand , and managed it very ill . but what would j. s. have done ? the thing to be made manifest by the conference , was , the absolute certainty of protestant faith. and so it was ; for protestant faith is to believe all that is contained in scripture , and no more . mr. g. did indeed ask some questions about your certainty of your rule ; and i gave him direct answers . where is the tricking in all this ? but i wisely cut off the course of the questions before they had question'd away the certainty of faith. so far otherwise , that i let them alone , till they plainly run away from the business of certainty to another question ; and then mr. t. cut them off , by declaring himself satisfied ; and asking how they could prove the church of rome to be infallible ? but now we are to see how much better the cards might have been plaid . and now , look ye gentlemen , the man of skill begins the game . after the certainty of scripture from tradition was admitted , there was no refusing to admit that tradition causes certainty , and makes faith as certain as scripture . see the difference of these two gamesters at tradition ! but what if i should yield him , that i will not refuse to give my assent to any point of faith , which comes down to us from the apostles times with as large and as firm a tradition as the scripture ? then ( saith he ) it would have proved something difficult to satisfie even a willing man , that the faith is certain which is opposed to a faith come down by tradition . something difficult ! nay very much so , without doubt . but this is fairly to suppose , that you have as vniversal a tradition for your tridentine faith , as we have for the scripture ; but this i utterly deny ; and i hope in another treatise to shew , i have not done it without reason . let the matter of tradition itself , as a rule of faith , be one of these points . if there were a constant vniversal tradition in the christian church from the apostolical times , that there were matters of faith necessary to salvation not contained in scripture , i grant that it would be difficult , to prove it to be a matter of faith that scripture alone is our rule of faith. but that is the mighty advantage of our cause , that we have both scripture and tradition for us ; and that no catholick tradition can be produced against us , in any one point of the additional creed of pius iv. which is the design i have undertaken , of which i shall suddenly publish the first part ; and if god gives me life and health , i hope to go through the rest. well ; but in the mean time , absolute certainty of scripture was not the point of the conference . can j. s. tell better than the managers ? his meaning is , it ought not to have been . nor is it the point of concern . this is strange . not the point of concern to those that own it to be the word of god , and the only rule of faith ! it is of infinite concern to us ; if it be not to you , i pity you for it . besides that , it is agreed on all hands , men are saved by believing and practising what christ taught , not barely by believing scripture is scripture . this is no new speculation ; but what follows from it ? therefore we ought to believe christ's doctrine contained in scripture , and obey his commands ; and do i give the least intimation against this ? but , the question was about our rule of faith , and that i still think is the scripture ; and whatever is contained therein , is to be believed on that account . but salvation is the thing that imports us in these disputes , and 't were well if nothing else were minded by disputers . and so think i too . i desire no more to end our controversies , than to make salvation our end , and the scripture our rule . but how can salvation be the thing that imports us in these disputes , if men cannot with reason hold any thing true , unless they can produce the intrinsecal grounds which prove it to be so ? doth mr. s. in earnest think , that none are saved but metaphysical speculators , that perch upon the specifick nature of things , and dig into the intrinsecal grounds of truth ? if this be his opinion , how few can be saved ! but if salvation be the end , the means must be suitable to the capacity of mankind ; and i do not think , the intrinsecal grounds of truth are so . but aftey all , he saith , that i stifle any further talk of the certainty of protestent faith. how can that be , when i own no protestant faith but what is contained in scripture , or may be deduced from it ; according to the sixth article of our church . i am not conscious to myself of any art in the matter , which he charges me with ; and he saith , i avoid what cannot be performed . what is that ? to make out that protestants are absolutely certain that they now hold all the same doctrine that was taught by christ and his apostles . if all that doctrine be contained in scripture , and they hold the scripture by grounds of absolute certainty , then protestants must be certain that they hold all the same doctrine that was taught by christ and his apostles . afterwards mr. s. starts something that comes nearer to the business ; which is , that certainty of faith and certainty of scripture , are two things : for those who have as much certainty of scripture as we , may have not only an vncertain but a wrong faith ; and therefore i am concerned to shew , not only that protestants have certainty of their rule , but of the faith which they pretend to have from that rule : that which i am now upon , is to settle the true state of the controversie about the certainty of faith. in the conference , my first answer was , that , we are absolutely certain that we now hold all the same doctrine , that was taught by christ and his apostles . and when the question was asked , by what certain rule do we hold it ? i answer'd , by the divine revelation contained in the writings of the new testament . so that the certainty of scripture was that which i was obliged to answer to . now comes j. s. and he finds fault with mr. g's management ; because he asked questions about the certainty of the rule ; whereas he ought to have gone another way to work . so that now mr. g. is given up , and a new controversie is begun upon other grounds ; and the words which i used with respect to the rule , are applied to particular doctrines . he saith , the certainty of scripture was not the point for which the conference was . how comes he to know better than mr. g. unless he directed the point , and mr. g. mistook and lost it in the management ? but i am now bound to manifest , that protestants have absolute certainty , not only of the scripture , as the rule , but of the faith they have from that rule , or else to own that i cannot . it seems mr. g's good nature betray'd him , when he asked questions about the rule of faith ; and so the main point was lost . yet methinks it was not meer good nature in mr. g. for , when we are asked , about the grounds and certainty of our faith , how is it possible we should answer more pertinently , than to assign the rule of our faith ? and we declare it to be the scripture , by which we judge what we are to believe , and what not . and therefore if any ask us of the matter of our faith , we must answer , it is whatever god hath revealed in the scripture which is our rule . if they ask us , how we come to know these books to be written by such persons , we say , it is by the vniversal tradition of the christian churches . if they ask us , why we believe the doctrine contained in those books , then our answer is , from the divine testimonies , which make us certain that it came from god. and thus we answer both to that which is called , the material and formal object of faith ; and if we are absolutely certain of these , we must be so of our faith. if we ask a jew about the certainty of his faith , he saith , he is certain of it , because all his faith is contained in the books of moses , and he is well assured they were written by divine inspiration . if we ask a mahometan , of his faith , his answer is , that his faith is contained in the alcoran ; and by proving that , he proves the certainty of his faith ; and if that be disproved , the certainty of it is overthrown . those who resolve their faith into a written rule , must go thither , when questions are asked them about the certainty of their faith. for , if i believe every thing in it , and nothing but what is in it , there lies my faith , and the certainty of it depends upon the certainty of my rule . but i must shew the certainty of the faith of protestants , as it is pretended to be taken from the rule . not certainly , when the question is asked about the entire object of our faith , or when we are to shew how we hold all the same doctrine that was taught by christ and his apostles ; for the word all makes it necessary for us to assign our rule wherein that all is contained . if he ask us of the certainty of any particular point of our faith , then we are to make it out , that this is contained in our rule ; and our certainty is according to the evidence we are able to produce for it . for the case is not the same , as to particular points of faith , with that of the general grounds of the certainty of faith. a jew firmly believes all that is contained in the books of moses , and with the highest degree of certainty ; but whether the resurrection can be proved certainly from those books , is a particular point ; and he may have absolute certainty of all contained in those books , though he may not have it , as to such a particular point . and when we come to particular points , their case is not only different from the general rule of faith , but such points are very different both among themselves , and as to the certainty of them . for , ( 1 ) there are some points of faith , which were necessary to be revealed , because they were necessary to be believed , in order to our salvation by jesus christ. for as mr. s. saith , salvation is the thing of greatest importance ; and therefore on supposition , that it is to be by jesus christ , the nature of the thing requires , that we have a firm and established faith in him . and of these points of faith , the church hath given a summary in the creeds which were proposed to those who were to be baptized ; and not only st. augustin , but aquinas saith , these were taken out of scripture ; and the certainty of them to us , doth depend not upon the authority of the church proposing them ; but the evidence of scripture for them , which is very much confirmed to us by the concurrent testimony of the christian church in all ages , from the apostles times , i. e. as to the main articles ; for that there was a great variety , as to others , is evident to any one who will compare the ancient creeds , as i have lately shewed . and these main articles are those which aquinas calls the prima credibilia ; which are therefore revealed , because necessary to be believed by all that hope for salvation by jesus christ. ii. there are other points of faith , which are only necessary to be believed , because they are so clearly revealed ; as that cajaphas was high priest when christ suffer'd ; that there were two malefactors who suffer'd with him ; that he was buried in joseph of arimathea's sepulchre ; no man who believes the scripture can doubt of these things ; and yet we do not make these points of faith in themselves necessary , because they have no immediate reference to salvation , which might have been as effectually carried on , if there had been another high priest , or christ had lain in another sepulchre . but in these points there is an absolute certainty from the unquestionable evidence of their being contained in scripture . iii. there are doctrinal points not necessary to salvation , about which some may attain to a greater degree of certainty than others . and the same measure is not required of all ; because mens capacities are not equal , if they do use equal diligence ; and all are not obliged to the same degrees of diligence that some are . as to the points necessary to salvation , god is not wanting by his grace to make them known to men of honest and sincere minds . and this is no peculiar doctrine of mine , as j. s. would insinuate , but it hath been the constant doctrine of their most learned and judicious school-divines ; as is evident from what they speak of the donum intellectus , and the lumen fidei , which secure men from errour in what concerns their salvation . if he hath therefore such an inveterate spleen against this doctrine , let him attaque the greatest divines of the church of rome , who have in terms asserted the same , which i have done . and i would fain see j. s. demonstrating against aquinas , and all his followers , that there is no such security from errour in points necessary to salvation , where ever god bestows true grace . as to points not necessary to salvation , i do not affirm , there is any such ground of absolute certainty , as to particular persons , who are only concerned as to their own salvation . and that was the reason of my answer to the fourth question . the universal testimony of the christian church , concerning the book of scripture , and the doctrine contained therein is a sufficient ground to make us certain of all matters necessary to our salvation . but of this more afterwards . it is sufficient here to observe , that even in the church of rome , there are points of doctrine , which are not de fide , and consequently the certainty of faith is not required to them . and then it is most unreasonable to require the absolute certainty of faith in those things which we deny to be points of faith. it is , as if we should ask them what absolute certainty of faith they have , as to the immaculate conception and assumption of the b. virgin , or the popes infallibility , they would tell us , these are no points of faith with them , and therefore it is unreasonable to ask after the absolute certainty of faith , where there is no faith pretended . the same we say , in the like case , it is very absurd to demand of us the absolute certainty of our faith in such things , wherein we never pretend to a certainty of faith ; but of common sense and reason proceeding according to the rule of scripture . as , if men impose false and absurd doctrines upon us , as transubstantiation ; &c. we insist upon the common right of mankind , not to be required to believe contradictions ; and the right of christians , not to believe , what hath neither scripture , nor reason , nor tradition for it . and these are the grounds on which we reject the additional creed of pius the fourth . we make them no points of faith at all ; and if others do make them so , we desire to be excused , because it is as certain to us they are not so , as we can be of negatives : and farther than this we go not in such points ; and if this be what he means by protestant faith , he hath my answer . iv. the general reason of the certainty of faith in particular persons is not from conclusive evidence as to the points of faith , but from some higher cause . and this mr. s. ought to know hath been the constant doctrine of the schools ever since divinity hath been brought into them . i except only one franciscus de marchia , who required conclusive evidence to the certainty of faith , but he is disputed against by gregorius ariminensis ; and he saith , his doctrine was condemned by the faculty of paris ; and gregory de valentia , speaks of him with great contempt for holding so absurd a doctrine . the certainty of faith is declared by the antient school-men to be above opinion , and below science : by which they understood , the intrinsic grounds on which truth is built ; which mr. s. makes necessary to the profession of it . hugo de sancto victore , saith , that the highest certainty of faith is owing to a pious and pure disposition of the mind , and an immediate divine influence . petrus pictaviensis , that it lies not in evidence , but adherence . guliel . parisiensis , proves conclusive evidence repugnant to faith , in a long discourse . gul. antissiodorensis , thinks rational evidence good to support and defend the faith , and to prepare men for it ; but that the certainty of it lies not in speculation , but in an adherence of the mind to the prime verity . alex. alensis , saith likewise , its certainty doth not lie in speculation , but in inward affection and adherence ; there is , he saith , an inferiour sort of acquisite faith which relies on reasons and testimonies ; but this , he saith , is meerly natural and preparatory to divine faith. bonaventure saith , the certainty of adherence is beyond that of speculation , because a martyr may have doubts , and yet die for his faith. thomas aquinas thinks , those that go about to bring demonstrations for faith , expose it to the scorn and reproach of infidels ; and he resolves the inward certainty of faith into divine illumination ; when the objection was put , that matters of faith could not be resolved into first principles . which mr. s. hath so long and so vainly pretended to . henricus gandavensis saith , there is a certainty of adherence in the habit of faith ; and that the evidence of credibility falls much short of that of science ; and he makes scripture the rule , whereby we are to judge of the doctrine of the present church , and of all ages succeeding the apostles . scotus distinguisheth between acquisite and human faith , and divine or infused faith ; but he denies any infallibility to belong to the former . durandus denies faith to be consistent with conclusive evidence ; and that the motives of credibility affords such evidence , because that necessitates assent . and it is observable , that he resolves faith not into the testimony of the present , but of the apostolical church . i need produce no more , to shew what a stranger mr. s. is to the doctrine of his own church ; or else what an obstinate opposer he is of it . but this is sufficient to shew what grounds of the certainty of faith are allowed by the chief divines of the church of rome , and how very different they are from those of the catholick letters . to summ up briefly therefore the state of this controversie about the certainty of our faith ; i. i assert , that we are absolutely certain of the formal object of our faith , viz. that whatever god reveals , is true , and to be professed by us , though we do not see the intrinsick grounds of it . ii. we are absolutely certain of the infallible rule of our faith ; and that all the necessary points of faith , in order to the salvation of mankind , are therein contained iii. the general certainty of divine faith in true believers , according to their own divines , doth not depend upon conclusive evidence , or intrinsick grounds , but an inward perception caused by divine grace . iv. particular points of faith are more or less certain , according to the evidence of their deduction from scripture as the rule of faith. v. where any propositions are imposed as points of faith , which others deny , those who impose , are bound to prove the certainty of them as such , and not those who reject them . and this is our case as to the points in difference between us and those of the church of rome : we do not make the negatives any points of our faith , any further than as the scripture is our rule , and we cannot be bound consequently to receive any thing as a point of faith , but what is contained in it , or deduced from it . but the church of rome requiring us to receive them as points of faith , is bound to prove the certainty of them as such . having thus endeavoured to set this controversie about the certainty of faith in its true light , i now proceed to consider what mr. s. doth object against it . and i shall conceal nothing that looks like an argument . his raillery i despise , and his impertinencies i shall pass over . i. that which looks most like an argument , is , what he hath set out by way of propositions in his first letter . 1. god hath left us some way to know what surely christ and his apostles taught . 2. therefore this way must be such , that they who take it , shall arrive by it at the end it was intended for ; i. e. know surely what christ and his apostles taught . 3. scriptures letter interpretable by private judgments , is not that way ; for we experience presbyterians and socinians ( for example ) both take that way , yet differ in such high fundamentals , as the trinity and the godhead of christ. 4. therefore scriptures letter interpretable by private judgments , is not the way left by god to know surely what christ and his apostles taught , or surely to arrive at right faith. 5. therefore they who take only that way , cannot by it arrive surely at right faith , since 't is impossible to arrive at the end , without the means or way that leads to it . upon setting down this , mr. s being sensible he had plaid his best cards , cannot help a little expressing the satisfaction he had in the goodness of his game . i do not ( saith he ) expect any answer to this discourse , as short as it is , and as plain , and as nearly as it touches your copy-hold . alas for me , that am fallen into the hands of such a gamester ! but i am resolved to disappoint him , and to give him a clear and full answer to this shew of reasoning . and that shall be , by making it appear , i. that it proceeds upon false suppositions . ii. that it destroys any rule of faith , even his own admired oral and practical tradition . i. that it proceeds upon false suppositions . as. 1. that no certainty can be attained where there is no infallibility . for if men may arrive at certainty where there is a general possibility of deception , all this seeming demonstration comes to nothing . and yet this is a thing all mankind are agreed in , who allow any such thing as certainty ; and the contrary opinion was ( which mr. s. little thinks ) the very foundation of seepticism ; viz. that there could be no certainty , unless men could find out such an infallible mark of truth , which could not agree to what was false ; as he might have learned in cicero's lucullus , without sending him to pyrrho's scholars . and till zeno and his disciples pretended to find out this , scepticism gained little ground ; but when they yielded to that principle , that no certainty was to be had without it , then a mighty advantage was given them , which they improved accordingly . but the more judicious philosophers were forced to quit the stoicks infallible mark , and to proceed upon such evidence of perception , and sense , and ratiocination , as might in things not self-evident form an assent which excludes all reasonable doubt of the contrary . but still those who pretended to infallibility , were the most deceived . as epicurus thought there could be no certainty in sense , unless it were made infallible ; and from hence he ran into that gross absurdity , that the sun was really no bigger than he seemed to be to our senses . for , he went just upon mr. s. his principles , if there be a possibility of deception , there can be no true certainty ; and to make good this hypothesis , the sun must be no bigger than a bonfire . but the wiser philosophers took in the assistance of reason , which , though not infallible , might give such evidence , as afforded certainty , where it fell short of demonstration . as in physical and moral things . i grant , that some of those who talked most and best of demonstration , fell wonderfully short of it , when they came to apply notions to things ; and the demonstrations they made were to little or no purpose , in the promoting of knowledge , as , that man is a rational creature , &c. but their physical speculations are very far from it ; yet this doth not hinder but that a certainty is attainable as to the nature of things . and in morals , they knew and confessed there could be no demonstration in them ; yet they professed a true certainty they had as to the nature of happiness , and the real differences of vertue and vice : they owned some moral principles to be absolutely certain , as that good is to be chosen , and evil to be avoided , &c. but in particular cases , they made use of the best reason they had , to prove some things good , and others evil. and although they could not proceed with equal certainty in all vertues and vices ; yet in some they had clear evidence , and in others they made use of the best means to give satisfaction to themselves and others . thus it is in matters of faith , there are some things absolutely certain , as , that god cannot deceive us ; that the scripture is our rule of faith ; but then , whether such points be contained in that rule and be of divine revelation , is not self-evident ; and therefore these must be deduced by all the best methods of reasoning from a written rule ; and when persons have examined the scripture with all the care and diligence , which one who would arrive at certainty thinks himself obliged to , then i do affirm , that such a man may attain to a true certainty and satisfaction of mind about it . and that true certainty is attainable without infallibility , i shall prove by an undeniable instance ( if an instance willl be allowed ; and i hope i shall make it appear as reasonable for me to produce instances as himself , ) and that is , concerning a point of faith of the greatest importance , viz. that jesus christ was the true messias foretold by the prophets . the proof of this depended on the interpretation of scripture ; and there could be no infallible interpreter relied upon in this case . as to christ himself , although he really was so , yet we suppose the question to be about him , whether he were an infallible teacher or not ; and therefore we must not suppose the thing to be proved . as to the publick interpretation , which mr. s. makes his infallible rule , if that were to be relied upon , then a jew was bound not to believe christ to be the true messias , because the publick interpretation was against him ; and the traditional sense of the prophecies was against him , being for a temporal prince ; i now demand of mr. s. whether the jews were capable of certainty in this point or not ? if not , then the jews were excused in their infidelity : if they were , then true certainty may be had without an infallible guide , although the publick interpretation and tradition be against it . and if it may be had in so difficult a case , which depended on the sense of obscure prophecies ; much more certainly under the clear revelation of the gospel ; wherein all necessary points are laid down with so much clearness , that the fault must be more in mens wills than their vnderstandings , if they do not apprehend them . 2. the second false supposition is , that a rule of faith must be a mechanical rule , and not a rational ; i. e. it must be like a carpenters rule , that hath all its dimensions fixed , and ready to be applied to material things ; but in matters of understanding no such rule is to be expected . the philosophers who disputed so much about certainty , would have laughed at any man who had applied a material rule to intellectual things ; yet this is mr. s's great example : i take my ruler , saith he , and draw a line by it ; does the streightness or crookedness of this line depend upon my vnderstanding ? by no means . but is there any such intellectual rule as this ? there have been great disputes in the world , among men of wit and subtilty , about the certainty of human knowledg ; whether any infallible criterion could be found to discern truth and falshood ? but they never imagined any such thing as an intellectual ruler to draw lines by ; but that there were certain differences of truth and falshood , which men might find out , but not without diligence and application of their minds to it . and notwithstanding the characters of truth and falshood were in themselves certain , yet it was very possible for men to mistake about them ; not only for want of judgment , but of diligence and impartiality : so we say here as to a rule of faith ; we do not suppose it to be a material rule ; i. e. if a man take the letter of scripture , and apply it to any opinions , he must presently know whether they be true or false ; but it is a rational and intellectual rule , which is absolutely certain in it self ; and whatever agrees to it is true , and whatever doth not is false : but still there may be mistakes in the vnderstanding and applying it ; and therefore care , and diligence , and impartiality , are required ; by which some may attain to that certainty , which others miss off . as in the points he mentions of the presbyterians and socinians differing about such high fundamentals , as the trinity and godhead of christ. 1. why presbyterians and socinians , i beseech him ? there is a notable insinuation in this , as though we of the church of england were socinians in those points ; and none but papists and presbyterians were orthodox in them . but this is an insinuation which hath as much folly as malice in it ; since our solemn and express declarations , are to the contrary : and he may as well call us papists as socinians , since our writings are as plainly against one , as the other . what our sense as to these matters is , he may find in the dialogues of the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation compared ; not long since published by a divine of the church of england . but to pass this over , 2. suppose the difference between us and the socinians , what then ? both take the same way of scriptures letter interpretable by private judgments , and yet differ in these fundamental points . and what follows ? that the scripture is no certain rule ? by no means . but that the socinians may err , and certainly do in misinterpreting this rule . but how can it be a certain rule , if men that use it may err in using it ? how can reason be certain in any thing , if men following reason may mistake ? how can arithmetick be a certain way of computation , if men following the rules of arithmetick , may mistake in casting up a sum ? doth any man question the certainty of the rule , for mens blundering in their accompts ? yet this is his way of reasoning . and i will put it just with his propositions . i. arithmetick prescribes a certain way by addition and substraction for us to find out any sum. ii. therefore it must be such that they who take it , shall arrive by it , at the exact sum. iii. but two men who have made use of the same way , differ at least a hundred in casting up the sum. iv. therefore arithmetick doth not prescribe a certain way to attain at a certain sum. v. therefore they who take only that way , cannot by it arrive at the certain sum. is not this clear and evident demonstration ? but those who consider a little better than mr. s. hath done , will distinguish between the rule and the application of it . the rule of arithmetick may be nevertheless certain , although those who want skill , or care and diligence , may mistake in casting up a particular accompt . the same we say here , scripture is a certain rule in all fundamental points , to such as have capacity and use , due care and diligence in finding them . but we do not deny , but men through prejudice , weakness , want of attention , authority of false teachers , impatience of throughly examining things , and not using proper helps may run into gross errors ; such as these about the trinity and incarnation ; but still the rule is certain to those who use it aright , although it be very possible for men through their own faults to mistake about it . and this is no way disagreeing to the infinite wisdom of god , who deals with us as with rational creatures ; and hath put faculties into us , that we might use them in order to the certainty of our faith. and such moral qualifications are required in the new testament , in order to the discerning the doctrine of it , as humility of mind , purity of heart , prayer to god , sincere endeavour to do the will of god ; that it would be very repugnant to the design of it , to suppose that the letter of scripture alone would give a man immediate and certain directions in all matters of doctrine being applied to it . therefore an easie answer is to be given to mr. s's . great difficulty , viz. how the sense drawn from the letter can any more fail to be true , than the line drawn by the rule to be straight . for , we say , that the sense truly drawn from the scripture can never fail to be true ; but we do not say , that every man must draw the true sense from the scripture ; for , although the scripture be an infallible rule , yet unless every man that makes use of it be infallible , he may mistake in the application of it . and this to me is so clear , that to make an infallible rule in his sense , he must make every person that uses it infallible , or else he may err in the application of it : but the right way , saith mr. s. will certainly bring a man to his journeys end , and the way must needs be a wrong way if it do it not . the right way will certainly bring them to their journeys end , if they continue in it ; but here we must consider what is meant by the journeys end. if by it be understood their salvation , then we say , that those who do their utmost endeavours to keep in that way , shall not fail of their journeys end. but if by it be understood the certain truth or falshood of every opinion tried by the scripture , then i answer , that although the sense of scripture be infallibly true , yet it was not designed as an infallible way for us to know the truth and falshood of all particular opinions by . for , as mr. s. well observes , salvation is that which chiefly imports us ; and it was for that end the doctrine of christ is made known to us , and it is an infallible way to it , if men continue therein ; but for judging the truth or falshood of opinions without respect to salvation as the end , it was not intended as an infallible way to every one that makes use of it ; and therefore it is easie for men to mistake in judging by it of things it was not design'd for . as if a man designed to observe all the old roman cities and stations here , and were told the old roman way would be a certain way to lead him to them , with the help of the roman itinerary , if that man objects , that this will not do , for he cannot find out all the modern towns and villages by this means , is it not a just and reasonable answer to say , that is a most certain way , which leads a man to that which it was design'd for ; and the roman way was only intended for roman foundations , but it is very unreasonable to find fault with it , because it doth not lead you to all modern towns and villages . so say i here ; the scripture was designed by divine wisdom to make us wise to salvation , and thither it will infallibly lead us , if we keep to it ; but if besides this we would know by it such things as are not necessary to salvation , we blame it for that , which was not in the original intention and design of it . for , when we make use of it to be our rule of judgment , meerly as to truth and falshood of things not necessary to salvation ; it is not because it was designed for that end ; but because it is of divine revelation , and so is the surest standard of divine truth ; and we are sure there is no other rule for us to judge besides . from whence we may and ought to reject any points of faith imposed upon us , which are neither contained in scripture , nor can be proved from it . and so it is our positive rule of faith , as to all necessary articles ; and our negative rule as to all pretended points of faith , which are not proved from thence . ii. i answer , that this method of mr. s. will overthrow the possibility of any rule of faith ; because none can be assigned , which it is not possible for men to misapprehend , and to mistake about it . let us at present suppose mr. s. to substitute his rule of faith in stead of scripture , viz. oral and practical tradition . why may not men mistake the sense of tradition , as well as the sense of scripture ? is tradition more infallible in it self ? is it deliver'd by persons more infallible ? doth it make those to whom it is delivered infallible ? why then , may not those who deliver it , and those who receive it , both be mistaken about it ? this i had mention'd in my second letter , that it was very possible to mistake the sense and meaning of tradition ; and i instanced in that of christ's being the son of god ; where the traditionary words may be kept and yet an heretical sense may be contained under them . mr. s. answers , that the sense of the words and all the rest of christ's doctrine is convey'd down by tradition . this is bravely said , if it could be made out ; and would presently put an end to all disputes . for if all the doctrine of christ be derived down to us in such a manner , that we cannot mistake the sense of it , we must be all agreed , whether we will or not . for , how can we disagree , if we cannot mistake the sense of tradition ? not while we hold to tradition . then it seems it is possible not to hold to tradition ; and if so , we have found a terrible flaw in human nature , that will let in errors in abundance , viz. that it may grosly err about the rule of faith ; yea , so far as to renounce it . but how is this possible , if the sense of tradition be infallibly convey'd ? for is not traditions being the rule of faith any part of it ? we must in reason suppose this : and if we do so , how can persons renounce its being the rule , while they cannot but believe its being the rule ? if men may mistake about traditions being the rule of faith ; why may we not suppose , they may as well mistake about any points convey'd by it ? for the greatest security lying in the rule , there must be more care taken about that , than about the points convey'd by it . but let us see how he proves that men cannot mistake the sense of tradition in particular points : the force of what he saith , is , that men were always men , and christians were always christians ; and mr. s. is always mr. s. pretending demonstration , when there is nothing like it . if men were always men , they were always apt to be deceived ; and unless christians by being such are infallible , they are liable to mistakes . but the highest means to convey the sense of words are to be found in tradition . i am quite of another opinion ; i think it the most uncertain way in the world ; and the corruption of the first ages of the world are an evident proof of it ; when there were all possible advantages of tradition , and yet the principles of natural religion were strangely corrupted , although they were plain , easie , few , of the highest importance , and men lived so long to inculcate them into the minds of their children . if therefore , notwithstanding tradition , the world might then degenerate into polytheism and idolatry ; what absurdity is it to suppose , that notwithstanding tradition , the christian doctrine might be corrupted likewise ? but mr. s. alledges not only words but actions , to determine the sense of them ; as , that christ is the son of god ; by praying to him , and giving divine reverence to christ without stinting them , or making them scruple , lest they give too much , or commit idolatry by giving that to a creature , which is due only to god. and does not this practice , beyond all possibility of mistake , insinuate into them , that he is equally to be adored with god the father , or co-equal to him , and so not a creature , but very god of very god ? i answer , i. would not the very same reasoning have made the coming in of idolatry impossible ? for , that there was but one true god , was evident from all acts of worship , being given only to him , as the proper object of it : how then could men so foully mistake , as to give proper divine worship to any creature , there being an infinite distance between god and his creatures , which every child could not but know by a constant tradition from adam . ii. how was it possible that external acts of worship should so infallibly prove christ to be true god , if all external acts of worship be of an equivocal nature , and receive their determination from the inward sense of the mind ? did not the arians use the same external acts of worship with others , with respect to christ ? where did they ever separate from the christian assemblies , on the account of the worship given to christ ? if not , how was it possible from thence to prove christ not to be a creature ? so that this is very far from putting the point of the divinity of christ beyond the possibility of mistake . especially , when solemn invocation , which is one of the most natural parts of divine worship , came to be allowed to meer creatures . all the difference that can be assigned then , must be from mens words and professions , and not from their external actions . iii. the same divine reverence was given to christ in the apostolical times , and the utmost care used to instruct people in the true doctrine of christ ; and yet then we find that persons did err in the sense of that proposition , that christ is the son of god. for , even then , the ebionites and cerinthians understood it , not in respect of nature , but adoption ; and so did the artemonites and samosatenians afterwards . and how can that be proved impossible to be done , which we shew was actually done ? men did notoriously mistake the sense of christ's being the son of god , when it was received by tradition ; and yet mr. s. pretends it cannot be mistaken , if it be so received . mr. s. still urges , that faith hath sense in it ; and it is inconsistent with the nature of mankind , not to hold some sense or other , and with the nature of christians , not to instruct their children in that sense . and i think words written have as much sense in them as words spoken , and less liable to mistakes ; there being no such mixtures of the infirmities of men in a written rule , as in oral tradition . but instances are unlucky things to be brought against demonstrations , and such is that of the cerinthians and artemonites , who pleaded tradition for their sense ; and yet they were men , and pretended to deliver the true doctrine of christ to their disciples . i alledged another instance , how the sense of tradition might be mistaken ; and that was about a real presence in the eucharist , which might be understood in very different senses . no , saith mr. s. that cannot be ; for , faith works on our devout affections , which must either oblige us to pay an infinite veneration to a creature , if christ's real body ( and consequently god ) be not there , or if christ be not god , which is the greatest deviation from true religion that is possible ; or else to be highly irreverent , and to want the most efficacious motive that can be imagined to excite and elevate our devotions , if he be there , or christ be indeed god. truly mr. s's way of writing is the most effectual means i know to make me question whether written words be a good way to convey a certain sense to our minds . for , i cannot understand , how faiths working on our devout affections , should oblige us , either to pay an infinite veneration to a creature , or else to be highly irreverent . for , supposing i believe christ's body not to be really in the eucharist , but yet that christ himself is god , i think my self bound to shew the utmost reverence to christ as god , even in the act of receiving the eucharist : and i am of opinion , that the just apprehension of the divine majesty , is as apt to excite and elevate our devotion , as the believing the body of christ to be there really present . but it is observable , what mr. s. here grants , that if christ's body be not there , they are guilty of paying an infinite veneration to a creature , which is the greatest deviation from true religion that is possible . and upon my word then they had need have better assurance , than what he offers , to prove christ's real body to be there . for , if as great reverence may be paid to christ in heaven , as if he were in the elements , i cannot see how the posture of adoration can any ways determin the sense of tradition in this matter . and thus mr. s. hath left the sense of tradition as uncertain , as he pretends that of scripture to be ; and if his argument will hold against the one being the rule of faith , it will do as great a kindness for the other also . thus i have fully answered his main argument , against scriptures being a rule of faith , which he hath been so free with me , as to tell me i cannot answer ; and he and i must now leave it to the reader 's judgment . the summ of it is , i. we distinguish necessary points of faith , from matters of speculation . ii. we distinguish certainty of faith in order to salvation , and certainty of opinion in matters of controversie . iii. we distinguish the certainty of the rule , from the certainty of the application of that rule ▪ and then my answer lies in these things ; i. that the scripture is a certain rule of faith as to all points necessary to salvation , to all such as make use of it as such , and do not through their own fault make a wrong application thereof . ii. that the scripture was not designed for a certain rule as to vnnecessary opinions ; and therefore mens not arriving at a certainty in them , doth not hinder its being a rule of faith. iii. that scripture being our rule of faith , we are bound to reject all pretended articles of faith , which cannot with certainty be proved from the sense of scripture . and so the proof of certainty lies upon those who affirm such articles of faith , and not upon us who deny them . this argument is mr. s's goliah , and now it is no wonder if his lesser men at arms soon quit the field . but i must take some notice of them , lest they be magnified , by being slighted . his next argument is , that i contradict myself : i hope i have in the beginning made him unwilling to repeat such a charge against me , till he hath cleared himself . but wherein is it ? in another place , he saith , i deny any absolute certainty as to tradition attesting the books of scripture ; which in the conference i asserted . i have looked in the place he refers to , and there i find nothing like it . i deny the necessity of any infallible society of men , either to attest or explain the scripture . where , by an infallible society of men , i mean such as have a divine assistance to that purpose : and what is this to the absolute certainty we have of the books of scripture by vniversal tradition ? but he urges it further , if this society be not infallible , then it is fallible ; and if it be fallible , then we cannot be more than fallibly certain , and so we can have no absolute certainty from a fallible testimony . this is the whole force of what he saith . to which i answer , i. i understand no such thing as infallibility in mankind , but by immediate divine assistance , i grant , that the holy spirit may , where he pleases , preserve the minds of men from any possibility of mistake , as to those things , wherein it doth inlighten them ; but set aside this , there is no such thing as infallibility ; the utmost is a rational certainty built on clear and convincing motives . where the motives are meerly probable , there may be opinion , but no certainty ; where the evidence is thought so strong as to determine assent , there is a certainty as to the mind ; as when we commonly say , we are certain of such things , we mean no more , than that we firmly believe them ; but when the evidence is the highest , which in point of reason the thing is capable of , then there is that which i call absolute certainty ; i. e. such as depends not meerly on the assent of the mind ; but the evidence which justifies that assent . ii if by being fallibly certain , he means any suspicion , that notwithstanding such evidence in all its circumstances , i may be deceived , then i utterly deny it ; for otherwise i could not be absolutely certain ; but if he means only , that there is no divine infallibility ( and i know no other ) then i own that there is still human fallibility consistent with this absolute certainty . but mr. s. will have absolute certainty to be infallible : if nothing will satisfie him , but human ( i. e. fallible ) infallibility , much good may it do him , but i much rather chuse proper terms , which i know the certain meaning of , than improper , though they make a far greater noise . i do own an absolute certainty in some acts of the mind by inward perception , as that i think , i doubt , and that i am ; i do own an absolute certainty as to common objects of sense ; and as to some deductions of reason ; i do own an absolute certainty as to some matters of fact , by a concurrence of circumstances ; but for all that , i do not account human nature infallible , nor this an infallible certainty , unless it be taken in another sense than divines take it in . for even the divines of the church of rome as well as ours make a difference between a human and acquisite certainty , and that which is divine and infallible . and if mr. s. by divine means human , and by infallible no more than certain , he must not think he hath gained any great matter , when he hath made use of words in an improper and unusual sense . iii. his next argument is , that our rule of faith is common to all the heresies in the world , which pretend scripture , as well as we . this is just the old sceptical argument against certainty ; if there be any such thing as certainty , you must assign such a criterion which is not common to truth and falshood ; but if you cannot assign any such mark of truth , which may not as well agree to what is false , then there is no such thing as certainty to be had . in matters of this nature , the proof must not lie in generals , but we must come to particulars , to shew the grounds of our certainty , viz. as to the trinity , and incarnation of christ , and then if we cannot shew why we believe those points , and reject the opposite heresies , as arianism , sabellianism , eutychianism , &c. then we are to be blamed for want of certainty in these points , but not before . but this , he saith , is to make light and darkness very consistent , and christ and belial very good friends . it seems then , there is no difference to be found by the rule of scripture , between the doctrine of christ and the devil . is this in truth your avowed principle ? do you in earnest believe the scripture to be such a chaos , where there is no difference of light and darkness , and that nothing but confusion can be found in it ; and we cannot tell by it , whether we are to worship god or the devil ? if mr. s. grants , that there is enough in scripture to distinguish these two ; then it is a rule so far , as to put a difference between light and darkness , between christ and belial ; and so these expressions must be disowned as little less than blasphemous , for all his pitiful defence of them in his second letter ; which is , that he never said that christ and belial could be reconciled , or advanced any position that implied it . but he said , that to make scripture our rule , is to make light and darkness consistent , and christ and belial very good friends . and is not this blasphemy against scripture ? and implies , that if we go by that rule only , they may be very good friends . how can this be , unless he asserts that by scripture alone , we can find no certain difference between light and darkness , between christ and belial ? let mr. s. answer to this , and not think to escape with such a poor evasion . if he owns the scripture a certain rule as to the difference of christ and belial , and light and darkness , then we have gained thus much , that in some matters of very great moment , the scripture is a very sufficient rule and ground of certainty , as to all points between us and infidels . and if it be so , as to these points , then why not as well as to other points consequent upon these ? if christ be the eternal son of god in opposition to heathen deities , and we can know him by scripture to be so , then we may as well know him to be the eternal son of god in opposition to arians and socinians . if against the heathens we can prove from scripture , that the word was made flesh , why will not this as well hold against nestorians and eutychians ? and so the scripture becomes a very sufficient rule to distinguish light and darkness in such points among christians too . for , is it ever the less fit to be a rule , because both parties own it ? but they differ about the sense of it , and therefore controversies can never be ended by it . if church-history deceive us not , the greatest controversies were ended by it , before general councils were heard of ; and more than have been since . many of those we read of in the first ages were quite laid asleep , as theodoret observes ; but since church-authority interposed , in the most reasonable manner , some differences have been perpetuated , as appears by the nestorian and eutychian controversies . i do not blame the authority of councils , proceeding as they then did by the rule of scriptures , but the event shewed , that the most probable means , are sometimes very ineffectual for ending controversies . and those which men think will most effectually suppress heresies , do often give a new life and spirit to them . so vain are the imaginations of men about putting an end to controversies , till they do come to a certainty about the true sense of scripture . it is possible to stop mens mouths by force and power , but nothing brings men to a true satisfaction , but inward conviction as to the true sense of scripture ; and there can be no rational certainty as to these points without it . if controversies be not ended , let us not blame the wisdom of providence ; for god doth not always appoint the means most effectual in our judgment , but such as are most suitable to his own design . and we see reason enough to blame the folly and weakness , the prejudice and partiality , the wilfulness and obstinacy of mankind ; and till human nature be brought to a better temper , we may despair of seeing any end of controversies . men may dispute , and for all that i know , will do to the worlds end , about the method to put an end to disputes . for , the controversies about certainty and fatality have been always the matters of debate , among disputing men , under several names and hypotheses , and are like so to be to the general conflagration . iv. he saith , scripture is not our distinguishing rule of faith , but our own particular judgments about scripture ; for that which distinguishes my rule from that of the most abominable heresies , can only be my own judgment upon the letter of scripture , and wriggle which way i will , there it will , and must end at last . i wish mr. s. had been a little better conversant in the old disputes about certainty ; for it would have saved me the trouble of answering some impertinent objections ; such as this before us . for they would have been thought mean logicians , who could not put a difference between the rule of judgment , and the judgment which a man made according to the rule . suppose the question were about sense , whether that were a certain rule , or not , to judge by ; and epicurus should affirm it , and say he so firmly believed it , that he judged the sun to be no bigger than he seemed to his senses ; would not he have been thought ridiculous , who should have said , this fancy of epicurus was his rule ? the rule he went by was in it self certain ; but he made a wrong judgment upon it ; but that was not his rule . so it is here . we declare the scripture to be our only certain and standing rule , whereby we are to judge in matters of faith ; and we understand it as well as we can , and form our judgments by it ; but doth it hence follow , that our judgment is our rule ? we may be deceived in our judgments , but our rule is infallible ; we may differ in our judgments , but our rule is one and the same . and how is it possible for those who differ in judgment , to have the same rule , if our rule and our judgments be the same ? for then their rules must be as different as their judgments . i know not what modern logick mr. s. learnt ; but i am sure he learnt not this way of reasoning from the antient philosophers , who discoursed about the criterion after another manner than our great pretender to logick doth . v. he objects , that our people do not make scripture the rule of their faith , not one in a million relying upon it ; and therefore this pretence of mine , he saith , books like a meer jest ; and he cannot perswade himself , that i am in earnest , while i advance such a paradox . what doth j. s. mean , to call one of the articles of our church , a jest and a paradox ? for the words of our sixth article , are , holy scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation : so that whatsoever is not read therein , nor may be proved thereby , is not to be required of any man , that it should be believed as an article of faith , or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation . doth j. s. now take this for a paradox among us ? i assure him , i love not to make jests about scripture , nor matters of faith and salvation . but wherein doth this jest lie ? why , forsooth , i make the people to make scripture their rule , and not one in a million thinks of relying on it . have they then any other rule of faith , which they rely upon ? what is it , i pray ? is it the churches infallibility ? no. is it pius the fourth's creed ? no truly , while they are children , they believe tradition . now , i think , j. s. hath hit it . tradition is indeed a rule of faith for children ; who are very apt simply to believe their fathers and teachers . but suppose , they come to years of discretion , what rule of faith have they then ? have they a judgment of discretion then ? no ; this is another jest. for he supposes all our people to be a dull sort of animals , that understand nothing of scripture or faith themselves , ( i wonder then , that they make no more converts among them ) but trust their parson for all ; for , boves arabant & asinae pascebantur juxta eos ; therefore the people have no judgment of discretion ; i hope j. s. knows whose jest or rather argument that was . whatever he insinuates , as to our people , i have reason to believe far better of them ; and that all those who mind their salvation do seriously read , and consider the holy scriptures , as the rule of their faith. but if in matters of opinion , or in doubtful or obscure places , they make use of the skill , and assistance of their teachers , wherein are they to blame ? the scripture is still their rule , but the help of their teachers is for the better understanding it . and cannot our logician distinguish between the rule of faith , and the helps to understand it ? suppose now a mother or a nurse should quit honest tradition , as j. s. here calls it ; and be so ill inclined , as to teach children to spell , and to read in the new testament , and by that means they come by degrees to understand the doctrine which christ preached , and the miracles which he wrought , and from thence to believe in christ , and to obey his commands , i desire to know , into what these persons do resolve their faith. is it indeed into those who taught them to read ? or into the new testament , as the ground of their faith ? when they have been all along told , that the scripture alone is the word of god ; and whatever they are to believe , it is because it is contained therein . and so , by whatever means they come to understand the scripture , it is that alone they take for the rule and foundation of their faith. if a man were resolved to observe hippocrates his rules ; but finds himself uncapable of understanding him , and therefore desires a physicians help ; i would fain know , whether he relies upon the skill of his interpreter , or the authority of hippocrates ? it is possible his interpreter may in some doubtful and obscure places have mistaken hippocrates his meaning ; but however , the reason of his keeping to the rules is not upon the account of the interpreter , but of hippocrates . but suppose a college of physicians interpret hippocrates otherwise , is he bound then to believe his own interpreter against the sense of the college ? i answer , if a college of physicians should translate bread for cheese ; or by phlebotomy should declare was meant cutting of arteries , or of a mans throat , let them presume to be never so infallible , i would trust any single interpreter , with the help of lexicons and common sense against them all ; but especially , if i can produce galen , and the old physicians , who understood hippocrates best , on my side . this is our case , as to the people , about disputable points ; we do not set up our own authority against a church pretending to be infallible ; we never require them to trust wholly to our judgments ; but we give them our best assistance , and call in the old interpreters of the church ; and we desire them to use their own reason and judgment with divine assistance for settling their minds . if people be negligent and careless , and will not take necessary pains to inform themselves , which mr. s. suggests , we are not bound to give an account of those , who do not observe our directions . and i never yet knew the negligent and careless brought into a dispute of religion ; for in this case , we must suppose people to act according to the principles of the religion they own ; otherwise their examples signifie no more against our doctrine , than debauchery doth against the rules of hippocrates . but suppose , saith mr. s. that one of my own flock should tell me , that i have erred in interpreting scripture , he desires to know , what i would say to him . this is a very easie question , and soon answer'd . i would endeavour to convince him as well as i could . and is that all ? and what would j. s. do more ? would he tell him he was infallible ? i think not ; but only as honest tradition makes him so , and how far that goes towards it , i shall examine afterwards . well ; but suppose john biddle against the minister of his parish , and the whole church of england to boot , understands scripture to be plainly against a trinity and christ's divinity . and it is but fair for me to suppose him , maintaining his heresie against j. s. and let any one judge whether of us be more likely to convince him . he owns the scripture , and confesses if we can prove our doctrine from thence , he will yield ; but he laughs at oral tradition , and thinks it a jest for any one to prove such a doctrine by it . and truly , if it were not for the proofs from scripture , i do much question , whether any argument from meer tradition could ever confute such a one as john biddle . but when we offer such proofs , as are acknowledged to be sufficient in themselves , we take the only proper way to give him reasonable satisfaction . suppose he will not be convinced . who can help that ? christ himself met with wilful and obstinate unbelievers . and was this any disparagement to his doctrine ? god himself hath never promised to cure those who shut their eyes against the light. shall the believing church then have the liberty to interpret scripture against the teaching church ? who ever asserted any such thing ? we only say , that the people are to understand the grounds of their faith ; and to judge by the best helps they can , what doctrine is agreeable to scripture , and to embrace what is so , and to reject what is not : but among those helps we take in , not barely the personal assistance of their own guide , but the evidence he brings , as to the sense of the teaching church , in the best and purest ages . it is very strange , that after this , it should presently follow , 't is evident hence , that tradition of our fathers and teachers , and not scriptures letter , is indeed our rule ; and by it we interpret scripture . if this be so evident , then how is it possible , we should set up the ecclesia credens against the ecclesia docens ; as he charged us just before . if tradition be our rule , and we interpret scripture by it , what fault then are we guilty of , if tradition be such an infallible rule ? but , methinks , this hence looks a little illogically upon the premises ; and if this be his conclusive evidence , he must excuse me as to the making it a ground of my faith. but he allows , that we set up scripture as our rule , when we dispute against them ; but when that is done , we set up our own authority over the people , and do not allow them that priviledge against us , which we take against the church of rome . this is all the strength of what i can make out of that paragraph . for if all writing were like his , it would be the best argument for oral tradition ; his sense is so intricate , and his conclusions so remote from his premises . just before he said , 't is evident hence that we follow tradition . and presently , 't is as evident we do not follow it , and set up our own authority against it . we do interpret scripture by tradition ; and yet immediately , we set up scripture against tradition . we plead for the peoples right to a judgment of discretion ; and yet we do not allow them a judgment of discretion . what invisible links hath oral tradition to connect things , that seem so far asunder ? but however it be expressed or connected , his meaning is , that we only set up scripture against the church of rome , and then set up our own authority over the people . this is not possible , if we do allow them a judgment of discretion ; and this is one of the things he so much charges upon me ; and saith , he never read any protestant that puts matters more into private hands than i do ; and yet in the very next page , he saith , i deny the people the same priviledge against pastoral authority . how can i deny them such a priviledge , if i put matters into their hands above any other protestant ? i do not know , that i do in the least differ from the sixth article of our church ; nor do i take off from the due authority of bishops and pastors of churches . but all our dispute is , about this judgment of discretion , whether it be allowable to people , and how far . in his third letter he resumes this argument , and thither i follow him , that i may lay things together into some method . the words he cavils at , are , if we have the consent of all christian churches against the only pretended infallible judge , we have their consent likewise , that every man is to judge for his own salvation . what hurt is there in this ? it seems then nothing will content us now but infallibility . was there ever such an awkard man at reasoning ? it follows indeed , that either there must be an infallible judge , or every man must judge for himself . do i then allow no authority to church-governors , that do not pretend to infallibility ? yes , very much , while they do not pretend to impose on our faith , by a pretence to infallibility . but what occasion do i give for this , when i say only , that every man must judge for his own salvation ; and yet he had the conscience to leave this out in repeating my sense , but two lines after . may not you mistake or pervert to day , what you heard yesterday , when i find you mistaking or perverting my sense , but at two lines distance ? and then run on in a long discourse , as though you had taken the true sense of my words . is not this a fit person to play out mr. g 's game , who shuffles in so strange a manner , and so openly plays false cards ? where did i ever dispute against church-authority in due proposing matters of faith , provided that every man is to judge for his own salvation ? but i have , he saith , an aking tooth at the churches intermeddling in matters of faith. from whence doth this appear ? this must either arise from great ignorance , as to the right of judging every man hath as to his own salvation ; or from a malicious design , to expose me to all church-governors ; but i pity his ignorance , and despise his malice . what pleasant entertainment doth he make with the sober enquirer ? 't is pity ( saith he ) but he had a blew apron on , and a tub to hold-forth in ; as a sober enquirer may possibly find some pretenders to infallibility have done in their time. but what is the meaning of all this ado about a sober enquirer ? i had said many years ago , that the scriptures being owned , as containing in them the whole will of god so plainly revealed , that no sober enquirer can miss of what is necessary for salvation , there can be no necessity supposed of an infallible society of men either to attest or explain these writings among christians , any more than there was for some ages before christ , of such a body of men among the jews , to attest or explain to them the writings of moses and the prophets . and where lies the heresie or danger of this doctrine ? if i said that no sober enquirer can miss of things necessary to salvation in scripture , it is no more than st. chrysostom , st. augustin , aquinas , and other school-men , had said before me ; and were they for blew aprons and tubs to hold forth in ? nay , to shew how unskilful j. s. is in the writers of his own church , ( if they do own him ) even bellarmin himself grants as much as i say . for being to answer that place jam. 1.5 . if any man lack wisdom , let him ask it of god , who giveth liberally , &c. he answers , this is to be understood of sapientia necessaria ad salutem ; so then a sober enquirer praying to god to give him wisdom , shall not want that which is necessary to his salvation . and he quotes several passages of st. augustin to prove , that prayer obtains nothing infallibly but that which is necessary or useful to the salvation of him that prays . if this be then obtained infallibly , then we see an infallible ground of certainty , as to what is necessary or useful to salvation . bellarmin indeed saith , that a gift of interpretation is not to be had by prayer ; and , do i ever say it is ? did i ever give the least countenance to enthusiastick pretenders , or to the breakers of the laws and orders of our established church ? what means then these spiteful insinuations ? doth the man hope to raise himself by exposing me ? or to be caressed by f.p. and f. w. by the brave attempt of throwing dirt so plainly in my face ? which will never stick , being so unskilfully thrown , either to my prejudice , or his advantage . but this matter about the peoples judgment of discretion , must not be thus pass'd over . for , he resumes it at the end of his third letter , and thought it a good relishing bit to conclude with . and towards the very end , he begins to state the controversie , this true logician having forgotten it before , or reserved it for a disert at the last . to come closer ( saith he ) and take a more distinct view of this judgment of discretion . it was even time to come closer in the 99th . p. of the third letter . alas for mr. g. ! he is like to have a hopeful game of it , when his substitute talks at this rate at the very end of the game . but let us see what feats he will do now he comes closer . now he will acquaint me , how far he allows it , and far and how in what he rejects it . this is well ; but why no sooner ? he was at ' another game before , viz. two or three throws at the sober enquirer , and having knock'd him down with his blew apron and tub , he now comes to t. g's cards again . and let us see how well he plays them . first , he grants , that every man is to judge for his own salvation ; i. e. he yields what the sober enquirer aimed at , and now methinks he desires the blew apron and tub , to hold-forth himself . secondly , he saith , all mankind are agreed in it . it seems then the fanaticks are true catholicks in mr. s's opinion . thirdly , he yields , that every man is to judge of the best way to salvation , and of all the controversies between them and vs. now the tub is turn'd to a chair , and the holder-forth become a judge of controversies . nay , he goes so far as to say , the contrary tenet is ridiculous , as what 's most ; nay , that it is sottishness to hold it ; and to deprive mankind of this priviledge of judging thus , is to debar him of the light and vse of his reason , when it is most useful for him . is not all this very obliging ? but where now lies the difference ? why , truly , if his discretion leads him to the infallible rule of tradition , all is well ; but if not , it is no longer discretion . what ? has he been judge of all the controversies between us already , and is he to seek for his rule still ? what discretion had he all that time , to judge without a rule ! what a judge of controversies have we found at last ? methinks the sober enquirer far exceeds him in point of common discretion ; for he never pretended to judge without a rule , much less all the controversies between us. but this discreet judge of all controversies first determins all the points ; and when he hath done this , he finds out his rule . of all the judges of controversies that have been yet talked of , commend me to this set up by j. s. for , how is it possible for him to judge amiss , who had no rule to judge by ? you see ( saith he ) how we allow them the vse of their reason and judgment of discretion , till it brings them to find a certain authority , and when they have once found that , the same judgment of discretion which shewed them that authority was absolutely certain , obliges them to trust it , when it tells them what is christ's faith , without using their private judgments any longer about the particular points themselves thus ascertained to them , but submitting to it . to which i answer , i. the same reason which enabled men to find out this infallible guide , or certain authority will help them to judge concerning this authority , and the matters proposed by it . for , either he hath a rule to find out this authority , or he hath none ; if he hath a rule , it must be either scripture , or pure natural reason . if scripture , that only affords fallible certainty , he saith over and over , and so a man can never come certainly to this authority . and if the foundation be uncertain , what can the rule do ? but mr. s. doth not pretend scripture , but reason , for his infallible rule . then i demand , whether reason doth afford an infallible ground of certainty , as to this certain authority or not ? if it doth , we are yet but fallibly certain ; if it doth not , then what need this certain authority ; for in the opinion of all reasonable men , certain reason is better than certain authority . and he cannot deny the certainty of reason , who builds the certainty of authority upon it . ii. suppose the particular points proposed by this certain authority be repugnant to that certainty of reason , by which i am required to believe it : as suppose this authority tells me , i am no longer to rely upon my reason , but barely to submit , although the matter proposed be never so much against it ; what is to be done in this case ? i am to believe this certain authority on the account of reason , and that requires me to believe such things as overthrow the certainty of reason ; how is it possible for me to rely on this certain authority on the certainty of reason , when that authority tells me , there is no certainty in reason ? iii. must i believe reason to be certain just so far and no further ? but who sets the bounds ? hath god almighty done it ? when and where ? i may and ought to use my reason in searching after this certain authority , and judge all controversies in order to the finding it out ; all this is allowed ; but as soon as ever this certain authority is discover'd , then goodnight reason ; i have now no more use for you . but who bid you be so ungrateful to that certain reason , which conducted you so far ? it is very possible it may be as useful still , why then do you turn reason off so unkindly after so good service ? iv. are all people capable of this certain reason , or not ? it requires , it seems , a great deal of logick to prove this certain authority , or this infallible guide by reason ; and i am one of those that think it can never be done : suppose then , some of us duller people can never comprehend the force of this reason , which is to lead us to an infallible guide , what is like to become of us uncapable people ? are we all to be damned for dunces and blockheads ? no , not so neither : this is really some comfort . for then it is to be hoped we may go to heaven without finding out this certain authority ; and then we may have true faith without it . this is still better and better . and then i pray what need have i to find out this certain authority at all , if i may have true faith and be saved without it ? v. i have greater certainty by reason of the certain authority of scripture , than you can have of the certain authority of tradition . here is reason on both sides , and authority on both sides ; but i say there is no comparison between either the reason or the authority . the reason to believe the scripture , is so incomparably beyond the reason to believe oral tradition . and the authority of scripture hath so much greater force on the consciences of men , that it is very extraordinary among those who own scripture to be the word of god , to find them compared in point of authority . for , we must deal plainly in this matter ; the scripture we look on as the rule of our faith , because it is the word of god. if you do not own it to be so , but resolve all into tradition , we know what you are ; but if you do own the scripture to be of divine revelation , how can you pretend to set up any certain authority in comparison with it ? vi. if this certain authority be only to lead us into the certain sense of scripture , then it must be either into the sense of plain places , or of difficult and obscure : if of plain places , then it is to kindle a torch to behold the sun ; if of obscure places , then who hath appointed this certain authority to explain them ? who is to appoint such a certain authority in the church , to explain his word , but god himself ? and we desire to see some plain places , that set up this authority to explain those which are obscure and doubtful . we think it our duty to read and search the scripture , and especially the new testament , where we find very great occasion for this certain authority to be mentioned . we find churches newly settled , and many disputes and controversies started among them ; and those of great and dangerous consequence ; we find the apostles giving frequent advice to these churches with respect to these differences , and with great earnestness giving caution against seducers , and warning them of the danger of them ; but not one word can we find in all their epistles tending this way , or mentioning any certain authority they were to submit to , for the putting an end to all controversies . this is really a matter of so much concernment to the whole christian world , that if any such thing had been in the design of christianity , i can never believe that the apostles would have omitted it in their several epistles . had not they sufficient care of the certainty of mens minds , and of the peace of the church ? was it a secret concealed then from them ? or not thought fit to be communicated by them , when it was most necessary to prevent the early corruptions and errours of the christian churches ? but they are so far from it , that i cannot find any intimation to that purpose in all their writings , although they had the fairest occasions for it . vii . if men by certain reason have found out this certain authority , what are they to do with this certain reason afterwards ? methinks it is a little hard for ever to discharge so useful a servant immediately after so extraordinary a piece of service , as the finding out an infallible guide . we do not find the apostles directing the people not to make use of their understandings , because their guides were infallible . i am apt to think the apostles were as infallible as tradition or church-authority ever since ; and therefore what allowance was made by them to a judgment of discretion is still to continue . what doth st. paul mean to speak to the corinthians in such a manner , i speak as to wise men , judge ye what i say : how different is this from , i speak by an infallible spirit , and ye are not to judge what i say ? when he saith to the thessalonians , prove all things , doth he mean , swallow all things , and prove nothing ? when st. john saith , try the spirits , whether they are of god , doth he only mean , till they had found a certain authority ? did not they believe st. john's authority to be certain ? if not , to what purpose did he write this epistle to them ? if he did , he supposed them still to have a liberty of judging , even those who pretended to inspiration . for , many false prophets are gone out into the world . and there are certain rules and marks to judge of the pretences to an infallible spirit , which were in vain assigned , if they were not to judge by them . viii . suppose men differ about this certain authority , wherein it lies , and how far it extends ; are not they to exercise their reason still about this ? suppose some pretend , that it lies in an infallible assistance which christ hath promised to his church in all ages ; and others say , this is impossible to be a ground of faith , because it is it self an article of faith : must not a man exercise his reason about this ? here is certain authority pleaded ; but others say , there is certain reason against this pretence of certain authority ; and they must grant i must follow certain reason , though against certain authority . again , others say , the certain authority of oral tradition is a novel , vain and dangerous opinion , destructive of faith , and leading to heresie and atheism ; what is to be done in this case ? must our reason be quitted , and men not be allowed to judge of this authority by it ? yes , till they come to own it , and then they are to judge no longer ; i. e. put out your eyes once , and ye need never think of opening them after . be very circumspect in the choice of your way , till you come to a precipice , and when you are come there , be sure to throw your self from it headlong , and there is an end of controversies . but we do not judge this a very reasonable method ; but think he had much better keep upon plain ground , and use the best method he can to find the true way ; and if his judgment , will serve him to find the way to a precipice , we think it will much better serve him to keep him from it ; and that he had better bear with some imperfection of his sight , than put out his eyes that he may be the more quietly led , he knows not whither . there is only one thing more , which deserves to be taken notice of , about this argument , viz. that j. s. saith , i expresly exclude the churches help ; which is , as he triumphantly concludes his third letter , the first principle , nay the quintessence of all heresie , fanaticism in the egg , perfect enthusiasm when hatcht , and downright atheism when fledg'd . this is a parting blow indeed . it is the bite of an angry viper , at its last gasp , when it puts its utmost force into the venom , and hopes even dying to destroy . others love to conclude gently , but j. s. is a man by himself , and as though he were writing epigrams , would reserve his sting for the last . but what ground is there for all this venemous froth ? even just as much as there was for the author of pax vobis to say , that i am for introducing paganism ; or for another to make me the founder of anti-catholick , and anti christian doctrines , whereas i profess to own no other than what have been received in this church ever since the reformation . but some mens spleen and gall must have a vent lest it destroy them . it is some satisfaction to me to think that none but such , who either oppose or betray our church , set themselves thus to defame me ; and it is a great comfort to find such feeble reasoning , where so much spite and malice is discover'd . thus it is here , with j. s. he could merit nothing without giving me hard words , and because many look on the beginning and end of a book , who mind nothing else in it ; therefore he hath here put together as the consequence of my doctrine , no less than heresie , fanaticism , enthusiasm , and downright atheism . he thought he could not make my case equal with his own , unless i were charged with heresie , and principles leading to atheism . but he is charged by the most zealous catholicks , and in respect to his avowed principles ; but my charge here is by an enraged adversary ; and for such a doctrine which is owned by all men of understanding in both churches , and if i may name him among them , even by j. s. himself . my words are , if it be said , that the churches power will become explicit to any sober enquirer , then every such person may without the churches help find out all necessary points of faith. and where lies the heresie , the enthusiasm , the atheism of this doctrine , which i have already shewed was asserted both by fathers and school-men ? and j. s. himself grants , that every man is to judge for his own salvation ; and of the best way to his salvation , and of all the controversies between them and us , and especially of the true grounds of faith ; and all this without the churches help . and if he can do all this , i desire to know whether he cannot find out all necessary points of faith ? hath he indeed , resolved all controversies , and yet wants some necessary points of faith ? and hath he found out the churches authority too , without the churches help , and yet doth he want some necessary points of faith ? then it follows , that after the submitting to the churches authority , there are still necessary points of faith which may be wanting ; and then an absolute submission is not all that is required of one that hath found out the churches authority . but my whole argument there proceeds upon a supposition , viz. that if one may without the churches help find out the churches authority in scripture , then why not all necessary points of faith ? so that it goes upon a parity of reason ; and i see no answer at all given or pretended , but only he endeavours to stop my mouth with a handful of dirt. thus i have dispatched this long argument about the judgment of discretion . and i shall now sum up my answer in these particulars . i. every christian , as such , is bound to enquire after the true way to salvation , and hath a capacity of judging concerning it . ii. every christian proceeding according to the best rules of judging , hath reason to receive the scripture as the rule of his faith. iii. the scripture is so plain in all necessaries , and god hath promised such assistance to them , that sincerely seek it , that none who do so , shall want the knowledge of such things as are necessary to their salvation . iv. when any thing is offer'd as necessary to be believed in order to salvation , every christian hath a right and liberty of judging , whether it can be proved by the scripture to be so necessary or not . v. we do not allow to particular persons the same faculty of judging in doubtful points of controversie , which we do as to matters that immediately concern their salvation . vi. no pretence of infallibility or authority can take away that right of judging , which was allowed them by the apostles , whose authority was infallible . vii . this right of judging doth not exclude the churches due authority as to matters of faith and controversies of religion , ( as it is declared art. 20. of our church ) but all that we now plead for , is ( not any authority as to others ) but a right of judging as to themselves , in matters that concern their salvation . viii . the certainty of faith , as to them depends upon two things ; 1. the clearness of scripture about them , which implies the certainty of reason . 2. the promise of divine assistance which makes their faith divine , both as to its principle , its ground , and its effect . but i have not yet ended his objections about our rule of faith ; for vi. he objects , that we cannot necessarily resolve our faith into the writings of the apostles only . what is the meaning that we cannot necessarily resolve it ? i think we must resolve it into a written rule , till we see another proved . did the apostles when they went to convert the world , go with books in their hands , or words in their mouths ? doubtless , with words in their mouths . or were those words a jot less sacred , when they came from their mouths , than when they put them in a book ? not one jot . or lastly , doth any command from christ appear to write the book of scripture , or any revelation before hand , that it was to be a rule of faith to the future church ? no such matter ; and the accidental occasions of its writing at first , and its acceptation afterwards bar any such pretences . on the other side , their grand commission was not scribite , but only praedicate evangelium . i have given an account so lately of the reasons and occasions of writing the gospels and epistles of the new testament , that i need only here to give these general answers . i. whatsoever was done as to the writing the books of the new testament , was done by the immediate direction and appointment of the holy ghost . ii. the reason given , by the writers of the gospels themselves , is , that matters of faith might be delivered with the greatest certainty . iii. those writings were not intended only for the benefit of the church then being , but for future ages ; and thence the books of scripture were so received and esteemed in the primitive churches . iv. the most antient writers of the christian church assure us , that the apostles wrote the same doctrine they taught , and for that purpose , that they might be a pillar and foundation of faith. v. the most certain way we now have to know what doctrine the apostles taught is by their writings ; since they taught and wrote the same doctrine ; and we are certain we have the doctrine they wrote , but we have no other way to be certain what doctrine they taught . vii . he objects , that the question being put concerning the new testament's containing all divine revelations of christ and his apostles , i gave no direct answer , but shuffled it off to matters necessary to salvation . the setting out of this is the subject of some pages . to which i give an easie answer . the question concerning the new testament containing all the divine revelations of christ and his apostles , may be taken in two senses . 1. as relating to the entire object of faith ; and so the answer was most direct and plain , to the second question , that the rule , whereby we hold all the same doctrine , that was taught by christ and his apostles , is by the divine revelations contained in the writings of the new testament . for since we believe all that is there , and nothing but what is there , that must contain the entire object of our faith. and the word all must relate to that . 2. as to all those things which particular persons are bound to believe , as contained therein ; and so the question being put , about the vniversal testimony to assure us , i. e. all particular christians , that the new testament contained all the divine revelations of christ and his apostles : my answer was direct and apposite to this sense , viz. that the universal testimony of the christian church , as to the book of scripture , and the doctrine therein contained , is a sufficient ground to make us certain , i. e. all particular persons , of all matters necessary to our salvation . so that the substance of my answer lies in these three things . i. that all our faith is contained in scripture ; and thereby we hold all the doctrine taught by christ and his apostles . ii. that although all particular persons may not reach to the entire object of faith contained in scripture , yet they had thereby a certainty , as to all matters necessary to their salvation . iii. that the ground of certainty as to both these , was the universal testimony of the christian church , concerning the books of scripture , and the doctrine contained therein . the words of my letter are , we are to consider , that the scripture being our sole and entire rule of faith , all matters necessary to salvation , must be supposed to be contained therein ; and therefore the same testimony , which delivers the scripture to us , doth deliver all the necessary articles as contained therein . which are there received as in the lump ; and if we receive the book which contains all , we must by the same authority receive all contained in it . as if a purse be left to a man by his fathers will , full of gold and silver , and this by the executors be declared to contain all the gold and silver his father left him they who deliver this purse to him from the executors , do certainly deliver to him all the gold and silver left him by his father . but if he suspects there was both gold and silver left him by his father , which was not in that purse , then he must call in question the integrity of the executors , who declared that all was contained therein . this is now the case of the christian church , as to all divine truths which respect mens salvation ; the primitive church , who answer to the executors in the other case , did unanimously declare that all such truths were undoubtedly contained in the written word . although therefore there may be a real difference in the nature of the doctrines therein contained , as there is between gold and silver , yet he that receives all , must receive one as well as the other ; and the matters of salvation , being of greatest moment , they that receive the whole will of god upon grounds of certainty , must be assured that therein they receive all matters necessary to our salvation . never was any purse so rifled as this is by j. s. he examines not only the coin in it , but the very strings and linings of it . he is a dreadful man at ransacking a metaphor . he tells me , my similitude is so far from running on four legs , that it is in many regards lame on the right ( and indeed only ) foot it ought to stand on ; and which is worse , perhaps against my self . the sum of it amounts to this , that because scripture contains all , and protestants have scripture , therefore they have all . a strange kind of discourse ! as if , because they have it in a book , therefore they have it in their minds and souls , in which , and no where else faith is to reside . but was not the question put , whether we had all the points of faith which our saviour taught ? and how could i answer a question about all , but by shewing where we had all ? if all the doctrine of christ be there , we must be certain we have all , if we have the scripture which contains all . but it is not enough to have it in a book . i grant it . but still if you ask , where all my faith is contained ; i must refer you to that book which contains all. for i profess to believe every thing there , and nothing as a point of faith , but what is there . we do not pretend , that it is enough for persons to say , their faith is in such a book ; but we grant that they ought to read and search , and actually believe what ever they find in that book ; but still all points are not equally necessary to all persons that are therein contained , but all such as are necessary to salvation lie there open to the capacities of all who desire to know them . now this is one of the things j. s. finds fault with this similitude of a purse for , viz. that people think it is an easie thing to open , and as easie to come at the sense of scripture , as to take money out of a purse : 't is but plucking the strings , and the deed is done . and is this any disparagement to a rule of faith to be plain and easie ? if it were not so , it could not be a rule of faith for all persons . we do not say , that any person by opening the scriptures , may presently attain to the certain sense of all places of scripture ; but that which i assert , is , that no man who sets himself to read and consider the scriptures as he ought , and prays for wisdom from god , shall miss of knowing all things necessary to his salvation . but mr. s. is for mending the similitude , and truly he doth it after an extraordinary manner . he will allow the scripture to be a purse , provided the purses mouth were tied up with a knot of such a mysterious contrivance , that none could open it but those who knew the mind of the bequeather ; and that the church , to which it was left as a legacy , had knowledge of his mind , and so could open it , whilst others only perplexed themselves more while they went about it . the point then between us , is , whether the scripture were left only to the church to interpret it to the people in all points ; or whether it were intended for the general good of the whole church , so as thereby to direct themselves in their way to heaven ; and consequently , whether it may not be opened and understood by all persons in matters that are necessary to their salvation . one would think by the church of romes management of the scripture , keeping it so much out of the peoples hands , and talking so much of the danger and mischief that comes by it , that they did esteem it just as the old romans did the sybillin oracles , which were to be kept up from the view of the people , and only to be consulted in cases of great difficulty , and no farther questions were to be asked , but what the keepers of them declared to be their meaning , was to be so received without any farther examination . and this is the sense of the politicians of that church , concerning the scripture . but when they have written like divines , and have been driven to state the controversie truly , they have been forced to such concessions , as have overthrown the political hypothesis . for , i. they cannot deny , that the scripture was designed to be a certain and infallible rule of faith to all . this bellarmin proves in the beginning of his controversies ; where he shews at large , that the law was the rule in the old testament . to the law , and to the testimony . blessed are they that search thy commandments , &c. that in the new testament christ proves his doctrine by the scriptures , and refers the pharisees to the scriptures , and confuted the sadduces out of them . that the apostles direct christians to honour , and esteem , and to rely upon them . and then he proves , that a rule of faith must be certain and known ; and for the scriptures , he saith , nihil est notius , nihil certius . nothing is more known , nothing more certain . how can this be , if there be such mystical knots which tye it together , that none but the church-guides can unloose ? how can this then ever be so known , as to be a rule of faith to the people ? and not meerly a rule , but a most certain and safe rule . which is the greatest non-sense in the world , if it cannot be understood by those , who are to make it their rule . they may as well say , that algebra was a rule for masons and carpenters , and a jacob's staff for a taylor 's measure . but mr. s. hath beaten his brains so long about rules and rulers , and that which is ruled and regulated by them , that we must not expect that he should be tied down to cardinal bellarmin's notions ; and therefore i must consider what he saith , after above twenty years hard labour about these things . he tells me plainly , i quite mistake the meaning of the word rule . for ( saith he ) it speaks rectitude . no doubt a right rule doth . but still i mistake his meaning . how so ? there must be a rectitude in the rule . that is not it . what then ? it must be evident rectitude , i. e. evident to be right . not so . i hope we shall come at it at last . it is such an evident rectitude as preserves those who regulate themselves by it from obliquity or deviation , that is , in our case , from errour . and is this the wonderful mystery ? there wants but one word to make it past dispute , viz. who effectually regulate themselves by it . for regulating is an ambiguous word , and may be taken , either 1. for what a man takes and professes to be his rule which he is to act by ; so a ciceronian regulates himself by cicero , i. e. he declares his manner of speech to be the rule he orders his speech by . and yet it is very possible that such a man may use phrases which are not cicero's , for want of sufficient skill and care. 2. for what he doth in conformity to his rule . and so he doth regulate himself by cicero , who doth not in the least swerve from his manner of speaking . but cicero is the rule to both these . and so the question here comes to this , whether that can be said to be a true intellectual rule , which men through their own default , and not through any defect in the rule , may deviate from ? if a rule be in it self certain , and be certainly received for a rule , that is surely enough to make it a rule to a man ; but it is not necessary to the being of a rule , that a man can never deviate from it by his own fault . for , there is no intellectual rule can be assigned , but it is possible for a free agent to deviate from ; although he do at the same time profess it to be his rule . do not all christians agree the commands of christ to be an infallible rule of life ? and j. s. by his admirable logick will either prove this not to be a rule , or that it is impossible for men to sin. for , saith he , a rule speaks rectitude , and that such an evident one as preserves those who regulate themselves by it from obliquity or deviation . yes , saith he , this is very plain , those who regulate themselves by christ's rule , cannot sin ; i grant it , those who do effectually regulate themselves by it ; but others may profess this to be their rule , and the most infallible rule of life , and yet through their own fault may deviate from it . so here persons may own the scripture to be a most certain & infallible rule as to truth and falshood ; and they are sure while they effectually regulate themselves by it , they can never err ; but while they profess to do it , they may . so that all mr. s's subtilty vanishes into nothing , by so plain and easie a distinction . therefore i am still of the mind , that a rule of faith is that whereby we are to judge what we are bound to believe as to divine revelations . no , saith j. s. i ought to have said , it is that by which , while we follow it , we shall be absolutely secured from erring in faith. this follows from the rectitude of the rule , that while men keep to it , they cannot err ; but it doth not follow from the nature of the rule , that men must necessarily follow it . for is it possible for men to misunderstand a certain rule or not ? i. e. such a rule which if they truly follow , they shall be secured from erring : if not , then the rule must be plain and evident to all capacities , to such a degree , that they cannot fail in judging by it . if it be possible , then , although the rule be in it self certain and infallible , yet it is possible for men to err through such a mistake , and while they think they follow the rule , they may run into errour . and it is strange to me , that mr. s. in all this time hath not discerned the fallacy that hath misled him . if it hath really misled him , and not been set up by him , on purpose to confound and confute hereticks , as he tells the cardinals at rome . but one of that number hath fully proved , as i have shewed already , that the scripture was intended for a rule of faith to the people ; and then it follows from j. s. himself , that while they regulate themselves by it , they can never err. what reason then can be given , why such a rule of faith should be kept from them ? and the purse be tied up with so many mysterious knots , which are utterly inconsistent with the notion of a rule of faith. ii. they grant , that there is a great difference in the points contained in scripture ; of which some are allowed to be simply necessary to salvation ; as those which are required to baptism ; and bellarmin yields , that all these points are certainly contained in scripture ; and were the things which the apostles constantly preached to all people . who cannot be denied to have been capable of understanding these things , when they heard them preached ; and how could they lose the capacity of understanding them when they were written ? and if they might still understand them , then the scripture hath no such mysterious knots , but all points necessary to salvation may be understood by the people . so that as to these points of greatest importance , the scripture must be left as a legacy to all christians , and not only to the guides of the church . but j. s. craves leave to explain himself ; and it is great pity to deny it him . mistake me not , saith he , i do not mean scriptures letter is not clear in such passages as concern morality , or the x commandments ; nor in matters of fact , as the marks or signs of the messias foretold by the prophets ; ( methinks the mysterious knots should have been about prophecies , ) nor in parables explained by himself and such like ; but in dogmatical points or tenets , which are spiritual , and oftentimes profound mysteries , as a trinity , christ's godhead , the real presence of his body in the sacrament , and such like ; and in such as these our rule is not intelligible enough to keep the followers of it from erring . i answer , either the apostles preached these points to all persons as necessary to their salvation , or they did not . if not , how come they to be necessary to be believed now ? if they did , then the people were capable of understanding them when they heard them , and therefore may as well understand them when they read them . i do not mean the manner as to the trinity and incarnation ( as to transubstantiation , i know nothing in scripture about it either as to thing or manner ) but the revelation of such a doctrine . so that if these points be owned to be necessary to salvation , they must be so plain that men may understand their duty to believe them . for , that is the bound i keep my self within , that all things necessary to salvation , are so plain , that we may be certain of our duty to believe them ; but if not , we may err without prejudice to our salvation . mr s. asks what i mean by all things necessary to salvation . nothing but what all others do mean by it . did christ ( saith he ) teach any unnecessary points ? alas for him ! but are all points taught by christ , or written in scripture , equally necessary to the salvation of all people ? no , he saith presently after , that he will grant that fewer means than the knowledge of all christ taught , may suffice for the salvation of some particular persons . very well ; now i hope he will make something of the main business in hand , viz. to prove that absolute certainty of all that christ taught , is necessary to mens salvation , when he grants that some may be saved , without so much as knowing all that christ taught . to what purpose was all this heat about the certainty of our faith , as to all that christ taught , if at last some may be saved without so much as knowing it ? how doth mr. s. prove , that those some are only the ignorant people in the church of rome ; but that all ours are tied to no less than infallible certainty of all that christ taught . he would have done well , to have proved such a privilege for ignorance to have been limited to their communion ; and that no claim can be allowed as to the circumstances of any other particular persons . some few ( he saith again ) may be saved without the knowledge of such and such points , slender motives being enough for their circumstances . i thank mr. s. for this . it seems the point as to salvation is gained , unless particular persons among us can be proved to be none of these few . but where-ever they are , it seems they may be saved ; but i hope , not without true and saving faith ; whence it follows , that such faith hath no necessary relation to these high points ; and there is no need of infallible certainty , as to them , of all christ taught . one of these high points , is that of transubstantiation ; too high for me and thousands and millions besides , ever to apprehend , let us do our utmost ; nay we cannot apprehend ( such is our dulness ) that we can have any certainty , as to sense or reason , if we hold it . we hope therefore j. s. will enlarge his number , and not talk only of some few that may be saved without the knowledge of such deep mysteries ; we desire to be admitted into his number , for truly our capacities can never be stretched so far , as to comprehend the possibility of transubstantiation . suppose our motives be slender , yet they are such as move us to that degree , that we cannot overcome the reluctancies of sense , and reason , and revelation , and tradition against it . but mr. s. brings himself off with a salvo ; though all points are not necessary for every particular person , yet all of them are necessary for the body of the church , whose pastors are to instruct their children in them , and apply the efficacy of them to their souls , as their capacities admit , and exigencies require . it seems still they are not necessary to particular persons , but according to their capacities and exigencies , but they are to the body of the church . but how came they to be necessary to the body of the church ? for instance , the point of transubstantiation is a very deep point ; and although particular persons may be saved without believing it , yet i cannot understand how this deep point comes to be necessary , in any respect , for the body of the church . i hope j. s. will not deny this to be one of his necessary church-points : let him then shew , how it comes to be so necessary for the pastors of the church to instruct their children in it . my capacity , i assure him , will not reach to this , and therefore i hope i may be excused ; and in his own words , my mind is not capable of being cultivated by such elevating considerations . i do not believe there is any such danger of the flocks dying , or falling short of their full growth they might have had in the plentiful pasturage of the church , as j. s. elegantly speaks , if they do not believe transubstantiation , or any such deep points . but still we have no absolute certainty of our highest fundamentals . no ? we affirm the contrary ; and from absolutely certain grounds . it is absolutely certain , that whatever god reveals is true , and ought to be believed by us . and we are , as absolutely certain as scripture and reason can make us , that god hath revealed the fundamentals of our faith. but there is experience to the contrary . what experience ? that we are not certain ? we affirm that we are ; and who can tell best ? how comes mr. s. to know we are not certain when we say we are ? but all are not , as socinians , &c. what are they to us ? are not we certain , because some are not certain ? what pittiful reasoning is this ? is mr. s. certain of his infallible ground of certainty , oral tradition ? why do i ask such a question ? for very good reason ; because there are some not certain of it , and even in his own church ; but cry out upon it , as fallible , fallacious , dangerous , and destructive of faith , and leading to atheism . from whence it follows , on mr. s's . principles , that he cannot be certain himself , because others are not . nay , it is impossible he should have any certainty on his own grounds . for he can have no rule of certainty , as i shall evidently prove from his own words . a rule must have absolute certainty ; absolute certainty there cannot be where persons are left uncertain ; but there are many in the church of rome , that not only doubt of his rule of infallible certainty , but utterly deny it , and dispute against it . how is it then possible , for him to be certain of it on his own grounds ? but it is time to proceed to another objection against our rule of faith. viii . j. s. saith , we can be no more certain of our rule , than we are of the truth of the letter of scripture ; but we cannot be certain we have the right letter , unless we have a right translation , and that must be from a true copy ; no copy can be true , unless conformable to the original ; and if there be any failure in any of these , nay , if we have not absolute certainty of all these , we cannot have any absolute certainty of our faith. this objection , those of the church of rome , who believe scripture to be a rule of faith , ( though not the complete ) are concerned to answer , as well as we . for , the matters of faith contained in scripture are convey'd to their minds after the same manner . but mr. s. saith their case is different from ours . do not they make the vulgar translation authentick ? and will not the same objections then lie against all those who rely upon it ? let us see how j. s. clears this matter : 1. the canon of the books comes down , saith he , by the testimony of all christian churches , that are truly christian . and we say , the canon of the books comes down by the concurrent testimony of all christian churches , however differing in other things . and herein , i think , we have much the advantage . for , we do not except against the testimony of any christian churches ; nor condemn them as not truly christian till their cause be better heard and examin'd . 2. the doctrine of christ , saith he , transfused into the hearts of the faithful , both taught them how , and obliged them to correct the copy in those particular texts that concerned faith. what is this , but in plain terms to expose the scriptures to the scorn and contempt of atheists and infidels ? who would desire no better a concession than this , that the scripture hath been corrected in matters of faith , according to the faith of the church . if this be granted , it is impossible to prove that we have any true original texts , in matters of faith : for if the church did correct the copy in those particular texts , which concerned faith , according to the sense of the faithful ; then the church in every age might so correct it : and consequently we can never be sure , that the texts continue the same for any two ages together ; unless it be first proved impossible for the sense of the church to vary in any two ages ; or of those who think themselves bound to correct the texts . and i should be very sorry to have my faith rest upon such a slippery foundation . i will put the case , as to the arian controversie . how was it possible for the nicene fathers to have convinced the arians on such a supposition as this ? you alledge several texts of scripture , might they say , to prove the godhead of christ , and his equality with the father ; but how can we know that these were original texts , and not corrected by the guides of the church then , according to their own sense ? we do not deny that there were some leading men of this opinion , and having gained a party to themselves , they corrected the texts according to it : and therefore we can never be satisfied , that these were the original texts , because we can bring down a tradition of a contrary sense from the apostles times . i do not see what satisfaction they could ever receive , if this pernicious principle be allowed , that the texts were to be corrected in matters that concern faith , according to the sense of the church . but he saith it is , if any errour , through the carelesness , unattentiveness , or malice of the translators , or transcribers at any time had crept in . this doth not one jot mend the matter . for if the faith of the present church be the rule , then the texts are to be corrected according to it , and the blame to be laid on the carelesness or malice of translators and transcribers . this is a miserable account of the certainty of texts of scripture in points of faith ; as to other texts of inferiour concern , as he speaks , they could be best corrected , by multitudes of other ancient copies , the churches care still going along , as was shewn in the highest manner , by the council of trent , that so it might be as exact as human diligence could well render it . as to multitudes of copies they serve us as well as them ; but as to the care of the council of trent , i am by no means satisfied . for 1. they went no farther than a translation , and declared that authentick ; without due regard to the original text. 2. the care taken was not so exact ; for then clemens the eighth did great injury to sixtus the fifth , when he recalled and corrected his bibles in so many places after sixtus the fifth , had published his for an exact edition . 3. there are still complaints in the church of rome of want of exactness in the vulgar latin. 4. after all this is but human diligence , and no such absolute certainty , as j. s. requires from us . but it may be , he will say , that he doth not at all make it his rule of faith ; let him declare so much ; and then we know what to answer . this is still putting off . therefore i will give a distinct answer . i. we do utterly deny that it is in any churches power to correct original texts , because they contradict the sense of the present church ; or any translations any farther , than they differ from the originals . and i do not know any assertion that shakes more our faith , as to the scripture , than this of j. s. doth . ii. the early appeals made to scripture in matters of faith , by the writers of the christian church , make us certain that there could be no such alterations or corrections of the texts , according to these use of the correctors . as for instance , we find the places produced against the arians used before against the samosatenians and artemonites . if it be said , they might correct the fathers to i answer , that there is no imaginable ground for any such suspicion ; because the fathers lived in distant places and countries , and therefore when their testimonies agree about some places of scripture alledged by them , there can be no reason to suspect any corruption or alteration of the text. as for instance , no one text of the whole new testament , hath been more suspected than that of 1 s. john 5.7 . there are three that bear record in heaven , &c. and it cannot be denied , that there hath been great variety , both in the greek and latin manuscripts about it ; yea , there was so in s. jeroms time , as appears by his preface to the canonical epistles ; who charges the leaving it out to the unfaithfulness of the translators . s. jerom is cried out upon as a party in this controversie , and therefore it is said on the other side , that he put it in as favouring his own opinion . but his integrity is vindicated herein , because s. cyprian so long before the arian controversie produced this place . so that our certainty as to scripture doth not depend upon the meer letter , but upon comparing the best and most antient copies , with the writings of the fathers , who still made use of the scriptures in all discourses and debates about matters of faith. iii. the variety of readings in matters that are not of faith , cannot hinder our certainty in matters of faith. we do not pretend , that there is no kind of variety in the copies of the new testament ; but i am of opinion that this rather establishes than weakens our faith. for , considering the great multitudes of them , and how insignificant they are , it shews that this book was liable to the common accidents of books ; but yet , that there is no such variety , as to make one suspect any fraud or design in the alterations that appear in the manuscript copies . and as to translations that have been made among us , the people who are not able to examin them by the originals , have no reason to suspect them , as to any matter of faith. not meerly from the skill and integrity of the persons , and the care that hath been taken , but because it was so much the concernment of some men to have lessen'd the credit of our translations , as much as was possible , and they have not been able to produce any thing that might shake the faith of a considering man. if it be said after all , this is but human faith , and not divine ; i answer , iv. we must be careful to distinguish the certainty of human and divine faith in this matter . we do not pretend that we have an absolute divine certainty of things that are only capable of human certainty ; and we do not say , that we have only human certainty of things capable of divine certainty . if the question be put concerning the objects of divine faith , then we do answer , that we have a divine certainty of them from those things , which are the proper evidence of divine revelation . we believe the doctrine of christ with a divine faith , because it was confirmed by miracles and prophecies : we believe the new testament to be written by the holy spirit , because the promise of the spirit was fulfilled upon them ; and especially in a thing of so great concernment to the whole christian church . but if the question be asked only concerning a matter of fact , as whether the books that bear such names were written by the persons , whose names they bear ; then i can have no greater certainty than belongs to a matter of fact ; but then it is so circumstantiated , that i have a greater and more absolute certainty , as to this , then any other matter of fact which wants the proofs that this hath . and if as to books , and copies , and translations , we have as high a certainty , as the thing is capable of , it is madness to expect and require more . for where there is but a human testimony , there cannot be the certainty of divine faith , which must not only have a divine object , but must rest on a divine testimony ; but where the testimony is human , the certainty must be such as relates to the highest of that kind . but still , such a faith may have absolute certainty of its kind ; and although in regard of its testimony it be human faith , yet in regard both of its object , its inward cause , and its effects , it may be truly called divine . ix . the last objection is , concerning the number of canonical books . pray satisfie us ( saith mr. s. ) about this exact number of books ; and how many will just serve turn . one would think by his objections , j. s. were preparing matter for the critical history of the new testament , he seems so concerned to lessen the authority of it . but i shall answer the objections he offers . 1. there may have been books lost that were written by persons divinely inspir'd , and we have no unanimous consent of the christian church that there is none lost ; and those books might contain matters different from , or to be superadded to the canon we have now ; and without this , we can have no certainty , that the books we have now , contained all the divine revelations . i answer , i. if we have the unanimous consent of the christian church , that we have the canon of the new testament entire , then we have their consent , that there is no book , written by divine inspiration , lost . and this appears by the contest in the iv. century , about the just number of the canonical books ; the churches then differ'd about some books not then universally receiv'd ; as the apocalypse in some , and the epistle to the hebrews in others . which shews , that the churches were then so solicitous to preserve any books that appear'd to be written by persons inspir'd , that although these did then want universal consent , yet they were still kept , and read , and dispers'd , till upon further examination they came to be universally read . it is not therefore in the least probable they should suffer any apostolical writings to be lost . ii. this is to charge the christian church with so gross a neglect , as overthrows the force of all his arguments for tradition . for we must suppose an apostolical writing sent to some church by direction of the holy spirit , and yet that church be so notoriously careless , as to lose a book containing in it many points of faith ; now i appeal to any one of common sense , whether he could trust their word for matters of faith , who could be so negligent as to lose a great many points of faith at once . and the more such a book were dispersed , the argument is still stronger against tradition . besides , this shews the great insufficiency of oral tradition , if these points of faith are lost ; because such a book was lost , wherein they were contained . if tradition had been so effectual a means of conveying matters of faith , it should have appear'd in such a case , viz. in preserving such matters of faith , though the books were lost : but we find nothing like this , so much as pretended . although it were much easier pretended than proved . iii. this is to suppose the providence of god not to be immediately concerned in preserving books written by divine inspiration . mr. s. doth really suppose that books written by divine inspiration may have been lost , or at least that we cannot prove that they are not : but we think it a considerable proof , that they could not , because the divine providence doth so immediately concern it self in preserving that which tends so much to the good of his church . if a hair doth not fall from our heads , nor a sparrow fall on the ground , without the providence of god ( as our saviour affirms ) is it not very unreasonable to suppose that a divine book , written for the benefit of the christian church , should be wholly lost ? especially considering the extraordinary care the first christians took , in times of the greatest persecutions , to preserve the scriptures ; and no force or violence could extort them out of their hands . on mr. s's supposition , it was no hard matter for a book of scripture to be lost , viz. if the several books had been committed to the custody of some men in trust for the whole church ; but if we consider the things as they really were , it will appear hardly possible . for the books were not kept up at first in a few hands , but dispersed abroad in multitudes of copies , and received with mighty veneration both on the account of the authors of them , and the matters contained in them . they were read both in publick and in private , they heard them in their assemblies , and they made them their constant imployment at home ; they were their rule of life , as well as of faith. and how is it possible to suppose any book so received , so esteemed , so dispersed , so constantly read , could be suffer'd to be lost among christians ? if it be objected , that they were not all so esteemed at first , as appears by the epistle to the hebrews , and therefore might more easily be lost ; i answer , that however they were not universally received at first , yet they were by those churches to whom they were written ; and among them they were not kept up , but mightily dispersed ; so that there was no way to lose them , from the first spreading of them abroad ; unless we can suppose such multitudes of christians to conspire together to suppress a book of so great concernment to themselves . as if persons who claim an estate by virtue of some deeds , should all agree to imbezel them , or any material part of them . here was no pretence for registers and abridgments , which some make use of to lessen the authority of the books of the old testament ; for here we have the very authentick writings of the apostles , and their own epistles in their own style and expressions . and supposing the churches , to whom they were sent , to have received them as their writings , and to have communicated them to others , as they did , i do not see , under these circumstances , how a book , containing divine revelations , could be lost . ii. he objects , that the canon of scripture was not entire , but deficient for some hundreds of years , till the whole canon was collected and acknowledged , and therefore so long the church had no perfect rule of faith. i answer , i. i distinguish between a compleat rule of faith , and a compleat canon of scripture . for , if the books owned and universally received , contain in them all matters of faith , then the rule of faith is compleat , although some particular books may be still in dispute . as for instance , it is certain , that in st. jerom's time , the church of rome did not receive as canonical the epistle to the hebrews ; had not that church therefore a compleat rule of faith ? if god hath so abundantly provided for his church , that there may be a full revelation of all points of faith in the rest , then the disputing the authority of such an epistle , doth not derogate from the compleatness of the rule of faith. for , if they have all points of faith , they must have a compleat rule of faith. ii. it is no prejudice to the true canon of scripture , that some particular books of the new testament were for some time disputed by some particular churches . for , if it were done without ground , it doth reflect more on those churches than on those books ; especially when those very churches afterwards received them . and this was the case of the church of rome , as to the epistle to the hebrews : st. jerom affirms , that not only the greek churches all received it , but that all the ancient writers did so ; and not meerly as an ecclesiastical , but as a canonical epistle . therefore this must be a late thing in the church of rome ; and in probability , began upon the novatian controversie , which epistle was thought too much to favour the novatian doctrine ; and when that controversie did abate , that epistle recovered its authority in the church of rome . but mr. s. is angry with me , for reflecting on the church of rome for not receiving the epistle to the hebrews in st. jerom 's time ; which ( he thinks ) was an act of prudence , antecedent to the judgment or determination of any church , whether greek or latin. one may see by this how well versed he is in the canon of scripture , when st. jerom declares , that not only all the greek writers received it , but all the ancient , and that as canonical . was here no antecedent judgment of the church in this matter ? doth not the consent of all ancient writers , even in st. jerom's time , make a judgment of the church ? but he adds , that what i make a heinous crime in the church of rome , was a commendable caution in it . that which i said , was , that it hence appear'd , that the church of rome was far from being believed then to have the authority of making the canon of scripture , or being infallible in faith. and what saith j. s. in answer to this ? not one syllable , but runs it off to another thing . but why do i not as well blame the greek churches for not receiving the apocalypse ? they do not pretend to such authority and infallibility in this matter , as the church of rome doth . i do not deny that there were some greeks then to blame in rejecting the apocalypse , but bellarmin saith , they were but few and obscure persons ; and he produces the testimonies of justin martyr , irenaeus , theophilus antiochenus , melito sardensis , dionysius alexandrinus , clemens alexandrinus , origen and athanasius , all approving it . and the occasion of disputing it arose from the millenary opinion , which some thought they could not confute , as long as the apocalypse had such authority in the church . and such disputes as these , which wore off by degrees , are no real prejudice to the canon of the new testament , which was at first generally received ; and although some few books were contested for a time , yet they recover'd their authority , and have ever since been received by the universal consent of all christian churches . iii. he objects against this universal consent , the testimonies of marcion , ebion , valentinus , cerinthus , and epiphanius his other hereticks , who rejected the canon of the new testament . could any man but j. s. make such an objection as this ? but he had a mind to bring me in as a favourer of all hereticks ; and , as such another man of integrity hath done , of all anti-catholick and anti-christian doctrines . but where have i given any occasion for such spiteful reflections ? all that i said , was , we have the universal consent of all christian churches for the canon of the new testament , i. e. of all since the time , that the epistle to the hebrews was receiv'd in the latin , and the apocalypse in the greek churches ; notwithstanding all the divisions they have since fallen into , yet they had no difference as to the canon of the new testament . and this i insisted on as the ground of our certainty , viz. the unanimous consent of all the great bodies of christians , that have continued under different denominations to this day . to this he gives no other answer , but that my answer to the fifth question , is co-incident with that to the fourth . i thought j. s. in the self-evident way , would have liked my answer the better for it . but he doth not comprehend the design of it . i had said before , that we relied on the universal testimony of the christian church ; upon that the question was asked , what i meant by the christian church : my answer was , that it was that which was made up of all christian churches ; i. e. saith j. s. that all the parts make the whole ; and what incongruity is there ? when mr. g. said , that the christian church may be taken in several latitudes , he desired to know in what sense i took it ; and could i answer him more directly than to tell him , i took it in the largest sense , as it was made up of all the parts ; and not in such a sense as they do , who give the denomination of the whole to a part ? but by this i do not seclude all hereticks . i do not take upon me to judge of all the bodies of christians in the world , whether they be justly charged with heresie or not ; but i take them only as christians , and from their universal consent , i prove the certainty of the canon of scripture . hereby i profess a brotherhood with excrementitious outcasts . i know not what brotherhood lies in making use of their testimony ; but i had rather do it , than with unsufferable pride and folly call so many bodies of christians ; for whom christ died , excrementitious outcasts . but although he seems to own that their testimony doth strengthen the evidence for the canon of the new testament ; yet he calls it back again , and for extraordinary reasons . 1. they may have corrupted the letter of scripture , although they may allow of the books . let us then take their testimony for the books , and examine the letter afterwards . 2. this vniversal testimony must reach to each chapter and verse ; but we must have assurance not only of each verse , but of each significant word in the verse . how hardly are some men satisfied about the certainty of scripture ! are there not different copies in all parts to examin and compare , if there be cause of mistrust ; and if there be none , what prejudice is this to our certainty ? at this rate , men may argue against every thing ; and that there can be no certainty of any writing , unless the person stood by and saw the author write ; and even then he might question his senses too . these objections do indeed lead to an incurable scepticism in the church of rome . 3. the judges suspect the justness of the cause , if known knights of the post are called in to corroborate the evidence . what a desperate cause is that , which forces men to fling such dirt in the face of so many christian churches ? and that without the least evidence or proof against them . how come all the greek , abyssine , coptick , oriental christians , to be compared to knights of the post , because they afford a concurrent testimony with us about the canon of the new testament ? they may be the honestest and best part of christendom , for any thing j. s. knows ; and what justice can there be in such uncharitable censures ? it is not enough for you to say , they are all accounted hereticks or schismaticks by you ; for we that know how unjust and unreasonable your censures are so near home , have no cause to regard them at such a distance . thus i have answered all the objections i have met with in j. s. against our rule of faith. i now come to the last part of my task , which is to examin the arguments produced to prove the infallibility of oral and practical tradition . the main argument is thus set down by mr. s. all traditionary christians believe the same to day which they did yesterday , and so up to the time of our blessed saviour ; and if they follow this rule , they can never err in faith , and therefore are infallible . and they could not innovate in faith , unless they did forget what they held the day before , or out of malice after it . all the parts of this argument mr. s. endeavours to shew to be self-evident ; but in truth it is a self-evident fallacy ; as i shall shew at large . but before i particularly lay it open , i must consider what he saith against the method i used in the conference for answering it . i then thought , and do still , that the clearest answer to an argument , which proves a thing impossible was to bring an undeniable instance that such a thing really was , which was proved impossible to be . and to this purpose i produced the instance of the greek church , which professed to follow tradition , and yet they could not deny to have erred . this mr. s. saith , is giving no answer at all ; for this is no answer to his argument , but producing a new argument against him . and he magisterially tells me , that it is my turn to answer ; and therefore i am confined to concedo , nego or distinguo : as the propositions are either true , false or ambiguous , or i may deny the inference , if i find more terms in the conclusion than in the premisses . but these are my bounds which i must not exceed . but with submission to these logicians , i answer , that where an argument is designed to prove a thing impossible , which is contrary to sense and experience , the producing an evident instance is the plainest and shortest way of answering ; as well as in an induction which is allowed to be disproved by a plain instance . as in the case of zeno's argument against motion ; diogenes his moving was a far more effectual answer , than if he had stood a great while with his concedo , nego and distinguo . j. s. confesses , that the vanity of zeno 's argument was not ill ridiculed by diogenes his moving before him . and why might not i then expose the vanity of this demonstration by the instance of the greek church ; unless some fault be found in the instance . he brings the argument , and i an instance against it , what are people the wiser ? and which shall they be for ; the argument or the instance ? zeno brought his argument , and diogenes his instance ; were not by-standers the wiser , when it so apparently proved the foppery of the argument ? doth j. s. think the vanity of it was not enough exposed by that means ? but he saith , this is excepting against the conclusion , when there lies none against the premisses . no such matter ; for it shews there is a fallacy in the premisses : it is however but an argument , ad hominem ; call it what you will , so it doth my business ; to shew the vanity of the demonstration . this way doth but sham an adversary . and truly that is a great matter , if they be such as p.g. they are of no use for discovery of truth . as much as laying open sophistry helps to the discovery of truth ; which is not a little when we deal with sophistical disputers . but we come to the instance . how doth he after all clear this instance of the greek church ? doth he deny that they hold to tradition ? no. doth he deny that they have erred notwithstanding ? all that he saith is , that p. g. was no ways obliged not to deny that the greek church had erred in points of faith. no ? then he must grant that the roman church hath erred , for they contradict each other . let him take his choice ; one doth my business as well as the other , and more effectually destroys the pretence of infallibility in the roman church . but i say , they did not err . what is my saying to the business in hand ? besides , there are other points contradictorily held between the greek and roman churches , besides that of the filioque and the argument holds as well in any other , as in that . and therefore he must fix the errour on one side or other . after all this flourishing he takes heart , and resolves to grapple with the instance . let us see what your instance will do . now i thought we shall have a direct answer . but i am strangely disappointed . for he runs still back to that , that i do not believe it erred . was the instance brought against me , or against p. g ? but his answer doth not make or marr the business . the business of the demonstration it doth , and that was my business . but this doth not prove that a church going upon tradition errs , unless i will grant that the greek church hath erred . what strange trifling is this ? the dispute was about p. g's . argument , and not my opinion . is this the answer to the instance about the greek church which mr. m. promised ? if this pass for an answer , i think j. s. may defend sure footing . i mentioned p. g's . answer , that the greek church followed tradition till the arians left that rule , and took up a new one . and why saith j. s. hath he not answered well ? because he did not answer to the purpose ; which was not about the arians , but the present greek church . but a church may follow tradition at one time , and leave it at another . very true ; but the greek church did not forsake tradition , and yet erred . and therefore tradition and errour were found together , and therein lies the force of this undeniable instance . the rest is such trifling , that i am really ashamed to answer it over and over . still he attempts to give an answer , and still fails ; but it is something new , and therefore shall be considered . his answer , saith j. s. holds as well as to the present as past greek church . his answer ! where is it ? it was that those who err in faith must leave tradition . but the greeks did not leave tradition , and yet erred in faith ; so that the instance holds good still . he denies that errour and tradition can be found together in the greek church , or any other ancient or modern , i. e. the conclusion must be held against all the instances in the world. but i ought to say , whether the differences were in matters of faith. yes , in such which the church of rome accounts matters of faith. but how can an erring church still plead tradition and adhere to it ? answer the instance ; for the greek church doth plead tradition . but then pleading tradition is no more but quoting some expressions of ancient writers , as the arians did : not so neither ; for the greek church relies most upon tradition from father to son in practise of any church in the world. but if they adhere to tradition , and that tradition leads them to christ , who could not err , how can they possibly err ? for , pray did christ teach any errour ? no certainly . when a father believed what christ taught him , and the son what the father believed , did not the son too believe what christ taught ? run it on to the last son that shall be born in the world , must not every one believe what christ taught , if every one believed what his father believed ? and so goodnight to the greek church ; we are come back to the argument . i might as well have instanced in the latin church it self . truly i think so too ; and so you shall find in a short time ; and how little advantage you get by such a challenge . but it is impossible for a church to adhere to tradition , and yet to err ; therefore if the present greek church have erred , it has not adhered to tradition ; if it have adhered to tradition , it hath not erred . that is , the argument must be good , let the instance be what it will. but an easie distinction will shew the weakness of this argument . adhering to tradition may be taken two ways . i. for adhering to tradition , as the rule and means of conveyance of matters of faith. ii. for actually adhering to that very doctrine which christ taught , and hath ever since been truly convey'd down by tradition . in this latter sense we grant it impossible for men to err , while they actually adhere to that very doctrine which christ taught , and is supposed to be deliver'd down by tradition . but this is not the matter before us ; which lies in these two points . i. whether tradition be an infallible way to convey the doctrine of christ down to us . ii. whether it be impossible for those who hold to this as their rule , to err or not . and so the answer is plain to the main argument . if by traditionary christians , be meant such as adhere to that very doctrine which christ taught , and was actually conveyed down to them , then such traditionary christians , so believing , cannot err. but if by traditionary christians be meant such as take tradition for an infallible rule of conveying all matters of faith ; then we say such traditionary christians may and have erred : and that for two reasons . i. because tradition is no infallible rule . ii. because although it were , yet men might err , either by mistaking it , or departing from it . but saith j. s. they cease to be traditionary christians if they do not believe the same to day which they did yesterday , and so up to christ. if by traditionary christians be meant , they do not really believe what christ taught , we grant it , that they are . if by traditionary christians be meant such as bear the name of traditionary christians , and look on tradition as their rule , and imagine they have the same faith which christ taught ; then they are still traditionary christians . and now i am to give a clear and distinct answer to the demonstration of the infallibility of oral tradition , as it is managed by j. s. and taken into propositions . i. all traditionary christians believe the same to day which they did yesterday , and so up to the time of our blessed saviour . j. s. hopes i have nothing to say to this ; but he is mistaken . for i have many things to say to lay open the notorious fallacy of it in every clause . i. all traditionary christians . who are they ? are all christians traditionary christians ? this were to the purpose , if it could be proved . but how doth this appear ? why is it not said , all christians have gone upon this principle ? he knew this could never have been proved . and therefore he puts in the thing in dispute , and would have it taken for granted , that there were no other but traditionary christians . which i deny , and i am certain he can never prove it . suppose then that there were christians not traditionary as well as traditionary , the proposition appears ridiculous ; so far is it from demonstration . traditionary christians believed so ; non-traditionary christians believed otherwise ; and which are to be believed , is the question ; and that to be determined by the certainty of the ground they went upon ; and so we are come to the debate between scripture and tradition . ii. all traditionary christians believe the same to day which they did yesterday . this is capable of a threefold meaning . i. that they do actually believe the same to day which they did yesterday . which is a meer contingent thing , and proves nothing . or , ii. that they are bound to believe to day , as they did yesterday . and that may be on several accounts . i. because they see evidence from the word of god to day as well as they did yesterday . ii. or because their guides of the church teach them the same to day which they did yesterday , whom they believe to be infallible . iii. or , meerly because they receive it by an oral tradition , and not on the other accounts ; and then it proves no more than that they are bound to do it ; and it is too well known that many fail to do what they are bound to . or iii. that they do infallibly believe the same to day which they did yesterday . but then this ought to have been inserted in the proposition , that traditionary christians cannot fail to believe to day what they did yesterday . if it be said , that this is implyed in their being traditionary christians , then i say , the whole is a fallacy of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for he supposes all true christians to be traditionary christians , and then that they infallibly hold to tradition as their rule , and from thence he proves tradition to be infallible . but if the body of christians may go upon another rule , or if going upon tradition , they may misunderstand it , then there is no inseparable connexion in the several links of this chain . and there is a further fallacy in supposing that if any change in faith happens , it must be as sudden and remarkable , as if all men should to day refuse to believe what they believed yesterday . whereas the changes of opinions are oft-times wrought by insensible degrees , and many concurrent causes ; and sometimes the very same words may be used and the faith altered , as in the case of merit , sacraments , sacrifice , &c. which sheweth men may continue the very same terms , and yet believe quite a different thing . and where changes are gradual , it is very unreasonable to pitch upon such a precise and narrow space of time , as between to day and yesterday . by the same method , one may demonstrate it to be impossible that any language should be changed ; for people speak the same language to day which they did yesterday and the same yesterday which they did the day before , and so up to the very building of babel ; and yet we all know that languages are continually changed , and to such a degree , that in some ages they cannot understand , what was at that time intelligible by all . in such cases , it is enough to assign the general causes and reasons of alterations without fixing a precise and determinate time. and those i shall speak to afterwards . iii. and so up to the time of our blessed saviour . to prove any thing from hence it must be shewed , i. that there can be no pretence to tradition taken up without ground ; for if there may , it can by no means follow , that if men pretend to tradition , that tradition must run up to the time of christ. but then they cease to be traditionary christians . what then ? not in pretence , for they may call themselves so still ; but in reality they are not . ii. that if men lay claim to a rule they must always observe it . we do not pretend to it as to the scripture : and what reason is there for it as to tradition ? but if men may pretend to follow tradition , and do not , then from their being traditionary christians , it can by no means follow that this tradition must be carried up to the time of our blessed saviour . ii. the second proposition is , and if they follow this rule , they can never err in faith. this is palpably self evident , saith j. s. so say i too , but it is only to be a meer fallacy . to follow this rule is to believe the same to day which they did yesterday , and so up to christ , or downwards : if they did this from christs time , and so forwards , they must continue to believe the same to the end of the world. if they really believe the same doctrine which christ taught , no doubt they cannot err . but the question is , whether this be an infallible rule for us to judge , they could never mistake in this rule , nor follow any other : for if either of these could happen , the demonstration is lost . if it were possible for errors to come in some other way , or for persons to misapprehend the doctrine delivered ; then it is not possible for us by this way to be convinced they could not err . the latter i have already spoken to ; i shall now shew that there were some other ways that errors might come in . and here i shall pass over the common infirmities of human nature , which i think oral tradition can never cure , and which leave men always lyable to error ; but i shall name some more particular ways of introducing them . i. by the authority of false teachers . and for this i shall not run back to the false apostles and seducers in the apostles times and afterwards ; but i shall bring a present instance in the church of rome ; and that is of michael de molinos , a person solemnly condemned at rome , aug. 28. of this year for 68 propositions taken out of his books and owned by himself , as the decree saith ; which are there said to be heretical , erroneous , blasphemous , offensive , rash , seditious , and contrary to christian discipline . this man is said to have had thousands of disciples in italy , in the very heart of the traditionary church . now , i desire j. s. to inform me , if tradition be infallible , and that be the way followed in the church of rome , how it was possible for such multitudes to be deceived in matters of such consequence ? to say they were not deceived , is to expose the authority of the guides of the church of rome to the greatest contempt ; to say they were deceived , is to own , that notwithstanding tradition , a single priest may gain such authority , as to deceive thousands ; and where lies then the infallibility of tradition ? ii. by enthusiasm , or a pretence to immediate revelation . for this i shall not produce the old instances in ecclesiastical history , as of montanus , asclepiades , theodotus , manichaeus , arius , aetius , &c. who all pretended to revelations for their particular opinions . but i shall keep to the late instance of molinos , who asserts , that the perfection of a christian state lies in a simple , pure , infused and perfect contemplation , above the vse of ratiocination or discursive prayer , and that in order to this , nothing is so necessary as self-annihilation . this doctrine is now condemned at rome ; but how came it into the church ; did not they believe the same to day which they did yesterday ? if there were oral tradition for it , how came it to be condemned ? if not , then notwithstanding oral tradition , dangerous doctrines may get in under a pretence of a more sublime and spiritual way of perfection , than is to be attained in the dull and heavy way of tradition from father to son. iii. by a pretence to a more secret tradition . and thus christianity was at first corrupted , by such as pretended that there was a mystical doctrine delivered by christ of a more purifying nature , than the plain and common doctrine taught to all people by the apostles . so hegesippus in eusebius affirms , that the christian church was corrupted by this means ; and to the same purpose irenaeus . so that tradition was so far from securing the church from error , that it was the means of bringing it in . and the publick tradition could not hinder this coming in of error , because the secret tradition was pretended to be more divine and spiritual ; the other was only for babes , and this for grown christians . iv. by differences among church-guides about the sense of scripture and tradition . thus it was in the samosatenian , arian , pelagian , nestorian , and eutychian controversies . neither of the parties disowned scripture or tradition ; and those who were justly condemned , pretended still to adhere to both . and if such flames could not be prevented , so much nearer the apostles times , by the help of tradition , what reason can there be to expect it so long after ? v. by too great a veneration to some particular teachers , not far from the apostolical times , in regard to their learning or piety ; which made their disciples despise tradition in comparison of their notions . and thus origens opinions came to prevail so much in the church ; and the mixture of platonism with christianity proved the occasion of several errors , with respect to the state of souls after death , as well as in other points . vi. by compliance with some gentile superstitions in hopes to gain more easily upon the minds of the people ; who having been long accustomed to the worship of images and tutelar deities , it was thought no imprudent thing in some guides of the church , when the main doctrines of paganism were renounced , to humour the people in these things ; so they were accommodated to christianity ; but others vehemently opposed this method , as repugnant to the true primitive christianity . but by degrees , those superstitions prevailed ; and the original tradition of the church thereby corrupted . vii . by implicit faith ; which puts it into the power of the church-guides to introduce what doctrines they thought fit . when the best of the people were told it was against the fundamental rights of the catholick church for them to examine any opinions which were proposed to them by their guides , that they neither did , nor could , nor ought to understand them ; and when once this point was gained , people never troubled themselves about scripture or tradition ; for all they had to do , was only to know what was decreed by the church , though with a non-obstante to a divine institution ; as is plain in the council of constance , notwithstanding all the tricks to avoid it . if then , errours might come into the church all these ways , what a vain thing is it to pretend , that oral tradition will keep from any possibility of error ? and so i need give no other answer to his last proposition , that if men did innovate in faith , it must be either through forgetfulness or malice ; for i have shewed many other causes besides these ; especially since i intend to shew in a particular discourse how the errors and corruptions we charge on the church of rome did come into it : my design here being only to shew the possibility of it . there remain only two things which deserve any consideration : 1. about the charge of pelagianism . 2. about the council of trents proceeding on tradition ; which will admit of an easie dispatch . i. as to the charge of pelagianism . it doth not lie in this , that he requires any rational inducements to faith , which we do assert as well as he . but it lay in these two things . i. that a divine faith was to be resolved into a natural infallibility . for we were told that divine faith must have infallible grounds ; and when we come to examine them , we find nothing but what is natural . and now to avoid the charge of pelagianism , this divine faith is declared to be meer human faith ; and so human faith is said to have infallible grounds , but divine faith must shift for it self . for saith j. s. 't is confess'd and ever was , that the human authority of the church or tradition , begets only human faith as its immediate effect ; but by bringing it up to christ , it leads us to what 's divine . well ; but what infallible ground is there for this divine faith ? where doth that fix ? is it on the infallibibility of tradition or not ? if not , then we may have divine faith without it . if it doth , then divine faith is to be resolved into natural means : and what is this but pelagianism ? ii. that he excludes the pious disposition of the will , from piecing out ( as he calls it ) the defect of the reasons why we believe . and in another place he excludes the wills assistance in these words , that faith , or a firm and immoveable assent upon authority is not throughly rational , and by consequence partly faulty , if the motives be not alone able to convince an vnderstanding rightly disposed without the wills assistance . how then can a pious disposition of the will be necessary in order to the act of faith ? and is it not pelagianism to exclude it ? therefore i was in the right , when i said , that this way of oral tradition resolves all into a meer human faith ; and that this is the unavoidable consequence of it . no , he saith , he resolves all into christs and the apostles teaching . how ridiculous is this ? for , did not pelagius and coelestius the very same ? and the thing i charged upon them , was , that they went no farther upon this principle than they did . upon this he asks a very impertinent question ; but if i do not answer it , i know what clamours will follow . pray do you hold that christ is a meer man , or that believing him is a meer human faith , or that the doctrine taught by him or them is meerly human ? what occasion have i given for such a question ? but i perceive there is a design among some , to make me be believed to be no christian. i pray god forgive the malice of such men. i thank god , i have better grounds for my faith than oral tradition . i do believe christ to be more than meer man , even the eternal son of god , and that his doctrine is divine , and his apostles had infallible assistance in delivering it . but what is all this to the present question ? i perceive some men when they are hard pinched , cry out , that their adversaries are atheists or socinians , &c. and hope by this means to divert them from the business before them . but these arts will not do . and such a dust cannot so blind the readers eyes , but he must see it is raised on purpose , that he may not be discerned in making an escape . ii. as to the council of trents proceeding upon tradition . that which i said , was , the church of rome hath no where declared in council , that it hath any such power of making implicit articles of faith contained in scripture to become explicit by its explaining the sense of them . and the reason i gave , was , because the church of rome doth not pretend to make new articles of faith : but to make implicit doctrines to become explicit , is really so to do ; as i there proved . now what saith j. s. to this ? i. he saith , that the council of trent defines it belongs to the church to judge of the true sense and interpretation of scripture . as though all that belonged to the church , must presently belong to the church of rome ; or all judgment of scripture must be infallible ; or must make things necessary to be believed which were not so before . ii. he shews , that the church did proceed upon this power . what power ? of making things not necessary to become necessary ? i. it declares sess. 13. that from some texts mentioned , the church was ever persuaded of the doctrin of transubstantiation . this is an admirable argument , to prove , that it can make that necessary to be believed , which was not , because it was always believed . ii. sess. 14. it declares 1 cor. 11. to be understood of sacramental confession by the custom and practise of the church . then i suppose the church thought it necessary before . iii. sess. 14. it declares jam. 5. to be understood of sacramental confession . but how ? by its power of making it necessary to be believed meerly by such declaration ? no ; but by apostolical tradition ; then the meaning is , that it was always so understood . but because the council of trent doth pretend to apostolical tradition for the points there determin'd , and the shewing that it had not catholick and apostolick tradition , is the most effectual confutation of the present pretence of oral tradition , i shall reserve that to another discourse , part whereof , i hope , will suddenly be published . finis . a catalogve of some books printed for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in s. paul's church-yard . a rational account of the grounds of protestant religion ; being a vindication of the lord archbishop of canterbury's relation of a conference , &c. from the pretended answer by t. c. wherein the true grounds of faith are cleared , and the false discovered ; the church of england vindicated from the imputation of schism ; and the most important particular controversie between us and those of the church of rome throughly examined : by edward stillingfleet , d. d. and dean of s. pauls , folio , the second edition . origines britannicae : or the antiquity of the british churches ; with a preface concerning some pretended antiquities relating to britain , in vindication of the bishop of s. asaph , by edward stillingfleet d. d. dean of s. pauls , folio . the rule of faith : or an answer to the treatise of mr. j. s. entituled , sure footing , &c. by john tillotson , d. d. to which is adjoyned , a reply to mr. j. s.'s third appendix , &c. by edward stillingfleet d. d. a letter to mr. g. giving a true account of a late conference at the d. of p's . a second letter to mr. g. in answer to two letters lately published concerning the conference at the d. of p. veteres vindicati : in an expostulatory letter to mr. sclater of putney , upon his consensus veterum , &c. wherein the absurdity of his method , and the weakness of his reasons are shewn ; his false aspersions upon the church england are wiped off , and her faith concerning the eucharist of proved to be that of the primitive church : together with animadversions on dean boileaus french translation of , and remarks upon bertram . an answer to the compiler of nubes testium : wherein is shewn that antiquity ( in relation to the points in controversie set down by him ) did not for the first five hundred years believe , teach and practice as the church of rome doth at present believe , teach and practice ; together with a vindication of veteres vindicati from the late weak and disingenuous attempts of the author of transubstantiation defended by the author of the answer to mr. sclater of putney . a letter to father lewis sabran jesuite , in answer to his letter to a peer of the church of england ; wherein the postscript to the answer to the nubes testium is vindicated , and father sabrans mistakes further discovered . a second letter to father lewis sabran jesuite , in answer to his reply . a vindication of the principles of the author of the answer to the compiler of nubes testium in answer to a late pretended letter from a dissenter to the divines of the church of england . scripture and tradition compared , in a sermon preached at guild-hall-chappel , nov. 27. 1687. by edward stillingfleet d. d. dean of s. pauls , the second edition . there is now in the press , and will speedily be published , an historical examination of the authority of councils , discovering the false dealing that hath been used in the publishing of them , and the difference amongst the papists themselves about their number . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61545-e1550 faith vindicated , pag. 13. faith vindicated , pag. 41. errour nonplust , pag. 135. haeres . blakloan . p. 37 , 38. p. 39. p. 39. p. 40. p. 42. p. 44. third letter , p. 65. append. ad haeres . blakloan . first letter , pag. 4.5 , 6. declaratio j. s. circa doctrinam in suis libris contentam ; exhibita sacrae congregationi eccles. & r. d d. cardinalium — general . inquisitorum . duaci . 1677. john 15.22 . haeres . blokloan . pag. 315 , 316 , 317. page 318. page 6. haeres . blackloan . p. 33.153 , &c. 323. haec nova propositio fidem christianam destruit impellitque ad scepticismum & atheismum . haeres . blaklo . p. 66. mecum omnes viri docti & orthodoxi sentiunt , per tua principia vastum ad atheismum & heresin hiatum aperiri . haeres . blackloan , p. 200. 2.2 . a 9. ad 1. sed circa ea quae sunt de necessitate salutis , sufficienter instruuntur à spiritu sancto . 2.2.9.8 . a. 4. ad 1. donum intellectus nunquam se subtrahit sanctis circa ea quae sunt necessaria ad salutem , sed circa alia interdum se subtrahit . ib. ad . 3. a. 3. dicendum quod lumen fidei facit videre ea quae creduntur — ita per habitum fidei inclinatur mens hominis ad assentièndum his quae conveniunt certae fidei & non aliis . 2.2.9.1 . a. 4. ad 3. per lumen fidei divinitus infusum homini homo assentit his quae sunt fidei , non autem contrariis ; & ideo nihil periculi vel damnationis inest his qui sunt in christo jesu , ab ipso illuminati per fidem . 2.2.9.2 . a. 3. ad 2. greg. ariminens . d. 1. a. 4. q. 1. greg. de valentia . tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. part. 4. hugo de sancto victore sumsent . l. 1. c. 1. de sacram. l. 1. p. 11. c. 2.4 . rich. de sancto victor . declar. part. 1. p. 373. petr. pictaviens . sentent . part. 3. c. 21. gul. parisiens . de fide. c. 1. gul. antissiodor sum. in praef. & l. 3. tit. q. 2. alex. alens . part. 1. q. 2. m. 3. a. 4. part. 3. q. 68. m. 2. a. 2. bonavent . l. 3. d. 23. q. 4. aquin. 1.9.46 . a 2. in c. 19.9.32 . a. 1. in . b. 2.2.9.2 . a. 1. ad 1.9.1 . a. 4. ad 3.9.2 . a. 3.9.5 . a. 4. c· henr. gandav . sum. art. 7. q. 2. n. 6 , 7 , 8. art. 9. q. 3. n. 13.13 . q. 1. n. 4 , 5. scot. in sentent . l. 3. q. 23. n. 14 , 15. durand . prolog . q. 1. n. 43 , 46. l. 3. dist. 24. q. 3. n. 8 , 9. second letter , p. 25. second letter , pag. 6. second letter to mr. g. pag. 7. third catholick letter , pag. 6. third letter , p. 14. first letter , p. 32. first letter , p. 25. second letter , p. 73 , 74. theod. haeret . fab. l. 2 , 3. first letter , p. 26. first letter , p. 26. page 27. 2.2.9.4.2.6 . page ●● . page 29. page 29. page 29. page 29. third letter , p. 92. p. 93. bell. de verbo dei , l. 3. c. 6. sect . respondeo . third letter , p. 99· p. 102. 1 cor. 10.15 . 1 thess. 5.21 . 1 joh. 4.1 . third letter . page , 104. 2d . letter , p. 21. third letter . page , 34. luke , 1.4 . job . 20.31 third letter , p. 38.39 , 40. second letter , p. 17. third letter , p. 40. bell. de verbo dei l. 1.2 . third letter , p. 81. bellar. de verbo dei , l. 4. c. 11. third letter , p. 44. pag. 48. pag. 48. ibid. page 49. third letter . page , 50. page 51. page 51. s. cyprian . de ●nit . epist. ad jubai . third letter , p. 58. page 56. mat. 10.29 , 30. page 58. hieronym . ad dardanum . third letter , p. 57. third letter , p. 59. page 74. page 75. page 76. page 57. page 76. first letter p. 8. page 10. page 11. page 12. page 13. page 14. page 15. page 16. page 19. page 20. page 8. euseb. l. 5. c. 3. c. 14. c. 28. l. 7. c 31. theod. l. 1. c. 4. l. 2. euseb. l. 3. c. 32. l. 4. c. 22. third letter , p. 24. faith vindicated , p. 155. page 157. page 27. the doctrines and practices of the church of rome truly represented in answer to a book intituled, a papist misrepresented, and represented, &c. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1686 approx. 298 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 79 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61552 wing s5590 estc r21928 12261082 ocm 12261082 57901 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61552) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 57901) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 880:1) the doctrines and practices of the church of rome truly represented in answer to a book intituled, a papist misrepresented, and represented, &c. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 5-164, [5] p. printed for w. rogers ..., london : 1686. reproduction of original in huntington library. attributed to edward stillingfleet. cf. bm. table of contents: p. [1]-[2] at end. errata: p. [2] at end. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng gother, john, d. 1704. -papist misrepresented and represented. catholic church. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the doctrines and practices of the church of rome truly represented ; in answer to a book intituled , a papist misrepresented , and represented , &c. london : printed for w. rogers , at the sun over against st. dunstan's church in fleetstreet . 1686. the doctrine and practices of the church of rome , truly represented , &c. an answer to the introduction . the introduction consists of two parts . i. a general complaint of the papists being misrepresented among us . ii. an account of the method he hath taken to clear them from these misrepresentations . i. as to the first ; whether it be just , or not , must be examin'd in the several particulars . but here we must consider , whether it serves the end it is designed for in this place , which is , to gain the reader 's good opinion of their innocency : not meerly because they complain so much of being injured , but because the best men in all times have been misrepresented ; as he proves at large in this introduction , from several examples of the old and new testament , but especially of christ and his apostles , and the primitive christians . but it is observable , that when bp. jewel began his excellent apology for the church of england , with a complaint much of the same nature , and produced the very same examples , his adversary would by no means allow it to have any force , being , as he called it , exordium commune , which might be used on both sides , and therefore could be proper to neither . and altho it be reasonable only for those to complain of being misrepresented , who having truth on their side , do notwithstanding suffer under the imputation of error ; yet it is possible for those who are very much mistaken , to complain of being misrepresented ; and while they go about to remove the misrepresentations of others , to make new ones of their own . and as the best men , and the best things , have been misrepresented ; so other men have been as apt to complain of it , and the worst things are as much misrepresented , when they are made to appear not so bad as they are . for evil is as truly misrepresented under the appearance of good , as good under the appearance of evil ; and it is hard to determine whether hath done the greater mischief . so that if the father of lies be the author of misrepresenting , ( as the introduction begins ) we must have a care of him both ways . for when he tried this black art in paradise , ( as our author speaks ) it was both by misrepresenting the command , and the danger of transgressing it . he did not only make the command appear otherwise than it was , but he did very much lessen the punishment of disobedience , and by that means deluded our first parents into that sin and misery , under which their posterity still suffers . which ought to be a caution to them , how dangerous it is to break the law of god under the fairest colour and pretences ; and that they should not be easily imposed upon by false glosses , and plausible representations , though made by such as therein pretend to be angels of light. but although the father of lies be the author of misrepresenting : yet we have no reason to think but that if he were to plead his own cause to mankind , he would very much complain of being misrepresented by them ; and even in this respect , when they make him the father of those lies which are their own inventions . and can that be a certain argument of truth , which may as well be used by the father of lies ? and the great instruments he hath made use of in deceiving and corrupting mankind , have been as forward as any to complain of being misrepresented . the true reason is , because no great evil can prevail in the world , unless it be represented otherwise than it is ; and all men are not competent judges of the colours of good and evil ; therefore when the designs of those who go about to deceive , begin to be laid open , they then betake themselves to the fairest representations they can make of themselves , and hope that many will not see through their pretences . if i had a mind to follow our author's method , i could make as long a deduction of instances of this kind . but i shall content my self with some few examples of those who are allowed on both sides to have been guilty of great errors and corruptions . the arrians pleaded they were misreprented , when they were taken for enemies to christ's divinity ; for all that they contended for , was only such a moment of time , as would make good the relation between father and son. the pelagians , with great success for some time ( and even at rome ) complained , that they were very much misrepresented , as enemies to god's grace ; whereas they owned and asserted the manifold grace of god ; and were only enemies to mens idelness and neglect of their duties . the nestorians gave out , that they never intended to make two persons in christ , as their adversaries charged them ; but all their design was to avoid blasphemy , in calling the blessed virgin the mother of god ; and whatever went beyond this , was their adversaries misrepresentations , and not their own opinions . the eutychians thought themselves very hardly dealt with , for saying there was but one nature in christ , they did not mean thereby ( as they said ) to destroy the properties of the humane nature , but only to assert that its subsistence was swallowed up by the divine ; and of all persons , those have no reason to blame them , who suppose the properties of one substance may be united to another . even the gentile idolaters , when they were charged by the christians , that they worshipped stocks and stones , complained , they were misrepresented , for they were not such ideots to take things for gods , which had neither life , nor sense , nor motion in them . and when they were charged with worshipping other gods as they did the supream ; they desired their sense might not be taken from common prejudices , or vulgar practices , but from the doctrine of their philosophers ; and they owned a soveraign worship due to him that was chief ; and a subordinate and relative to some coelestial beings , whom they made application to as mediators between him and them . must all these complaints now be taken for granted ? what then becomes of the reputation of general councils , or the primitive christians ? but as , if it were enough to be accused , none would be innocent ; so none would be guilty , if it were enough to complain of being misrepresented . therefore in all complaints of this nature it is necessary to come to particulars ; and to examine with care and diligence the matters complained of , and then to give judgment in the case . i am glad to find our author professing so much sincerity and truth without passion ; and i do assure him i shall follow what he professes : for the cause of our church is such , as needs neither tricks nor passion to defend it ; and therefore i shall endeavour to state the matters in difference with all the clearness and calmness that may be , and i shall keep close to his method and representations , without digressons , or provoking reflections . ii. but i must declare my self very much unsatisfied with the method he hath taken to clear his party from these misrepresentations . for , 1. he takes upon him to draw a double character of a papist ; and in the one he pretends to follow a certain rule , but not in the other , which is not fair and ingenuous . as to the one , he saith , he follows the council of trent , and their allowed spiritual books and catechisms : and we find no fault with this . but why must the other part then be drawn by fancy , or common prejudices , or ignorant mistakes ? have we no rule , whereby the judgment of our church is to be taken ? are not our articles as easy to be had and understood , as the decrees and canons of the council of trent ? i will not ask , how the council of trent comes to be the rule and measure of doctrine to any here , where it was never received ? but i hope i may , why our representations are not to be taken from the sense of our church , as their's from the council of trent ? if he saith , ●his design was to remove common prejudices , and vulgar mistakes ; it is easy to answer , if they are contra●y to the doctrine of our church , we utterly disown them . we know very well there are persons , who have so false a notion of popery , that they charge the rites and customs of our church with it : but we pitty their weakness and folly , and are far from defending such misrepresentations . but that which we adhere to , is the doctrine and sense of our church , as it is by law established ; and what representations are made agreeable thereto , i undertake to defend , and no other . but if a person take the liberty to lay on what colours he pleases on one side , it will be no hard matter to take them off in the other , and then to say , how much fairer is our church than she is painted ! it is an easy , but not so allowable a way of disputing , for the same person to make the objections and answers too ; for he may so model and frame the arguments by a little art , that the answers may appear very full and sufficient ; whereas if they had been truly represented , they would be found very lame and defective . 2. he pretends to give an account why he quotes no authors for his misrepresentations , which is very unsatisfactory , viz. that he hath described the papist therein , exactly according to the apprehension he had of him when he was a protestant . but how can we tell what sort of protestant he was ; nor how well he was instructed in his religion ? and must the character now supposed to be common to protestants , be taken from his ignorant , or childish , or wilful mistakes ? did ever any protestant that understands himself , say , that papists are never permitted to hear sermons which they ar● able to understand , ( p. 58. ) or that they held it lawful to commit idolatry , ( p. 9. ) or , that a papist believes th● pope to be his great god , and to be far above all angels , & c ? yet these are some of his misrepresentations , ( p. 40. ) did he in earnest think so himself ? i● he did , he gives no good account of himself : if he did not , he gives a worse ; for then how shall we believe him in other things , when he saith , he hath draw● his misrepresentations exactly according to his own apprehensions . it is true , he saith , he added some few points , which were violently charged on him by his friends : but we dare be bold to say , this was none of them . but let us suppose it true , that he had such apprehensions himself . are these fit to be printed as the character of a party ? what would they say to us , if a spanish convert should give a character of protestants , according to the common opinion the people there have of them ; and set down in one column their monstrous misrepresentations , and in another , what he found them to be since his coming hither ; and that in good truth he saw they were just like other men. but suppose he had false apprehensions before he went among them ; why did he not take care to inform himself better before he changed ? had he no friends , no books , no means to rectify his mistakes ? must he needs leave one church , and go to another , before he understood either ? if this be a true account of himself , it is but a bad account of the reasons of his change. 3. the account he gives of the other part of his character , affords as little satisfaction ; for although in the general , it be well that he pretends to keep to a rule , yet ( 1. ) he shews no authority he hath to interpret that rule in his own sense . now several of his representations depend upon his own private sense and opinions , against the doctrine of many others as zealous for their church as himself ; and what reason have we to adhere to his representation , rather than to theirs ? as for instance , he saith , the pope's personal infallibility is no matter of faith , ( p. 42. ) but there are others fay it is , and is grounded on the same promises which makes him head of the church . why now must we take his representation rather than theirs ? and so as to the deposing power , he grants , it hath been the opinion of several popes ( and councils too ) but that it is no matter of faith , ( p. 47. ) but whose judgment are we to take in this matter , according to the principles of their church ? a private man's , of no name , no authority , or of those popes and councils who have declared it , and acted by it ? and can any man of their church justify our relying upon his word , against the declaration of popes and councils ? but suppose the question be about the sense of his own rule , the council of trent : what authority hath he to declare it , when the pope hath expresly forbidden all prelats to do it , and reserved it to the apostolical sea ? ( 2. ) he leaves out , in the se●eral particulars , an essential part of the character of a papist since the council of trent ; which is , that he doth not only believe the doctrines there defined to be true , but to be necessary to salvation . and there is not a word of this in his representation of the points of doctrine , but the whole is managed as though there were nothing but a difference about some particular opinions ; whereas in truth , the necessity of holding those doctrines , in order to salvation , is the main point in difference . if men have no mind to believe their own senses , we know not how to help it ; but we think it is very hard to be told , we cannot be saved unless we renounce them too . and this now appears to be the true state of the case , since pius the 4th drew up and published a confession of faith , according to the decrees and canons of the council of trent , wherein men are not only required to believe their traditions as firmly as the bible , the seven sacraments , transubstantiation , the sacrifice of the mass , purgatory , invocation of saints , worshiping of images , indulgences , supremacy , &c. but they must believe , that without believing these things , there is no salvation to be had in the ordinary way ; for after the enumeration of those points , it follows , hanc veram catholicam fidem extra quam nemo salvus esse potest , &c. this is the true catholick faith , without which no man can be saved ; i. e. the belief of these things is thereby declared as necessary to salvation , as of any other articles of the creed . but it may be objected , the subscribing this profession of faith , is not required of all members of that church . to which i answer , that to make a man a member of it , he must declare that he holds the same faith which the church of rome holds : and this is as much the faith of the roman church , as the pope and council of trent could make it . and it is now printed in the roman ritual at paris , set forth by paul v. as the confession of faith owned by the church of rome . and therefore this ought to have been a part of the true representation , as to the doctrinal points ; but when he comes to the 35th head , he then owns , that unless men do believe every article of the roman faith , they cannot be saved , ( p. 96. ) and he that disbelieves one , does in a manner disbelieve all , ( p. 97. ) which may as well reach those who disown the deposing power , and the pope's personal infallibility , as us , since those are accounted articles of faith by the ruling part of their church , to whom it chiefly belongs to declare them ; and the former hath been defined both by popes and councils . ( 3. ) he never sets down what it is which makes any doctrine to become a doctrine of their church . we are often blamed for charging particular opinions upon their church ; but we desire to know what it is which makes a doctrine of their church ; i. e. whether frequent and publick declaration , by the heads and guides of their church , be sufficient or not to that end ? our author seems to imply the necessity of some conditions to be observed ; for besides the pope's authority , he requires due circumstances , and proceeding according to law , ( p. 42. ) but who is to be judg of these circumstances and legal proceedings ? and he never tells what these circumstances are . and yet after all , he saith , the orders of the supream pastor are to be obey'd , whether he be infallible or not . and this now brings the matter home ; the popes , he confesses , have owned the deposing doctrine , and acted according to it : and others are bound to obey their orders , whether infallible or not ; and consequently they are bound by the doctrine of their church to act , when the popes shall require it , according to the deposing power . but he seems to say , in this case , that a doctrine of their church is to be judged by the number ; for , saith he , there are greater numbers that disown this doct●●ne , ( p. 47. ) i will not at present dispute it ; but i desire to be informed , whether the doctrines of their church go by majority of votes , or not ? i had thought the authority of the guides of the church ought to have over-ballanced any number of dissenters . for , what are those who refuse to submit to the dictates of popes and councils , but dissenters from the church of rome ? the distinction of the court & church of rome is wholly impertinent in this case . for , we here consider not the meer temporal power which makes the court , but the spiritual capacity of teaching the church : and if popes and councils may err in teaching this doctrine , why not in any other ? i know there are some that say , universal tradition is necessary to make a doctrine of their church . but then no submission can be required to any doctrine in that church , till the universal tradition of it , in all times , and in all parts of the christian church , be proved . and we need to desire no better terms than these , as to all points of pope pius iv his creed , which are in dispute between us and them . ( 4. ) he makes use of the authority of some particular divines as delivering the sense of their church , when there are so many of greater authority against them . whereas , if we proceed by his own rule , the greater number is to carry it . therefore we cannot be thought to misrepresent them , if we charge them with such things as are owned , either by the general and allowed practices of their church , or their publick offices , or the generality of their divines and casuists ; or in case of a contest , with that side which is owned by the guides of their church , when the other is censured ; or which was approved by their canonized saints , or declared by their popes and councils , whose decrees they are bound to follow . and by these measures i intend to proceed , having no design to misrepresent them , as indeed we need not . and so much in answer to the introduction . i. of praying to images . in this , and the other particulars , where it is necessary , i shall observe this method ; 1. to give a clear and impartial account of the state of the controversy in as few words as i can . 2. to make some reflections on what he saith , in order to the clearing them from misrepresentations . as to the state of this controversy , as it stands , since the council of trent , we are to consider . 1. we must distinguish between what persons do in their own opinion , and what they do according to the sense of the divine law. it is possible that men may intend one thing , and the law give another sense of it : as is often seen in the case of treason ; although the persons plead never so much they had no intention to commit treason , yet if the law makes their act to be so , their disavowing it , doth not excuse them . so it is in the present , case ; men may have real and serious intentions , to refer their final , ultimate , and soveraign worship only to god ; but if the law of god strictly and severely prohibits this particular manner of worship by images , in as full , plain , and clear words as may be , and gives a denomination to such acts , taken from the immediate object of it ; no particular intention of the persons can alter that denomination , or make the guilt to be less than the law makes it . 2. there can be no misrepresenting as to the lawfulness of many external acts of worship , with respect to images , which are owned by them . but it doth not look fairly to put the title , of praying to images ; for the question is , about the worship of images : whereas this title would insinuate , as though we did directly charge them with praying to their images , without any farther respect . which we are so far from charging them with , that i do not know of any people in the world , who are not like stones and stocks themselves , who are liable to that charge . the pendets in the east-indies are fully cleared from it , by thevenot , as well as bernier . and it would be hard we should not allow the same to our fellow-christians . i do therefore grant what our author saith , viz. that all the veneration they express before images , whether by kneeling , praying , lifting up the eys , burning candles , incense , &c. is not at all done for the image , but is wholly referr'd to the things represented , which he intends to honour by these actions . but i hope now , it is no misrepresenting for us to say , that they do kneel , pray , lift up their eyes , burn candles , incense , &c. before their images ; which is all i charge them with at present . 3. to perform these acts before images , without a design to worship the images by them , is declared , by great divines of the church of rome , to be next to heresy . the case was this ; there were before the council of trent , several persons who lived in communion of that church , but by no means approved the worship of images , such as durandus , holcot , picus mirandula , and others . now these persons thought fit to comply in these external acts , but declared they intended not to worship the images , but the objects before them . since the council of trent decreed images were to be worshiped , this case hath been debated by the divines and casuists of greatest reputation among them ; and suarez saith , this way of durandus , is dangerous , rash , and savours of heresy ; and he saith further from medina , that it was victoria 's , opinion , that it was heretical ; but he adds , that his own opinion , that images were truly and properly to be worshipped , was generally received by their divines ; and therefore i need name no more . 4. it is granted by their divines and casuists , that the people in the worship of images may easily fall into idolatry . 1. if the worship do not pass from the image to the thing represented . and so aquinas himself determins , that no irrational creature is capable of worship , but as it hath respect to a rational being . but here lies the difficulty , how an extrinsical relation to an object of worship , where the thing is confessed to deserve none , can give any reason , for its being properly worshipped . but they all grant , if the worship stop at the inanimate part , it can be no other than the worship of stocks and stones . 2. if the worship be given to the image , which is proper to god alone . this bellarmin is forced to grant , because the evidence is so clear in antiquity , that the gnosticks were condemned for some worship which they performed to the image of christ. now , we cannot think that these gnosticks were such sots , as to take the image of christ to be christ himself ; and therefore whatever worship it was , it must be relative , i. e. given to the image for the sake of christ represented by it . 3. if the people believe any divinity to be in the images , or put any trust or confidence in them , then the council of trent it self owns such to be like the heathen idolaters . now , how shall it be known when the people believe divinity to be in images , but by some more than ordinary presence or operation in or by them ? by their having a greater opinion of one image than of another of the same person ? by their going long pilgrimages to certain images in hopes of relief , when they might easily cause images to represent at home ? and that such are no extravagant imaginations , is known to all who have heard of loretto , or compostella , or other places nearer home . i need not mention the complaints of polydore virgil , cassander , or wicelius to this purpose , who died all in the communion of the church of rome ; for the same is very lately complained of by a considerable person in that communion , who saith , the greatest part of the devotion of the people of italy , spain , and portugal , consists in prostrating themselves before images , and going in pilgrimage to them , and hoping for remission of their sins by so doing . and another very lately yields , that to avoid the peril of idolatry , to which , he saith , the people is evidently exposed by the use of images , it would be necessary to take them away from the altars , and by no means to have them allowed for the objects of religious worship . the question now is , whether the council of trent hath taken any effectual course to prevent these abuses ? if not , what misrepresenting is it to charge the abuses upon the doctrines and practices allowed by it ? the remedies prescribed by the council , are these ; 1. declaring that there is no divinity or vertue in them for which they should be worshipped ; and that nothing is to be desired of them , nor any trust or confidence to be put in them . 2. expressing their earnest desire , that if any abuses have crept in , they may be removed . but in the mean time the council decrees , the images not only to be useful to be set up in churches , but to have due honour and worship given them there , for the sake of those they represent ; as not only putting off the hat , but falling down before them . and the roman catechism declares , that this worship is very beneficial to the people , and so much is to be told them ; and that images are to be in churches , not meerly for instruction , sed ut colantur , that they may be worshipped . but what could the council do more , than to desire all abuses may be taken away ; and is it not them the fault of others , and not of the council if they be not ? i grant , the council doth desire abuses may be taken away , if any such be ; but then it enumerates those abuses , in heterodox images , in making gain of images , in painting them too wantonly ; but besides , it doth say , that all superstition be removed in the sacred use of images ; but it doth not say in the worship of them ; and so it may relate to magick and divination . but that the council could not prevent , or design to prevent the abuses mention'd in the worship of images , will appear by these things . 1. the council of trent allows the highest relative worship to be given to them ; it setting no bounds to it , so it be for the sake of the prototypes . 2. it allows a worship to be given to the images themselves too ; for it confirms the second council of nice , which decreed an inferiour adoration to be given to them . 3. it disapproves no customs then practised among them in the worship of images ; which were all known , and by many complained of , both as pilgrimages to them , and the carrying of them about in procession , and the solemn consecration of them ; the form whereof is not only inserted , but inlarged in the new pontifical since the council of trent . and it is to be observed , that in the old pontifical , a. d. 1511. there is no form for consecrating an image ; in that of paul the 3d , it is inserted , but out of durandus ; but in that of clement the 8th , it is put in more largely , and as authentically as if it had been always there . and is not this the way to reform the worship of images ? to come now to our author's reflections on the misrepresentation he saith hath been made as to this point . 1. a papist represented , believes it damnable to worship stocks and stones for gods ; to pray to pictures or images of christ , the virgin mary , or any other saints . these expressions are capable of a double sense , and therefore this is not fair representing . ( 1. ) to worship stocks or stones for gods , may signify two things . ( 1. ) to believe the very stocks and stones to be gods. and this we do not charge them with . ( 2. ) to give to images made of wood and stone , the worship due only to god ; and so by construction of the fact , to make them gods , by giving them divine worship . and if they will clear themselves of this , they must either prove that external adoration is no part of divine worship , ( notwithstanding the scripture makes it so , and all the rest of mankind look upon it as such , even jews , turks , and infidels ) or that their external adoration hath no respect to the images ( which is contrary to the council of trent ) or that divine worship being due to the being represented , it may be likewise given to the image . and how then could the gnosticks be condemned for giving divine worship to the image of christ , which bellarmine confesses ; and is affirmed by irenaeus , epiphanius , s. augustin , and damascen ? ( 2. ) to pray to images of christ , or the blessed virgin , may likewise be taken in two senses . ( 1. ) to pray to them , so as to expect to be heard by the meer images , and so we do not charge them with it . ( 2. ) to pray to them , so as to expect to be rather heard by themselves for praying to them by their images . and if this be not so , to what end are the prayers made in the consecration of images , for those that shall pray before them ? to what purpose do so many go in long pilgrimages to certain images , if they do not hope to be better heard for praying there ? but he goes on , 2. he keeps them by him indeed , to keep in his mind the memory of the things represented by them . and is this all in good truth ? we will never quarrel with them , if this be true representing . no , that he dares not say . but , 3. he is taught to use them , p. 2. but how ? by casting his eye upon the pictures or images , and thence to raise his heart to the prototypes . and is this all yet ? no. but , 4. he finds a double conveniency in the use of them . ( 1. ) they represent at one glance ; and men may easily make good reflections , as upon the sight of a death's head , or old time painted with his forelock , hour-glass , and syth . and will he undertake , that images shall be used in churches for no other end ? was the picture of old time ever consecrated , or placed upon the altar , or elsewhere , that it might be worshipped ? as the roman catechism speaks of their images . ( 2. ) they cure distractions ; for they call back his wandring thoughts to the right object . what is this right object ? the image , or the person represented ? and that must be either a creature , or god himself . if it be a creature , doth not this imply that it is made a right object of worship ? if god himself , how doth an image cure our distraction , in the worship of an infinite invisible being ; when the very image is most apt to distract our thoughts , by drawing them down from his divine and adorable perfections , to the gross and mean representations of an image . but are we yet come to the utmost use of them ? no. but , 5. he cannot but love , honour , and respect the images themselves , for the sake of those they represent . will this content them ? and will he promise to go no further ? it is hard to part upon terms of meer respect and decent regard , where there is no encroachment upon divine worship . and here we are at a stand . but he goes further . 6. and so he is come at last , to veneration before images . and is this all ? dares he deny veneration to images ? when the council of trent hath determined it . eisque venerationem impartiendam . what is this veneration before images only ? bellarmine hath a chapter on purpose to prove , that true and proper worship is to be given to images . and was he a misrepresenter ? suarez saith , it is an article of faith , that worship is to be given to them . but if the veneration be only before them , why are they consecrated , and set up in places proper for adoration ? but , 7. to satisfy any one that he is far from making gods of his images , he is ready to break them into a thousand pieces . what , a consecrated image ? dares he take a crucifix from the altar and tear it in pieces ? this doth not look like the love , honour , and respect he mentioned before , not to name veneration . and i am afraid this is a strain beyond true representing : yet at length he hath found some pretty parallels for the veneration of images themselves ; and so we are come at last to the main point . but this is not directly owned ; yet in the way of his representing , it is fairly insinuated by his parallels . 1. a christian loves and honours his neighbour , because he bears the image of god in his soul. but doth he therefore take him and set him before him when he kneels at his devotion , to raise his mind , and cure his distractions ? would he set him upon the altar , and burn incense before him , because of the image of god in him ? is there no difference between the object of christian love , and of divine worship ? nor between a spiritual invisible divine image in the souls of men , and a material and corporeal representation ? 2. we may kiss and esteem the bible , because it contains and represents to us god's word . but when we kiss and esteem the bible , we remember the second commandment is in it ; and we dare not break his law , when we pretend to honour his word . but we think there is some difference between reverence and respect to the bible , and falling down before an image . the circumstances of the one declare it to be meer respect , and a religious decency ; and if the other be not external adoration , we know not what it is . 3. a good preacher is loved , because he minds men of their duty . but what should we say to him that should therefore kneel down and say his prayers , and burn candles and incense before him , out of a respect to his good doctrine ? did s. peter , or s. paul like this , when men would have worshipped them ? a good preacher would tell them of their duty , as they did ; and take men off from the worship of any creature , animate or inanimate , and direct them to worship god alone , who made heaven and earth . ii. of worshipping saints . for the clear stating this controversy , these things are to be premised . 1. we do not charge them , that they make gods of dead men , i. e. that they believe the saints to be independent deities . for this our author confesses were a ●ost damnable idolatry . 2. we do not say , that the state of the church of rome , with respect to the worship of dead men , is as bad as heathenism . for we acknowledg the true saints and martyrs to have been , not only good and vertuous , but extraordinary persons , in great favour with god , and highly deserving our esteem and reverence as well as imitation ; whereas the heathen deified men , were vile and wicked men , and deserved not the common esteem of mankind , according to the accounts themselves give of them . and we own the common doctrine and advantages of christianity to be preserved in the church of rome . 3. we do not deny , that they do allow some external acts of worship to be so proper to god alone , that they ought to be given to none else besides him . and this they call latria ; and we shall never dispute with them about the proper signification of a word , when the sense is agreed , unless they draw inferences from it , which ought not to be allowed . to this latria , they refer not only sacrifice , but all that relates to it , as temples , altars , and priests : so that by their own confession , to make these immediately and properly to the honour of any saint , is to make a god of that saint , and to commit idolatry . 4. they confess , that to pray to saints to bestow spiritual or temporal gifts upon us , were to give to them the worship proper to god , who is the only giver of all good things . for else i do not understand , why they should take so much pains to let us know , that whatever the forms of their prayers and hymns are , yet the intention and spirit of the church , is only to desire them to pray for us , and to obtain things for us by their intercession with god. but two things cannot be denied by them . 1. that they do use solemn invocation of saints in places of divine worship , at the same time they make their addresses to god himself withal the circumstances of external adoration , with bended knees and eyes lifted up to heaven ; and that this practice is according to the council trent , which not only decrees a humble invocation of them , but declares it to be impiety to condemn mental and vocal supplication to the saints in heaven . 2. that they do own making the saints in heaven to be their mediators of intercession , but not of redemption ; although christ be our mediator in both senses . and upon these two points , this controversy depends . let us now see what our representer saith to them . 1. his church teaches him indeed , and he believes that it is good and profitable to desire the intercession of the saints reigning with christ in heaven ; but that they are either gods , or his redeemers , he is no where taught , but detests all such doctrine . there are two ways of desiring the intercession of others for us . 1. by way of friendly request , as an act of mutual charity ; and so , no doubt , we may desire others here on earth to pray for us . 2. by way of humble supplication , with all the external acts of adoration : and we cannot think s. peter , or s. paul , who refused any thing like adoration from men , would have been pleased to have seen men fall down upon their knees before them ; and in the same posture of devotion in which they were praying to almighty god , to put their names into the middle of their litanies , and so pray them then to pray for them . but how are we sure that their church teaches no more than this ? i have read over and over the council of trent , and the roman catechism about it , and i can find no such limitation of their sense there , where , if if any where , it ought to be found . the council of trent mentions both the prayers , and the help and assistance of the saints which they are to fly to . if this help and assistance be no more than their prayers , why is it mentioned as distinct ? why is their reigning together with christ in heaven spoken of , but to let us understand they have a power to help and assist ? for what is their reigning to their praying for us ? but i have a further argument to prove the council meant more , viz. the council knew the common practices and forms of invocation then used and allowed , and the general opinion , that the saints had power to help and assist those who prayed to them . if the council did not approve this , why did it insert the very words upon which that practice was grounded ? they likewise very well knew the complaints which had been made of these things ; and some of their own communion cried shame upon some of their hymns . wicclius saith , one of them , salve regina , &c. is full of downright impiety , and horrible superstition , and that others are wholly inexcusable . lud. vives had said , he found little difference in the peoples opinion of their saints in many things , from what the heathens had of their gods. these things were known , and it was in their power to have redressed them , by declaring what the sense of the council was , and that whatever forms were used , no more was to be understood by them , but praying to them to pray for them . besides , the council of trent , in the very same session , took care about reforming the missal and breviary ; why was no care taken to reform these prayers and hymns , which they say are not to be construed by the sense of the words , but by the sense of the church ? there was time enough taken for doing it ; for the reformed missal was not published till six years after the council , nor the breviary till four . in all that time , the prayers and hymns might easily have been altered to the sense of the church , if that were truly so . but instead of that , a very late french writer cries out of the necessity of reforming the breviaries as to these things ; wherein he confesses , many hymns are still remaining , wherein those things are asked of saints , which ought to be asked of god alone ; as being delivered from the chains of our sins , being preserved from spiritual maladies and hell fire ; being inflamed with charity , and made fit for heaven . in good conscience , saith he , is not this joining the saints with god himself , to ask those things of them which god alone can give ? and whatever men talk of the sense of the church , he confesses , the very forms , and natural sense of the words , do raise another idea in mens minds ; which ought to be prevented . but doth not the roman catechism explain this to be the sense of the church ? i have examined that too , with all the care i could , about this matter . and i cannot find any necessity from thence of putting this sense upon them . i grant in one place , where it explains the difference of the invocation of god and saints , it saith , we are to pray to god as the giver , and to saints that they would obtain things of god for us ; and then it adds , the forms differ , that to god is miserere nobis and audi nos ; that to saints is , ora pro nobis . very well ! and is there then no other form owned or allowed in the church of rome to saints besides this ? hold a little , saith the catechism , for it is lawful to make use of another form ; and that is , we may pray to saints too , ut nostri misereantur . and how doth this now differ from that to god , but only in number ? but it adds , that the saints are very pittiful ; then surely we are encouraged to pray to them for help and pitty . yes , saith the catechism , we may pray to them , that being moved with pity towards us , they would help us with their favour and intercession with god. but yet this doth not clear the matter ; for elsewhere the roman catechism attributes more to saints than meer intercession ; and we may pray to them for what is in their power : for where it undertakes to give an exact account of the reason of invocation● of saints and angels ; it there parallels them with magistrates under a king ; and saith , they are god's ministers in governing the church ; invocandi itaque sunt quod & perpetuo deum intuentur , & patrocinium salutis nostrae libentissime suscipiunt . what is this patrocinium falutis nostrae ? is it only praying and intercession with god ? that cannot be , for it instances presently in deliverances by angels , and jacob 's praying to the angel to bless him , and not meerly to intercede for him . but though this is spoken of angels , yet from hence it infers the invocation of saints too . but what need we insist more on this , since they do own the ministry of saints as well as angels , with respect to the church ; and do canonize saints for particular countries , as lately s. rosa for peru. and where there is such a particular protection supposed , what incongruity is it to interpret the form of their prayers , according to a doctrine so received and allowed ? but of this more under the next head. 2. he confesses that we are all redeemed by the blood of christ alone , and that he is our only mediator of redemption ; but as for mediators of intercession , he doth not doubt but it is acceptable with god we should have many . i would ask concerning this distinction , the question which christ asked concerning john's baptism , is it from heaven , or of man ? no doubt there may be such a distinction of mediators , if god please to make them . but who hath authority to appoint mediators with him besides himself ? is it not usurping his prerogative , to appoint the great officers of his kingdom for him ? would any prince upon earth allow this , viz. when he hath absolutely declared his pleasure , that his own son should present petitions to him , that others shall take upon them to set up masters of requests themselves ? can any thing be plainer in the new testament , than that god hath appointed the mediator of redemption , to be our mediator of intercession ? and that his intercession is founded upon his redemption . as the high priest's going into the holy of holies to intercede for the people , was upon the blood of the sacrifice of expiation , which he carried in with him . if there were no revelation in this matter , there might be some reason for it . but since the revelation is so clear in it , this distinction looks just like the socinians distinction of a god by nature , and a god by office ; which was framed on purpose to avoid the plain texts of scripture which called christ god. so doth this look as if it were intended to avoid that clear text , which saith , there is but one mediator between god and man , the man christ jesus . which is pre●ently answered with this distinction ; although there ●e not the least ground in that or any other text for it . yes , saith our author , moses was such a mediator for the israelites ; job for his three friends ; stephen for his persecutors : the romans were desired by s. paul to be his mediator , and the corinthians and ephesians ; so almost every sick person desires the congregation to be his mediator , that is , to be remembred in their prayers , p. 4 , 5. but is there no difference between men praying for one another , and desiring others to pray for them here on earth , and an humble invocation of the saints in heaven to be our mediators of intercession with god there ? there is a threefold disparity in the case . 1. here upon earth we converse with one another as fellow-creatures , and there is no danger of our having an opinion thereby , that we are able to assist one another any other way than by our prayers . but the case is very different as to the saints in heaven , who by being addressed to there by such solemn invocation , may too easily be conceived to have the power of bestowing such blessings upon those who call upon them . 2. heaven is looked on by all mankind who direct their devotions thither , as the particular throne of god , where he dwells , and discovers himself after another manner than he doth upon the earth . and we are directed to pray to our father in heaven ; where he is represented as infinitely above all his creatures ; and the great concernment of religion is , to keep up the apprehension of this distance between him and them . now it is hardly possible to keep it up , if in the publick offices of religion , in the solemnest postures of devotion , with eyes lifted up to heaven , they do make addresses , both to god and to his creatures . 3. men are sure , when they pray to others on earth , to pray for them , that they do no more than they can justify in point of discretion , when they speak or write to those that can understand what their desire is ; but no man on earth can be certain that the saints in heaven can do it : for it is agreed they cannot do it without revelation , and no man can be assured there is a revelation ; and it is not reasonable to expect it ; for they pray to saints to pray to god for them ; and they cannot tell what they pray for , unless god to whom they are to prav , reveal to them what it is they must pray to him for . is it not then the better , the safer , the wiser way , to make our prayers to him , who we are sure is able to hear and help us ; and hath promised to grant what we ask in his son's name ? but there is no other name , either under heaven , or in heaven , whereby we can be saved , or our prayers accepted , but his alone . but our author saith , it is no part of his faith , how the saints in heaven know the prayers and necessities of such who address themselves to them , p. 5. but how comes it to be any part of his faith , that they know them ? however he doth not doubt but god can never want means of letting the saints know them , p. 6. and is this a sufficient ground for solemn invocation of saints ? god doth not want means to let the emperor of japan know a request any one here hath to make to him ; but is this a reasonable ground , for him at this distance to make it to him ? god doth not want means to let the pope know what a mighty service it would be to the christian world , to make a wise and truly christian-reformation in the church ; but would this be a ground sufficient for me at this distance , to make a speech to him about it ? i knew a man who understood not a word of latin , but yet would needs go hear a latin sermon : some asked him afterwards , what he meant by it ? and the chief reason he gave was much like this , god did not want means to let him know what the preacher meant . but after all , suppose god should make known to the saints what is desired of them ; i ask , whether this be sufficient ground for solemn invocation ? when socinus was not able to defend the invocation of christ himself , supposing that he could know our hearts only by revelation . and he had nothing material to say , but only that there was a command for it ; which can never be so much as pretended in this case . as to what he alleadges of the elders falling down before the lamb , having vials full of odours , which are the prayers of the saints , apoc. 5. 8. it must be strained hard to be brough● to this purpose , when both ancient and modern interpreters take it for a representation of what was done upon earth , and not in heaven . and if it were in heaven , prophetical visions were never intended for a measure of our duties . if the angels do pray for mankind , zech. 1. 12. doth it therefore follow we must pray to them ? but we say as the angel did to s. john , revel . 19. 10. in a like case ; see thou do it not : worship god. iii. of addressing more supplications to the virgin mary , than to christ. here is no need of farther stating the question ; this only relating to the extraordinary service of the blessed virgin. and therefore we are presently to attend his motions . he believes it damnable to think the virgin mary more powerful in heaven than christ , or that she can in any thing command him , p. 6. but in good earnest , is it not damnable , unless a man thinks the blessed virgin more powerful than christ ? suppose one should think her to have an equal share of power with christ ; is this damnable , or not ? is it not setting up a creature equal with god ? but what thinks he then of those who have attributed an universal dominion to her , over angels , men , and devils ? what thinks he not only of psalters , but of a creed , litany , and all the hymns of scripture being applied to her ? all which was done by a canonized saint in their church ; and the books printed out of the vatican manuscripts , and dedicated to the pope . and there we find something more than an ora pro nobis in the litany ; for there is parce nobis domina , spare us , good lady : and ab omni malo , libera nos domina : from all evil , good lady , deliver us . what thinks he of another canonized saint , who said , these two propositions are both true , all things are subject to god's command , even the virgin ; and all things are subject to the command of the virgin , even god. was this damnable in a canonized saint ? what thinks he of the noted hymn ? o felix puerpera nostra pians scelera jure matris impera redemptori ! was not this damnable ? and i have not only seen it in the old paris missal , but balinghem a jesuit saith , it was in the missals of tournay , liege , amiens , artois , and the old roman . i could produce many other passages cited by him out of the old offices to the same purpose ; but i forbear . but i cannot omit the approbation given to the blaspemous saying of s. bernardin by mendoza , ( who endeavours to prove the blessed virgin 's kingdom , not to be a metaphorical , but a true and real kingdom ) . and by salazar , another noted jesuit , who saith , her kingdom is as large as her sons . and we have lately seen how far this divinity is spread , for not many years since , this proposition was sent from mexico ; filius non tantum tenetur audire matrem , sed & obedire ; the son is bound , not only to hear , but to obey his mother . and is it still damnable for to say , she commands him ? but our author saith , what ever esteem they have for her , they own her still as a creature . is he sure of that ? what thinks he of another saying , which mendoza approves of , viz. of christ's saying to his mother , as thou hast communicated humanity to me , i will communicate my deity to thee . but it may be said , we are by no means to judg the sense of a church by some mens extravagant sayings . i grant it ; but i have something considerable to reply ; viz. that we may easily judg which way the guides of that church incline by this following passage . about ten years since a gentleman of that communion published a book , called , wholsome advice to the worshippers of the blessed virgin ; and the whole design of it , being printed in latin and french , was to bring the people of that church to a bare ora pro nobis to the blessed virgin. but this was so far from being approved , that the book was condemned at rome , and vehemently opposed by the jesuits in france ; and a whole volumn published against it . here i have reason to enquire , whether the virgin mary then , according to the sense of the church of rome , be only a mediatrix of intercession or not , since so large power and dominion is attributed to her ? and why should not her suppliants go beyond an ora pro nobis , if this doctrine be received ; as it must be , if the contrary cannot be endured ? for that author allowed her intercession , and prayer to her on that account ; but he found fault with those who said she had a kingdom divided with her son ; that she was the mother of mercy , or was a co-saviour , or co-redemptrix ; or that she was to be worshipped with latria ; or that men were to be slaves to her . now , if these things must not be touched without censure and no censure pass on the other books ; is it not ea●y to judg , which is more agreeable to the spirit of the guides of that church ? but we have a fresh instance of this kind at home , in a book very lately published ; permissu superiorum . there we are told in the epistle , that not only the blessed virgin is the empress of seraphims — the most exact original of practical perfection which the omnipotency of god ever drew ; but that by innumerable titles she claims the utmost duty of every christian , as a proper homage to her greatness . what can be said more of the son of god in our nature ? in the book it self she is said to be queen of angels , patroness of the church , advocate of sinners ; that the power of mary in the kingdom of jesus , is suitable to her maternity , and other priviledges of grace ; and therefore by it she justly claims a servitude from all pure creatures . but wherein doth this special devotion to her consist ? he names several particulars . 1. in having an inward , cordial and passionate value of the maternity of mary , and all other excellencies proper to , and inseparable from the mother of god. 2. in external acts of worship , of eminent servitude towards her , by reason of the amplitude of her power in the empire of jesus . and can we imagine these should go no farther , than a poor ora pro nobis ? he instances in these external acts of her worship . ( 1. ) frequent visiting holy places dedicated to her honour . and are not those her temples then ? which bellarmin confesses to be a peculiar part of the worship due to god. and the distinction of basilicae cannot hold here : because he believes the assumption of the b. virgin ; and he will not pretend to her honour is only for discrimination . ( 2. ) a special reverence towards images representing her person . ( 3. ) performing some daily devotions containing her praises , congratulating her excellency , or imploring her mediation ; and by oft calling upon the sacred name of holy mary , &c. 3. in having a firm and unshaken confidence in her patronage amidst the greatest of our inward conflicts , and outward tribulations ; through a strong judgment of her eminent power within the empire of jesus , grounded upon the singular prerogative of her divine maternity . i have not patience to transcribe more , but refer the reader to the book it self ; only the eighth particular of special devotion is so remarkable , that it ought not to be passed over , viz. entring a solemn covenant with holy mary , to be for ever her servant , client and devote under some special rule , society or form of life , and thereby dedicating our persons , concerns , actions , and all the moments and events of our life to jesus , under the protection of his divine mother , choosing her to be our adoptive mother , patroness and advocate ; and entrusting her with what we are , have , do or hope , in life , death , and through all eternity . and is all this no more than an ora pro nobis ? and it follows , put your self wholly under her protection . what a pitiful thing was the old collyridian cake , in comparison of these special acts of devotion to her ! but there are some extraordinary strains of devotion afterwards , which it is pity to pass over . as , i will ever observe thee as my soveraign lady , adoptive mother , and most powerful patroness ; relying on thy bowels of mercy , in all my wants , petitions , and tribulations of body and mind . could any thing greater be said to the eternal son of god ? and in the praise : vers. open my lips , o mother of jesus . resp. and my soul shall speak forth thy praise . vers. divine lady , be intent to my aid . resp. graciously make haste to help me . vers. glory be to iesus and mary . resp. as it was , is , and ever shall be . then follows the eighth psalm , applied thus to her . mary , mother of jesus , how wonderful is thy name , even unto the ends of the earth ! all magnificence be given to mary , and let her be exalted above the stars and angels . reign on high as queen of seraphims and saints ; and be thou crowned with honour , and glory , &c. glory be to jesus and mary , &c. in the next page , follows a cantique in imitation of the te deum . let us praise thee , o mother of jesus ! let us acknowledge thee our soveraign lady . let men and angels give honour to thee , the first conceived of all pure creatures , &c. i think i need mention no more ; only three things i shall observe , ( 1. ) that this is now printed permissis superiorum ; and we thank them for the seasonableness of it , in helping us in true representing , what their allowed doctrines and practices are . ( 2. ) that this is published english , that our people as well as theirs ; may be convinced how far we have been from unjust charging them as to such things as these . ( 3. ) that at the same time they plead for keeping the bible out of the hands of the people , wherein their discretion is so far to be commended , since the scripture , and this new scheme of devotion , can never stand together . there being not one word in the bible towards it , but very much against it ; and the psalms and hymns must be burlesqu'd to found that way . but what saith our author to their rosaries , wherein there are ten ave maries to one pater noster ; which is accounted a special piece devotion ; and great things are said of the effects of it by alanus de rupe , and many others . 1. as to the ave maries , he saith , there is no more dishonour to god in reciting the angelical salutation , than in the first pronouncing it by the angel gabriel and elizabeth . but it may not be altogether so pertinent . but doth he really think they said the whole ave maria , as it is used among them ? did the angel and elizabeth say , sancta maria , mater dei ? 〈◊〉 , or a pro nobis peccatoribus , nunc & in hora mortis nostrae ? if not , to what purpose are they mentioned here ? 2. as to the repetition , that , he saith , is no more an idle superstition , than david ' s repeating the same words 26 times in the 136 psalm . but what is this to the question , why more supplications to the blessed virgin , than to christ ? and not one word of answer is given to it . but alanus de rupe answers it roundly , because the blessed virgin is our mediatrix to christ , the mother of mercy , and the special patroness of sinners . this is indeed true representing . iv. of paying divine worship to reliques . for the right understanding this controversy , we are to consider , 1. that there is a due veneration to the bodies of saints and martyrs , allowed on both sides ; and there is an undue worship of them , which is disowned on both sides . the due veneration is , a religious decency to be observed towards them ; which lies in avoiding any thing like contempt or dishonour to them , and using all such testimonies of respect and decency , which becomes the remains of excellent persons ; provided we are satisfied of their sincerity , without having recourse to divine omnipotency to prove them ; which ferrandus the jesuit runs so much to , to prove the truth of many reliques , worshipped in the church of rome in many places at once . but that it is possible to exeeed in the worship of true reliques , even bellarmin confesseth , who says , that god took away the body of moses , lest the people should give divine worship to it . and st. jerom as hot as he was against vig●antius , yet he utterly denied giving any adoration to the reliques of martyrs . it seems then it is very possible to exceed that way . 2. the question then is , whether those acts of worship which are allowed in the church of rome , do not go beyond due veneration ? for it is unreasonable to suppose those who give it , to believe those reliques to be gods ; and therefore it must be such a worship as is given to them , supposing them to be only reliques of such persons . the council of trent decrees honour and veneration to be given to them , but never determines what is due , and what not : it forbids all excesses in drinking and eating , in the visiting of reliques ; but not a word of excesses in worshipping of them , unless it be comprehended under the name of superstition . but superstition lies in something forbidden , according to their notion of it : therefore , if there be no prohibition by the church , there can be no superstition in the worship of them . and if they had thought there had been any in the known practices of the church , they would certainly have mentioned them ; and because they did not , we ought in reason to look on them as allowed . and yet not only cassander complains of the great superstition about them ; but even the walenbergii lately confess , that the abuses therein , have not only been offensive to us , but to themselves too . but what saith our representer to them ? he believes it damnable to think there 's any divinity in the reliques of saints , or to adore them with divine honour . p. 7. but what is this adoring them with divine honour ? a true representer ought to have told us what he meant by it , when the whole controversy depends upon it . is it only saying mass to reliques , or believing them to be gods ? is there no giving divine honour by prostration , burning of incense , & c. ? nothing in expecting help from them ? yes , if it be from any hidden power of their own . but here is a very hard question : if a man doth not believe it to be an intrinsick power in the reliques , may a man safely go to them , opis impetrandae causà , as the council of trent saith , in hopes of relief from them ? is it not possible for the devil to appear with samuel's true body , and make use of the relique of a saint to a very bad end ? then , say i , no reliques can secure men against the imposture of evil spirits , who , by god's permission , may do strange things with the very reliques of saints . but god hath visibly worked by them , saith our author , by making them instruments of many miracles ; and it is as easie for him to do it now . p. 8 , 9. this is the force of all he saith . to which i answer , ( 1. ) it is a very bold thing to call in god's omnipotency , where god himself hath never declared he will use his power ; for it is under his own command , and not ours . but there is no reason to deduce the consequence of using it now , because he hath done it formerly . and that they may not think this is cavilling in us , i desire them to read pere annat's answer to the jansenists pretended miracle at port royal , viz. of the cure wrought by one of our saviour's thorns . there he gives another account of such miracles than would be taken from us . but where he saith , it is as much for the honour of god's name to work such miracles now ; their own authors will tell him the contrary ; and that there is no such reason now , as in former times , when religion was to be confirmed by them ; and when martyrs suffered upon the sole account of the truth of it ; and therefore their reputation had a great influence upon converting the unbelieving world. ( 2. ) suppose it be granted , yet it proves not any religious worship to be given to them . for i shall seriously ask an important question : whether they do really believe , any greater miracles have ever been done by reliques , than were done by the brazen serpent ? and yet , altho that was set up by god's own appointment , when it began to be worshipped after an undue manner , it was thought fit by hezekiah to be broken in pieces . what now was the undue worship they gave to it ? did they believe the serpent , which could neither move nor understand , was it self a god ? but they did burn incense to it . and did that make a god of it ? suppose men burn incense to reliques ; what then , are they made gods presently ? suppose they do not , but place them upon altars , carry them in procession , fall down before them , with intention to shew the honour they do them ; are not these as much as burning a little incense , which could not signifie so much honour as the other do ? and it is hard then to make the one unlawful , and not the other . v. of the eucharist . there are two material points under this head which are to be examined , because he endeavours to set them off with all the advantage he can , viz. adoration of the host , and transubstantiation . i. of the adoration of the host. 1. the question is far enough from being , whether it be lawful to commit idolatry ? as our representer puts it . for the misrepresenter saith , that a papist believes it lawful to commit idolatry : and to clear this , our author gravely saith , he believes it unlawful to commit idolatry . pag. 9. as tho any men ever owned it to be lawful : which is , as if the question were , whether such a man committed adultery , and he should think to clear himself by saying , he believed it unlawful to commit adultery . 2. the question is not , whether christ may be lawfully adored by us in the celebration of the eucharist ; which we are so far from denying , that our church requires our receiving it in the posture of adoration . 3. the true question is , whether the body of christ , being supposed to be present in the host by transubstantiation , be a sufficient ground to give the same adoration to the host , which they would do to the person of christ ? and that this is the true state of the question , will appear by these things . 1. the council of trent first defined transubstantiation , and from thence inferred adoration of the host ; as is most evident to any one that will read the fourth and fifth decrees of the 13th session . nullus itaque dubitandi locus , &c. i. e. if transubstantiation be true , then adoration follows . it 's true , the sixth canon only speaks of christ being there worshipped ; but that ought to be compared with the first , second , and fourth canons , where the doctrine of transubstantiation is fully set down , as the foundation of that adoration . 2. the adoration is not fixed on the person of christ , as separate from the host , but as making one object of worship together with it . and so the council of trent declares in the sixth decree ; when it saith , the sacrament is never the less to be adored , because it was instituted to be received . this cannot be otherwise understood , than as relating to the sacrament : and so that whatever it be , must be granted to be the object of adoration . by the sacrament , saith cardinal pallavicini , is understood the object made up of the body of christ , and the accidents . the worship then being confessed to be adoration , which is due to god alone , and that adoration directed to the sacrament as its proper object ; the question now is , whether such a supposition in the sacrament , doth justify that adoration ? our author saith , he accounteth it most damnable to worship or adore any breaden god , or to give divine honour to any elements of bread and wine , p. 9. then , i say , by his own confession , if it be only bread , he commits idolatry ; for the adoration he cannot deny . but our representer loves ambiguous expressions , which to the people sound very well , but have no sincere meaning : for what is it he understands by his breaden god ? if it be that he worships a god which himself supposes to be nothing but bread , we do not charge him with it ; but if it be what we believe it to be , the substance of bread , but himself believes to be turned into the body of christ , then he cannot deny his adoration to be given to it . all that can excuse them is , the supposition ; and whether that will or not , is now to be consider'd . 1. if it be not true , themselves grant it to be idolatry . the testimonies of bishop fisher , and costerus , are so well known to the purpose , that i shall not repeat them . and catharinus , a divine of note in the council of trent , confesses it is idolatry to worship an unconsecrated host , altho the person , through a mistake , believes it consecrated . and he quotes st. thomas and paludanus for his opinion ; and gives this reason for it ; because christ is not worshipped simply in the sacrament , but as he is under the species ; and therefore if he be not so present , a creature hath divine worship given it . as those were guilty of idolatry , who worshipped any creatures of old , supposing god to be there , as that he was the soul of the world. they were not excused , saith he , that they thought they worshipped but one god ; because they worshipped him as present in such a manner , as he was not . and this book of his , he saith , in the review of it , was seen and approved by the pope's order , by their divines at paris . 2. if the bread were taken to be god , our author doth not deny it would be idolatry , for that were to worship a breaden god. yet here would be a mistake , and a gross one ; yet the mistake would not excuse the persons committing it from most damnable idolatry , as he confesses : why then should the other mistake excuse them , when they suppose the substance of the bread not to be there , but the body of christ to be under the species ? yes , say they , then no creature is supposed to be the object of worship . but when the bread is supposed to be god , it must be supposed not to be a creature . there is no answer to be given in this case , but that the bread really is a creature , whatsoever they imagined ; and if this mistake did not excuse , neither can the other . 2. of transubstantiation . three things our author goes upon , with respect to this . 1. he supposes christ's words to be clear for it . 2. he shews the possibility of it , from god's omnipotency . 3. he argues against the testimony or evidence of sense or reason in this case , from some parallel instances , as he thinks . 1. he believes jesus christ made his words good , pronounced at his last supper , really giving his body and blood to his apostles ; the substance of bread and wine being , by his powerful words , changed into his own body and blood ; the species only , or accidents of the bread and wine , remaining as before . the same he believes of the eucharist consecrated now by priests . this is a very easy way , of taking it for granted that the words are clear for transubstantiation . and from no better ground , to fly to god's omnipotency to make it good , is as if one should suppose christ really to be turned into a rock , a vine , a door ; because the words are every jot as clear , and then call in god's omnipotency , which is as effectual to make them good . i confess , these words are so far from being clear to me for transubstantiation , that if i had never heard of it , i should never have thought of it , from these or any other words of scripture , i. e. not barely considering the sound of words , but the eastern idioms of speaking ; the circumstances of our saviour's real body at that time when he spake them ; the uncouth way of feeding on christ's real body , without any objection made against it by his disciples . the key our saviour elsewhere gives for understanding the manner of eating his flesh ; and withal , if these words be literally and strictly understood , they must make the substance of bread to be christ's body ; for that is unavoidably the literal sense of the words . for can any men take this to be any thing but this bread , who attend to the common sense and meaning of words , and the strict rules of interpretation ? yet this sense will by no means be allow'd ; for then all that can be infer'd from these words is , that when christ spake these words , the bread was his body . but either christ meant the bread by this , or he did not ; if he did , the former proposition is unavoidable in the literal sense : if he did not , then by virtue of these words , the bread could never be turned into the body of christ. for that only could be made the body of christ which was meant , when christ said , this is my body . this seems to me to be as plain and convincing as any demonstration in euclid . which hath often made me wonder at those who talk so confidently of the plain letter of scripture , being for this doctrine of transubstantiation . but several divines of the church of rome , understood themselves better , and have confessed , that this doctrine could not be drawn out of the literal sense of these words ; as it were easy to shew , if it had not been lately done already . it is enough here to observe , that vasquez confesseth it of scotus , durandus , paludanus , ockam , cameracensis ; and himself yields that they do not , and cannot signify expresly the change of the bread and wine into the body of christ. for how can , this is my body , literally signify , this is changed into my body ? if that proposition were literally true , this is my body , it overthrows the change ; for how can a thing be changed into that which it is already ? 2. he believes christ being equal to his father in truth and omnipotency , can make his words good . we do not in the least dispute christ's omnipotency , but we may their familiar way of making use of it to help them out , when sense and reason fail them . and therefore cajetan well said ; we ought not to dispute about god's absolute power in the doctrine of the sacraments , being things of such constant use ; and that it is a foolish thing to attribute to the sacrament all that god can do . but we must consider what he saith against sense and reason . for the believing this mystery , he does not at all think it meet for any christian to appeal from christ's words , to his own senses or reason , for the examining the truth of what he hath said , but rather to submit his senses and reason to christ's words in the obsequiousness of faith. what! whether we know this to be the meaning of christ's words , or not ? and thus we shall be bound to submit to every absurd interpretation of scripture , because we must not use our senses or reason for examining the truth of what is said there . can any thing be plainer said in scripture , than that god hath eyes , and ears , and hands ? must now every man yield to this in the obsequiousness of faith , without examining it by principles of common reason ? and we think we are therefore bound to put another sense upon those expressions , because they imply a repugnancy to the divine perfections . why not then where something is implied which is repugnant to the nature of christ's body , as well as to our senses ? but the question about judging in this matter by our senses , is not , as our author is willing to suppose , viz. whether our senses are to be believed , against a clear and express divine revelation ; but whether the judgment of our senses and reason is not to be made use of for finding out the true sense of this revelation ? and we think there is great reason for it . ( 1. ) because we have no more certain way of judging the substance of a body , than by our senses . we do not say our senses go beyond the accidents ; but we say , our senses , by those accidents , do assure us of the bodily substance , or else it were impossible for us to know there is any such thing in the world. ( 2. ) because christ did himself appeal to the judgment of his disciples senses concerning the truth of his own body after the resurrection ; behold my hands and my feet , that it is i my self : handle and see , for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have . now we think we have reason to allow the same criterion which christ himself did about the very same body . unless he had then told his disciples , that there was to be another supernatural manner of existence of the same body , concerning which their senses were not to be judges . ( 3. ) some of the most important articles of the christian faith do suppose the judgment of our senses to be true . as about the truth of christ's body ; whether he had really a body , or only the outward accidents and appearance of a body : if he had not , he did not really suffer upon the cross , and so the sacrifice of propitiation there offered up to the father for the sins of mankind is lost . there was a great controversy in st. john's time , and afterwards , whether christ had any real body ? those who denied it , brought revelation for it ; those who asserted it , proved it by their senses , as s. john himself , that which we have seen , and heard , and our hands have handled ; &c. he doth not tell men , they must submit their sense and reason to the pretence of revelation ; but they ought to adhere to the judgment of their senses concerning the reality of christ's body . since therefore christ himself appealed to it , the apostles made use of it , without any caution or limitation , we have great reason to rely still on the judgment of our senses concerning the same object , viz. the body of christ. 3. but we must now consider his instances to overthrow the judgment of our senses and reason in this point . 1. he believes christ to be god , though to senses he seemed nothing but man. do we ever pretend to judg of christ's divinity by our senses ? how then can this be pertinent , when our only dispute is about judging his body , and the substance of bread and wine by them ? and yet the senses were of great use as to the proof of his divinity by the miracles which he wrought ? which if they had been like the pretended miracles in transubstantiation , could have convinced no man , because they could never see them . 2. he believes the holy ghost descended on our saviour , though senses or reason could discover it to be nothing but a dove . if there were no reason to judg otherwise , the judgment of sense were to be followed : but since the scripture declares it was the holy ghost descending as a dove , we have no reason to question that revelation . for we do not pretend that our senses are so far judges of divine appearances , as to exclude the possibility of god's assuming the shape and figure of his creature when he pleases , by moulding the substance of a real body into such a representation . thus we do not deny the possibility of an appearance of the holy ghost under bread and wine , if god thought fit , any more than under a dove ; and in this case we do not pretend that our senses can exclude the presence of a spirit under the elements ; but that is very different from the present case , for here the substance is supposed to be gone , and nothing but accidents remaining ; and no spiritual presence of christ is denied , but that of his body , the very same body which suffered on the cross. 3. he believes the man who appeared to joshua , ( ch . 5. 13. ) ; and the three men to abraham , ( gen. 18. ) were really and substantially no men , notwithstanding all the information and evidence of sense to the contrary , from their colour , features , proportion , talking , eating , and many others . and what follows from hence , but that spiritual invisible substances may be under the appearance of bodies , and that our senses cannot be judges of them ? which is not our question , but , whether bodies can be so present after the manner of spirits , as to lose all the natural properties of bodies ? and whether a material substance can be lost , under all the accidents proper to it , so as our senses cannot be proper judges of one by the other ? but our author seems to grant this , in a natural way of the existence of a body : but he saith , christ gives to his body a supernatural manner of existence , by which being left without extension of parts , and rendred independent of place , it may be one and the same in many places at once , and whole in every part of the symbols , and not obnoxious to any corporeal contingencies . this is to me a mystery beyond all comprehension by sense or reason ; and there is certainly a great difference between governing our understandings , and giving them up , as we must do if this doctrine hold good ; for it overthrows any fixed principles of reason in mankind concerning the nature and properties of bodies . for , 1. we must still suppose the body of christ to be the very same individual body which suffered upon the cross ; but if it have no extension of parts , and be reckoned independent upon place , it ceaseth to be a body . it is granted , that after a natural way of existence , a body cannot be in more places than one ; but let the way of existence be what it will , if it be a body , it must be finite ; if finite , it must be limited and circumscribed ; if it be circumscribed within one place , it cannot be in more places , for that is to make it circumscribed , and not circumscribed ; undivided from it self , and divided from it self at the same time . which is a manifest contradiction , which doth not depend only on quantity or extension , but upon the essential unity of a body . 2. if it be possible for a body to be in several places by a supernatural existence ; why may not the same body be in several places by a natural existence ? is it not because extension and circumscription are so necessary to it , that in a natural way it can be but in one place . then it follows that these are essential properties of bodies ; so that no true body can be conceived without them . 3. this supernatural existence doth not hinder the body's being individually present in on place : my meaning is this ; a priest consecrates an host at london , and another at york ; is the body of christ at london , so present there by virtue of consecration , as to be present at york too , by this supernatural existence : what then doth the consecration at york produce ? if it be not , then its presence is limited to the host , where the consecration is made ; and if it be so limited , then this supernatural existence cannot take off its relation to place . 4. the same body would be liable to the greatest contradictions imaginable : for the same body after this supernatural way of existence , may not only be above and below , within and without , near and far off from it self : but it may be hot and cold , dead and alive ; yea , in heaven and hell at once . 5. what is it that makes it still a body after this supernatural way of existence , &c. if it lose extension and dependency on place ? if it be only an aptitude to extension , when that supernatural existence is taken off , then it must either be without quantity , or with it . if it be without quantity , how can it be a body ? if with quantity , how is it possible to be without extension ? 6. this confounds all the differencs of greater and less , as well as of distance and nearness . for upon this supposition , a thing really greater may be contained within a less : for the whole original body of christ , with all its parts , may be brought within the compass of a waser ; and the whole be in every part without any distance between head and feet . 7. this makes christ to have but one body , and yet to have as many bodies as there are consecrated hosts . no , saith our author , this supernatural manner of existence is without danger of multiplying his body , or making as many christs as altars . p. 11. but how this can be , is past all human understanding : for every consecration hath its effect , which is supposed to be the conversion of the substance of the bread into the body of christ. now , when a priest at london converts the bread into the body of christ there , he doth it not into the body of christ at york , but the priest there doth it ; therefore the body of christ at london , is different from that at york ; or else the conversion at london would be into the body , as at york . but if not , what is the substantial term of this substantial change , where nothing but an accidental mode doth follow ? if there be any such term , whether that must not be a production of something which was not before ; and if it be so , christ must have as many new bodies , as there are consecrations . 8. this makes that which hath no particular subsistence of its own , to be the subject of a substantial change ; for this is the condition of christ's body , whatever its manner of existence be , after the hypostatical union to the divine nature . for , when bellarmin , petavius , and others of their greatest divines , undertake , against nestorius , to explain the hypostatical union , they tell us it consists in this , that the human nature loseth its proper subsistence , and is assumed into the subsistence of the divine nature . from whence i infer , that the body of christ , having no proper subsistence of its own , there can be no substantial change into that which hath no proper subsistence , but into that which hath ; and consequently the change must be into the divine nature principally ; from whence it will follow , the elements losing their subsistence , upon consecration the divinity must be united hypostatically to them , as to the human nature ; and so there will be as many hypostatical unions , as there are consecrations . and so this doctrine not only confounds sense and reason , but the mysteries of christ's incarnation too : which i think is sufficient for this head. vi. of merits and good works . for the true stating this controversy , we are to observe ; 1. that we do not charge those of the church of rome , that they believe christ's death and passion to be ineffectual and insignificant , and that they have no dependence on the merits of his sufferings , or the mercy of god for attaining salvation ; but that they are to be saved only by their own merits and good works ; as the misrepresenter saith , pag. 12. 2. we do not charge them with denying the necessity of divine grace in order to merit ; or with asserting that they can merit independently thereupon . 3. we do by no means dispute about the necessity of good works , in order to the reward of another life ; or assert that christ's merits will save men without working out their own salvation ; but do firmly believe , that god will judg men according to their works . the question then is , whether the good works of a just man , as our author expresses it , are truly meritorious of eternal life ? which he affirms , but qualifies with saying , that they proceed from grace , and that through god's goodness and promise , they are truly meritorious . but the council of trent denounces an anathema against those who deny the good works of justified persons , to be truly meritorious of the increase of grace , and of eternal life . here then lies the point in difference , ( 1. ) whether such good works can be said to be truly meritorious ? ( 2. ) whether those who deny it , deserve an anathema for so doing ? as to what relates to god's acceptance and allowance , and his goodness and promise , we freely own all that he saith about it ; and if no more be meant , what need an anathema about this matter ? there must therefore be something beyond this , when good works are not only said to be truly meritorious , but we are cursed if we do not say the same . to make any thing truly meritorious , we must suppose these conditions requisite . 1. that what we pretend to merit by , be our own free act. 2. that it be not defective . 3. that there be an equality between it , and the reward due to it . 4. that there be an obligation in point of justice , to give that reward to him that doth it . and from these considerations , we deny that , good works , even of justified persons , can be truly meritorious . 1. it is granted by themselves , that what is truly meritorious , must be a free act of the person who doth it . now the good works of justified persons cannot be said to be their own free acts , if the power of doing them depend upon divine assistance , and there was an antecedent obligation upon them to perform them : so that they can do nothing but what they are bound to , as god's creatures ; and their very power of doing it is from the grace of god. if men pretended to merit at anothers hands by what god gives , there were some colour for it ; but to merit from god himself by what he gives us , seems very incongruous . if i owe a man an 100 l. and another knowing me unable to pay it , gives me so much to pay the debt , this is no more than what may be called strict payment , as to the creditor ; but if the creditor himself gives me this 100 l. to pay himself with , will any man call this strict payment ? he may call it so himself , if he pleases , but that only shews his kindness and favour ; but it doth not look very modestly or gratefully , for the debtor to insist upon it as true legal payment . just so it is in good works done by the power of god's grace , which we could never have done without it ; and therefore such cannot be truly meritorious . 2. what is truly meritorious must not be defective ; because the proportion is to be equal between the act , and the reward due to it ; which being perfect , requires that there be no defect in the acts which merit it . but this can never be said of good works of justified persons , that they have no defects in them . we do not say , they are not good works , but they are not exact and perfect : for altho the grace of god , as it comes from him , be a perfect gift ; yet as it acts upon mens minds , it doth not raise them to such a degree , but that they have imperfections in their best actions . and whatever is defective , is faulty ; whatever is faulty , must be forgiven ; whatever needs forgiveness , cannot be truly meritorious . but not only their good works are defective ; but if they would merit , they ought to have none but good works , whereas the mixture of others renders the good uncapable of being meritorious , because there is so much to be pardoned , as takes away all claim of merit in the good they perform . and themselves do not pretend , that men can merit the grace of remission ; but it is very strange that those who cannot deserve to be forgiven , should deserve to have an infinite reward bestowed upon them . 3. there must be an exact proportion between the act and the recompence : for to merit , is to pay a price for a thing ; and in such acts of commutative justice , there must be an equality of one thing with another . but what equality can there be between the imperfect good works of the best men , and the most perfect happiness of another world ? especially when that consists in the fruition of the beatifical vision ? for what proportion can there be between our acts towards god , and god's acts towards the blessed in heaven ? let the acts be of what person soever , or of what nature soever , or from what principle soever ; as long as they are the acts of finite imperfect creatures , it is impossible there should be any equality , or exact proportion between them and the eternal favour of god , which is the reward promised . 4. where acts are truly meritorious , there follows an obligation of strict justice , to pay the recompence due to them . but what strict justice can there be between the creator and his creatures , to recompence the service they are bound to perform ; when their very being , power to act , assistance in acting , and recompence for it , are all from his bounty and goodness ? but our author would avoid all this , by saying , that though good works are truly meritorious ; yet it is through the merits of christ , and as they proceed from grace , and through his goodness and promise that they are so ; i. e. they are truly meritorious , because it appears from all these things they neither are , nor can be meritorious . for , ( 1. ) how come the merits of christ to make good works truly meritorious ? are the merits of christ imputed to those good works ? then those good works must be as meritorous as christ's own works ; which i suppose he will not assert . or , is it that christ hath merited the grace whereby we may merit ? but even this will not make our personal acts truly meritorious ; and the nature of merit relates to the acts , and not to the power . ( 2. ) how comes the power of grace to make them truly meritorious ; when the power of grace doth so much increase the obligation on our side ? if it be said , that the state of grace puts men into a capacity to merit : we might more reasonably infer the contrary , that it puts them out of a capacity of meriting ; because the remission of sins , and the favour of god , are things for which we can never make him any recompence . ( 3. ) how comes a divine promise to make acts truly meritorious ? for god's promise is an act of meer kindness , which is very different from strict justice : and although by the promise god binds himself to performance ; yet how come those acts to be more meritorious of heaven , than the acts of repentance are of remission of sins ? yet none will now say , that there can be any acts meritorious of that . yet certainly there is as clear a promise of pardon upon repentance , as there is of heaven upon good works : and if the promise in the other case , doth not make repentance meritorious of pardon ; how can it make good works truly meritorious of eternal life ? but notwithstanding , we do not deny god's fidelity to his promise may be called justice ; and so god , as a righteous judg , may give a crown of rightcousness to all that follow st. paul 's example , without making good works to be truly meritorious . vii . of confession . 1. vve do not charge the church of rome , that in the power of absolving , they make gods of men ; p. 14. as our misrepresenter pretends . 2. we do not deny , that christ gave to the bishops and priests of the catholick church , authority to absolve any truly penitent sinner from his sins , ( which he therefore needlesly proves out of scripture ) and that such absolution is ratified in heaven . 3. we are glad to find that our author declares , that no man receives benefit by absolution , without repentance from the bottom of his heart , and real intention of forsaking his sins ; p. 15. by which we hope he means more than attrition . but yet there are some things which stick with us , as to the doctrine and practice of the church of rome in this matter , which he takes no notice of . 1. that secret confession of sins to a priest is made so necessary to salvation , that an anathema is denounced against all that deny it , when they cannot deny that god doth forgive sins upon true contrition . forthe council of trent doth say , that contrition , with charity , doth reconcile a man to god before the sacrament of penance be actually received . but then it adds , that the desire of confession is included in contrition : which is impossible to be proved by scripture , reason , or antiquity . for so lately , as in the time of the master of the sentences , and gratian ( in the 12th centurie ) it was a very disputable point , whether confession to a priest were necessary . and it is very hard for us to understand how that should become necessary to salvation since , which was not then . some of their own writers confess , that some good catholicks did not believe the necessity of it . i suppose the old canonists may pass for good catholicks ; and yet maldonat saith , that all the interpreters of the decrees held , that there was no divine precept for confession to a priest ; and of the same opinion he grants scotus to have been . but he thinks it is now declared to be heresy , or he wishes it were . and we think it is too much already , unless there were better ground for it . 2. that an anathema is denounced against those who do not understand the words of christ , whose sins ye remit , they are remitted , &c. of the sacrament of penance , so as to imply the necessity of confession : whereas there is no appearance in the words of any such sense ; and themselves grant , that in order to the remission of sins , by baptism , ( of whch st. matthew and st. mark speak in the apostles commission ) there is no necessity of sacramental confession , but a general confession is sufficient . and from hence the elder jansenius concludes , that the power of remission of sins here granted , doth not imply sacramental confession . cajetan yields , there is no command for confession here . and catharinus adds , that cajetan would not allow any one place of scripture to prove auricular confession . and as to this particular , he denies that there is any command for it ; and he goes not about to prove it , but that cajetan contradicts himself elsewhere , viz. when he wrote school-divinity , before he set himself to the study of the scriptures . vasquez saith , that if these words may be understood of baptism , none can infer from them the necessity of auricular confession . but gregory de valentia evidently proves , that this place doth relate to remission of sins in baptism ; not only from the comparison of places , but from the testimonies of s. cyprian , s. ambrose , and others . 3. that it is expressed in the same anathema's that this hath been always the doctrine and practice of the catholick church from the beginning . we do not deny the ancient practice , either of canonical confession , as part of the discipline of the church for publick offences ; nor of confession , for ease and satisfaction of the perplexed minds of doubting or dejected penitents ; but that which we say was not owned nor practised by the church from the beginning , was this sacramental confession as necessary to the remission of sins before god. it is therefore to no purpose to produce out of bellarmine , and others , a great number of citations , to prove that which we never deny ; but if they hold to the council of trent , they must prove from the fathers , that sins after baptism cannot be forgiven without confession to men : which those who consider what they do , will never undertake , there being so many testimonies of undoubted antiquity against it . and it is observable , that bonaventure grants , that before the lateran decree of innocentius 3. it was no heresy to deny the necessity of confession ; and so he excuses those who in the time of lombard and gratian , held that opinion . and all other christians in the world besides those of the church of rome , do to this day reject the necessity of particular confession to a priest , in order to remission , as the writers of the church of rome themselves confess . so godignus doth of the abyssins ; philippus à ss . trinitate , of the jacobites ; clemens galanus of the nestorians , who saith , ' they made a decree against the use of confession to any but to god alone . and alexius meneses of the christians , of of s. thomas in the indies . the greeks believe confession only to be of positive and ecclesiastical institution , as the late author of the critical history of the faith and customs of the eastern nations , proves . and the very form of their absolution declares , that they do not think particular confession of all known sins , necessary to pardon : for therein the priest absolves the penitent from the sins he hath not confessed through forgetfulness , or shame . and now let any one prove this to have been a catholick tradition by vincentius his rules , viz. that it hath been always received , every where , and by all. viii . of indulgences . 1. they must be extreamly ignorant , who take the power of indulgences , to be a leave from the pope to commit what sins they please ; and that by vertue thereof , they shall escape punishment for their sins , without repentance in another world. yet this is the sense of the misrepresentation which , he saith , is made of it . and if he saith true in his preface , that he hath described the belief of a papist , exactly according to the apprehension he had when he was a protestant : he shews how well he understood the matters in difference , when i think no other person besides himself ever had such an apprehension of it , who pretended to be any thing like a scholar . 2. but now he believes it damnable to hold that the pope , or any other power in heaven or earth , can give him leave to commit any sins whatsoever ; or that for any sum of mony , he can obtain any indulgence or pardon for sins that are to be committed by him , or his heirs hereafter . very well ! but what thinks he of obtaining an indulgence , or pardon , after they are committed ? is no such thing to be obtained in the court of rome for a sum of mony ? he cannot but have heard of the tax of the apostolick chamber for certain sins , and what sums are there set upon them . why did he not as freely speak against this ? this is published in the vast collection of tracts of canon law , set forth by the pope's authority , where there are certain rates for perjury , murder , apostacy , &c. now what do these sums of mony mean ? if they be small , it is so much the better bargain , for the sins are very great . and espencaeus complains , that this book was so far from being called in , that he saith , the pope's legats renewed those faculties , and confirmed them . it seems then a sum of mony may be of some consequence towards the obtaining pardon for a sin past , though not for a licence to commit it . but what mighty difference is there , whether a man procures with mony a dispensation , or a pardon ? for the sin can hurt him no more , than if he had licence to commit it . 3. he doth believe there is a power in the church to grant indulgences ; which , he saith , concern not at all the remission of sins , either mortal or venial , but only of some temporal punishments remaining due after the guilt is remitted . here now arises a material question , viz. whether the popes , or the representer , be rather to be believed . if the popes , who grant the indulgences to be believed ; then not only the bare remission of sins is concerned in them , but the plenary , and most plenary remission of sins is to be had by them . so boniface the 8th , in his bull of jubilee granted , non solum plenam & largiorem , imo plenissimam veniam peccatorum . if these words had no relation to remission of sins , the people were horribly cheated by the sound of them . in the bull of clement the 6th , not extant in the bullarium , but published out of the utrecht manuscript , not only a plenary absolution from all sins is declared to all persons who died in the way to rome ; but he commands the angels of paradise to carry the soul immediatly to heaven . and i suppose , whatever implies such an absolution as carries a soul to heaven , doth concern remission of sins . boniface the 9th granted indulgences , à poenâ & à culpâ ; and those certainly concerned remission of sins ; being not barely from the temporal punishment , but from the guilt it self . clement the 8th , whom bellarmine magnifies for his care in reforming indulgences , in his bull of jubilee , grants a most plenary remission of sins ; and urban the 8th , since him , not only a relaxation of penances , but remission of sins ; and so lately as a. d. 1671. clement the 10th published an indulgence upon the canonization of five new saints , wherein he not only grants a plenary indulgence of sins , but upon invocation of one of these saints in the point of death , a plenary indulgence of all his sins . and what doth this signify in the point of death , if it do not concern the remission of sins ? 4. indulgences , he saith , are nothing else but a mitigation or relaxation , upon just causes , of canonical penances , which are or may be enjoyned by the pastors of the church on penitent sinners , according to their several degrees of demerits . if by canonical penances , they mean those enjoyned by the penitential canons , greg. de valentia saith , this opinion differs not from that of the hereticks , and makes indulgences to be useless and dangerous things . bellarmine brings several arguments against this doctrine . ( 1. ) there would be no need of the treasure of the church ; which he had proved to be the foundation of indulgences . ( 2. ) they would be rather hurtful than profitable , and the church would deceive her children by them . ( 3. ) they could not be granted for the dead . ( 4. ) they who receive indulgences , do undergo canonical penances . ( 5. ) the form of them doth express , that they do relate to god , and not only to the church . and this , i think , is sufficient to shew how far he is from true representing the nature of indulgences ; for we do not dispute the churche's power in relaxing canonical penances to penitent sinners upon just causes . ix . of satisfaction . 1. he believes it damnable to think any thing injuriously of christ's passion : but then he distinguishes the eternal and temporal pain due to sin. as to the guilt and eternal pain , the satisfaction , he saith , ● proper to christ ; but as to the temporal pain , which m●● remain due by god's justice , after the other are remitted , he saith , that penitent sinners may in some measure satisfy for that by prayer , fasting , alms , &c. p. 17. 2. these penitential works , he saith , are no otherwise satisfactory , than as joined and applied to christ's satisfaction , in virtue of which alone our good works find a grateful acceptance in god's sight . p. 19. but for right apprehending the state of the controversy , we must consider ; 1. that they grant both eternal and temporal pain due to sin , to be remitted in baptism ; so that all the satisfaction to be made , is for sins committed after baptism . 2. we distinguish between satisfaction to the church before absolution , and satisfaction to the justice of god for some part of the punishment to sin which is unremitted . 3. we do not deny that truly penitential works are pleasing to god , so as to avert his displeasure ; but we deny that there can be any compensation in way of equivalency , between what we suffer , and what we deserve . the matter in controversy therefore on this head , consists in these things . 1. that after the total remission of sins in baptism , they suppose a temporal punishment to remain , when the eternal is forgiven ; which the penitent is to satisfy god's justice for ; and without this being done in this life , he must go into purgatory for that end. of which more under that head. 2. that this satisfaction may be made to the justice of god , after absolution is given by the priest. so that although the penitent be admitted into god's favour , by the power of the keys , according to their own doctrine ; yet the application of the merits of christ , together with the saints in the sentence of absolution ( according to their form ) do not set him so free , but he either wants a new supply from the treasure of the church , i. e. from the same merits of christ and the saints ; or else he is to satisfie for the temporal punishment by his own penances . 3. that these penitential works are to be joyned with the merits of christ , in the way of proper satisfaction to divine justice . and however softly this may be expressed ; the meaning is , that christ hath merited , that we may merit , and by his satisfaction , we are enabled to satisfie for our selves . and if the satisfaction by way of justice be taken away , the other will be a controversy about words . 4. that these penitential works may not only be sufficient for themselves , but they may be so over-doing , that a great share may be taken from them to make up the treasure of the church , for the benefit of others who fall short , when they are duly applied to them in the way of indulgences . and about these points , we must desire greater proof than we have yet ever seen . x. of reading the holy scripture . 1. he believes it damnable in any one , to think , speak , or do any thing irreverently towards the scripture , or by any means whatsoever to bring it into disrepute or disgrace ; but not being contented with this , he adds , that he holds it in the highest veneration of all men living . now , here we must desire a little better representation of this matter . for certainly , those who derive its authority from the church ; who set traditions in equal esteem with it ; who complain so much of its obscurity , can never be said to hold it in equal veneration with those who maintain its independent authority , its sufficiency , and perspicuity . and these are known and material points in controversy between us and them : therefore let them not say , they hold it in the highest veneration of all men living ; though those thought themselves through catholioks , who have compared it to a nose of wax , to a lesbian rule , to a dead letter , unsensed characters , and to other things , not fit to be repeated . but we are well pleased to find them express such veneration for it . wherefore then are the people to be kept from reading it ? 2. he saith , it is not out of disrespect to it . but why then ? ( 1. ) because private interpretation is not proper for the scr●ture , ( 2 pet. 1. 20. ) one would think the scripture were not kept only from the people , by such a sense being put upon it : for any one that would but consider that place , will find it must relate to the prophets themselves ; and doth he think the prophets were to be debarred from reading the scriptures ? but this is playing with scripture , and not reasoning from it . ( 2. ) because in the epistles of st. paul are certain things hard to be understood , which the unlearned and unstable deprave , as also the rest of the scriptures , to their own perdition . ( 2 pet. 3. 16. ) now in my opinion , such men deserve more to be debarred from the medling with the scripture , who make such perverse inferences from it , than ordinary readers . and if they use all other places , as they do this , they cannot be excused from depraving it . it is granted , there were then unlearned and unstable men , who misunderstood , or misappled the writings of st. paul , and other scriptures . and what then ? there are men of all ages , who abuse the best things in the world , even the gospel it self , and the grace of god. doth it hence follow , that the gospel must not be preached to them , or the grace of god made known to them , for fear of mens making ill use of it ? if this had been the just consequence , would not st. peter himself have thought of this ? but he was so far from making it , that he adviseth those persons he writes to , to have a mighty regard to the scriptures , even to the prophetical writings , as to a light shining in a dark place , 1 pet. 1. 19. according to this way of deducing consequences , s. peter should have argued just contrary ; the prophetical writings are dark and obscure , therefore meddle not with them , but trust your guides : whereas the apostle , after he had told them what the apostles saw and heard , he adds , that they have a more sure prophetical word , as the rhemists translate it . how could that be more sure to them , unless they were allowed to read , consider , and make use of it ? ( 3. ) because god hath given only some to be apostles , some prophets , other some evangelists , and other some pastors and doctors , ephes. 4. 11. doth it hence follow that the people are not to read the scriptures ? in the universities , tutors are appointed to interpret aristotle to their pupils ; doth it hence follow that they are not to read aristotle themselves ? it is , no doubt , a mighty advantage to have such infallible interpreters as the apostles & prophets ; and all christians are bound to follow their sense , where they have delivered it . but suppose the question be about the sense of these interpreters ; must their books not be looked into , because of the danger of error ? this reason will still hold against those who go about to deliver their sense ; and so on , till by this method of reasoning , all sorts of books and interpretations be rejected ; unless any such can be found out , which is not liable to be abused or misunderstood . and if there be any such to be had , they are much to blame who do not discover it . but as yet we see no remedy for two things in mankind , a proneness to sin and to mistake . but of all things , we ought not to take away from them one of the best means to prevent both , viz. a diligent , and careful , and humble reading the holy scriptures . but 3. he denies that all persons are forbid to read the scriptures , but only such as have no license , and good testimony from their curates : and therefore their design is not to preserve ignorance in the people , but to prevent a blind , ●gnorant presumption . these are plausible pretences to such as search no far●her ; but the mystery of this matter lies much deeper . ●t was no doubt the design of the church of rome to keep the bible wholly out of the hands of the people . but upon the reformation they found it impossible ; so many translations being made into vulgar languages ; ●nd therefore care was taken to have translations made ●y some of their own body ; and since the people of ●etter inclinations to piety were not to be satisfied with●ut the bible ; therefore they thought it the better way ●o permit certain persons whom they could trust , to have license to read it : and this was the true reason of the ●ourth rule of the index libr. prohibit . made in pursu●nce of the order of the council of trent , and published ●y pius iv. by which any one may see it was not an original permission out of any good will to the thing ; ●ut an aftergame to get the bible out of the hands of ●●e people again : and therefore absolution was to be ●enied to those who would not deliver them to their or●naries when they were called for : and the regulars ●●emselves were not to be permitted to have bibles with●●t a license : and as far as i can understand the addi●on of clement viii . to that fourth rule , he withdraws ●y new power of granting such licenses ; and saith ●ey are contrary to the command and usage of that ●●urch , which he saith is to be inviolably observed : ●herein i think he declares himself fully against such ●censes : and how inferior guides can grant them a●inst the command of the head of the church , is a thing ●t very agreeable to the unity and subordination they ●ast of . xi . of apochryphal books . 1. we do not charge the church of rome with m●king what additions to scripture they thi● good , as the misrepresenter saith ; but we charge the● with taking into the canon of scripture such books ● were not received for canonical by the christian church as those books himself mentions , viz. toby , judith , eclesiasticus , wisdom , and maccabees . 2. we do not only charge them with this , but with anathematizing all those who do not upon this decla●tion believe them to be canonical ; since they cannot 〈◊〉 but know , that these books never were in the jewish ●●non , and were left out by many christian writers . a● if the church cannot add to the scripture , and 〈◊〉 author thinks it damnable to do it ; how can it ma● any books canonical , which were not so received by t●● church ? for the scripture in this sense is the canon ; a● therefore if it add to the canon , it adds to the scripture i. e. it makes it necessary to believe some books to be ● infallible authority , which were not believed to be ● either by the jewish or christian church , as appears 〈◊〉 abundant testimonies to that purpose produced by learned bishop of this church ; which ought to ha● been considered by the representer , that he might 〈◊〉 have talked so crudely about this matter . but however , i must consider what he saith , 1. he produces the testimony of greg. nazia●● who is expresly against him , and declares but twe●● two books in the canon of the old testament but how doth he prove that he thought these boo● canonical ? he quotes his oration on the maccabe● where i can find nothing like it ; and instead of it 〈◊〉 expresly follows , as he declares , the book of josephus , 〈◊〉 the authority of reason concerning them . so that if ●his proves any thing , it proves josephus his book canonical , and not the maccabees . 2. he adds the testimony of st. ambrose , who in the place he refers to , inlarges on the story of the maccabees , ●ut saith nothing of the authority of the book : and even coccius himself grants , that of old melito sardensis , amphilochius , greg. nazianzen . the council of laodicea , s. hierom , ruffinus , and gregory the great , did not own the book of maccabees for canonical . 3. innocentius ad exuperium speaks more to his purpose ; and if that decretal epistle be allowed , against which bishop cosins hath made considerable objections ; then it must be granted , that these books were then in the roman canon ; but that they were not received by the universal church , appears evidently by the canon of the council of laodicea , c. 60. wherein these books are ●est out ; and this was received in the code of the uni●ersal church ; which was as clear a proof of the canon ●hen generally received , as can be expected . it is true , the council of carthage took them in ; and st. augustine seems ●o be of the same opinion : but on the other side they ●re left out by melito bishop of sardis , who lived near ●he apostles times ; origen , athanasius , st. hilary , st. cyril of jerusalem , epiphanius , st. basil , amphilochius , st. chrysostom , and especially st jerom , who hath laboured ●n this point so much , that no fewer than thirteen places ●re produced out of him to this purpose , by the forementioned learned bishop of our church , who clearly ●roves there was no tradition for the canon of the council of trent in any one age of the christian church . but our author goes on . 4. it is of little concern to him , whether these books were ever in the hebrew copy . i would ●nly ask whether it be of any concern to him , whether they were divinely inspired or not ? he saith it is damnable to add to the scripture ; by the scripture we mean books written by divine inspiration can the church make books to be so written , which were not so written ? if not , then all it hath to do , is to deliver by tradition what was so , and what not . whence should they have this tradition , but from the jews ? and they owned no divine inspiration after the time of malach how then should there be any books so written afte● that time ? and he that saith in this matter , as he doth it is of little concern to him whether they were in the hebrew canon , doth little concern himself what he oug●● to believe , and what not , in this matter . 5. since the churches declaration , he saith , no cathlicks ever doubted . what doth he mean by the church● declaration , that of innocentius , and the council of cathage ? then the same bishop hath shewed him , th● since that time , there have been very many , both 〈◊〉 the greek and latin church of another opinion . an● but a little before the council of trent , catharinus saith that a friend of his , and a brother in christ , deride him as one that wanted learning for daring to assert the● books were within the canon of scripture ; and it 's plain , card. cajetan could never be perswaded of it : b● if he means since the council of trent , then we are ●●turned to our first difficulty , how such a council c●● make any books canonical , which were not received 〈◊〉 such by the catholick church before ? for then they 〈◊〉 not declare the canon , but create it . xii . of the vulgar edition of the bible . 1. we do not dispute about the vulgar editi●● whether it may not be prefer'd before modern latin editions because of its great antiquity in som● parts of it , and its general reception since the time of gregory i. but our dispute is , whether it be made so authentick since the council of trent , that no appeals are to be made to the originals , i. e. whether that council by its authority could make a version equal to the originals out of which it was made ? especially since at the time of that decree , the vulgar edition was confessed to be full of errors and corruptions by sixtus v. who saith , he took infinite pains to correct them , and yet left very many behind , as appeared by clement viii . who corrected his bibles in very many places , and grants some faults were left uncorrected still ; now , how was it possible for the council of trent to declare that edition authentick , which was afterwards so much corrected ? and , whether was the correct edition of sixtus v. authentick or not , being made in pursuance of the decree of the council ? if not , how comes clemens his edition to be made authentick when the other was not , since there may be corruptions found in that , as well as the other ; and no one can tell , but it may be reviewed and corrected still ; as some of their own writers confess it stands in need of it ? 2. our controversy is not so much about the authority of the vulgar latin above other latin versions to those who understand them ; but whether none else but the latin version must be used by those who understand it not ? and here our representer saith , that he is commanded not to read any of these translations ( speaking of tindal's , and that in q. elizabeths time ) but only that which is recommended to him by the church . if this relate to the vulgar latin , then we are to seek , why the common people should have none to read but what they cannot understand ; if to translations of their own , then we doubt not to make it appear , that our translation allowed among us , is more exact and agreeable than any they can put into their hands . xiii . of the scriptures as a rule of faith. the only thing insisted on here is , that it is not the words , but the sense of scripture is the rule ; and that this sense is not to be taken from mens private fancies , which are various and uncertain ; and therefore where there is no security from errors , there is nothing capable of being a rule . to clear this , we must consider , 1. that it is not necessary to the making of a rule , to prevent any possibility of mistake , but that it be such that they cannot mistake without their own fault . for certainty in it self , and sufficiency for the use of others , are all the necessary properties of a rule ; but after all , it 's possible for men not to apply the rule aright , and then they are to be blamed , and not the rule . 2. if no men can be certain of the right sense of scripture , then it is not plain in necessary things ; which is contrary to the design of it , and to the clearest testimonies of antiquity , and to the common sense of all christians , who never doubted or disputed the sense of some things revealed therein ; as the unity of the godhead , the making of the world by him , the deluge , the history of the patriarchs , the captivity of the jews , the coming of the messias , his sending his apostles , his coming again to judgment , &c. no man who reads such things in scripture can have any doubt about the sense and meaning of the words . 3. where the sense is dubious , we do not allow any man to put what sense he please upon them ; but we say , there are certain means , whereby he may either attain to the true sense , or not be damned if he do not . and the first thing every man is to regard , is not his security from being deceived , but from being damned . for truth is made known in order to salvation ; if therefore i am sure to attain the chief end , i am not so much concerned , as to the possibility of errors , as that i be not deceived by my own fault . we do not therefore leave men either to follow their own fancy , or to interpret scripture by it ; but we say , they are bound upon pain of damnation to seek the truth sincerely , and to use the best means in order to it ; and if they do this , they either will not err , or their errors will not be their crime . xiv . of the interpretation of scripture . 1. the question is not , whether men are not bound to make use of the best means for the right interpretation of scripture , by reading , meditation , prayer , advice , a humble and teachable temper , &c. i. e. all the proper means fit for such an end ? but whether after all these , there be a necessity of submitting to some infallible judge , in order to the attaining the certain sense of scripture ? 2. the question is not , whether we ought not to have a mighty regard to the sense of the whole christian church in all ages since the apostles , which we profess to have ; but whether the present roman church , as it stands divided from other communions , hath such a right and authority to interpret scripture , that we are bound to believe that to be the infallible sense of scripture which she delivers . and here i cannot but take notice how strangely this matter is here misrepresented ; for the case is put , 1. as if every one who rejects their pretence of infallibility , had nothing to guide him but his own private fancy in the interpretation of scripture . 2. as if we rejected the sense put upon scripture by the whole community of christians in all ages since the apostles times . whereas we appeal in the matters in difference between us , to this universal sense of the christian church , and are verily perswaded they cannot make it out in any one point wherein we differ from them . and themselves cannot deny , that in several we have plainly the consent of the first ages , as far as appears by the books remaining , on our side ; as in the worship of images , invocation of saints , papal supremacy , communion in both kinds , prayer and scripture in known tongues ; and i may safely add , the sufficiency of scripture , transubstantiation , auricular confession , publick communions , solitary masses , to name no more . but here lies the artifice ; we must not pretend to be capable of judging either of scripture or tradition , but we must trust their judgment what is the sense of scripture , and what hath been the practice of the church in all ages , although their own writers confess the contrary ; which is very hard . but he seems to argue for such a submission to the church ; 1. because we receive the book of scripture from her ; therefore from her we are to receive the sense of the book . an admirable argument ! we receive the old testament from the jews , therefore from them we are to receive the sense of the old testament ; and so we are to reject the true messias . but this is not all ; if by the church they mean the church of rome in distinction from others , we deny it ; if they mean the whole christian church , we grant it ; but then the force of it is quite lost . but why is it not possible for the church of rome to keep these writings , and deliver them to others , which make against her self ? do not persons in law-suits often produce deeds which make against them ? but there is yet a farther reason ; it was not possible for the church of rome to make away these writings , being so universally spread . 2. because the church puts the difference between true and false books , therefore that must be trusted for the true sense of them . which is just as if one should argue , the clerks of the rolls are to give an account to the court of true records , therefore they are to sit on the bench , and to give judgment in all causes . the church is only to declare what it finds as to canonical books ; but hath no power to make any book canonical which was not before received for such . but i confess stapleton saith , the church if it please may make hermes his pastor , and clemens his constitutions canonical : but i do not think our author will therein follow him . xv. of tradition . 1. the question is not about human traditions supplying the defects of scripture , as he misrepresents it ; but whether there be an unwritten word , which we are equally bound to receive with the written word : altho these things which pass under that name , are really but humane traditions ; yet we do not deny that they pretend them to be of divine original . 2. we do not deny , but the apostles might deliver such things by word , as well as by epistle , which their disciples were bound to believe and keep : but we think there is some difference to be made between what we certainly know they delivered in writing , and what it is now impossible for us to know ; viz. what they delivered by word without writing . 3. we see no ground why any one should believe any doctrine with a stedfast and divine faith , which is not bottom'd on the written word ; for then his faith must be built on the testimony of the church as divine and infallibe , or else his faith cannot be divine . but it is impossible to prove it to be divine and infallible , but by the written word ; and therefore , as it is not reasonable that he should believe the written word by such a divine testimony of the church ; so if any particular doctrine may be received on the authority of the church without the written word , then all articles of faith may , and so there would be no need of the written word . 4. the faith of christians doth no otherwise stand upon the foundation of the churches tradition , than as it delivers down to us the books of scripture ; but we acknowledg the general sense of the chrstian church to be a very great help for understanding the true sense of scripture ; and we do not reject any thing so delivered ; but what is all this to the church of rome ? but this is still the way of true representing . xvi . of councils . 1. we are glad to find so good a resolution as seems to be expressed in these words , viz. that he is obliged to believe nothing besides that which christ taught , and his apostles ; and if any thing contrary to this should be defined , and commanded to be believed , even by ten thousand councils , he believes it damnable in any one to receive it , and by such decrees to make additions to his creed . this seems to be a very good saying , and it is pity any thing else should overthrow it . but here lies the misrepresenting ; he will believe what christ and his apostles taught , from the definitions of councils ; and so all this goodly fabrick falls to nothing ; for it is but as if one should say , if aristotle should falsly deliver plato's sense , i will never believe him , but i am resolved to take plato's sense only from aristotle's words . so here , he first declares he will take the faith of christ from the church ; and then he saith , if the church representative should contradict the faith of christ , he would never believe it . 2. we dispute not with them , the right and necessity of general councils , ( upon great occasions ) if they be truly so , rightfully called , lawfully assembled , and fairly managed ; which have been , and may be of great use to the christian world , for setling the faith , healing the breaches of christendom , and reforming abuses . and we farther say , that the decrees of such councils ought to be submitted to , where they proceed upon certain grounds of faith , and not upon unwritten traditions ; which was the fatal stumbling at the threshold in the council of trent , and was not to be recovered afterwards ; for their setting up traditions equally with the written word , made it easie for them to define , and as easie for all others to reject their definitions , in case there had not been so many other objections against the proceedings of that council . and so all our dispute concerning this matter is taken off from the general notion , and runs into the particular debate concerning the qualifications and proceedings of some which were called free , general councils ; but were neither general , nor free ; and therefore could not deliver the sense of the catholick church , which our author requires them to do . xvii . of infallibility in the church . 1. he doth not pretend this belongs to the pastors and prelates of his church , who may fall , he saith , into heresie and schism ; but that the whole church is secured by divine promises from all error and danger of prevarication ; which he proves from the promises of the new testament , mat. 16. 18 — 28. 20. john 14. 16 , 26. but however the former seems to take away infallibility from the guides of the church , yet that this is to be understood of them separately , appears by what follows . 2. the like assistance of the holy ghost he believes to be in all general councils , which is the church representative ; by which they are specially protected from all error in all definitions and declarations in matters of faith. now here are two sorts of infallibility tacked to one another by vertue of these general promises , which ought more distinctly to be considered . 1. to preserve christs church so as it shall never cease to be a church , is one thing ; to preserve it from all error is another : the former answers the end of christs promises as to the duration of the church ; and the latter is not implied in them . 2. the promise of teaching them all truth , joh. 16. 13. is not made to the whole church , but to the apostles : and their case was so peculiar and extraordinary , that there can be no just inference from the assistance promised to them , of what the church should enjoy in all ages . 3. if the diffusive church have no infallible assistance promised , then no infallible assistance can from thence be proved for the church representative ; so that some particular promises to the guides of the church as assembled together , are necessary to prove the infallibility of councils . 4. it by no means proves following councils to be infallible , because the apostles said , acts 15. 28. it seemed good to the holy ghost , and to us . our author doth not doubt , but the same may be prefixed to all determinations in point of faith , resolved on by any general council lawfully assembled since that time , or to be held to the worlds end . but what reason he had for not doubting in this matter , i cannot see ; the assistance , he saith , being to extend as far as the promise : but shall assistance imply infallibility ? then there must be good store , as long as the promises of divine grace hold good : but this assistance of councils is very different from the assistance of grace ; for the church may subsist without councils , but cannot without grace : what general council was there from the meeting , acts 15. to the council of nice ? were not christs promises fulfilled to his church all that time , when it encreased in all parts against the most violent opposition ? 5. no parity of reason from the jewish church can be sufficient proof for infallibility in the christian. but our author argues thus , if gods special assistance was never wanting to the church of the jews so as to let it fail in the truth of its doctrine , or its authority ; why should not he believe the same of the church of christ , which is built on better promises ? what special assistance was it which israel had , when it is said , that for a long time israel had been without the true god , and without a teaching priest , and without law ? and as to judah , was there no failing in point of doctrine in our saviours time ? it is true they had the law intire , and that was all that was good among them ; for their teachers had corrupted themselves and the people , and made the law of no effect among them : if there were infallibility any where , it must be in the high priest and sanhedrim ; but is it possible for any christian to think them infallible , when they were so grosly mistaken about the main article of their faith as to the messias , and pronounced him worthy of death ? is not this a fine argument for the infallibility of the guides of the christian church ? but the church of christ hath better promises : no doubt of it , greater promises of grace and mercy in this world , and in that to come : but what is all this to infallibility in councils ? 6. christ's command of obedience to those who sat in moses chair , ( matt. 23. 2. ) doth not prove the infallibility of those who sat there . yet this is alledged to that purpose ; and that men ought not to doubt of the reasonableness of the commands of their superiors . but st. chrysostom saith , our saviour speaks of the things commanded by the law of moses . per cathedram doctrinam legis ostendit , saith s. jerom ; not their own doctrine , but that of moses , saith isidore ; and so hilary and theophylact . maldonate confesseth , our saviours words are to be understood , not of their own doctrine , but of that of the law ; and therefore he yields the obedience here required is to be restrained to that ; all things , saith cajetan , which they teach out of moses 's chair : not all their doctrines , but as far as they were conformable to the law , saith ferus . now , can any one hence infer , that no men ought to dispute any commands of superiors , when it is supposed , that there is a rule and standard for them to speak according to ; and our saviour elsewhere doth suppose these very men to teach things contrary to the law ; as in the case of corban . would our saviour contradict himself ? or require a blind obedience in things repugnant to the law ? we do not deny a due submission to our superiours in the church ; yea , we allow them a power to determine things not forbidden ; and think obedience due in such things by vertue of their authority ; but yet this is far enough from infallibility , or an unlimited implict obedience , which would overthrow the force of all our saviours reasonings against the scribes and pharisees , as to their misinterpreting the law , and the superstitious practises they imposed upon the people . xviii . of the pope . 1. we do not charge them with believing the pope to be god ; which it seems himself did , if we believe the misrepresenter in his preface ; but there is some reason to doubt whether they do not at some times give him greater honour than becomes a man. i instance in the adoration after his election , when the new pope is placed upon the altar to receive the submissions of the cardinals ; but the altar , themselves do confess to be sacred to god alone ; and there they profess to worship jesus christ , as present in the host. this therefore looks too much like assuming the place of christ , and not becoming the distance between god and man. 2. the question is , whether christ hath appointed the pope or bishop of rome to be pastor , governour , and head of his church under him ? this , he saith , he believes , and this he knows we deny , and therefore had reason to expect some proof of it . but instead , he tells us how they look on themselves as obliged to shew him the respect due to his place , which he knows is not the matter in question . two things however he saith , which seem to justify his title . 1. he is the successor of st. peter , to whom christ committed the care of his flock . but how far is this from proving the pope to be head of the church under christ ? for , how doth it appear that christ ever made s. peter head of the church , or committed his flock to him , in contradistinction to the rest of the apostles ? this is so far from being evident from scripture , that the learned men of their church are ashamed of the places commonly produced for it ; it being impossible ever to justify the sense of them according to their own rules of interpreting scripture , viz. by the unanimous consent of the fathers . for , 1. thou art peter , and upon this rock will i build my church , is interpreted by many of the fathers both greek and latin , of s. peters confession , and not of his person ; so by s. chrysostom , s. ambrose , s. augustin , s. basil of selucioe , s. hilary , s. gregory nyssen , and theodoret ; all great and considerable persons in the christian church , whose words are plain and full to that purpose ; and so they can never produce the unanimous consent of the fathers for s. peter's supremacy out of these words . 2. and unto thee will i give the keys of the kingdom of heaven , are interpreted by the fathers of s. peter in common with the other apostles ; so origen , s. cyprian , s. hilary , s. hierom , and s. augustin , as they are all owned by a member of the roman communion . and 3. for these words , feed my sheep , a late learned doctor of the sorban shews , that if they prove any thing peculiar to s. peter , they must prove him sole pastor of the church , which was the thing s. gregory disputed against so warmly . but that there was nothing peculiar to s. peter , above or beyond the rest of the apostles , he shews at large from s. chrysostom , s. cyril , s. augustin and others , to whom i refer the reader , and to the former authors . but suppose it were made to appear , that s. peter was head of the church , how doth the bishop of rome's succession in that headship shew it self ? to that he saith , 2. that there hath been a visibile succession of above two hundred and fifty bishops , acknowledged as such in all past ages by the christian world. as such : what is that ? as bishops of rome ? that is not of weight enough to put it upon trial ; as heads of the catholick-church ? that he knows is not only denied by us , but by all the greek , armenian , nestorian , abyssin churches ; so that we dare say , it was never allowed in any one age of the christian church . but we need not insist on the proof of this , since the late mentioned authors of the roman communion have taken so great pains , not only to prove the popes supremacy to be an incroachment and usurpation in the church , but that the laying it aside is necessary to the peace and unity of it . and until the divine institution of the papal supremacy be proved , it is to no purpose to debate what manner of assistance is promised to the pope in his decrees . our author is willing to decline the debate about his personal infallibility , as a matter of opinion , and not of faith ; and yet he saith he doubts not but god doth grant a special assistancé to the high priest , for the good of the whole flock , under the new law , as he did under the old ; and produces the instance of caiaphas , joh. 11. 51. this is a very surprizing way of reasoning ; for if his arguments be good from scripture , he must hold the popes personal infallibity as a matter of faith ; and yet one would hardly think he should build an article of faith on the instance of caiaphas : for what consequence can be drawn from gods over-ruling the mind of a very bad man , when he was carrying on a most wicked design , to utter such words , which in the event proved true in another sense than he meant them ; that therefore god will give a special assistance to the pope in determining matters of faith ? was not caiaphas himself the man who proposed the taking away the life of christ at that time ? was he assisted in that council ? did not he determine afterwards christ to he guilty of blasphemy , and therefore worthy of death ? and is not this a rare infallibility which is supposed to be consistent with a decree to crucifie christ ? and doth he in earnest think such orders are to be obeyed , whether the supreme pastor be infallible or not ? for so he concludes , that his sentence is to be obeyed , whether he be infallible or no ? xix . of dispensations . here the misrepresenter saith , that a papist believes that the pope hath authority to dispense with the laws of god , and absolve any one from the obligation of keeping the commandments . on the other side , the representer affirms , that the pope has no authority to dispense with the law of god , and that there 's no power upon earth can absolve any one from the obligation of keeping the commandments : this matter is not to be determined by the ones affirming , and the others denying ; but by finding out , if possible , the true sense of the church of rome about this matter . and there are three opinions about it . 1. of those who assert , that the pope hath a power of dispensing in any divine law , except the articles of faith : the gloss upon the canon law saith , that where the text seems to imply , that the pope cannot dispense against the apostle , it is to be understood of articles of faith : and panormitan saith , this exposition pleases him well ; for the pope may dispense in all other things : contra apostolum dispensat , saith the gloss on the decree : and the roman editors in the margin , refer to 34 dist. c. lector to prove it : and there indeed the gloss is very plain in the case , sic ergo papa dispensat contra apostolum : and the roman correctors there justifie it , and say it is no absurd doctrine as to positive institutions : but the former notable gloss , as panormitan calls it , sets down the particulars wherein the pope may dispense . as 1. against the apostles and their canons . 2. against the old testament . 3. in vows . 4. in oaths . the summa angelica saith , the pope may dispense as to all the precepts of the old testament . and clavasi●● founds this power upon the plenitude of the popes power , according to that expression in the decretal mentioned , that he can , ex plenitudine potestatis de jure supra jus dispensare ; and without such a power , he saith , god would not have taken that care of his church , which was to be expected from his wisdom . jacobatius brings several instances of this power in the pope , and refers to the speculator for more . jac. almain saith , that all the canonists are of opinion , that the pope may dispense against the apostle , and many of their divines , but not all : for , 2. some of their divines held that the pope could not dispense with the law of god , as that implies a proper relaxation of the law , but could only authoritatively declare that the law did not oblige in such a particular case ; because an inferior could not take away the force of a superiors law ; and otherwise there would be no fixed and immutable rule in the church ; and if the pope might dispense in one law of god , he might dispense in the rest : and of this opinion were some of the most eminent school-divines , as thomas aquinas , bonaventure , major , soto , and catbarinus , who at large debates this question , and denies that the pope hath any power to dispense with gods law : but then he adds , that the pope hath a kind of prophetical power to declare in what cases the law doth oblige , and in what not ; which he parallels with the power of declaring the canon of scripture ; and this he doth not by his own authority , but by gods ; he confesseth the pope cannot dispense with those precepts which are of themselves indispensable ; nor alter the sacraments ; but then , saith he , there are some divine laws , which have a general force , but in particular cases may be dispensed with ; and in these cases the law is to be relaxed , so that the relaxation seems to come from god himself : but he confesses this power is not to be often made use of ; so that he makes this power to be no act of jurisdiction , but of prophetical interpretation , as he calls it ; and he brings the instance of caiaphas to this purpose : and he adds , that the difference between the divines and canonists was but in terms ; for the canonists were in the right as to the power , and the divines in the manner of explaining it . 3. others have thought this too loose a way of explaining the popes power , and therefore they say , that the pope hath not a bare declaratory power , but a real power of dispensing in a proper sense in particular cases : for say they , the other is no act of jurisdiction , but of discretion , and may belong to other men as well as to the pope ; but this they look on as more agreeable to the popes authority and commission ; and a bare declaratory power would not be sufficient for the churches necessity ; as sanchez shews at large , and quotes many authors for this opinion , and sayr . more ; and he saith the practice of the church cannot be justified without it : which suarez much insists upon ; and without it , he saith , the church hath fallen into intolerable errors ; and it is evident he saith , the church hath granted real dispensations , and not meer declarations . and he founds it upon christs promise to peter , to thee will i give the keys , and the charge to him , feed my sheep . but then he explains this opinion , by saying that it is no formal dispensation with the law of god , but the matter of the law is changed or taken away . thus i have briesly laid together the different opinions in the church of rome about this power of dispensing with the law of god ; from which it appears , that they do all consent in the thing , but differ only in the manner of explaining it . and i am therefore afraid our representer is a very unstudied divine , and doth not well understand their own doctrine , or he would never have talked so boldly and unskilfully in this matter . as to what he pretends , that their church teaches that every lye is a sin , &c. it doth not reach the case ; for the question is not , whether their church teach men to lye , but whether there be not such a power in the church , as by altering the nature of things , may not make that not to be a lye , which otherwise would be one : as their church teaches that men ought not to break their vows ; yet no one among them questions , but the pope may dissolve the obligation of a vow , altho it be made to god himself . let him shew then , how the pope comes to have a power to release a vow made to god , and not to have a power to release the obligation to veracity among men . again , we do not charge them with delivering any such doctrine , that men may have dispensations to lye and forswear themselves at pleasure ; for we know this dispensing power is to be kept up as a great mystery , and not to be made use of , but upon weighty and urgent causes , of great consequence and benefit to the church , as their doct●●● declare . but as to all matters of fact , which he alludes to , i have nothing to say to them ; for our debate is only , whether there be such a power of dispensation allowed in the church of rome , or not ? xx. of the deposing power . to bring this matter into as narrow a compass as may be , i shall first take notice of his concessions , which will save us a labour of proofs . 1. he yields that the deposing and king-killing power hath been maintained by some canonists and divines of his church , and that it is in their opinion lawful , and annexed to the papal chair . 2. that some popes have endeavoured to act according to this power . but then he denies that this doctrine appertains to the faith of his church , and is to be believed by all of that communion . and more than that , he saith , the affirming of it is a malicious calumny , a down-right falsity . let us now calmly debate the matter , whether according to the received principles of the church of rome , this be only a particular opinion of some popes and divines , or be to be received as a matter of faith. the question is not , whether those who deny it , do account it an article of faith ; for we know they do not : but whether upon the principles of the church of rome they are not bound to do it . i shall only , to avoid cavilling , proceed upon the principles owned by our author himself , viz. 1. that the sense of scripture , as understood by the community of christians in all ages since the apostles , is to be taken from the present church . 2. that by the present church he understands the pastors and prelates assembled in councils , who are appointed by christ and his apostles for the decision of controversies ; and that they have infallible assistance . 3. that the pope as the head of the church , hath a particular assistance promised him , with a special regard to his office and function . if therefore it appear that popes and councils have declared this deposing doctrine , and they have received other things as articles of faith upon the same declarations , why should they then stick at yielding this to be an article of faith , as well as the other ? it is not denied , that i can find , that popes and councils for several ages have asserted and exercised the deposing power ; but it is alledged against these decrees , and acts , 1. that they were not grounded upon universal tradition . 2. that they had not universal reception . now , if these be sufficient to overthrow the definitions of councils , let us consider the consequences of it . 1. then every man is left to examin the decrees of councils , whether they are to be embraced or not ; for he is to judge whether they are founded on universal tradition ; and so he is not to take the sense of the present church for his guide , but the universal church from christs time : which overthrows a fundamental principle of the roman church . 2. then he must reject the pretended infallibility in the guides of the church , if they could so notoriously err in a matter of so great consequence to the peace of christendom , as this was ; and consequently their authority could not be sufficient to declare any articles of faith. and so all persons must be left at liberty to believe as they see cause , notwithstanding the definitions made by popes and councils . 3. then he must believe the guides of the roman church to have been mistaken , not once or twice , but to have persisted in it for five hundred years , which must take away , not only infallibility , but any kind of reverence to the authority of it . for whatever may be said as to those who have depended on princes , or favour their parties against the guides of the church , it cannot be denied that for so long time the leading party in that church did assert and maintain the deposing power . and therefore lessius truely understood this matter , when he said , that there was scarce any article of the christian faith , the denial whereof was more dangerous to the church , or did precipitate men more into heresy and hatred of the church , than this of the deposing power ; for , he says , they could not maintain their churches authority without it . and he reckons up these ill consequences of denying it . 1. that the roman church hath erred for at least five hundred years , in a matter fundamental as to government , and of great moment : which is worse than an error about sacraments , as penance , extreme unction , &c. and yet those who deny the church can err in one , hold that it hath erred in a greater matter . 2. that it hath not only erred , but voluntarily and out of ambition , perverting out of design the doctrine of the primitive church and fathers concerning the power of the church , and bringing in another contrary to it , against the right and authority of princes ; which were a grievous sin . 3. that it made knowingly , unrighteous decrees , to draw persons from their allegiance to princes ; and so they became the causes of many seditions and rebellions , and all the ill consequences of them , under a shew of piety and religion . 4. that the churches decrees , commands , judgements and censures may be safely contemned as null , and containing intollerable errors . and that it may require such things which good subjects are bound to disobey . 5. that gregory vii . in the canon nos sanctorum , &c. urban ii. gregory ix . the councils of lateran under alex. iii. and innocent iii. the councils of lyons , of vienna , of constance , of lateran under leo x. and of trent , have all grievously and enormously erred about this matter ; for that it was the doctrine of them all , he shews at large ; and so seven general councils lose their infallibility at one blow . 6. that the gates of hell have prevailed against the church : for the true church could never teach such pernicious doctrine as this must be , if it be not true . and if it erred in this , it might as well err in any other doctrine , and so men are not bound to believe or obey it . 7. that princes and all laymen have just cause to withdraw from their church ; because it shewed it self to be governed by a spirit of ambition , and not by the spirit of god ; and not only so , but they may justly prosecute all that maintain a doctrine so pernicious to government , if it be not true . let us now see what our author saith to clear this from being a doctrine of the church of rome . 1. that for the few authors that are abettors of this doctrine , there are of his communion three times the number that publickly disown all such authority . if this be true , it is not much for the reputation of their church , that there should be such a number of those who are liable to all these dreadful consequences , which lessius urges upon the deniers of it : but is it possible to believe there should be so few followers of so many popes , and seven general councils , owned for such by the disowners of this doctrine , except the lateran under leo 10. ? the poor eastern christians are condemned for hereticks by the church of rome , for refusing to submit to the decrees of one general council , either that of ephesus , or of chalcedon : and they plead for themselves , that there was a misinterpretation of their meaning , or not right understanding one another about the difference of nature and person , which occasioned those decrees . i would fain know , whether those churches which do not embrace the decrees of those councils , are in a state of heresie or not ? if they be , then what must we think of such who reject the decrees of seven general councils , one after another , and give far less probable accounts of the proceedings of those councils in their definitions , than the other do ? 2. he saith , those who have condemned it , have not been in the least suspected of their religion , or of denying any article of faith. let any one judg of this by lessius his consequences : and the author of the first treatise against the oath of allegiance saith in plain terms , that the opinion that the pope hath no such power , is erroneous in faith , as well as temerarious and impious ; and he proves it by this substantial argument ; because they who hold it , must suppose that the church hath been for some time in a damnable error of belief , and sin of practice : and he not only proves that it was defined by popes and councils , but for a long time universally received ; and that no one author can be produced before calvins time , that denied this power absolutely , or in any case whatsoever . but a few authors that are abettors of it , saith our representer : not one total dissenter for a long time , saith the other : and which of these is the true representer ? the deniers of it not in the least suspected of their religion ; saith one : their opinion is erroneous in faith , temerarious and impious , saith the other . 3. if we charge their church with this opinion , may not they as well charge ours with the like ; since propositions as dangerous were condemned at oxford , july 26. 1683. as held not by jesuits , but by some among our selves ? this is the force of his reasoning : but we must desire the reader to consider the great disparity of the case . we cannot deny , that there have been men of ill minds , and disloyal principles , factious and disobedient , enemies to the government , both in church and state ; but have these men ever had that countenance from the doctrines of the guides of our church , which the deposing doctrine hath had in the church of rome ? to make the case parallel , he must suppose our houses of convocation to have several times declared these damnable doctrines , and given encouragement to rebels to proceed against their kings , and the university of oxford to have condemned them ; for this is truly the case in the church of rome ; the popes and councils have owned , and approved , and acted by the deposing principle ; but the universities of france , of late years , have condemned it . how comes the principles of the regicides among us to be parallel'd with this doctrine , when the principles of our church are so directly contrary to them ; and our houses of convocation would as readily condemn any such damnable doctrines , as the university of oxford ? and all the world knows how repugnant such principles are to those of the church of england ; and none can be rebels to their prince , but they must be false to our church . as to the personal loyalty of many persons in that church , as i have no reason to question it , so it is not proper for me to debate it , if i did ; since our business is not concerning persons , but doctrines ; and it was of old observed concerning the epicureans , that tho their principles did overthrow any true friendship , yet many of them made excellent friends . xxi . of communion in one kind . for our better proceeding in this controversie , i shall set down the state of it as clearly as i can . 1. the question is not , whether the first institution of the sacrament of the eucharist by jesus christ , were in one kind , or two ; for all confess it was under both kinds . 2. it is not , whether both kinds are not still necessary for the due celebration of it ; for it is granted that both kinds are necessary to be upon the altar , or else there could be no compleat sacrifice . 3. it is not , whether the people may be wholly excluded from both kinds , and so the sacrifice only remain ; for they grant that the people are bound to communicate in one kind . 4. it is not concerning any peculiar and extraordinary cases , where no wine is to be had , or there be a particular aversion to it , or any such thing , where positive institutions may be reasonably presumed to have no force ; but concerning the publick and solemn celebration , and participation of it in the christian church . 5. it is not concerning the meer disuse or neglect of it , but concerning the lawfulness of excluding the people from both kinds , by the churches prohibition , notwithstanding the institution of it by christ in both kinds , with a command to keep up the celebration of it to his second coming . here now consists the point in controversie , whether the church being obliged to keep up the institution in both kinds , be not equally obliged to distribute both as our saviour did , to as many as partake of it ? our author not denying the institution , or the continuance of it , saith , our saviour left it indifferent to receive it in one kind , or both . and that is the point to be examined . 1. he saith , christ delivered it to his apostles , who only were then present , and whom he made priests just before ; yet he gave no command that it should be so received by all the faithful . but were not the apostles all the faithful then present ? i pray in what capacity did they then receive it ? as priests ? how did they receive the bread before the hoc facite ? as priests or as faithful ? it is ridiculous to suppose the hoc facite changed their capaciy ; and if it did , it only relates to consecrating , and not to receiving : but if christ gave it only to the apostles as priests , then for all that i can see , the people are not at all concerned in one kind or other ; but it was intended only for priests : if the people be concerned , how came they to be so ? where is there any command but what refers to the first institution ? and it had been more plausible , according to this answer , to exclude the people wholly , than to admit them to one kind , and to debar them the other . 2. christ attributes the obtaining life everlasting , the end of the institution , sometimes to receiving under both kinds , sometimes under one , john 6. 51 , 57 , 58. he could not easily have thought of any thing more against himself ; for our saviour there makes it as necessary to drink his blood , as to eat his flesh , verily , verily , i say unto you , except ye eat the flesh of the son of man , a● drink his blood , ye have no life in you : if this be understood of the sacrament , as he saith , how is it possibl● for him to make the cup indifferent ? unless it be ind● ferent whether the people be saved or not . 3. christ himself administred the sacrament to some of his disciples under one kind only , luke 24. 30. but is he sure christ did then administer the sacrament to them ? or that if he did , the cup was not implied , since breaking of bread , when taken for an ordinary meal in scripture , doth not exclude drinking at it ? but s. augustin , he saith , ( l. 49. de consensu evangel . ) understands that place of the sacrament . if he doth , it cannot be where he saith ; for s. augustin wrote but four books of that subject ; but l. 3. 25. he doth say something towards it ; yet s. augustin in another place supposes that these disciples did both eat and drink . the disciples did not know him , but in the breaking of bread ; and truely he that doth not eat and drink judgment to himself , doth in the breaking of bread own christ. where it is plain , that he applies both , to the breaking of bread here spoken of . 4. he saith , it was the custom of the primitive christians to give it under one kind to children , the sick , and to men in a journey . i would he had produced his authorities to prove these things ; for i can bring several to prove the direct contrary as to children , and sick persons , and travellers , and not only ancient writers , but the most learned of their own church . and therefore i cannot but wonder to find him saying , this was attested by all ancient writers , and modern historians . but i have ever found those have been most mistaken , who produce all writers and historians ; when it may be , there is not one that speaks home to the business . at least , we have here none mentioned , and therefore none to examin ; and it would be too hard a task to search all. 5. he adds to this extravagancy , in saying , that receiving in one or both kinds , was indifferent for the first four hundred years ; when the contrary is so manifest , that the most ingenuous of their own writers consess it . if any persons did carry home one kind ( which is very questionable ; for baronius and albasinoeus say , they carried both kinds ) to receive it in times of persecution , at what season they thought fit afterwards ; this ought not to be set up against the general and constant rule of the church ; which is attested , not only by cassander and such like , but even by salmero , ruardus , tapperus , and lindanus , who make no scruple of saying , the publick celebration in the primitive church was in both kinds . but then , how is it possible for us to judge better , what they thought themselves bound to do , than what they constantly observed in all their publick celebrations ? the church is not accountable for the particular fancies or superstitions of men ; but what was observed in all publick offices , we have reason to think the church thought it self obliged so to do , out of regard to the institution of christ. and to shew how universal this observation was in the church , those who give account of the eastern church say , that the greeks , nestorians , armenians , maronites , cophtites and abyssins , do all observe it still , viz. that the publick communicants do partake of both kinds . and not one of all these churches but think themselves bound to observe it , out of regard to the institution of christ ; and why then should any think the primitive church thought it indifferent ? 6. the first precept of receiving under both kinds , was given to the faithful by pope leo , a. d. 443. and confirmed by gelasius , a. d. 490. this is a great mistake , for leo gave no precept about it ; but only told the people how they might certainly discover the manichees , for they would conform in other things , but they would not taste of the wine : which argued , that all other communicants did then partake in both kinds . gelasius not only confirms the custom then used , but he saith , that it is sacriledge to divide that holy mystery . and surely he did not account sacriledge an indifferent thing . 7. lastly he saith , that those who receive in one kind , are truely partakers of the whole sacrament . this is a new way of concomitancy ; we used to hear of whole christ under either species , and that whole christ was therefore received ; but how comes it to be the whole sacrament , which consists of two distinct parts ? and if it be a sacrifice , the blood must be separated from the body , else the blood of christ is not considered as shed , and so the notion of the sacrifice will be lost ; which is our next head. xxii . of the mass . under this head , which is thought of so great consequence in the roman church , i expected a fuller representation than i here find ; as about the opus operatum , i. e. how far the meer act is effectual ; about their solitary masses , when no person receives but the priest ; about the people having so little to do , or understand , in all the other parts of the mass ; about the rites and ceremonies of the mass , how useful and important they are ; about reconciling the present canon of the mass , with the present practises ; about offering up masses for the honour of saints . all which we find in the council of trent , but are omitted by our representer ; who speaks of the mass , as though there were no controversy about it , but only concerning the sacrifice there supposed to be offered up , and which he is far from true representing : for the council of trent not only affirms a true proper propitiatory sacrifice to be there offered up for the quick and dead , but denounces anathema's against those that deny it . so that the question is not , whether the eucharist may not in the sense of antiquity be allow'd to be a commemorative sacrifice , as it takes in the whole action ; but whether in the mass there be such a representation made to god of christ's sacrifice , as to be it self a true and propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the quick and the dead ? now , all that our representer saith to the purpose , is , 1. that christ bequeathed his body and blood at his last supper , under the species of bread and wine , not only a sacrament , but also a sacrifice . i had thought it had been more proper to have offered a sacrifice , than to have bequeathed it . and this ought to have been proved , as the foundation of this sacrifice , viz. that christ did at his last supper offer up his body and blood , as a propitiatory sacrifice to god. and then what need his suffering on the cross ? 2. he gave this in charge to his apostles , as the first and chief priests of the new-testament , and to their successors , to offer . but where ? when ? and how ? for we read nothing at all of it in scripture . christ indeed did bid them do the same thing he had there done in his last supper . but did he then offer up himself , or not ? if not , how can the sacrifice be drawn from his action ? if he did , it is impossible to prove the necessity of his dying afterwards . 3. this sacrifice was never questioned till of late years . we say , it was never determined to be a propitiatory sacrifice , till of late . we do not deny the fathers interpreting mal. 1. 11. of an offering under the gospel ; but they generally understand it of spiritual and ecclesiastical sacrifices ; and although some of them , by way of accommodation , do apply it to the eucharist , yet not one of them doth make it a propitiatory sacrifice , which was the thing to be proved : for , we have no mind to dispute about metaphorical sacrifices , when the council of trent so positively decrees it to be a true , proper , and propitiatory sacrifice . xxiii . of purgatory . here our author begins with proving from scripture and antiquity , and then undertakes to explain the doctrine of purgatory from substantial reasons . 1. as to his proof from scripture . 1. is that from 2 maccab. c. 12. where he saith , money was sent to jerusalem , that sacrifices might be offered for the slain ; and 't is recommended as a holy cogitation , to pray for the dead . to this , which is the main foundation of purgatory , i answer , 1. it can never prove such a purgatory as our author asserts ; for he supposes a sinner reconciled to god , as to eternal punishment , before he be capable of purgatory ; but here can be no such supposition ; for these men died in the sin of achan , which was not known till their bodies were found among the slain . here was no confession , or any sign of repentance , and therefore if it proves any thing , it is deliverance from eternal punishment , and for such as dye in their sins without any shew of repentance . 2. we must distinguish the fact of judas from the interpretation of jason , or his epitomizer . the fact of judas was according to the strictness of the law , which required in such cases a sin-offering ; and that is all which the greek implies , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and so leo allatius confesses all the best greek copies agree ; and he reckons twelve of them . now what doth this imply , but that judas remembring the severe punishment of this sin in the case of achan , upon the people , sent a sin-offering to jerusalem ? but saith leo allatius , it was the sin of those men that were slain . i grant it . but the question is , whether the sin-offering respected the dead or the living ? for the law in such a case required a sin-offering for the congregation . and why should not we believe so punctual a man for the law , as judas , did strictly observe it in this point ? but the author of the book of macchabees understands it of those that were slain . i do not deny it ; but then 3. we have no reason to rely upon his authority in this matter ; which i shall make appear by a parallel instance . he doth undoubtedly commend the fact of razias in killing himself ( 2. macc. 14. 42. ) when he saith he did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , like a brave man ; and if he had thought it a fault in him , he would never have given such a character of it , but he would have added something of caution after it . and it is no great advantage to purgatory , for him that commends self-murder to have introduced it . the most probable account i can give of it is , that the alexandrian jews , of whose number jason of cyrene seems to have been , had taken in several of the philosophical opinions , especially the platonists , into their religion , as appears by philo ; and bellarmin himself confesses , that plato held a purgatory ; and they were ready to apply what related to the law , to their platonick notions . so here the law appointed a sin-offering with respect to the living ; but jason would needs have this refer to the dead ; and then sets down his own remark upon it , that it was a holy cogitation to pray for the dead ; as our author renders it . if it were holy with respect to the law , there must be some ground for it in the law. and that we appeal to : and do not think any particular fancies sufficient to introduce such a novelty as this was ; which had no foundation eithe● in the law or the prophets . and it woul be strange for a new doctrine to be set up , when the spirit of prophecy was ceased among them . but s. august . hold these books for canonical , and saith , they are so received by the church , l. 18. de civit de● . to answer this , it is sufficient to observe , not only the different opinions of others before mentioned as to these books : but that as canus notes , it was then lawful to doubt of their authority : and he goes as low as gregory i. whom he denies not to have rejected them . and i hope we may set the authority of one against the other ; especially when s. august in himself , being pressed hard with the fact of razias , confesses , 1. that the jews have not the book of macchabees in their canon , as they have the law , the prophets , and the psalms , to whom our lord gave testimony as to his witnesses . which is an evident proof , he thought not these books sufficient to ground a doctrine upon , which was not found in the other . 2. that however this book was not unprofitably received by the church , if it be soberly read and heard . which implies a greater caution than s. augustin would ever have given , concerning a book he believed truely canonical . but saith bellarmin , his meaning is only to keep men from imitating the example of razias ; whereas that which they pressed s. august in with , was not meerly the fact , but the character that is given of it . sanctarum scripturarum auctoritate laudatus est razias , are their very words in s. augustin . and therefore the caution relates to the books , and not meerly to his example . and he lessens the character given by the author , when he saith , he chose to dye nobly ; it had been better , saith he , to have died humbly . but the other is the elogium given in the heathen histories , and better becomes brave heathens , than true martyrs . can any one now think s. augustin believed this writer divinely inspired , or his doctrine sufficient to ground a point of faith upon ? and i wonder they should not every jot as well commend self-murder as an heroical act , as prove the doctrine of purgatory from these words of jason , or his epitomizer . for the argument from the authority of the book , will hold as strongly for one as the other . and yet this is the achilles for purgatory ; which natalis alexander ( whom our author follows in this matter ) saith , is a demonstrative place against those that deny it . but i must proceed . 2. purgatory is plainly intimated by our saviour , matt. 12. 32. whosoever speaketh against the holy-ghost , it shall not be forgiven him , neither in this world , neither in the world to come . by which words , christ evidently supposes , that some sins are forgiven in the world to come . i am so far from discerning this plain intimation , that i wonder how any came to think of it out of this place . well! but doth it not hence follow , that sins may be forgiven in the world to come ? not near so plainly , as that sins will not be forgiven in the world to come . not that particular sin , but others may ; how doth that appear ? what intimation is there , that any sins not forgiven here , shall be forgiven there ? or that any sins here remitted as to the eternal punishment , shall be there remitted as to the temporal ? and without such a kind of remission , nothing can be inferred from hence . but if there be a remission in another world , it can be neither in heaven nor hell , therefore it must be in purgatory . but those who own a remission of sins in another world , say it will be on the day of judgment : for the actual deliverance of the just from punishment , may be not improperly called the full remission of their sins . so s. augustin , whom he quotes , plainly saith , si nulla remitterentur in judicio illo novissimo , &c. c. julian , l. 6. c. 5. where it is evident s. augustin takes this place to relate to the day of judgment ; and so in the other , ( de civit. dei l. 21. c. 24. ) but as he supposed a remission , so he did a purgation as by fire in that day . in illo judicio poenas quasdam purgatorias futuras . de civit. dei l. 20. c. 25. and so he is to be understood on psal. 37. to which he applies 1 cor. 3. 15. but our author was very much out , when he saith s. augustin applied 1 pet. 3. 15. to some place of temporal chastisement in another world , when bellarmin sets himself to confute s. augustin about it , as understanding it of this world. and therefore he hath little cause to boast of s. augustins authority about purgatory , unless he had brought something more to the purpose out of him . his other testimonies of antiquity are not worth considering ; which he borrows from natalis alexander ; that of dionysius areopag . eccl. hierarch . c. 7. is a known counterfeit , and impertinent , relating to a region of rest and happiness . and so do tertullians oblations for the dead , de cor. milit. c. 3. for they were eucharistical , as appears by the ancient liturgies , being made for the greatest saints . st. cyprian ep. 66. speaks of an oblation for the dead ; and he there mentions the natalitia of the martyrs ; but by comparing that with his epist. 33. it will be found that he speaks of the anniversary commemoration of the dead , which signifies nothing to purgatory ; for the best men were put into it ; and st. cyprian threatens it as a punishment to be left out of the diptychs ; but surely it is none to escape purgatory ; arnobius , l. 4. only speaks of praying for the dead , which we deny not to have been then used in the church , not with respect to any temporary pains in purgatory , but to the day of judgment : and therein lies the true state of the controversie , with respect to antiquity ; which is not , whether any solemn prayers were not then made for the dead ; but whether those prayers did relate to their deliverance out of a state of punishment before the day of judgment : for whatever state souls were then supposed to be in , before the great day , if there could be no deliverance till the day of judgment , it signisies nothing to the present question . as to the vision of perpetua concerning her brother dinocrates , who died at seven years old , being baptized , it is hardly reconcilable to their own doctrine , to suppose such a soul in purgatory ; i will not deny that perpetua did think she saw him in a worse condition ; and thought likewise that by her prayers she brought him into a better ; for she saw him playing like little children ; and then she awaked , and concluded that she had given him ease : but is it indeed come to this , that such a doctrine as purgatory must be built on such a foundation as this ? i do not call in question the acts of perpetua , nor her sincerity in relating her dream ; but must the church build her doctrines upon the dreams or visions of young ladies , tho very devout ? for ubia perpetua was then but twenty two , as she saith her self . but none are to be blamed , who make use of the best supports their cause will afford . it is time now to see what strength of reason he offers for purgatory . 1. he saith , when a sinner is reconciled to god , tho the eternal punishment due to his sins is always remitted , yet there sometimes remains a temporal penalty to be undergone ; as in the case of the israelites , and david . but doth it hence follow , that there is a temporal penalty that must be undergone either here or hereafter , without which there will be no need of purgatory ? who denies , that god in this life , for example sake , may punish those whose sins he hath promised to remit as to another world ? this is therefore a very slender foundation . 2. there are some sins of their own nature light and venial . i will not dispute that ; but suppose there be , must men go then into purgatory for mere venial sins ? what a strange doctrine doth this appear to any mans reason ? that god should forgive the greater sins , and require so severe a punishment for sins in their own nature venial ; i. e. so inconsiderable in their opinion , that no man is bound to confess them ; which do not interrupt a state of grace ; which require only an implicite detestation of them ; which do not deserve eternal punishment ; which may be remitted by holy water , or a bishops blessing , as their divines agree . 3. that to all sins some penalty is due to the justice of god. and what follows from hence but the necessity of christs satisfaction ? but how doth it appear , that after the expiation of sin by christ , and the remission of eternal punishment , there still remains a necessity of farther satisfaction for such a temporal penalty in another world ? 4. that generally speaking , few men depart out of this life , but either with the guilt of venial sins , or obnoxions to some temporal punishment ; no doubt all men are obnoxious by their sins to the punishment of another world ; but that is not the point , but whether god hath declared , that altho he remits the eternal punishment , he will not the temporal ; and altho he will forgive thousands of pounds , he will not the pence and farthings we owe to him : but if mortal sins be remitted as to the guilt , and venial do not hinder a state of grace , what room is there for vindictive justice in purgatory ? yet this is the doctrine which so much weight is laid upon ; that bellarmine saith , they must go directly to hell , who do not believe purgatory . if this be true , why was it not put into the representation , that we might understand the danger of not believing so credible , so reasonable a doctrine as this ? but we believe it to be a much more dangerous thing to condemn others for not believing a doctrine which hath so very slender a pretence either to scripture or reason . xxiv . of praying in an unknown tongue . the question in short is , whether the church-service , at which persons are bound to assist , ought not to be in a language understood by those who are bound to assist ? for our author grants , that a papist is bound to assist at the church-service , and to hear mass ; but he is not bound to understand the words there spoken . this is a plain state of the case ; and one would have thought st. pauls discourse about edification in the church-service , and a known tongue , and the primitive practice , had deserved a little consideration , but not a word is said to either of them ; and the whole is so managed , as tho there had been no rule , or any appearance of practice to the contrary . but i must consider what he doth say . 1. the mass is a sacrifice : and what then ? have they no other church-service but the mass ? what then becomes of their breviaries , litanies , and all other offices ? but suppose the priests office in the mass , be to offer the sacrifice ; are there no prayers in the canon of the mass , wherein the people are concerned ? why must not they understand what they are required to assist in prayer for ? if they have english books , as he saith , to teach them every part and ceremony of the mass , why not as well the prayers in the mass , wherein they are to join ? they tell us , it is unseasonable then for the people to say their beads , and other devotions : and i suppose as unseasonable to talk , or think of other matters . why then should not they know what it is they are to do , and what petitions they are then to make to god ? are there no responses to be made ? no lessons to be read ? no creed : to be professed ? doth not the priest speak to the people to pray , and they answer him ? is there no thanksgiving after the communion which the people is concerned in ? we are as much for their devout affections , as they can be ; but we think they are not hindred by understanding what they are about : we cannot but wonder , that any man should say , that it nothing concerns his devotion , that the mass is in latin , if he understand it not . is it no part of devotion to join in the publick prayers , not merely by rote , but from a due apprehension of the matter contained in them ? he requires , that they accompany the priest in prayer and spirit : and why not in understanding also ? but the church hath so ordered it : and that is the thing we complain of , as done against st. paul , against the primitive church , against the natural sense of mankind , who think it is fit for them to know what they do , especially in the worship of god : but it is to preserve unity : methinks however unity in spirit and understanding is better than without it : there are other good reasons : i know not one good one ; and if there were more , he would have produced them : the greatest part is said in a low voice , that it is not possible he should hear it : and to what purpose should it be spoken louder , if they are not to understand it ? but why so low in publick ? yet the people might have books , and join , if they understood what was said . but why should not the rest be understood , which is spoken as if it were . 2. as to other offices , he saith , he is taught , that he may perform them in a language which he understands not , with great benefit to his soul , and the acceptance of god , if at those occasions he endeavours to raise his thoughts to heaven , and fix his heart upon his maker . but the question is not , whether a man may not have devout thoughts at that time , but whether he can perform his part in the publick offices , with true devotion , without understanding ? for the publick offices of devotion were designed for the uniting the hearts and desires of the people in the same things . it is not , whether one man may not pray for heaven , and another for fair weather , and another for pardon of his sins , and a fourth for patience , and so on , in the same place , and at the same time ; for all this may be done as well in a silent meeting , where not a word is spoken : but there being one form of prayer for all to join together in , that with the united force of the whole congregation , their petitions may go up to heaven ; the matter now in dispute is , whether it be not necessary in order to this united devotion , that the people all know what they pray for ? and one would think nothing need to be said to prove this : but what our author adds in justification of this , overthrows all publick devotion ; for he saith , it is not necessary to have attention on the words , or on the sense of prayers , but rather purely on god : which is to make all publick forms unnecessary , and to turn all devotion into prayer of contemplation : for if this be true , all forms whatsoever , are not only useless , but burdensom ; and by the stinting the spirit , do hinder the nimbler flights of the soul , in pure silence towards god : and this principle must lead men to enthusiasms , and unintelligible unions , and make them despise forms as a mean and dull dispensation . but at last he saith , a petitioner may accompany his petition with an earnest desire of obtaining it , tho the language in which it is written , be unknown to him . very true , if he indited the matter of the petition , and trusted another to put it into that language , which the person to whom he makes it , doth understand , but not his own : but all languages are alike to gods infinite wisdom , and so there can be no pretence on that account , to keep only to some particular tongues , tho unknown to the party ; and if it were so to all men , no man would have a petition presented in a language which he did not know : but in prayer to god , the design of it is not to acquaint him with something which he knew not , but to excite the hearts and affections of men to an earnest desire of the things which are fit for them to ask ; now let any man undertake to prove , that mens affections are as easily moved by words they do not understand , as by those they do ; and i will give up this cause . xxv . of the second commandment . the dispute about this is not , whether the second commandment may be found in any of their books , but by what authority it comes to be left out in any : as he confesses it is in their short catechisms and manuals : but not only in these ; for i have now before me the reformed office of the blessed virgin , printed at salamanca , a. d. 1588. published by order of pius v. where it is so left out : and so in the english office at antwerp , a. d. 1658. i wish he had told us in what publick office of their church it is to be found : but himself pleads for the leaving it out , when he saith , the people are in no danger of superstition or idolatry by it ; since the first commandment secures them from it ; and there is nothing in this , but what is vertually contained in the first , and is rather an explanation , than a new and distinct precept . but is this so plain and clear , that a mans conscience can never make any just and reasonable doubt concerning it ? there is a terrible sanction after it ; and men had need go upon very good grounds in a matter of such moment . hath god himself any where declared this to be only an explication of the first commandment ? have the prophets , or christ and his apostles ever done it ? how then can any mans conscience be safe in this matter ? for it is not a trifling controversie , whether it be a distinct commandment , or an explication of the first ; but the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the worship of images depends very much upon it : for if it be only an explication of the first , then unless one takes images to be gods , their worship is lawful , and so the heathens were excused in it , who were not such ideots ; but if it be a new and distinct precept , then the worshipping any image or similitude , becomes a grievous sin , and exposes men to the wrath of god in that severe manner mentioned in the end of it : and it is a great confirmation that this is the true meaning of it , because all the primitive writers of the christian church , not only thought it a sin against this commandment , but insisted upon the force of it against those heathens who denied that they took their images for gods : and therefore this is a very insufficient account of leaving out the second commandment . xxvi . of mental reservations . under this head he denies two things . 1. that they are ever taught to break faith with hereticks . 2. that their church doth allow any equivocations , or mental reservations . as to the former i am sincerely glad to find a principle so destructive to all humane society , so utterly disowned , when he saith , he is taught to keep faith with all sorts of people , of whatsoever judgment or perswasion they be ; and to stand to his word , and observe his promise given , or made to any whatsoever . and whatever opinions and practices there may have been of that kind formerly , we hope there will never be occasion given to revive that dispute . 2. as to the second , we embrace his declaration against it , and hope there is no equivocation , or mental reservation in it . but there are some things which must here be taken notice of . 1. he cannot deny that there are authors in communion with his church , which may be charged with teaching another doctrine ; and those not a few , nor inconsiderable ; who not only allow the practice of mental reservations and equivocations , but say with great confidence , it hath been received in the roman church for no less than four hundred years ; and that in some cases they are all still agreed in it . see parsons treatise of mitigation , c. 7. sect. 2. 3. c. 10. sect. 1. 2. we do not deny , that innocent xi . hath condemned equivocations , and mental reservations in swearing , as at least scandalous and pernicious in practise ; and therefore we cannot charge the pope with abetting this doctrine . but we cannot but reflect on what our author said about the deposing doctrine , that although popes had believed it , and acted by it , yet the greater number opposed it . and what shall we say in this case , if the generality of their casuists in some cases approve it , and think it no lie or perjury , as in that of confession ; but if it be really so in any one case , then it may be some other fault , but it is not a lie or perjury in any other , when a man doth not think himself bound to speak all he knows . 3. that as we highly commend the popes condemning such doctrines and practises now ; so we have reason to think the contrary did not once want the encouragement and approbation of the roman see. as may be sound in the resolution of some cases by pius v. relating to some missionaries , who were to be sent hither ; and then it was declared , that if they were summon'd before our judges , they might sophistice jurare & sophistice respondere ; and that they were not bound to answer according to the intention of the judges , but according to some true sense of their own , i. e. which was made true by the help of a mental reservation . but it is very well , that now the very same things are condemned at rome , as scandalous and pernicious in practise . xxvii . of a death-bed repentance . we have no difference with them about this matter , as far as they hold to these points : 1. that men are strictly obliged to work out their salvation with fear and trembling in time of health . 2. that it is very dangerous to defer their repentance to the last . 3. that if any are surprized , they ought in charity to have all possible assistance , to put them into the best way for their salvation . but yet there may be some particular doctrines owned in the church of rome , which may give men too much encouragement to put off true repentance ; as 1. the easiness of being put into a state of grace by the sacrament of penance ; for which no more is required than removing the impediment ; as appears by the council of trent . sess. 7. can. 6. and afterwards it defines that bare attrition doth sufficiently dispose a man to receive grace in that sacrament , sess. 14. c. 4. so that altho a man hath led a very bad life , if he hath but this attrition for his sins when he doth confess them , he is put into a state of grace by this sacrament . and what can any man expect more , and what can he do less ! i do not mean a bare natural attrition , the sufficiency whereof is condemned by innocent xi . in the same proposition , fifty seventh ; but that which the council of trent calls imperfect contriti●n , i. e. a good motion in a mans mind to ●orsake his sins for fear of punishment ; if really no more be required for a state of grace but this , it is no wonder if men put off the doing of that which may be done at any time so easily by the help of a priest. 2. the treasure of the church is another thing which is very apt to hinder mens speedy repentance ; for by that they believe there is a stock ready of so many merits and satisfactions of others , if duely applied to them by indulgences , that they need not be at such pains to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling . when a man by the sacrament of penance is put into a state of grace , the eternal punishment is discharged , and nothing remains but some temporal pains ; and to ease him of these he hath many helps , but especially the treasure of the church , which the pope hath the dispensing of , as he is bound to believe ; and by indulgences he may easily get off some thousands of years of purgatory-pains ; and if these should fail him , there is another help yet left , which is leaving a stock for prayers for his soul when he dies ; which , even our author assures him , are very available towards bis speedier release out of purgatory , p. 58. xxviii . of fasting . the question here is , whether a man doth not observe their churches command about fasting , who forbears all forbidden things , but takes liberty in those which are not forbidden ? it is not , whether they may not break the commands of god , against gluttony and drunkenness ; but whether they break the law of the church about fasting ? and notwithstanding what our author hath said , i see no reason for the affirmative . i do not deny , 1. that it is a very indifferent sort of fasting , to abstain from flesh , unless all other sorts of excesses at the same time be carefully avoided . 2. that excesses on such days are more scandalous , because there is a pretence of fasting . 3. that god's command doth at all times sorbid intemperance . which are the chief things he insists upon . but yet this doth not reach the point , which is about their churches command . for their casuists distinguish fasting into 1. natural ; which is total abstinence ; and this is required only in order to receiving the eucharist . 2. moral ; which is the same with temperance , or fasting for health . 3. ecclesiastical ; which is defined by them to be , an abstinence from food forbidden by the church . and if this definition be true , it cannot be broken but by eating what the church hath prohibited . and therefore their casuists , as far as i can find , are agreed in these things , 1. that a man may eat a full meal of what is not forbidden , and not break the churches precept of fasting , provided vespers be first said . and the later casuists blame covarr●vias for making any scruple about it . if a mans excess comes to be a mortal sin ; yet for all that , saith reginaldus , he shall not be judged as a breaker of his fast. nay , lessius goes further , and saith , he doth not lose the merit of fasting . quamvis aliquis multum excedet non solvit jejunium , saith card. tolet. and paulus zacchias saith , this is the common opinion ; and he thinks the intention of the church is sufficiently answered . and so doth pasqualigus in his praxis of fasting . 2. a man may drink wine , or other drink , as often as he pleaseth , without breaking his fast. he may toties quoties bibere , saith diana . zach. pasqualigus , who hath written most fully on this subject , shews , that it is the general opinion , that no quantity of wine or other drink , though taken without any necessity , is a violation of the precept of fasting ; no , not although the wine be taken for nourishment , because the church doth not forbid it ; but this last , he saith , is not the general , but the more probable opinion . 3. a man may eat something when he drinks , to prevent its doing him hurt ; besides his good meal , he may take what quantity he pleases of sweet-meats or fruit ; he may have a good refection at night , and yet not break this strict precept of fasting ; for the eating as often as one drinks , it is the common opinion , saith the same casuist ( who was no jesuit ) that it is not forbidden , because it is taken by way of a medicine ; and he quotes a great number of their casuists for it . a collation at evening is all●wed , saith he . and lessius saith , there is no certain rule for the quantity of it . and card. tolet saith , very large ones are all●wed at rome by the popes connivence ; even in the court of rome , saith reginaldus . and now i leave the reader to judge of the severity of fasting requir●d in the church of rome . xxix . of divisions and schisms in the church . two things he saith upon this head. 1. that they are all agreed in matters of faith. 2. that they only differ in some school points ; from whence he infers , that they have no schisms or separations among them . but that this is no just consequence , will appear by the schisms and separations among us , made by such who profess to agree in all matters of faith. yet let us see how he proves that they agree in all matters of faith ; because they agree to submit equally to the determinations of the church . now this very way evidently proves that they do not all agree , because they do not equally submit to the churches determinations . for , 1. some say they are bound to submit to the churches determinations , as it represents the universal church ; others say no ; but as the churches power is virtually lodged in the guides of it . now this is a very material difference : for if it be on the former account , then not the popes and councils declarations are to be regarded , but as they express the sense of the universal church ; and so the majority of votes , and numbers in the representative and diffusive church is chiefly to be regarded . and on this ground some reject the deposing-power , though plainly decreed by popes and councils ; but they unhinge their churches authority by it : now how is it possible for them to agree about matters of faith , who differ fundamentally about the way how any things come to be matters of faith. if they be decreed by popes and councils , say some ; and so the deposing power is become an article of faith. no such matter , say others , for a greater number in the diffusive church oppose it , as in the gallican church , and elsewhere . very well ! but how then can these parties be said to agree in matters of faith. and an equal submission to the determinations of the church ? 2. some again say , that it is not the consent of the present church can make any article of faith , but there must be an universal tradition from the apostles times . and so they tell us the deposing power can never be an article of faith , because it wants the consent of all the ages before gregory vii . so that upon this ground there can be no article of faith which cannot be proved to be thus delivered down to us . others again say , this is in effect to give up their cause , knowing the impossibility of proving particular points in this manner ; and therefore they say , the present church is wholly to be trusted for the sense of the foregoing . now these differences are still on foot in their church ; and from these do arise daily disputes about matters of faith , and the seat of infallibility , whether in the guides , or the body of the church ; if the former , whether in the church representative , or virtual ? whether the personal infallibilty of the pope be a matter of faith or not ? our author saith , not ; others say , yes ; and yet he saith they are agreed in matters of faith. so that by his own confession they differ about other things than mere school-points . but suppose they were agreed in articles of faith , can there be no schisms or divisions in their church ? what thinks he of all the schisms between popes and popes ? of all the schisms between the popes and the emperors parties ? which were as notorious , and scandalous , and mischievous , as ever were in the world. what thinks he of the schisms between the bishops and the regular orders , which were as cross and peevish towards the bishops and secularclergy , as our dissenters themselves ? and among the regular orders , what heats and contentions have been , not about the practice of a devout life , i assure him , but about matters of doctrine ; and which both parties severally plead to be matters of faith ? as in the noted controversies of this last age , about the immaculate conception of the blessed virgin , the power of grace , and the popes personal infallibility ; and they cannot say they are as yet agreed about these things . xxx . of friars and nuns . our dispute is not , about the lawfulness of retiring from the world by such persons who are rendred unfit for doing service in it ; and the more they spend their time in devotion and contemplation , so much the better . but it lies in these things , 1. whether the perfection of a christian state of life lies in being cloystered up from the world , or labouring to do good in it ? for this was the great snare made use of , to draw men into it , because they represented this as the most perfect state ; whereas according to the doctrine and example of christ and his apostles , the active life of doing good , is far beyond it . 2. whether , altho such a retirement be allowed , it be a thing pleasing to god , to tye such persons up by indispensable vows , whatever their circumstances may be , not to alter that state of life ; who either in youth , or through force , passion , or discontent , have entred into it ? and this may be so much rather questioned , because those who assert the pope may dispense , go upon this ground , because circumstances may alter the obligation of a vow ; and when a greater good is to be attained , it ceaseth to oblige ; which to my apprehension doth not prove the popes power to dispense , but the dispensable nature of the vows themselves . whether all things of this nature being liable in continuance of time , to great degeneracy and corruptions ; and the numbers of such places being unserviceable either to church or state , it be not in the power of the king and states of the kingdom , to dissolve and reduce them to ways more suitable to the conveniencies of both ? as to what he discourses about councils of perfection , the distractions of the world , the corruptions of the best things , &c. they reach not the main points , but are only general topicks , which we are not concerned to debate . xxxi . of wicked principles and practices . the misrepresenter charges the church of rome with many horrid practices , as the french and irish massacres , the murders of two kings of france , the holy league , the gun-powder treason , &c. and charges these as being done according to the principles of that church . but in answer to this he saith . 1. in general , that the doctrine of it is holy , teaching the love of god and our neighbour ; and that none can be saved by faith alone . in which doctrine we heartily concur with them . 2. that altho many uncertain things pass for certain , and false for true , yet he cannot deny that all ranks and degrees of men have been corrupted among them , being scandalous in their lives , wicked . in their designs , without the fear of god in their hearts , or care of their own salvation . this is a general acknowledgment , but no particular answer to the things objected . 3. that tbe whole cburch is not to be charged for the sake of such villanies . very true , unless some doctrine owned in that church gave encouragement to them : as suppose any should ever have fallen into rebellion upon the belief of the deposing power ; is not that doctrine chargeable with the consequences of it ? they are extremely to blame who charge a church with what her members do in direct opposition to her doctrine ; but it is quite another case , when the main ground they alledg for their actions is some allowed principle in it . 4. they are not accountable for the actions of every bishop , cardinal , or pope ; for they extend not their faith beyond the declaration of general councils . but suppose general councils have declared such doctrines , and popes act but according to them ; is not their church then accountable for their actions ? 5. there is more praying and fasting , and receiving the sacraments , more visiting the prisoners , and the sick , more alms-giving in any of our neighbouring popish towns , as . paris , antwerp , gant , &c. than in any ten towns of the reformation . and is there more charity too ? it doth not appear , if they be as ready to censure others , and admire themselves , as our author , who so freely gives his judgment about a matter it is impossible for him to know . we see no reason to admire or imitate the manner of their praying , and fasting , and receiving the sacraments ; for to pray without understanding , to fast without abstinence , to receive a maimed sacrament , are things we do not envy them for ; but altho our devotion be not so pompous , and full of shew , yet we may pray and fast in secret , according to our saviours directions , far more than they do ; however our people are mightily to blame if they do not understand what they pray for , if they do not receive more of the sacrament than they ; and we verily believe there is as great and remarkable instances of true charity among those of the church of england , as among any people in the world. xxxii . of miracles . 1. our author saith , he is not obliged to believe any one miracle besides what is in scripture . 2. he sees no reason to doubt the truth of many miracles , which are attested by great numbers of eye-witnesses , examined by authority , and found upon record , with all the formalities due to such a process . now , how can these two things stand together ? is not a man obliged to believe a thing so well proved ? and if his other arguments prove any thing , it is , that he is bound to believe them . for he thinks there is as much reason to believe miracles still , as in the time of the old or new law. if he can make this out , i see no reason why he should not be as well obliged to believe them now , as well as those recorded in scripture . but i can see nothing like a proof of this . and all persons of judgment in their own church , do grant there is a great difference between the necessity of miracles for the first establishing a religion , and afterwards . this is not only asserted by tostatus , erasmus , stella , andradius , and several others formerly ; but the very late french author i have several times mentioned , saith it in express terms . and he confesses the great impostures of modern miracles , which , he saith , ought to be severely punished ; and that none but women and weak people think themselves bound to believe them . and he cannot understand what they are good for : not to convert hereticks ; because not done among them : not to prove there are no corruptions or errors among them , which is a thing incredible ; with much more to that purpose , and so concludes with monsieur paschal , that if they have no other use , we ought not to be amused with them . but christ promised , that his apostles should do greater miracles than himself had done . and what then ? must therefore s. francis , or s. dominic , or s. rosa , do as great as the apostles had done ? what consequence can be drawn from the apostles times to latter ages ? we do not dispute god's omnipotency , or say his hand is sho●tned ; but we must not from thence infer , that every thing which is called a miracle is truely so ; or make use of god's power , to justify the most incredible stories . which is a way will serve as well for a false as a true religion ; and mahomet might run to gods omnipotency for cleaving the moon in two pieces , as well as others for removing a house over the seas , or any thing of a like nature . but , he saith , their miracles are not more ridiculous and absurd than some in the old testament . which i utterly deny ; but i shall not run out into the examination of this parallel , by shewing how very different the nature , design , and authority of the miracles he mentions , is from those which are believed in the roman church . and it had been but fitting , as he set down the miracles of the old testament , so to have mentioned those of the roman church which were to vye with them ; but this he was willing to forbear , for certain good reasons . if most of poor man's impossibles be none to god , as he concludes , yet every thing is not presently true which is not impossible ; and by this way of arguing , there can be nothing objected against the most absurd and idle fictions of the golden legend , which all men of understanding among themselves , not only reject for want of authority , but of credibility . xxxiii . of holy water . the misrepresenter charges him with approving superstitious uses of inanimate things , and attributing wonderful effects to them ; as holy-water , candles , oyl , bread , &c. in answer , our author 1. declares , that the papist truely represented , utterly disapproves all sorts of superstition . but if he had designed to have represented truely , he ought to have told us what he meant by superstition , and whether any man who observes the commands of the church can be guilty of it . 2. he saith , that these things are particularly deputed by the prayers and blessing of the priest to certain uses for god's glory , and the spiritual and corporal good of christians . this is somewhat too general ; but marsilius columna , archbishop of salerno , who hath taken most pains in this matter , sums them up ; 1. as to spiritual , they are seven . 1. to fright devils . 2. to remit venial sins . 3. to cure distractions . 4. to elevate the mind . 5. to dispose it for devotion . 6. to obtain grace . 7. to prepare for the sacrament . 2. as to corporal . 1. to cure barrenness . 2. to multiply goods . 3. to procure health . 4. to purge the air from pestilential vapours . and now , as our author saith , what superstition in the use of it ? he names several things of god's own appointing to parallel it ; as the waters of jealousy , the shew-bread , the tables of stone ; but the first was miraculous , the other had no such effects that we ever heard of . elisha's salt for sweetning the water , was undoubtedly a miracle . is the holy water so ? as to the liver of the fish for expelling the devil , in the book of tobit , he knows the book is not owned for canonical by us ; and this very place is produced as an argument against it ; there being no ground from scripture , to attribute the power of expelling devils , to the liver of a fish , either naturally or symbolically : vallesius offers at the only probable account of it , that it must be a divine power given to it , which the angel raphael did not discover ; and yet it is somewhat hard to conceive , how this liver should have such a power to drive away any kind of devil , as it is there expressed , unless by a devil there , no more be meant than some violent disease , which the jews generally believed to arise from the possession of evil spirits : but however here is an angel supposed , who made this known to tobit ; but we find not raphael to discover the virtue of holy water against devils . as to christs using clay to open the eyes of the blind , it is very improperly applied , unless the same miraculous power be supposed in it , which was in christ himself : and so is the apostles laying on of hands , and using oyl for miraculous cures ; unless the same gift of miracles be in every priest which consecrates holy water , which was in the apostles : and bellarmine himself confesses , that no infallible effect doth follow the use of holy water , because there is no promise of god in the case , but only the prayers of the church : but these are sufficient to sanctifie the water , saith our author : and to what end ? for all the spiritual and corporeal benefits before-mentioned ? is no promise of god necessary for such purposes as those ? how can any church in the world dispose of gods power without his will ? it may appoint significant and decent ceremonies , but it can never appropriate divine effects to them ; and to suppose any divine power in things which god never gave them , is in my opinion , superstition ; and to use them for such ends , is a superstitious use : st. cyril , whom he quotes , speaks of the consecration of the water of baptism , catech. 3. st. augustine only of a consecrated bread , which the catechumens had ( de peccat . merit . & remiss . l. 2. c. 26. ) but he attributes no divine effects to it . pope alexanders epistle is a notorious counterfeit . those passages of epiphanius , theodoret , and s. jerom , all speak of miraculous effects ; and those who had the power of miracles , might sometimes do them with an external sign , and sometimes without , as the apostles cured with anointing , and without : but this is no ground for consecrating oyl by the church , or holy water , for miraculous effects . if these effects which they attribute to holy water , be miraculous , then every priest must have not only a power of miracles himself , but of annexing it to the water he consecrates ; if they be super-natural but not miraculous , then holy water must be made a sacrament to produce these effects ex opere operato ; if neither one nor the other , i know not how to excuse the use of it from superstition . xxxiv . of breeding up people in ignorance . the misrepresenter charges them with this , on these acccounts . 1. by keeping their mysteries of iniquity from them . 2. by performing divine service in an unknown tongue . 3. by an implicite faith. to which the representer answers . 1. that they give encouragement to learning ; and he instances in their universities and conventual libraries ; but what is all this to the common people ? but their indices expurgatorii , and prohibiting books so severely , which are not for their turn , ( as we have lately seen in the new one of paris ) argues no great confidence of their cause , nor any hearty love to learning : and is it could be rooted out of the world , their church would fare the better in it ; bur if it cannot , they must have some to be able to deal with others in it . 2. as to the common people he saith , they have books enough to instruct them . is it so in spain or italy ? but where they live among hereticks , as we are called , the people must be a little better instructed to defend themselves , and to gain upon others . 3. if the people did know their church-offices and service , &c. they would not find such faults , since the learned approve them . let them then try the experiment , and put the bible and their church-offices every where into the vulgar tongues : but their severe prohibitions shew how much they are of another opinion : what made all that rage in france against voisins translation of the missal ? such proceedings of the assembly of the clergy against it ; such complaints both to the king and the pope against it , as tho all were lost , if that were suffered ? such an edict from the king , such a prohibition from the pope in such a tragical stile about it ? such a collection of authors to be printed on purpose against it ? do these things shew , even in a nation of so free a temper , in comparison , as the french , any mighty inclination towards the encouraging this knowledg in the people ? and since that , what stirs have there been about the mons testament ? what prohibitions by bishops ? what vehement opposition by others ? so that many volumes have already been written on the occasion of that translation . and yet our author would perswade us , that if we look abroad , we shall find wonderful care taken to keep the people from ignorance ; but we can d●scern much greater to keep them in it . xxxv . of the uncharitableness of the papists . the misrepresenter , ( as he is called ) charges this point home , because they deny salvation to those who believe all the articles of the christian faith in the apostles creed , and lead vertuous and good lives , if they be not of their communion . to this the representer answers in plain terms , that this is nothing but what they have learnt from the mouth of christ and his apostles . and to this end he musters up all their sayings against infidels , false apostles gnosticks , cerinthians , as tho they were point-blank levelled against all that live out of the communion of the church of rome . but this is no uncharitableness , but pure zeal , and the same the primitive church shewed against hereticks , such as marcion , basilides , and bardesanes , who were condemned in the first age for denying the resurrection of the dead , &c. what in the first age ! methinks the second had been early enough for them : but this is to let us see what learning there is among you . but do we deny the resurrection of the dead ? or hold any one of the heresies condemned by the primitive church ? what then is our fault , which can merit so severe a sentence ? we oppose the church : what church ? the primitive apostolical church ? the church in the time of the four general councils ? i do not think that will be said , but i am sure it can never be proved : what church then ? the present church ? is it then damnable to oppose the present church ? but i pray let us know what ye mean by it ; the universal body of christians in the world ? no , no , abundance of them are hereticks and schismaticks as well as we : i. e. all the christians in the eastern and southern parts , who are not in communion with the church of rome : so that two parts in three of christians , are sent to hell by this principle ; and yet it is no uncharitableness . but suppose the church of rome be the only true church , must men be damned presently for opposing its doctrines ? i pray think a little better on it , and you will change your minds . suppose a man do not submit to the guides of this church in a matter of doctrine declared by them ; must he be damned ? what if it be the deposing power ? yet his principle is , if a man do not hold the faith entire , he is gone . but popes and councils have declared this to be a point of faith : therefore if he doth not hold it , he must 〈◊〉 damned . there is no way of answering this , but he must abate the severity of his sentence against us . for upon the same reason he questions that , we may question many more . and all his arguments against us , will hold against himself ; for , saith he , he that disbelieves one article of catholick faith , does in a manner disbelieve all . let him therefore look to it , as well as we . but he endeavours to prove the roman catholick church to be the true church , by the ordinary notes and marks of the church . although he is far enough from doing it ; yet this will not do his business . for he must prove , that we are convinced that it is the true church ; and then indeed he may charge us with obstinate opposition , but not before . and it is a very strange thing to me , that when their divines say , that infidels shall not b● damned for their infidelity , where the gospel hath not been sufficiently proposed to them ; and no christian for not believing any article of faith till it be so proposed ; that we must be damned for not believing the articles of the roman faith , which never have been , and never can be sufficiently proposed to us . methinks such men should study a little better their own doctrine , about the sufficient proposal of matters of faith , before they pass such uncharitable and unlearned censures . xxxvi . of ceremonies and ordinances . his discourse on this head is against those who refuse to obey their superiours in things not expressed in scripture , which is no part of our controversy with them . but yet there are several things about their ceremonies we are not satisfied in : as 1. the mighty number of them ; which have so much mussled up the sacraments , that their true face cannot be discerned . 2. the efficacy attributed to them , without any promise from god ; whereas we own no more but decency and significancy . 3. the doctrine that goes along with them , not only of obedience , but of merit ; and some have asserted the opus operatum of ceremonies as well as sacraments , when the power of the keys goes along with them ; i. e. when there hath been some act of the church exercised about the matter of them ; as in the consecration of oyl , salt , bread , ashes , water , &c. xxxvii . of innovation in matters of faith. the substance of his discourse on this head may be reduced to these things . 1. that the church in every age hath power to declare what is necessary to be believed , with anathema to those who preach the contrary ; and so the council of trent , in declaring transubstantiation , purgatory , &c. to be necessary articles , did no more than the church had done before on like occasions . 2. that if the doctrines then defined had been innovations , they must have met with great opposition when they were introduced . 3. that those who charged those points to be innovations , might as well have laid the scandal on any other article of faith which they retained . these are things necessary to be examined , in order to the making good the charge of innovation in matters of faith , which we believe doth stand on very good grounds . 1. we are to consider , whether the council of trent had equal reason to define the necessity of these points , as the council of nice and constantinople had to determin the point of the trinity ; or those of ephesus and chalcedon , the truth of christ's incarnation . he doth not assert it to be in the churches power to make new articles of faith , as they do imply new doctrines revealed ; but he contends earnestly , that the church hath a power to declare the necessity of believing some points which were not so declared before . and if the necessity of believing doth depend upon the churches declaration , then he must assert , that it is in the churches power to make points necessary to be believed which were not so ; and consequently to make common opinions to become articles of faith. but i hope we may have leave to enquire in this case , since the church pretends to no new revelation of matters of doctrine , therefore it can declare no more than it receives , and no otherwise than it receives . and so nothing can be made necessary to salvation but what god himself hath made so by his revelation . so that they must go in their declaration either upon scripture , or universal tradition ; but if they define any doctrine to be necessary without these grounds , they exceed their commission , and there is no reason to submit to their decrees , or to believe their declarations . to make this more plain by a known instance : it is most certain that several popes and councils have declared the deposing doctrine , and yet our author saith , it is no article of faith with him . why not , since the popes and councils have as evidently delivered it , as the council of trent hath done purgatory , or transubstantiation ? but he may say , there is no anathema joined to it . suppose there be not ; but why may it not be , as well as in the other cases ? and if it were , i would know , whether in his conscience he would then believe it to be a necessary article of faith , though he believed that it wanted scripture and tradition ? if not , then he sees what this matter is brought to , viz. that altho the council of trent declare these new doctrines to be necessary to be believed ; yet if their declaration be not built no scripture and universal tradition , we are not bound to receive it . 2. as to the impossibility of innovations coming in without notorious opposition , i see no ground at all for it , where the alteration is not made at once , but proceeds gradually . he may as well prove it impossible for a man to fall into a dropsy or a hectick-fever , unless he can tell the punctual time when it began . and he may as well argue thus , such a man fell into a fever upon a great debauch , and the physicians were presently sent for to advise about him ; therefore the other man hath no chronical distemper , because he had no physicians when he was first sick ; as because councils were called against some heresies , and great opposition made to them , therefore where there is not the like , there can be no innovation . but i see no reason why we should decline giving an account , by what degrees , and steps , and upon what occasions , and with what opposition several of the doctrines defined at trent were brought in . for the matter is not so obscure as you would make it , as to most of the points in difference between us . but that is too large a task to be here undertaken . 3. there is no colour for calling in question the articles of faith received by us on the same grounds that we reject those defined by the council of trent ; for we have the universal consent of the christian world for the apostles creed ; and of the four general councils for the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation ; who never pretended to determin any point to be necessary which was not revealed in scripture ; whose sense was delivered down by the testimony of the christian church from the apostles times . but the council of trent proceeded by a very different rule ; for it first set up an unwritten word to be a rule of faith , as well as the written ; which although it were necessary in order to their decrees , was one of the greatest innovations in the world ; and the foundation of all the rest , as they were there established . an answer to the conclusion . having thus gone through the several heads , which our author complains have been so much misrepresented ; it is now fit to consider what he saith in his conclusion , which he makes to answer his introduction , by renewing therein his doleful complaints of their being misrepresented just as christ and his apostles , and the primitive christians were . i hope the former discourse hath shewed their doctrines and practices are not so very like those of christ and his apostles , and the primitive christians , that their cases should be made so parallel ; but as in his conclusion he hath summed up the substance of his representations , so i shall therein follow his method , only with this difference , that i shall in one column set down his own representations of popery , and in the other the reasons , in short , why we cannot embrace them . wherein popery consists as represented by this author . 1. in using all external acts of adoration before images , as kneeling , praying , lifting up the eyes , burning candles , incense , &c. not merely to worship the objects before them , but to worship the images themselves on the account of the objects represented by them ; or in his own words , because the honour that is exhibited to them , is referred to the prototypes which they represent . 2. in joining the saints in heaven together with christ in intercession for us , and making prayers on earth to them on that account . p. 5. 3. in allowing more supplications to be used to the blessed virgin , than to christ ; for he denies it to be an idle superstition , to repeat ten ave maria's for one pater noster . 4. in giving religious honour and respect to relicks . such as placing them upon altars , burning wax-candles before them , carrying them in processions , to be seen , touched , or humbly kissed by the people : which are the known and allowed practices in the church of rome . p. 8. 5. in adoring christ as present in the eucharist on the account of the substance of bread and wine being changed into that body of christ which suffered on the cross. p. 10. 6. in believing the substance of bread and wine by the words of consecration , to be changed into his own body and blood , the species only or accidents of bread and wine remaining as before . p. 10. 7. in making good works to be truly meritorious of eternal life . p. 13. 8. in making confession of our ●●s to a priest in order to absolu●on . p. 14. 9. in the use of indulgences for taking away the temporal punishments of sin , remaining due after the guilt is remitted . 10. in supposing that penitent sinners may in some measure satisfy by prayer , fasting , alms , &c. for the temporal pain , which by order of god's justice sometimes remains due , after the guilt and the eternal pain are remitted . p. 17. 11. in thinking the scripture not fit to be read generally by all , without licence , or in the vulgar tongues . p. 19. 12. in allowing the books of tobit , judith , ecclesiasticus , wisdom , maccabees , to be canonical . p. 21. 13. in preferring the vulgar latin edition of the bible before any other , and not allowing any translations into a mother tongue to be ordinarily read . p. 24 , 26. 14. in believing that the scripture alone can be no rule of faith to any private or particular person . p. 28. 15. in relying upon the authority of the present church for the sense of scripture . p. 29. 16. in receiving and believing the churches traditions as the doctrine of christ and his apostles , and assenting to them with divine faith , just as he doth to the bible . p. 31 , 32. 17. in believing that the present guides of the church being assembled in councils for preserving the unity of the church , have an infallible assistance in their decrees . p. 38. 18. in believing the pope to be the supreme head of the church under christ , being successour to s. peter to whom he committed the care of his flock . p. 40. 41. 19. in believing that communion in both kinds is an indifferent thing ; and was so held for the first four hundred years after christ ; and that the first precept for receiving under both kinds , was given to the faithful by pope leo i. and confirmed by pope gelasius . p. 51. 20. in believing that the doctrine of purgatory is founded on scripture , authority , and reason . p. 54 , &c. 21. in believing that to the saying of prayers well and devoutly , it is not necessary to have attention on the words , or on the sense of prayers . p. 62. 22. in believing that none out of the communion of the church of rome can be saved ; and that it is no uncharitableness to think so . p. 92. 23. in believing that the church of rome , in all the new articles defined at trent , hath made no innovation in matters of faith. p. 107. our reasons against it in the several particulars . 1. thou shalt not make to thy self any graven image , or any likeness of any thing in heaven , or earth , &c. thou shalt not bow down to them , nor worship them . which being the plain , clear , and express words of the divine law , we dare not worship any images , or representations , lest we be found transgressors of this law. especially since god herein hath declared himself a jealous god ; and annexed so severe a sanction to it . and since he that made the law is only to interpret it , all the distinctions in the world can never satisfie a mans conscience , unless it appear that god himself did either make or approve them . and if god allow the worship of the thing represented by the representation , he would never have forbidden that worship absolutely , which is unlawful only in a certain respect . 2. we have an advocate with the father , jesus christ the righteous , 1 john 2. 1. and but one mediator between god and men , the man christ jesus , 1 tim. 2. 5. for christ is entred into heaven it self , now to appear in the presence of god for us , heb. 9. 24. and therefore we dare not make other intercessors in heaven besides him ; and the distance between heaven and us , breaks off all communication between the saints there , and us upon earth ; so that all addresses to them now for their prayers , are in a way very different from desiring others on earth to pray for us : and if such addresses are made in the solemn offices of divine worship , they join the creatures with the creator in the acts and signs of worship , which are due to god alone . 3. call upon me in the day of trouble , i will deliver thee , and thou shalt glorifie me , psal. 50. 15. when we pray to our father in heaven , as our saviour commanded us , we do but what both natural and christian religion require us to do : but when men pray to the blessed virgin for help and protection now , and at the hour of death , they attribute that to her , which belongs only to god , who is our helper and desender : and altho christ knew the dignity of his mother above all others , he never gives the least encouragement to make such addresses to her : and to suppose her to have a share now in the kingdom of christ in hea. ven , as a copartner with him , is to advance a creature to divine honour , and to overthrow the true ground of christs exaltation to his kingdom in heaven , which was , his suffering on the cross for us . 4. and no man knoweth of the sepulcher of moses unto this day , deut. 34. 6. why should god hide the body of moses from the people , if he allowed giving religious honour and respect to relicks ? why should hezekiah break in pieces the brazen serpent , because the children of israel did burn incense to it ? 2 kings 18. 4. especially when it was a type or representation of christ himself , and god had wrought many miracles by it . 5. whom the heaven must receive until the times of the restitution of all things , acts 3. 21. and therefore in the eucharist we adore him , as sitting on the right hand of god ; but we dare not direct our adoration to the consecrated host , which we believe to be the substance of bread and wine , ( tho consecrated to a divine mystery ) , and therefore not a fit object for our adoration . 6. the bread which we break , is it not the communion of the body of christ , 1 cor. 10. 16. this is spoken of the bread after consecration , and yet the apostle supposes it to be bread still , and the communion of his body is interpreted by the next words , for we being many , are one bread , and one body ; for we are all partakers of that one bread , v. 17. which is very different from the bread being changed into the very body of christ ; which is an opinion that hath no foundation in scripture , and is repugnant to the common principles of reason , which god hath given us , and exposes christian religion to the reproach and contempt of jews , turks , and infidels . 7. when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you , say , we are unprofitable servants , we have done that which was our duty to do , st. luk. 17. 10. and therefore in no sense can our best works be truly meritorious of eternal lise : which consisting in the enjoyment of god , it is impossible there should be any just proportion , or due commensuration between our best actions , and such a reward . 8. and the son said unto him , father i have sinned against heaven , and in thy sight , st. luke 15. 21. where confession to god is required because the offence is against him , but it is impossible for any man upon earth to forgive those whom god doth not forgive : and he alone can appoint the necessary conditions of pardon , among which true contrition and repentance is fully declared ; but confession to a priest , tho it may be useful for the ease of the penitent , is no where in scripture made necessary for the forgiveness of sin. 9. i said , i will consess my transgressions unto the lord ; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin , psal. 32. 5. if god doth fully forgive th● guilt of sin , there remains n● obligation to punishment ; fo● whereever that is , the guilt remains : it is true , god may no sometimes fully pardon ; but h● may reserve some temporal p● nishment here for his own ho●our , or the chastisement of penitent sinner ; but then wh● have any men to do , to prete● that they can take off what g● thinks fit to lay on ? can any ind●gences prevent pain or sickness sudden death ? but if indulgen● be understood only with respe● to canonical penances , they a● a most notorious and inexcu● ble corruption of the discipli● of the ancient church . 10. for if when we were enemies , we were reconciled to god by the death of his son ; much more , being reconciled , we shall be saved by his life , rom. 5. 10. and therefore no satisfaction to the justice of god is now required from us , for the expiation of any remainder of guilt . for if christ's satisfaction were in it self sufficient for a total remission , and was so accepted by god ; what account then remains for the sinner to discharge , if he perform the conditions on his part ? but we do not take away hereby the duties of mortification , prayer , fasting , and alms , &c. but there is a difference to be made between the acts of christian duties , and satisfaction to divine justice for the guilt of sin , either in whole or in part . and to think to joyn any satisfactions of ours , together with christs , is like joyning our hand with gods in creating or governing the world. 11. let the word of christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom ; teaching and admonishing one another , &c. coloss. 3. 16. how could that dwell richly in them , which was not to be communicated to them , but with great caution ? how could they teach and admonish one another in a language not understood by them ? the scriptures of the new testament were very early perverted ; and if this reason were sufficient to keep them out of the hands of the people , certainly they would never have been published for common use , but as prudently dispensed then , as some think it necessary they should be now . but we esteem it a part of our duty , not to think our selves wiser than christ or his apostles , nor to deprive them of that unvaluable treasure which our saviour hath left to their use . 12. all scripture is given by inspiration of god , 2 tim. 3. 16. holy men of god spake as they were moved by the holy-ghost , 2 pet. 1. 21. therefore , where there is no evidence of divine inspiration , those books cannot be made canonical . but the jewish church , to whom the oracles of god were committed , never deliver'd these books as any part of them , being written when inspiration was ceased among them . and it is impossible for any church in the world to make that to be divinely inspired , which was not so from the beginning . 13. but i say , have they not heard ? yes verily : their sound went into all the earth , and their words unto the ends of the world. rom. 10. 18. therefore the intention of god was , that the gospel should be understood by all mankind ; which it could never be , unless it were translated into their several languages . but still the difference is to be observed , between the originals and translations ; and no church can make a translation equal to the original . but among translations , those deserve the greatest esteem which are done with the greatest fidelity and exactness . on which account our last translation deserves a more particular regard by us ; as being far more useful to our people , than the vulgar latin , or any translation made only from it . 14. thy word is a lamp unto my feet , and a light unto my path , psalm 119. 105. which it could never be , unless it were sufficient for necessary direction in our way to heaven . but we suppose persons to make use of the best means for understanding it , and to be duely qualified for following its directions : without which , the best rule in the world can never attain its end. and if the scripture hath all the due properties of a rule of faith , it is unconceivable why it should be denied to be so ; unless men find they cannot justify their doctrines and practises by it , and therefore are forced to make tradition equal in authority with it . 15. wo unto you lawyers , for ye have taken away the key of knowledge ; ye entred not in your selves , and them that were entering in , ye hindred . s. luke 11. 52. from whence it follows , that the present guides of the church may be so far from giving the true sense of scripture , that they may be the chief means to hinder men from right understanding it . which argument is of greater force , because those who plead for the infallibility of the guides of the present church , do urge the promises made to the jewish church at that time ; as our author doth from those who sat in the chair of moses , and from caiaphas his prophesying . 16. we have also a more sure word of prophesie ; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed , 2 pet. 1. 19. and yet here the apostle speaks of something delivered by the testimony of those who were with christ in the holy mount. from whence we infer , that it was not the design of christ to leave us to any vocal testimony , but to refer us to the written word , as the most certain foundation of faith. and it is not any persons assuming the title of the catholick church to themselves , can give them authority to impose any tradition● on the faith of christians ; or require them to be believed equally with the written , word . for before any traditions can be assented to with divine faith , the churches authority must be proved to be divine and infallible , either by a written or unwritten word ; but it can be done by neither , without overthrowing the necessity of such an infallibility in order to divine faith ; because the testimony on which the churches infallibility is proved , must be received only in a way of credibility . 17. also of your own selves shall men arise , speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them , act. 20. 30. which being spoken of the guides of the christian church , without limitation of number , a possibility of error is implied in any assembly of them ; unless there were some other promises which did assure us , that in all great assemblies the spirit of god shall always go with the casting voice , or the greater number . 18. and he gave some apostles , and some prophets , and some evangelists , and some pastors and teachers — for the edisying of the body of christ — till we all come in the unity of the faith , &c. ephes. 4. 13 , 14 , 15. now here being an account given of the officers christ appointed in his church , in order to the unity and edification of it , it had been unfaithfulness in the apostle to have left out the head of it , in case christ had appointed any . because this were of more consequence than all the rest ; being declared necessary to salvation to be in subjection to him . but neither this apostle , nor s. peter himself , give the least intimation of it . which it is impossible to conceive should have been left out in the apostolical writings upon so many occasions of mentioning it , if ever christ had instituted a headship in the church , and given it to s. peter and his successors in the see of rome . 19. for as often as ye eat this bread , and drink this cup , ye do shew the lord's death till he come , 1 cor. 15. 26. the apostle speaking to all communicants , plainly shews , that the institution of christ was , that all should partake of both kinds , and so to continue to do as long as this sacrament was to shew forth the death of christ , viz. till his second coming . and there is no colour for asserting the christian church ever looked on observing christs institution in this matter as an indifferent thing ; no not for a thousand years after christ. altho the practise and the obligation are two things , yet when the practise was so agreeable to the institution , and continued so long in the church ; it is hardly possible for us to prove the sense of the obligation , by a better way , than by the continuance of the practise . and if some traditions must be thought binding , and far from being indifferent , which want all that evidence which this practise carries along with it , how unreasonable is it in this case to allow the practise , and to deny the obligation ? 20. and whom he justified , them he also glorified , rom. 8. 30. but whom god justifies , they have the remission of their sins as to eternal punishment . and if those who are thus justified , must be glorified , what place is there for purgatory ? for there is not the least intimation of any other state of punishment that any who are justified must pass through before they are admitted to glory . we grant they may , notwithstanding , pass through many intermediate trials in this world ; but we say , where there is justification , there is no condemnation ; but where any part of guilt remains unremitted , there is a condemnation remaining so far as the punishment extends . and so this distinction as to eternal and temporal pains , as it is made the foundation of purgatory , is wholly groundless ; and therefore the doctrine built upon it can have no foundation in scripture or reason . 21. i will pray with the spirit , and i will pray with the understanding also , 1 cor. 14. 15. what need this praying with the understanding , if there were no necessity of attending to the sense of prayers ? for then praying with the spirit were all that was required : for that supposes an attention of the mind upon god. and i can hardly believe any man that thinks with understanding , can justify praying without it : especially when there are exhortations and invitations to the people to joyn in those prayers , as it is plain there are in the roman offices . 22. then peter opened his mouth , and said , of a truth i perceive that god is no respecter of persons ; but in every nation , he that feareth god , and worketh righteousness , is accepted with him , acts 10. 34 , 35. whereby we perceive , that god doth not limit the possibility of salvation under the gospel to communion with the see of rome ; for if s. peter may be believed , the capacity of salvation depends upon mens fearing god and working righteousness and it is horrible uncharritablebleness to exclude those from a possibility of salvation , whom god doth not exclude from it . 23. that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints , jude v. 3. therefore all necessary doctrines of faith were at first delivered ; and whatever articles cannot be proved to have been delivered by the apostles , can never be made necessary to be believed in order to salvation . vvhich overthrows the additional creed of pius iv. after the council of trent ; and puts them upon the necessity of proving the universal tradition of those doctrines from the apostostolical times : and when they do that , we may think better of them than at present we do ; for as yet we can see neither scripture , nor reason , nor antiquity for them . thus i have represented that kind of popery which our author , ( who complains so much of misrepresenting ) allows ; and i have in short , set down how little ground we have to be fond of it ; nay , to speak more plainly , it is that we can never yield to , without betraying the truth , renouncing our senses and reason , wounding our consciences , dishonouring god and his holy word and sacraments , perverting the doctrine of the gospel as to christs satisfaction , intercession and remission of sins ; depriving the people of the means of salvation which god himself hath appointed , and the primitive church observed , and damning those for whom christ died . we do now in the sincerity of our hearts , appeal to god and the world , that we have no design to misrepresent them , or to make their doctrines and practises appear worse than they are : but take them with all the advantages even this author hath set them out with , we dare appeal to the judgments and consciences of any impartial men , whether ( the scripture being allowed on both sides ) our doctrines be not far more agreeable thereto than the new articles of trent , which are the very life and soul of popery ? whother our worship of god be not more suitable to the divine nature and perfections , and the manifestations of his will , than the worship of images , and invocation of fellow-creatures ? whether the plain doctrine of the necessity of repentance and sincere obedience to the commands of christ , do not tend more to promote holiness in the vvorld , than the sacrament of penance , as it is delivered and allowed to be practised in the church of rome , i. e. with the easiness and efficacy of absolution , and getting off the remainders by indulgences , satisfactions of others , and prayers for the dead ? vvhether it be not more according to the institution of christ to have the communion in both kinds , and to have prayers and the scriptures in a language which the people understand ? and lastly , whether there be not more of christian charity in believing and hoping the best of those vast bodies of christians , who live out of the communion of the church of rome , in the eastern , southern , western , and northern parts , than to pronounce them all uncapable of salvation on that account ? and therefore out of regard to god and the holy religion of our blessed saviour ; out of regard to the salvation of our own and others souls , we cannot but very much prefer the communion of our own church , before that of the church of rome . but before i conclude all , i must take some notice of his anathema's : and here i am as much unsatisfied , as in any other part of his book , and that for these reasons , 1. because he hath no manner of authority to make them , suppose they were meant never so sincerely : and if we should ever object them to any others of that church , they would presently say , what had he to do to make anathema's ? it belongs only to the church and the general councils to pronounce anethema's , and not to any private person whatsoever . so that if he would have published anathema's with authority , he ought to have printed those of the council of trent ; viz. such as these , cursed is he that doth not allow the worship of images . cursed is he that saith saints are not to be invocated . cursed is he that dotb not believe transubstantiation , purgatory , &c. 2. because he leaves out an anathema in a very material point , viz. as to the deposing doctrine . we do freely , and from our hearts anathematize all such doctrines as tend to dissolve the bonds of allegiance to our soveraign , on any pretence whatsoever . why was this past over by him , without any kind of anathema ? since he seems to approve the oxford censures , p. 48. why did he not here show his zeal against all such dangerous doctrines ? if the deposing doctrine be falsly charged upon their church , let us but once see it anathematized by publick authority of their church , and we have done : but in stead thereof , we find in a book very lately published with great approbations , by a present professor at lovain fr. d' enghien , all the censures on the other side censured and despised , and the holding the negative as to the deposing doctrine , is declared by him to be heresie , or next to heresie : the censure of the sorbon against sanctarellus . he saith , was only done by a faction ; and that of sixty eight doctors there were but eighteen present ; and the late censure of the sorbon , he saith , was condemned by the inquisition at toledo , jan. 10. 1683. as erroneous and schismatical ; and so by the clergy of hungary , oct. 24. 1682. vve do not question but there are divines that oppose it ; but we fear there are too many who do not ; and we find they boast of their own numbers , and despise the rest as an inconsiderable party : this we do not misrepresent them in , for their most approved books do shew it . however , we do not question , but there are several worthy and loyal gentlemen of that religion , of different principles and practises : and it is pity such be not distinguished from those who will not renounce a doctrine so dangerous in the consequences of it . 3. because the anathema's he hath set down , are not penned so plainly and clearly , as to give any real satisfaction ; but with so much art and sophistry , as if they were intended to beguile weak and unwary readers , who see not into the depth of these things , and therefore may think he hath done great matters in his anathema's , when if they be strictly examined , they come to little or nothing ; as 1. cursed is he that commits idolatry . an unwary reader would think herein he disowned all that he accuses of idolatry ; but he doth not curse any thing as idolatry , but what himself thinks to be so . so again , cursed is he ( not that gives divine worship to images , but ) that prays to images , or relicks as gods , or worships them for gods. so that if he doth not take the images themselves for gods , he is safe enough from his own anathema . 2. cursed is every goddess worshipper , i. e. that believes the blessed virgin not to be a creature . and so they escape all the force of this anathema . cursed is he that honours her , or puts his trust in her more than in god. so that if they honour her and trust in her but just as much as in god , they are safe enough ; or that believes her to be above her son : but no anathema to such as suppose her to be equal to him . 3. cursed is he that believes the saints in heaven to be his redeemer , that prays to them as such . vvhat if men pray to them as their spiritual guardians and protectors ? is not this giving gods honour to them ? doth this deserve no anathema ? 4. cursed is he that worships any breaden god , or makes god of the empty elements of bread and wine : viz. that supposes them to be nothing but bread and wine , and yet supposes them to be gods too . doth not this look like nonsense : and yet i am afraid our author would think it a severe anathema in this matter , to say , cursed is he who believes nonsense and contradictions . it will be needless to set down more , since i have endeavoured by clear stating the several controversies to prevent the readers being ●mposed upon by deceitful anathema's . and yet after all he saith , 〈◊〉 cursed are we , if in answering and saying amen to any of these c●rses , we use any equivocations or mental reservation , or do not assent to them in the common and obvions use of the words . but there may be no equivocation in the very vvords , and yet there may be a great one in the intention and design of them : there may be none in saying amen to the curses so worded ; but if he would have prevented all susp●cion of equivocation , he ought to have put it thus , cursed are we if we have not fairly and ingenuously expressed the whole meaning of our church as to the points condemned in these anathema's ; or if we have by them designed to deceive the people : and ●●e● i doubt he would not so readily have said amen . the contents . an answer to his introduction . page 1. 1. of praying to images . p. 16. 2. of worshiping saints . p. 25. 3. of addressing more supplications to the virgin mary than to christ. p. 34. 4. of paying divine worship to relicks . p. 40. 5. of adoration of the host. p. 43. 6. of transubstantiation . p. 46. 7. of merits and good works . p. 55. 8. of confession . p. 60. 9. of indulgencies . p. 63. 10. of satisfaction . p. 66. 11. of reading the holy scriptures . p. 68. 12. of apocryphal books p. 82. 13. of the vulgar edition of the bible . p. 84. 14. of the scripture as a rule of faith. p. 86. 15. of the interpretation of scripture . p. 87. 16. of tradition . p. 89. 17. of councils . p. 90. 18. of infallibility in the church . p. 91. 19. of the pope . p. 94. 20. of dispensations . p. 97. 21. of the deposing power . p. 101. 22. of communion in one kind . p. 107. 23. of the mass. p. 108. 24. of purgatory . p. 113. 25. of praying in an unknown tongue . p. 119. 26. of the second commandment . p. 123 27. of mental reservations . p. 124. 28. of a deathbed repentance . p. 126. 29. of fasting . p. 127. 30. of schisms and divisions in the church . p. 129. 31. of friers and nuns . p. 131. 32. of wicked principles and practises . p. 132. 33. of miracles . p. 134. 34. of holy water . p. 136. 35. of breeding up people in ignorance . p. 138. 36. of the uncharitableness of the papists . p. 139. 37. of ceremonies and o●dinances . p. 141. 38. of innovations in matters of faith. p. 142. an answer to his conclusion . p. 145. finis . the errata . page 12. margin , for conformat , read confirm . p. 14. l. 19. for dodrine , r. doctrine . p. 35. margin , for lapidiana , r. lapidicina . p , 39. l. 13. after publis●●d insert in l. 26. after piece insert of . p. 40. l. 4. blot out ? or. p. 41. l. 4. for vigdantius , r. vigilantius . p. 82. l. 10. after cannot , blot out say . p. 88. l. 12. for solemn , r. solitary . p. 96. margin , for sues , r. surs. ib. for philean , r. philerene . p. 98. l. 26. for claevasus , r. clavasius . p. 101. l. 12. for doctrine , r. doctors . p. 106. margin , for d' erast , r. d' eng●ien . p. 112. 〈◊〉 26. for ecclesiastical , r. e●charistical . p. 132. l. 11. before whether , insert ( 3. ) p. 134. 〈◊〉 ● . for i● . r. are . l. 20. blot out as well . p. 141. l. 4. and l. 19. for de r. be . advertisement . a discourse against transubstantiation , printed for w. rogers . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61552-e130 bulla pli 4ti super conf●rm ●ra● concil . tridentini . notes for div a61552-e1450 thevenot voyage des indes . p. 188. bernier memoirs . tom. 3. p. 172. pag. 3. suarez in 3. part . qu. 25. disp. 53. sect. 3. 2do . principaliter . & sect. 5. bellarmin . de imag. l. 2. c. 24. concil . triden● . sess. 25. moyens surs & honestes pour la conversion de tous les heretiques . to. 2. p. 115. catechis . rom. part. 3. c. 2. s. 14. notes for div a61552-e3320 sect. 25. pag. 4. wicel . in elencho abusuum . vives in aug. de civit. dti , l. 8. c. 27. entritiens de p●ilalethe & philerene . part 2. p. 160 , 163 , 165. catech. rom. part 4. c. 6. n. 2 , 3. catech. rom. part 3. c. 2. n. 4 , 6. cum praesint nobis sancti & rer●m nostrarum curam gerant . bellarm. de sanct. beatit . l. 1. c. 20. §. deinde . non solum ab angells sed etiam ● spiritibus beatorum hominum regi & gubernarl fideles ●iventes . id. ib. c. 18. §. nos autem . john 14. 13 , 14 , 16 , 23 , 24. heb. 7. 25. & 9. 7 , 24. 1 jo. 2. 1. 1 tim. 2. 5. notes for div a61552-e5050 s. bonavent . opust . tom. 1. ad sin . s. bernardin . sen. apud bernardin . à bustis marial . part. 12. serm. 2. balinghem . parnass . m●●i●● p. 268. mendoza . virid . sacr. l. 2. probl. 1 , & 4. salazar pro immac . concept . c. 32. hier. peres de nueros lapidi●●na sacra tr. 1. sect. 12. n. 148. pag. 7. viridar . sacr. l. 2. probl. 2. n. 11. la veritable devotion envers la s. vierge etable & defendu par le pere crasset à paris a. d. 1679. monita salutaria b. v. mariae ad cultores suos indiscretos §. 3. n. 56. §. 4. contemplations of the life and glory of holy mary , the mother of jesus , a. d. 1685. pag. 4. pag. 8. billarmin . de cultu . sanct. l. 3. c. 4. inis . pag. 12. pag. 14. pag. 22. pag. 24. pag. 25. pag. 7. alanus de rupe de usu psalt●●ii , l. 1. c. 6. notes for div a61552-e6920 de imag. sanct. l. 2. c. 4. cassand . consult . art. 21. tract . special . 4. controv. 4. rabat . joy de jasenists , a. d. 1656. notes for div a61552-e7350 pallavicin . hist. concil . trident. l. 12. c. 6. rossens . c. oecu . lamp . l. 1. c. 2. coster . euchi●id . c. 8. n. 10. catherin . in cajet . p. 133 , &c. ed. paris , 1535 i●g●●● . 1542. p. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12. vasq. in 3 part. disc. 180. q. 75 art. 2. c. 5. cajetan . in 3 part. q. 75. art. 1 , 2 , 3. s. luk. 24. 39. s. joh. 1. 1 , 3. bellarm. de incarn . l. 3. c. 8. p●●av . de incarnatione , p. 6. c. 1. §. 3. notes for div a61552-e8920 pag. 13. concil . trident. sess. 6. can. 32. meritum est actio libera cui merces debetur ex justitiâ . coster . enchirid. de merit is bo● . oper. c. 7. in quantum homo propriâ voluntate facit id quod debet , meretur apud deum , alioquin reddere debitum non esset mer●torum . aquin. 1 , 2. qu. 114 , artic . 1. resp . ad 1. meritum se habět ad praemium sicut pretium ad illud quod emitur . altisiodor . l. 3. tr . 12. absoluta aequalitas inter mercedem & meritum ponitur per modum justitiae commutativae . bell. justif. l. 5. ● . 14. 2 tim. 4. 8. notes for div a61552-e9740 s●ss . 14. can. 6. s●ss . 14. c. 4. lomb. l. 4. dist. 17. grat. de poenit. dist. 1. c. 90. quidam . greg. de valentiâ de necessit . confess . c. 2. maldonat . oper. to. 2. de poenit. c. 2 , & 3. john 20. 23. s. mat. 28. 19. mark 16. 16. jansen . concord evang. c. 147 cajetan . in loc . ed. paris , 1540. catharin . in cajeta● . l. 5. p. 444. vasquez in 3 part. th. tom. 4. qu. 90. art. 1. dub. 2. nam . 2. greg. de valent . in thom. tom. 4. disp. 7. qu. 9. punct . 2. p 284. bonavent . in l. 4. sent. dist. 17. part . 2. godign . de rebus abassin . l. 1. c. 28. itinerarium ori●ntale . l. 5. c. 8. galan . concil . eccles. armenae to. 2. p. 605. historie critique de la creance & de coutums des nations du levant . ch . 8. p. 105. ch. 1. p. 14. resp. 1. jer m. patriarch . ad theolog. wirte●tberg . p. 87. arcud . de concord . ecclesiae occident . & orient . in 7 sacram . l. 4. c. 3. goar in eucholog . p. 681. notes for div a61552-e11110 pag. 15 , 16. tractat. tractatuum . to : 15. part. 1. f. 368. espencae . in ep. ad tit. c. 1. degress . 2. bullar . cherubin . in to. 1. p. 204. prorsus mandamus angelis paradisi , quantum animam illius à purgatorio penitus absolutam in paradisi gloriam introducant . bulla clem. 6. ultrajecti a. d. 1653. gobel . person . cosmodr . aet . 6. c. 86. p. 278. bellar. to. 3. p. 74. to. 4. p. 85. greg. de valent . de indulg . c. 2. bell. de indulg . l. 1. c. 7. c. 2. notes for div a61552-e11970 catech. roman . part. 2. c. 5. n. 52 , 56. catech. rom. de paenit . sacr. n. 61. notes for div a61552-e12240 pag. 19. p. 21. quod quidem inviolate servandum est . clem. viii . ad reg. 4. indicis roman . notes for div a61552-e12650 p. 21. concil trident . sess. 4. 8. apr. de canon script . bp. cosins scholastical history of the canon of scripture . greg. nazianzen . in carmin , 2. vol. p. 98. orat. de mac. cab . vol. 1. p. 308. ambros de jacob & vi●ae erat l. 2. c. 10 , 11 , 12. cocci . thes. catho . l. 6. act 18. scholastical history , n. 83. euseb. l. 5. c. 24. orig. pref . in psal. athan. in synopsi . hilar. pref . in psal. st. cyril . catech . 4. epiph. haer . 8. 76. basil. philocal . c. 3. amphil. epist. canon . ad seleuc. chrys. hom . 4. in gen. scholastical history . n. 71. p. 22. p. 23. cathar . adv. cajet . p , 48. ed. paris 1535. notes for div a61552-e13470 p. 24 , 25. in hac vulgata editione visa sunt nonnulla mutanda , quae consulto mutata non sunt . clem. viii . in bullâ . luc. brugens . in variis lect. nat. alexand : dissert . de vulg . vers . quaest. 6. p 26. notes for div a61552-e13850 p. 27. notes for div a61552-e13980 p. 29. p. 29. controv. 5. qu. 4. art . 2. notes for div a61552-e14250 p. 30 , 31. 2 thes. 2. 13. p. 37. p. 32. notes for div a61552-e14430 p. 33. p. 33. notes for div a61552-e14570 p. 36. p. 38. p. 38. p. 39. 2 chron. 15. 3. p. 39. chrysost. in matt. hom. 72. hieron . in loc . caten . gr. in loc . hilaer . canon . 24. theophilact . in loc . matt. 15. notes for div a61552-e15200 cerem . sect. 1. c. 2. p. 40. p. 41. matt. 16. 18. chrysost. hom . 1. in pentec . tom. 5. ed savil. p 979. ambros de incarnat . dom. sacramento c. 5. aug. de verbis dom. ad evang. secund . matth. serm. 13. tract . in joh. 124. basil. seleuc. orat. 25. ad fin . hilar. de trinit . l. 6. greg. nyssen de advent . domini cap. ult . theodoret epist. 77. 146. matt. 16. 19. orig. comment . in matt. gr. lat. p. 275. cyprian . de unit. ecclesiae . hilar. de trinit . 1. 6. hier. c. jovin . l. 1. c. 14. in matt. 16. aug. in joh. tr. 118. 124. in epist. joh. to. 10. moyens su●● & honestes , &c. p. 34 , &c. entretiens de philaleth . in phile● p. 121. joh. launoi . epist. part . 5. reim . formentino , & part. 2. ep. 5. p. 47 , &c. p. 42. notes for div a61552-e15960 p. 43. de concess . praebend . è proposuit . abb. c. proposuit de conc. praebend . c. 15. q. 6. c. auctoritate sum. angelic . v. dispensatio . jacobat . de conciliis l. 5. p. 215. almain . de potest . ecclesiae c. 13. catharin . c. cajetan . 6. p. 524. sanchez . de matrim l. 8. disp. 6. n. 5. sayr . clavis reg. l. 6. c. 11. suarez . de vot . l. 6. c. 9. n. 7. 8 , 9 , 17. p. 45. notes for div a61552-e16490 p. 46. p. 29. p. 34. p. 40 , 41. discussio decreti magni concil . lateran . p. 89. p. 90 , &c. discuss . discuss . part 3. sect. 3. p. 1. philip. a ss . trinir . itiner . orient . l. 5 c. 5. clem. galau . concil . eccl. arm. qu. 2. ss . ● . p. 92. jesuits loyalty , first treatise , p. 1 , &c a professor of lovain , now living , hath undertaken to see● , that the number is far greater of those who assert this doctrine , than of those who deny it . auctoritas sedis . p. 47 , 48. apostolicae vindicata adversus natal . alexand. per francisc. d. erast. colon. a. d. 1684. notes for div a61552-e17490 s. john 6. 51. tract . 2. in epist. s. joh. cotovic . itiner . hierosolymit . l. 2. c. 6. histoir . critique , p. 14. p. 52. notes for div a61552-e18090 sess. 22. cap. ● . can . 1 , 2 , 3 , &c. p. 53. eucharistical notes for div a61552-e18420 p. 57. leo allat . de purgat . p. 889. levit. 4. 13. bellar. de purgat . l. 1. c. 8. p. 55. can. l. 2. c. 10. ad 4. aug. c●nt 2d . epist. gaudent l. 2. c. 23. de purgat . l. 1. c. 3. natal . alex. sec. 4. diss. 4. p. 56. bell. de an. christi l. 4. c. 13. p. 57. s. th. part . 3. q. 87. art 3. in cor . v. marsil . column . hydragiolog . sect. 7. c. 3. n. 32. sect. 3. c. 2. n. 15. 29. c. 3. n. 1. bell. de cultu . sanct. l. 3. c. 7. sect. secundo . de purgatorio l. 1. c. 11. ss . haec sunt . notes for div a61552-e19990 p. 59. p. 61. p. 60. p. 61. p. 62. notes for div a61552-e20420 p. 63. p. 64. notes for div a61552-e20560 p. 64. apud g. ab●bot de mendacio , &c. in praef. p. 6 , &c. notes for div a61552-e20900 p. 67 , 68. notes for div a61552-e21070 p. 69. p. 71. reginald . praxis l. 4. c. 14. n. 163. less . de justit . l. 4. c. 2. dub. 2. n. 10. instruct. sacerd . l. 6. c. 2. n. 4. p. zacch . qu. medico . legales l. 5. tit . 1. qu. 1. p. 29 , 30 , 31. pasqual . decis . 120. n. 5. dian. sam. v. jejun . n. 7. zach. pasqualigi . praxis jejunii eccles decis . 116. n. 3. dec. 117. 1. 2 , 3. decis . 119. n. 2. decis . 86. n. 3 , 4. less . ubi supr . n. 11. tolet. ubi sup . regin ubi sup . n. 185. notes for div a61552-e21600 p. 72. notes for div a61552-e21890 p. 77. p. 79. p. 81. p. 82. p. 83. notes for div a61552-e22210 p. 83. moyens surs & honestes , &c. to. 2. p. 149. notes for div a61552-e22470 p. 86. hydragiolog . sect. 3. c. 2. 12. p. 45. valles . sacr. philosoph . c. 28. p. 229. de cultu sanct. l. 3. c. 7. notes for div a61552-e23090 p. 89. p. 90. collectio authorum vulg. versionis damnantium jussu ac mandato cleri gallicani edita . lutet . paris . 1661. notes for div a61552-e23340 p. 92. p. 95. p. 96. p. 97. p. 98. notes for div a61552-e23810 p. 108 , 109 p. 112 , &c. p. 116. p. 109. sess. quarta . notes for div a61552-e24220 p. 119. p. 3. auctoritas sed●s apostolicae in reges . p. 374 , 408. ad 430. p. 549. the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's second letter wherein his notion of ideas is prov'd to be inconsistent with itself, and with the articles of the christian faith. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1698 approx. 237 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 93 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-01 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61523 wing s5558 estc r3400 12185882 ocm 12185882 55785 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61523) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 55785) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 879:8) the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's second letter wherein his notion of ideas is prov'd to be inconsistent with itself, and with the articles of the christian faith. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 178, [7] p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1698. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng locke, john, 1632-1704. -essay concerning human understanding. knowledge, theory of. 2002-09 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2002-10 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2002-11 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2002-11 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-12 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's second letter ; wherein his notion of ideas is prov'd to be inconsistent with it self , and with the articles of the christian faith . london , printed by i. h. for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , mdcxcviii . the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's second letter , &c. sir , i was not a little surpriz'd at the length of your second letter , considering the shortness of the answer contained in it : but it put me in mind of the springs of modená mention'd by ramazzini , which rise up with such a plenty of water upon opening a passage , that the undertaker is afraid of being overwhelm'd by it . i see how dangerous it is to give occasion to a person of such a fruitfull invention to write ; for letters become books , and small books will soon rise to great volumes , if no way be found to give a check to such an ebullition of thoughts , as some men find within themselves . i was apt to think the best way were , to let nature spend it self ; and although those who write out of their own thoughts do it with as much ease and pleasure as a spider spins his web ; yet the world soon grows weary of controversies , especially when they are about personal matters : which made me wonder that one who understands the world so well , should spend above fifty pages of a letter in renewing and enlarging a complaint wholly concerning himself . suppose i had born a little too hard upon you in joyning your words and anothers intentions together ; had it not been an easie and effectual way of clearing your self , to have declared to the world , that you owned the doctrine of the trinity , as it hath been received in the christian church , and is by ours in the creeds and articles of religion ? this had stopt the mouths of the clamorous , and had removed the suspicions of the doubtfull , and would have given full satisfaction to all reasonable men. but when you so carefully avoid doing this , all other arts and evasions do but leave the matter more suspicious among the most intelligent and impartial readers . this i mention , not that you need be afraid of the inquisition , or that i intend to charge you with heresie in denying the trinity ; but my present design is to shew , that your mind is so intangled and set fast by your notion of ideas , that you know not what to make of the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation ; because you can have no idea of one nature and three persons , nor of two natures and one person ; as will fully appear afterwards . and therefore , out of regard to publick service , in order to the preventing a growing mischief , i shall endeavour to lay open the ill consequences of your way of ideas with respect to the articles of the christian faith. but i shall wave all unnecessary repetitions , and come immediately to the matter of your complaint as it is renewed in this second letter , which i shall briefly answer , before i proceed to that which i chiefly design . your complaint , you say , was , that you were brought into a controversie wherein you had never meddled , nor knew how you came to be concerned in . i told you , it was because the person who opposed the mysteries of christianity went upon your grounds , and made use of your words ; although i declared withall , that they were used to other purposes than you intended them ; and i confess'd , that the reason why i quoted your words so much , was , because i found your notion as to certainty by ideas , was the main foundation on which the author of christianity not mysterious went ; and that he had nothing that look'd like reason , if that principle were removed ; which made me so much endeavour to shew , that it would not hold , and so i supposed the reason why i so often mention'd your words , was no longer a riddle to you . these passages you set down in your second letter ; but you say , all this seems to you to do nothing towards the clearing of this matter . whether it doth or not , i am content to leave it to any indifferent reader ; and there it must rest at last , although you should write volumes about it . but for what cause do you continue so unsatisfied ? you tell us , it is , that the author mentioned , went upon this ground , that clear and distinct ideas are necessary to certainty , but that is not your notion as to certainty by ideas ; which is , that certainty consists in the perception of the agreement or disagreement of ideas , such as we have , whether they be in all their parts perfectly clear and distinct or no : and you say , that you have no notions of certainty more than this one . this is no more than what you had said before in your former letter , and i took particular notice of it , and gave three several answers to it , which i shall here lay together and defend , because you seem to think i had not answered it . ( 1. ) that those who offer at clear and distinct ideas bid much fairer for certainty than you do ( according to this answer ) and speak more agreeably to your original grounds of certainty . for it is a very wonderfull thing in point of reason , for you to pretend to certainty by ideas , and not allow those ideas to be clear and distinct ? you say , the certainty lies in the perception of the agreement or disagreement of ideas : how can i clearly perceive the agreement or disagreement of ideas , if i have not clear and distinct ideas ? for how is it possible for a man's mind to know whether they agree or disagree , if there be some parts of those ideas , we have only general and confused ideas of ? and therefore i had great reason to say , that if certainty be placed in ideas we must have clear and distinct ideas . you may as well say , a man may be certain of the agreement and disagreement of colours in a confused or uncertain light. for so much as the idea fails of clearness and distinctness , so much it fails of that evidence which it is necessary to judge by . where-ever there is obscurity , confusion or imperfection in the ideas , there must be so much uncertainty in the perception of the agreement or disagreement of them . and to pretend to certainty by ideas without pretending to clear and distinct ideas , is to judge without evidence , and to determine a thing to be certainly true , when we cannot know whether it be so or not ; for how can you be sure that your ideas agree with the reality of things ( wherein you place the certainty of knowledge ) if there be no such ideas of those things , that you can perceive their true nature , and their difference from all others ? for therein you will not deny that the notion of clear and distinct ideas consists . but you say more than once or twice , or ten times , that i blame those who place certainty in clear and distinct ideas , but you do it not , and yet i bring you in among them ; which is the thing you so much complain of . i will give you a full answer to this complaint . i do not deny , but the first occasion of my charge was the supposition that clear and distinct ideas were necessary in order to any certainty in our minds , and that the only way to attain this certainty was by comparing these ideas together : but to prove this , your words were produced , and your principles of certainty laid down , and none else ; and i could not imagine that you could place certainty in the agreement or disagreement of ideas , and yet not suppose those ideas to be clear and distinct . but finding your self joyned in such company which you did not desire to be seen in , you rather chose to distinguish your self from them , by denying clear and distinct ideas to be necessary to certainty . but it must be here observed , that our debate about certainty by ideas is not about any other certainty , but about certainty of knowledge with regard to some proposition , whose ideas are to be compared as to their agreement and disagreement . for your words are , certainty of knowledge is to perceive the agreement or disagreement of ideas as expressed in any proposition . this we usually call knowing or being certain of the truth of any proposition . so that a proposition whose ideas are to be compared as to their agreement or disagreement , is the proper object of this certainty . and therefore this certainty is to be distinguished , 1. from a certainty by sense ; or that by which we come to know the existence of external objects . for you say , that the knowledge of the existence of any other thing we can have only by sensation . for there being no necessary connexion of real existence with any idea a man hath in his memory ; no particular man can know the existence of any other being , but only when by actual operating upon him it makes it self perceived by him . but that this is quite another certainty from that of ideas , appears from these following words of yours ; for the having the idea of any thing in our mind , no more proves the existence of that thing than the picture of a man evidences his being in the world , or the visions of a dream make thereby a true history . therefore this is a very different certainty from that of ideas . 2. from a certainty by reason ; when from the existence of some things evident to sense , we inferr the existence of another thing not evident to sense : as to take your own words in your former letter . as to the existence of bodily substances , i know by my senses , that something extended , solid and figur'd does exist ; for my senses are the utmost evidence and certainty i have of the existence of extended , solid , figured things . these modes being then known to exist by our senses , the existence of them ( which i cannot conceive can subsist without something to support them ) makes me see the connection of those ideas with a support , or as it is called , subject of inhesion , and so consequently the connection of that support , which cannot be nothing , with existence . granting all this , yet it by no means proves that we can have a certainty in the way of ideas , where the ideas themselves by which we have the certainty are obscure and confused ; but that supposing the ideas we have by our senses to be true , we may from them inferr the existence of something of which we have only an obscure and confused idea ; which is the case of bodily substances . of which i grant you may come to a certain knowledge , but not a certainty by ideas , but by a consequence of reason deduced from the ideas we have by our senses . and this can never prove that we may have a certainty by ideas , where the ideas themselves are not clear and distinct : for there is a great difference between having a certainty by reason , of a thing whose idea is confused and obscure , and having that certainty by obscure and confused ideas . for in this case the idea of substance is obscure : but the way of certainty is by a clear deduction of reason from the ideas we have by our senses . 3. from a certainty by remembrance ; by which i mean the remaining impression on the mind of an original certainty by demonstration . as to use your own instance ; a man hath found by mathematical evidence , that the three angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles ; the perception of this at the time of the demonstration was clear and distinct ; but afterwards , the method of demonstration may have slipt out of his mind , yet he retains a certainty of the thing by virtue of that demonstration ; but this is not a clear perception , as you would have it , where the ideas are confused ; but it is an obscure remembrance of the grounds of that certainty which he once had ; and hath never seen any reason since , why he should call it in question . these things then being put out of the question , which belong not to it ; the question truly stated is , whether we can attain to any certainty of knowledge as to the truth of a proposition in the way of ideas , where the ideas themselves by which we come to that certainty be not clear and distinct ? another thing to be observed is , that des cartes who first started this way of certainty by ideas , thought it a ridiculous thing in any to pretend to it , unless their ideas were clear and distinct . he saith , that when we assent without clear perception , we are either deceived , or fall into truth by chance , but we do often err when we think we have clear perception , and have not . but to a certain iudgment , it is necessary that our perception be not only clear but distinct : that is , when the thing not only lies open to our view , but we see it on all sides , and so can distinguish it from all other things . you agree with him in placing certainty in ideas , but you differ from him in that which alone made his opinion reasonable , viz. that these ideas be clear and distinct . if it were possible for us to come to clear and distinct ideas of the things we pretend to be certain of , it were a just pretence to certainty in that way ; but since we cannot come at them , we must be content with such measures of knowledge as we are capable of . but for you to talk so much of certainty by ideas , and yet to allow obscurity and imperfection in those ideas , is like a purblind man who would pretend to judge exactly of the differences of colours in the twilight , because another pretended to do it at noon-day : or like one , who would undertake to shew certainly the agreement or disagreement of two men at a distance from him , in their habit , features , and stature , and yet at the same time confess that he could not clearly distinguish one from the other . so that if i did think you spake more consistently to your hypothesis , than you say now that you did , i hope you will forgive me that wrong , if at least it be a wrong to you ; for after all , there are several passages in your essay , which suppose clear ideas necessary to certainty . for in one place you say , that the mind not being certain of the truth of that it doth not evidently know . what is this but to make clear ideas necessary to certainty ? in another , yet more plainly , that which is requisite to make our knowledge certain is the clearness of our ideas . in a third place you say ; for it being evident that our knowledge cannot exceed our ideas ; where they are either imperfect , confused or obscure , we cannot expect to have certain , perfect or clear knowledge . in a fourth ; but obscure and confused ideas can never produce any clear and certain knowledge , because as far as any ideas are confused or obscure , the mind can never perceive clearly whether they agree or disagree . what can be more express ? and yet you have complained of me in near twenty places of your second letter for charging this upon you . by this the world will judge of the justice of your complaints , and the consistency of your notion of ideas . ( 2. ) i answer'd , that it is very possible the authour of christianity not mysterious , might mistake or misapply your notions , but there is too much reason to believe he thought them the same , and we have no reason to be sorry that he hath given you this occasion for the explaining your meaning , and for the vindication of your self in the matters you apprehend he had charged you with . here you enter upon a fresh complaint , and say ▪ this can be no reason why you should be joyned with a man that had misapplied your notions ; and that no man hath so much mistaken and misapplied your notions as my self , and therefore you ought rather to be joyned with me . but is this fair and ingenuous dealing , to represent this matter so , as if i had joined you together , because he had misunderstood and misapplied your notions ? can you think me a man of so little sense to make that the reason of it ? no , sir , it was because he assigned no other grounds but yours , and that in your own words , however now you would divert the meaning of them another way . and although i was willing to allow you all reasonable occasions for your own vindication , as appears by my words ; yet i was sensible enough , that you had given too just an occasion to apply them in that manner , as appears by the next page . but because these words follow some i had quoted out of your postscript , you fall into a nice piece of criticism about them , which , you say , in grammatical construction , must refer to the words of the postscript ; but any one that reads without a design to cavil , would easily interpret them of your words and notions about which the debate was ; and not of the postscript which comes in but as a parenthesis . this looks like chicaning in controversie ; which no man , who knows his cause is good , ever falls into . but if , you say , by an unintelligible new way of construction the word them be applied to any passages in your book : what then ? why then , whoever they are , you intend to complain of them too . but the words just before tell you who they are , viz. the enemies of the christian faith. and is this all that you intend , only to complain of them for making you a party in the controversie against the trinity ? but whether you have not made your self too much a party in it , will appear , before we have done . i had with great kindness , as i thought , taken notice of a passage in your postscript : in which i was glad to find that in general , you owned the mysteries of the christian faith , and the scripture to be the foundation and rule of it : from whence i inferr'd , that i could not believe you intended to give any advantage to the enemies of the christian faith. this passage , you say , you were surprized to find in a paragraph design'd to give you satisfaction . there are some persons i find very hard to be satisfied . for i speak of my satisfaction in this passage , and that i was glad you agreed so far with me , although you could not come up in all things to what i could wish . but what reason have you to express so much dissatisfaction at these words ? you call it an extraordinary sort of complement ; and that they seem to intimate as though i took you for a heathen before . how like a cavilling exception is this ? do not we know that in the debate about the mysteries of faith our adversaries are no heathens ; but they deny any mysteries : i was glad to find that you owned them ; and resolved your faith into the scripture as the foundation of it . did not this look more like a good opinion of you as to these matters , than any inclination to suspect you for a heathen ? but you say , it must not be taken for granted , that those who do not write or appear in print in controversies of religion do not own the christian faith , and the scriptures as the rule of it . i was far enough from any such apprehension ; but the case is quite otherwise , with those who are not sparing of writing about articles of faith , and among them take great care to avoid some which have been always esteem'd fundamental articles by the christian church . and i think it was no want of humanity or christian charity in me , that i was so glad to find you own the mysteries of the christian faith in general : which shews at least , that you cannot object against any articles of faith , because they contain something mysterious in them . but i said , that in all things your answer doth not come fully up to what i could wish . and i think i gave sufficient proof of it , as to your idea of substance , the nature of ideas , the materiality of the soul , the disparaging some arguments to prove the existence of god , the tendency of your principles ; and the ground of certainty , &c. which are put off to another letter , except the last , which is therefore now to be examin'd . ( 3. ) the third answer i gave was , that your own grounds of certainty , tend to scepticism ; and that in an age wherein the mysteries of faith are too much exposed by the promoters of scepticism and infidelity , it is a thing of dangerous consequence to start such new methods of certainty , as are apt to leave men's minds more doubtfull than before . these words , you say , contain a farther accusation of your book , which shall be consider'd in its due place . but this is the proper place of considering it . for i said , that hereby you have given too just occasion to the enemies of the christian faith , to make use of your words and notions , as was evidently proved from your own concessions . and if this be so , however i was willing to have had you explained your self to the general satisfaction ; yet since you decline it , i do insist upon it , that you cannot clear your self from laying that foundation , which the author of christianity not mysterious built upon . for your ground of certainty is the agreement or disagreement of the ideas , as expressed in any proposition . which are your own words . from hence i urged , that let the proposition come to us any way , either by humane or divine authority , if our certainty depend upon this , we can be no more certain , than we have clear perception of the agreement or disagreement of ideas contained in it . and from hence the author of christianity not mysterious thought he had reason to reject all mysteries of faith which are contained in propositions , upon your grounds of certainty . by this it evidently appears , that although i was willing to allow you all fair ways of interpreting your own sense ; yet i by no means thought that your words were wholly misunderstood or misapplied by that author : but rather that he saw into the true consequence of them , as they lie in you book . and what answer do you give to this ? not a word in the proper place for it . but afterwards ( for i would omit nothing that may seem to help your cause ) you offer something towards an answer . for there you distinguish the certainty of faith , and the certainty of knowledge , and you humbly conceive the certainty of faith , if i think fit to call it so , hath nothing to do with the certainty of knowledge ; and to talk of the certainty of faith seems all one to you as to talk of the knowledge of believing , a way of speaking not easie for you to understand . so that if i shake never so much the certainty of knowledge , it doth not at all concern the assurance of faith , that is quite distinct from it , neither stands nor falls with knowledge . faith stands by it self and upon grounds of its own , nor can be removed from them and placed on those of knowledge . their grounds are so far from being the same , or having any thing , that when it is brought to certainty , faith is destroyed , 't is knowledge then and faith no longer . so that , whether you are , or are not mistaken in the placing certainty in the perception of the agreement or disagreement of ideas , faith still stands upon its own basis , which is not at all alter'd by it ; and every article of that hath just the same unmoved foundation , and the very same credibility that it had before . this is the substance of what you say about this matter , and is the most considerable passage in your book towards clearing this matter . but i was aware of this , as appears by these words ; is faith an unreasonable act ? is it not an assent to a proposition ? then , if all certainty in acts of reason be derived from the perceiving the agreement or disagreement of the ideas contained in it ; either there can be no certainty in the reasonable act of faith , or the grounds of certainty must be laid some other way . but this is a matter of too great weight and consequence to be easily past over , because the main strength of your defence lies in it , and therefore i shall more strictly examine what you say ; and set this point of the certainty of faith in as good a light as i can , and shew the inconsistency of your notion of ideas , with the articles of the christian faith. to talk of the certainty of faith , say you , seems all one to you as to talk of the knowledge of believing ; a way of speaking not easie for you to understand . but how comes the certainty of faith to become so hard a point with you ? have not all mankind , who have talked of matters of faith , allow'd a certainty of faith as well as a certainty of knowledge , although upon different grounds ? in your former letter you told us , that if we knew the original of words , we should be much helped to the ideas they were first applied to and made to stand for . now what is there in the original of the word certainty which makes it uncapable of being applied to faith ? i had thought that our word was taken from the latin ; and that among the romans it was opposed to doubting , nil tam certum quam quod de dubio certum . and therefore where the mind upon examination of the grounds of assent saw no reason for doubting , it might properly be said to be certain : if it sees no cause to doubt from the evidence of the thing it self , or the clear deduction of consequences , that is certainty of knowledge ; but where it sees no reason to doubt from the authority of him that speaks , that is certainty of believing ; and the greater the authority of him that speaks , the less reason there is to doubt , and therefore the greater certainty of faith. and this i think is very easie to be understood , and so have the generality of mankind thought to this day . but it seems our old words must not now pass in the current sense ; but then it is fit they be called in , and new stampt , that we may have none but new milled words to talk with ; but in common justice , a competent time ought to be allow'd for it , that none be surprized ; and in the mean time they ought to pass in their current sense ; and that is all the favour i desire in this matter . but i am utterly against any private mints of words ; and think those persons assume too much authority to themselves , who will not suffer common words to pass in their general acceptation ; but will set such bounds and limits to the sense of them , as suit best with their own speculations . but is not this all one as to talk of the knowledge of believing ? for what reason ? knowledge and faith are too distinct things , the one relates to evidence , and the other to testimony ; but certainty is common to them both , unless you think it impossible to be certain upon any testimony whatsoever . you tell us in your postscript ( which i hope may be brought hither without offence ) that it is a shame among christians to raise such a doubt of this , whether an infinitely powerfull and wise being be veracious or no. then i suppose the veracity of god is a certain and undoubted principle ; and if there be sufficient means to assure us of divine revelation ( as i doubt not but you yield there are ) what should hinder one , that believes upon such grounds as are sufficient to convince him , from attaining to a certainty of faith ? but you take certainty as belonging only to knowledge . so do the papists , as belonging only to infallibility , and say there can be no certainty of faith , where there is not an infallible proponent ; but neither you nor they are to impose upon the understandings of mankind , who know how to distinguish the grounds of certainty both from knowledge and infallibility . you allow such a thing as assurance of faith ; and why not certainty as well as assurance ? i know no reason , but that you have appropriated certainty to the perception of the agreement or disagreement of ideas in any proposition ; and now you find this will not hold as to articles of faith ; and therefore you will allow no certainty of faith ; which i think is not for the advantage of your cause . but you go on and tell us , that if this way of certainty by ideas doth not hold , yet it cannot affect matters of faith which stand immoveable upon other grounds ; faith in your own words stands still upon its own basis ; and every article of it has just the same unmoved foundation , and the very same credibility that it had before . this will appear to be an extraordinary answer , when we have throughly examin'd it . here we see faith is taken not with respect to the general grounds of certainty , but to the particular articles of faith , i. e. the propositions contained in that revelation which we embrace on the account of its divine authority ; now these propositions are of several kinds . 1. some that are more clearly expressed therein , but such as might be attained to by the light of reason without revelation . and such are the fundamental principles of natural religion , viz. the being of god and providence , and the rewards and punishments of a future state. these mankind may attain to a certainty in , without revelation , or else there can be no such thing as natural religion in the world ; but these things are more fully and plainly revealed in the scriptures . let us now suppose a person by natural reason to attain to a certainty , as to the being of god and immortality of the soul ; and he proceeds upon your general grounds of certainty , from the agreement or disagreement of ideas ; and so from the ideas of god and the soul , he is made certain of those two points before mention'd . but let us again suppose that such a person upon a farther examination of your method of proceeding finds , that the way of ideas in these cases will not do ; for no idea proves the existence of the thing without it self , no more than the picture of a man proves his being , or the visions of a dream make a true history , ( which are your own expressions . ) and for the soul he cannot be certain , but that matter may think , ( as you affirm ) and then what becomes of the soul's immateriality ( and consequently immortality ) from its operations ? but for all this , say you , his assurance of faith remains firm on its own basis. now i appeal to any man of sense , whether the finding the uncertainty of his own principles which he went upon in point of reason , doth not weaken the credibility of these fundamental articles when they are consider'd purely as matters of faith ? for before , there was a natural credibility in them on the account of reason ; but by going on wrong grounds of certainty , all that is lost ; and instead of being certain he is more doubtfull than ever . and if the evidence of faith falls so much short of that of reason , it must needs have less effect upon mens minds , when the subserviency of reason is taken away ; as it must be when the grounds of certainty by reason are vanished . is it at all probable , that he who finds his reason deceive him in such fundamental points should have his faith stand firm and unmoveable on the account of revelation ? for in matters of revelation , there must be some antecedent principles supposed before we can believe any thing on the account of it . and the first is , that there is a god ; but this was the very thing he found himself at a loss in by his way of certainty by ideas ; and how can his faith stand firm as to divine revelation , when he is made uncertain by his own way , whether there be a god or no ? besides , to suppose divine revelation , we must be certain that there is a principle above matter and motion in the world ; but here we find , that upon the principles of certainty by ideas he cannot be certain of this ; because he doth not know but matter may think ; and consequently , all revelation may be nothing but the effects of an exalted fancy , or the heats of a disordered imagination , as spinoza affirmed . again , before there can be any such thing as assurance of faith upon divine revelation , there must be a certainty as to sense and tradition ; for there can be no revelation pretended now without immediate inspiration ; and the basis of our faith is a revelation contained in an ancient book , whereof the parts were delivered at distant times , but conveyed down to us by an universal tradition . but now , what if your grounds of certainty can give us no assurance as to these things ? i do not mean , that they cannot demonstrate matters of fact , which it were most unreasonable to expect ; but that these grounds of certainty make all things uncertain ; for i think i have proved , that this way of ideas cannot give a satisfactory account as to the existence of the plainest objects of sense ; because reason cannot perceive the connexion between the objects and the ideas . how then can we arrive to any certainty in perceiving those objects by their ideas ? and i was in the right , when i said this way tended to scepticism ; and i do not think that consistent with the assurance of faith. but this is an imputation you take very ill , and say , that i have brought no argument for it , but only that my great prejudice against this way of certainty is , that it leads to scepticism . ( sceptism is the new mill'd word . ) this is very strange , when that expression is only the introduction to the arguments from p. 125 to 132 , to which no answer at all is given . and so i leave it . there are other propositions or articles of faith which wholly depend on the sense of words contained in the scripture , and we are to enquire , whether the assurance of faith , as you call it , be consistent with the overthrowing your grounds of certainty ; i. e. whether those who embrace the articles of faith in the way of ideas , can retain their certainty of those articles when these ideas are quitted . and this alone will be a plain demonstration in the case , that the certainty of faith cannot stand with such men , if this way of certainty by ideas be destroyed . and by this which i am now to make out , let any one judge how true your words are like to prove , when you say , let the grounds of knowledge or certainty be resolved into what they please , it touches not your faith ; the foundation of that stands as sure as before , and cannot be at all shaken by it . of this we shall judge by some important articles of christian faith according to your ideas . the first shall be that of the resurrection of the dead . the reason of believing the resurrection of the same body upon your grounds is from the idea of identity ; which i take to be this from your own words . 1. that the identity of living creatures depends not on a mass of the same particles , but on something else ; for in them the variation of great parcels of matter alters not the identity ; for which you instance in the growth of an oak and a horse . 2. that the identity of a man consists in nothing but a participation of the same continued life by constantly fleeting particles of matter , in succession vitally united to the same organized body . 3. that personal identity , i. e. the sameness of a rational being lies in self-consciousness , and in that alone , whether it be annexed only to one individual substance , or can be continued in a succession of several substances . 4. that those who place thought in a purely material , animal constitution , void of spirit , do place personal identity in something else that identity of substance , as animal identity is preserved in identity of life and not of substance . 5. that it matters not to this point of being the same self , whether this present self be made up of the same or other substances . 6. that in this personal identity of self-consciousness is founded all the right and iustice of reward and punishment , happiness and misery , being that for which every one is concerned for himself , not mattering what becomes of any substance not joined to , or affected with that consciousness . 7. that the sentence at the day of iudgment will be justified by the consciousness all persons shall have that they themselves in what bodies soever they appear , or what substances soever that consciousness adheres to , are the same that committed those actions and deserve that punishment for them . this i suppose to be a true and just account of your sense of this matter ; and so the article of the resurrection is resolved into your idea of personal identity . and the question between us now is , whether your certainty of this matter from your idea have no influence on the belief of this article of faith ? for the main of your defence lies upon this point , whether your method of certainty by ideas , doth at all shake , or in the least concern the assurance of faith ? which you absolutely deny , and affirm , that faith stands upon its own basis , and is not at all altered by your method of certainty ; and every article of that has just the same unmoved foundation , and the very same credibility that it had before . now i take this article of the resurrection of the dead to be an article of faith , and we are to consider , whether if your method of certainty by ideas do hold in this matter , it continues as firm , and in the same credibility it had before ? i shall not urge you with the sense of our own or other christian churches in this point of the sameness of the body in the resurrection of the dead , but i shall continue my self to the scripture as the foundation and rule of our faith ; and the main point is , whether according to that , it be not necessary for the same substance which was united to the body to be raised up at the last day ? i do not say the same individual particles of matter which were united at the point of death ; for there must be a great alteration in them in a lingring disease , as if a fat man falls into a consumption : i do not say , the same particles which the sinner had at the very time of commission of his sins ; for then a long sinner must have a vast body , considering the continual spending of particles by perspiration ; but that which i suppose is implyed in it is , that it must be the same material substance which was vitally united to the soul here . you mention the hypothesis of those , who place thought in a purely material animal constitution void of spirit : but you agree , that the more probable opinion is , that this consciousness is annexed to the affection of one individual immaterial substance . it is very well that it is allowed to be the more probable opinion ; but it seems without any certainty as to the truth of it . for you have told us , what the effect of probability is , viz. that it is enough to induce the mind to judge the proposition true or false rather than the contrary ; and that it is conversant about things whereof we have no certainty , but only some inducements to receive it for true . thence i cannot but observe , that we have no certainty upon your grounds , that self-consciousness depends upon an individual immaterial substance , and consequently that a material substance may , according to your principles , have self-consciousness in it ; at least , that you are not certain of the contrary . now i pray consider , whether this doth not a little affect the whole article of the resurrection ? for , if it may be only a material substance in us that thinks , then this substance , which consists in the life of an organiz'd body , must cease by death ; for how can that , which consisted in life , be preserved afterwards ? and if the personal identity consists in a self-consciousness depending on such a substance as cannot be preserved without an organiz'd body , then there is no subsistence of it separate from the body , and the resurrection must be giving a new life . to whom ? to a material substance which wholly lost its personal identity by death . so that here can be no personal identity at all ; unless you say the very same life which was long since at an end can be reproduced . which i suppose you will not assert . but let us take the more probable opinion ; which i think certain , viz. that self-consciousness depends upon an immaterial principle in us ; and then the question is , how far the scripture determines the sameness of the body at the resurrection , i. e. of that material substance , which was vitally united with that immaterial substance in this life . the doctrine delivered by our saviour is , that all that are in the graves shall hear his voice ; and shall come forth ; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life , and they that have done evil to the resurrection of damnation . what is the meaning of all that are in their graves ? doth this relate to any other substance than that which was united to the soul in life ? can a different substance be said to be in the graves and to come out of them ? is it not material , as you say , whether the present self be made up of the same or other substances ? if it be not so to your idea of identity , it is as to the sense of our saviour's words : unless you can make it out , that a substance which never was in the grave may come out of it . but it may be said , that if these words be taken strictly they confine the resurrection to those particles of matter only which were in the grave ; if not , then they may extend to another substance . i answer , that by comparing this with other places we find that the words are to be understood of the substance of that body to which the soul was united ; and not to those individual particles . so st. paul , for we must all appear before the iudgment seat of christ , that every one may receive the things done in his body , according to that he hath done , whether it be good or bad . can these words be understood of any other material substance , but that body in which these things were done ? how could it be said , if any other substance be joyned to the soul at the resurrection , as its body , that they were the things done in or by the body ? curcellaeus his copy reads it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; the complutensian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and several of the fathers so took it ; either way , it must relate to that which was the real body in which the person lived and acted , whether good or evil. and st. paul's dispute about the manner of raising the body might soon have been ended , if there were no necessity of the same body . if there be no resurrection of the dead , then is not christ raised . it seems then , other bodies are to be raised as his was ; and can there be any doubt whether his body were the same material substance which was united to his soul before ? and the apostle lays so much weight upon it , that he saith , if christ be not raised your faith is vain ; doth he mean , if there were not the same personal identity , as to the soul of christ and the matter united to it after the resurrection ? that cannot be his meaning , for then there would have been no necessity of christs own body being raised ; which he asserts and proves by undoubted witnesses . were they witnesses only of some material substance then united to his soul ? he saith , he was seen of five hundred brethren at once . what he was this ? it was christ that died . yes , the person of christ ; but personal identity doth not require the same substance , but the same consciousness ; and so if christ were conscious to himself in another substance , there was no necessity of the same body . and so truly from the seeing the person of christ they could not prove it was the same individual body . but thomas said , except i shall see in his hands the print of the nails , and put my finger into the print of the nails , and thrust my hand into his side , i will not believe . the doing whereof convinced him it was the same individual body ; but there will be no such proof at the great day . and there is no reason there should , since the resurrection of christ was a sufficient proof of god's power to raise the dead , and the dissimilitude of circumstances can be no argument against it , since the power and wisdom of god are concerned in it . but the apostle insists upon the resurrection of christ , not meerly as an argument of the possibility of ours , but of the certainty of it ; because he rose as the first fruits ; christ the first fruits , afterwards they that are christs at his coming . st. paul was aware of the objections in mens minds about the resurrection of the same body ; and it is of great consequence as to this article , to shew upon what grounds he proceeds . but some man will say , how are the dead raised up , and with what body do they come ? first he shews , that the seminal parts of plants are wonderfully improved by the ordinary providence of god in the manner of their vegetation . they sow bare grain of wheat , or of some other grain , but god giveth it a body , as it hath pleased him , and to every seed his own body . here is an identity of the material substance supposed ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that proper body which belongs to it ; every seed having that body in little , which is afterwards so much inlarged ; and in grain the seed is corrupted before its germination ; but it hath its proper organical parts , which make it the same body with that which it grows up to . for although grain be not divided into lobes as other seeds are , yet it hath been found , by the most accurate observations , that upon separating the membranes these seminal parts are discerned in them ; which afterwards grow up to that body which we call corn. st. paul indeed saith , that we sow not that body that shall be ; but he speaks not of the identity but the perfection of it . and although there be such a difference from the grain it self , when it comes up to be perfect corn with root , stalk , blade and ear , that it may be said to outward appearance not to be the same body , yet with regard to the seminal and organical parts , it is as much the same as a man grown up is the same with the embryo in the womb. and although many arguments may be used to prove , that a man is not the same , because life which depends upon the course of the blood and the manner of respiration and nutrition is so different in both states , yet that man would be thought ridiculous that should seriously affirm , that it was not the same man. and you grant , that the variation of great parcels of matter in plants , alters not the identity : and that the organization of the parts in one coherent body partaking of one common life makes the identity of a plant ; so that in things capable of any sort of life , the identity is consistent with a continued succession of parts ; and so the wheat grown up is the same body with the grain that was sown . and thus the alteration of the parts of the body at the resurrection is consistent with its identity , if its organization and life be the same ; and this is a real identity of the body which depends not upon consciousness . from whence it follows , that to make the same body , no more is required but restoring life to the organized parts of it . and you grant likewise , that the identity of the same man consists in a participation of the same continued life by constantly fleeting particles of matter in succession vitally united to the same organized body . so that there is no difficulty as to the sameness of the body , if life were continued ; and if by divine power life be restored to that material substance which was before united , by a re-union of the soul to it , there is no reason to deny the identity of the body . not from the consciousness of the soul , but from that life which is the result of the union of soul and body . but st. paul still supposes that it must be that material substance to which the soul was before united . for saith he , it is sown in corruption , it is raised in incorruption : it is sown in dishonour , it is raised in glory ; it is sown in weakness , it is raised in power ; it is sown a natural body , it is raised a spiritual body . can such a material substance which was never united to the body be said to be sown in corruption , and weakness , and dishonour ? either therefore he must speak of the same body , or his meaning cannot be comprehended . for what doth all this relate to a conscious principle ? the apostle speaks plainly of that body which was once quickened and afterwards falls to corruption ; and is to be restored with more noble qualities . for this corruptible must put on incorruption , and this mortal must put on immortality . i do not see how he could more expressly affirm the identity of this corruptible body , with that after the resurrection , and that without any respect to the principle of self-consciousness ; and so if the scripture be the sole foundation of our faith , this is an article of it , and so it hath been always understood by the christian church . and your idea of personal identity is inconsistent with it ; for it makes the same body which was here united to the soul not to be necessary to the doctrine of the resurrection , but any material substance being united to the same principle of consciousness makes the same body . the dispute is not , how far personal identity in it self may consist in the very same material substance ; for we allow the notion of personal identity to belong to the same man under several changes of matter ; but whether it doth not depend upon a vital vnion between the soul and body and the life which is consequent upon it ; and therefore in the resurrection the same material substance must be reunited ; or else it cannot be called a resurrection , but a renovation ; i. e. it may be a new life , but not a raising the body from the dead . 2. the next articles of faith which your notion of ideas is inconsistent with , are no less than those of the trinity , and of the incarnation of our saviour . the former by the first article of our church is expressed by three persons in the vnity of the divine nature : the latter is said art. 2. to be by the vnion of the divine and humane nature in one person . let us now see whether your ideas of nature and person can consist with these . but before i come to that i must endeavour to set this matter right , as to the dispute about the notion of nature and person , which you have endeavour'd with all your art , to perplex and confound , and have brought in several interlocutors to make it look more like an entertainment . of which afterwards : the original question was , whether we could come to any certainty about the distinction of nature and person in the way of ideas ; and my business was to prove that we could not , because we had no simple ideas by sensation or reflection , without which you affirm that our vnderstanding seems to you not to have the least glimmering of ideas : and that we have nothing in our minds which did not come in one of these two ways . these are your own words . and then i undertook to shew , that it was not possible for us to have any simple ideas of nature and person by sensation or reflection : and that whether we consider'd nature as taken for essential properties , or for that substance wherein that property lies : whether we consider it in distinct individuals or abstractly ; still my design was to shew that in your way of ideas , you could come to no certainty about them . and as to person i shew'd , that the distinction of individuals is not founded meerly on what occurs to our senses , but upon a different manner of subsistence , which is in one individual , and is not communicable to another . and as to this i said , that we may find within our selves an intelligent substance by inward perception ; but whether that make a person or not , must be understood some other way ; for if the meer intelligent substance make a person , then there cannot be the union of two such natures , but there must be two persons . which is repugnant to the article of the incarnation of our saviour . that this was the true state of the question will appear to any one that will vouchsafe to look into it . but what said you in your first letter in answer to it ? as to nature you say , that it is a collection of several ideas combined into one complex , abstract idea , which when they are found united in any individual existing , though joyned in that existence with several other ideas , that individual or particular being is truly said to have the nature of a man , or the nature of a man to be in him ; forasmuch as these simple ideas are found united in him , which answer the ●omplex , abstract idea , to which the specifick name is given by any one : which abstract specifick idea , he keeps the same when he applies the specifick name standing for it to distinct individuals . and as to person , in the way of ideas , you say , that the word person in it self signifies nothing , and so no idea belonging to it , nothing can be said to be the true idea of it . but as soon as the common vse of any language has appropriated it to any idea , then that is the true idea of a person , and so of nature . against this i objected in my answer to that letter , that if these terms really signifie nothing in themselves , but are only abstract and complex ideas , which the common use of language hath appropriated to be the signs of two ideas ; then it is plain that they are only notions of the mind , as all abstracted and complex ideas are ; and so one nature and three persons can be no more . to this you answer in your second letter , that your notion of the terms nature and person is , that they are two sounds that naturally signifie not one thing more than another , nor in themselves signifie any thing at all , but have the signification which they have barely by imposition . whoever imagined that words signifie any otherwise than by imposition ? but the question is , whether these be meer words and names , or not ? or whether there be not a real foundation in things for such a distinction between nature and person ? of which i gave this evident proof , that if it were not the same nature in different individuals , every individual must make a different kind . and what answer do you give to this plain reason ? nothing particular that i can find . but in the general you say , that all that you can find that i except against in your notion of nature and person is nothing but this , viz. that these are two sounds which in themselves signifie nothing . and is this all indeed ? did not i tell you in these words , ( which i am forced to repeat on this occasion , although i am very unwilling to fill pages with repetitions . ) the question now between us comes to this , whether the common nature or essence of things lies only in an abstract idea , or a general name , and the real essence consists only in particular beings from which that nature is abstracted ? the question is not whether in forming the notion of common nature , the mind doth not abstract from the circumstances of particular beings ; but it is whether there be not an antecedent foundation in the nature of things , upon which we form this abstract idea ? for if there be , then it cannot be called an universal name only ; or a meer sign of an idea , which we have formed from putting many simple ideas together , which name belongs to all of such a sort , as have those simple ideas united together . in these words , which you cannot deny to be in the place mention'd , i thought i had stated the case fairly between us . and why do you not return an answer to them ? but instead of that you only mention another passage more liable to cavilling , where i say , that upon your notions of nature and person , i do not see how it is possible to defend the doctrine of the trinity . for if these terms really signifie nothing in themselves , but are only abstract and complex ideas , which the common use of language hath appropriated to be the sign of two ideas ; then it is plain that they are only notions of the mind , as all abstract and complex ideas are ; and so one nature and three persons can be no more . upon this you charge me with affirming that of you which you never said , viz. that these terms are only abstract or complex ideas : but your words are , taking therefore nature and person for the sign of two ideas they are put to stand for : and by enumerating all the simple ideas , that are contained in the complex idea , that each of them is made to stand for , we shall immediately see the whole difference that is between them . these are your own words . now from thence it appears , that nature and person are terms which are the signs of two ideas by your own confession : but you never made these , or any other terms to be ideas : and you should be ashamed of such iargon . but have not you said in your essay , that it is a very common practice for names to be made use of instead of the ideas themselves , especially if the ideas be very complex . nature and person you grant to be complex ideas ; and these terms you confess are appropriated to be the signs of two ideas : therefore here is an ambiguity in the use of these words , for they are complex ideas themselves , and they are made the signs of them ; and so the words of the sentence are capable of both those senses . for it is true , according to you , that these terms , nature and person , really signifie nothing in themselves , but are only complex and abstract ideas ; and those terms are appropriated to be the signs of two ideas . so that nature and person are both ideas themselves , and those terms are the signs of two ideas : and the sense had not been liable to exception , if and had been inserted ; for if these terms really signifie nothing in themselves , but are only abstract and complex ideas ; and which the common use had appropriated to be the signs of two ideas , &c. but whether this be properly expressed or not , according to your sense of ideas , the weight of the controversie depends not at all upon it ; but whether nature and person can be any other but abstract ideas , according to your own plain expressions ; and if they are so , they are no more than notions of the mind , and then the consequence must hold , that one nature and three persons can be no more . upon which i said , i did not see how it was possible to defend the doctrine of the trinity , ( and i now add of the incarnation ) which was the thing i undertook to make out . but you very freely say , whether i rightly deduce from it this consequence , viz. and so one nature and three persons can be no more ; is what you neither know not are concerned to examin . which i think is an expression could hardly drop from a person , who did know how to declare his belief of three persons in the vnity of the divine nature . but you pretend these are none of your notions of nature and person , nor indeed any thing you can understand . but it is plain , that this consequence follows from your own notions of nature and person ; as they are set down expresly by your self in the former letter . you tell me , i made this inference a little in haste ! whether a man write in haste or not , the world will judge by what appears , and not by what he or any other saith . and i think it will appear , that i did not make this inference in haste , but from a deliberate consideration of your notion of the ideas of nature and person . but by those terms signifying nothing in themselves , you say , that you meant , that they are two sounds that naturally signifie not one thing more than another , nor in themselves signifie any thing at all , but have the signification which they have barely by imposition . and was this truly all that you meant by it ? and do you think that peter , and iames , and iohn signifie any thing by nature ? are not all words made significative by imposition ? but is there no difference in the signification of words as they stand for signs of things ? if they be words for particular substances , then you grant , that there is something really existing which is meant by those words ; but if they relate only to the conceptions of the mind , then they signifie them and no more . and the question is , which of these two you meant by those words nature and person ? and you plainly affirm both of them to be complex ideas , which are made only by an act of the mind , and therefore your meaning can be no otherwise understood . you presume , that upon more leisurely thoughts , both my self and the rest of mankind will concur with you . i never affected singularity , and am ready to comply with the rest of mankind in any reasonable thing . but you say , that this notion of nature and person , that they are two words that signifie only by imposition , is what will hold in the common sense of mankind . no doubt of it : but i must again and again tell you , that is not the point in question , but whether they are only abstract and complex ideas , which have no other being but in the mind . and to this you answer not a word . i do not in the least think as you suggest , that it is necessary to the defense of the trinity , that these two articulate sounds should have natural significations , and that unless they are used in those significations , it were impossible to defend the doctrine of the trinity . but i do affirm , that those who make nature and person to be only abstract and complex ideas ; can neither defend nor reasonably believe it . and this is making no extraordinary supposition necessary to the belief or defence of it ; but only that which in the common sense of mankind is necessary to it . for , if you have expressed your own mind in your former letter ; that must guide us in your notion of nature and person , where you undertook to explain them . for if nature and person be abstract , and complex ideas , as you say , and such are only acts of the mind , i do not see how it is possible for you to reconcile these notions with the articles of the trinity and incarnation . i do not go about to accuse you of denying these doctrines ; i hope you do not . but i impute all this hesitancy , and doubting only to your notions of ideas ; which you had been so long forming in your mind , that as it often happens in such cases , one darling favourite notion proves too hard for some points of far greater consequence , when they are found inconsistent with it . and because you had first fixed your notion of ideas , and taken much pains about them , you thought all other things were to be entertained as they appear'd consistent with them . but you could not but find , that the articles of three persons , and one nature ; and two natures , and one person , were not reconcileable with your ideas of nature and person ; which is that they are complex ideas , which depend upon the act of the mind ; for this were to make the two natures in christ to be only two complex ideas . for if nature , as you say , be a collection of several ideas combined into one complex , abstract idea ; then two natures can be nothing else but two such collections , or two abstracted and complex ideas . it may be said , that when you make nature an abstracted and complex idea , you speak of a specifick idea , but the humane nature in christ was a particular substance , and this you assert to be a real thing , and not to depend on the act of the mind . but this doth not clear the matter . for in your former letter you said , that all the ideas we have of particular distinct substances , are nothing but several combinations of simple ideas : which in corporeal substances are sensible qualities , in incorporeal are operations of the mind . the utmost then which the idea of humane nature in christ comes to is , that there were in him the sensible qualities and intellectual operations of a man , with an unknown substance to support them : which belongs not to the simple ideas , but is supposed by them . this is all i can make of your way of ideas : and so the incarnation of christ is the assuming the sensible qualities , and intellectual operations of a man , to which a substratum doth belong : but is no part of the simple ideas . so that we can have no idea at all of the humane nature of christ ; but only an inference , that since those are but accidents , there must be a substratum to support them ; and consequently there was a particular substance in him made up of mind and body . but if this had come in the way of ideas , yet it cannot make out the humane nature of christ. for if it were in him no otherwise than in other men , then the mystery of the incarnation is quite gone , and christ is to be consider'd but like other men ; which doth not answer to what the scripture saith of the word 's being made flesh , and that god was manifest in the flesh. there must be therefore something beyond the meer humane nature in him ; and either it must be only some divine operation upon , and with it , and that is no substance ; or if it be a substance , it must either cohabit with it , or else be united to it . if it only co-habits , then there are two persons dwelling together in one body , and the actions of one cannot be attributed to the other ; if there be a real union between them , so as the acts belong to one person ; then there must be such a manner of existence in the humane nature of christ , which is different from it in other persons . for in all others , the acts belong to the humane person ; but if it were so in christ , then the divine acts of christ must flow from the humane nature as the principle of them ; which is to confound the divine and humane nature , and operations together ; if they come from the divine person , then the humane nature must have another kind of subsistence , than it hath in others , or else there must be two persons ; and person being as you say , a forensick term , there must be two different capacities of rewards and punishments ; which is so absurd an opinion as i think no one will assert . if there be then but one person and two natures , how can you possibly reconcile this to your way of ideas ? person , say you , in it self signifies nothing ; but as soon as the common use of any language has appropriated it to any idea , then that is the true idea of a person , i. e. men may call a person what they please , for there is nothing but common use required to it : they may call a horse , or a tree , or a stone a person if they think fit ; but since the common use of language hath appropriated it to an intelligent being , that is , a person . and so you tell us , that person stands for a thinking intelligent being that hath reason and reflection , and can consider it self as it self , the same thinking being in different times and place . how comes person to stand for this and nothing else ? from whence comes self-consciousness in different times and places to make up this idea of a person ? whether it be true or false , i am not now to enquire , but how it comes into this idea of a person ? hath the common use of our language appropriated it to this sense ? if not , this seems to be a meer arbitrary idea ; and may as well be denied as affirmed . and what a fine pass are we come to in the way of ideas , if a meer arbitrary idea must be taken into the only true method of certainty ? but of that afterwards . we now proceed in the way of ideas as you give it us . but if this be the true idea of a person , then there can be no union of two natures in one person : for if an intelligent conscious being be the idea of a person ; and the divine and human nature be intelligent conscious beings , then the doctrine of the union of two natures and one person is quite sunk , for here must be two persons in this way of ideas . again , if this be the idea of a person , then where there are three persons , there must be three distinct intelligent beings ; and so there cannot be three persons in the same individual essence . and thus both these doctrines of the trinity and incarnation are past recovery gone , if this way of ideas hold . so great a difference there is , between forming ideas first , and then judging of revelation by them ; and the believing of revelation on its proper grounds , and interpreting the sense of it by the due measures of reason . you may pretend what you please , that you hold the assurance of faith , and the certainty by ideas to go upon very different grounds ; but when a proposition is offered you out of scripture to be believed , and you doubt about the sense of it , is not recourse to be made to your ideas ? as , in the present case , whether there can be three persons in one nature , or two natures and one person ; what resolution can you come to upon your principles , but in the way of ideas ? you may possibly say , that where ideas are clear and distinct , there you are to judge of revelation by them ; and this is what you assert in your essay , that in propositions whose certainty is built on clear and perfect ideas and evident deductions of reason , there no proposition can be received for divine revelation which contradicts them ; from hence you conclude it impossible for the same body to be in two places at once . and yet there is a person who hath lately told the world , that there is one certain secret way how by divine power , the same body , but not the same person , may be in very distant places at once ; but he is advised to keep it up as a secret ; which was good friendly advice : but till it be discovered there is no judging of it . here i observe , that you require clear and distinct ideas ; and yet we find , if a man's word may be taken , these clear and distinct ideas do not prove the thing impossible . but what is to be said when the ideas are not clear and distinct ? you say , your method of certainty is by the agreement or disagreement of ideas , where they are not in all their parts perfectly clear and distinct . and this is your secret about certainty ; which i think had been better kept up too : for i pray , in the case now before us , are your ideas of nature and person clear and distinct or not ? if they are , then it is plain from your own doctrine , that if revelation be pretended , you are to reject it . how then comes the certainty of faith to be preserved firm and immoveable , although the grounds of certainty be disputed ? but suppose they are not clear and distinct ? what is to be done in a matter of revelation contrary to your ideas ? are you to submit to the revelation or not ? whatever god hath revealed is most certainly true , no doubt can be made of it . this is the proper object of faith ; but whether it be a divine revelation or no , you say , reason must judge . yes , reason proceeding upon clear and distinct ideas . but suppose you have ideas sufficient for certainty in your way , but not clear and distinct ; what is to be done then ? in things that are above reason , you say , when they are revealed , they are proper matters of faith. what is here being above reason ? either above the discovery of reason ▪ as the fall of angels , the resurrection of the body , &c. and about these , you say , reason hath nothing to do . ( what not if there be an idea of identity as to the body ? ) or such as are above the comprehension of reason when discovered . and they are either such as we have no natural ideas of ; and then you grant , that they are pure matters of faith ; or they are such , as you have certain ideas of , but not clear and distinct . now here lies the pinching difficulty , as to your way of ideas . you say indeed , that revelation must carry it against meer probabilities to the contrary ; because the mind not being certain of the truth of that it doth not evidently know , but is only probably convinced of , is bound to give up its assent to such a testimony , which it is satisfied comes from one who cannot err and will not deceive . i pray observe your own words , you here positively say , that the mind not being certain of the truth of that it doth not evidently know : so that it is plain here , that you place certainty only in evident knowledge , or in clear and distinct ideas ; and yet your great complaint of me was , that i charged this upon you , and now i find it in your own words ( which i observed before . ) but let us allow you all you desire , viz. that there may be certainty by ideas , where they are not clear and distinct : and let us now suppose that you are to judge of a proposition delivered as a matter of faith , where you have a certainty by reason from your ideas , such as they are : can you assent to this as a matter of faith , when you are already certain by your ideas of the contrary ? how is this possible ? can you believe that to be true , which you are certain is not true ? suppose it be that there are two natures in one person ; the question is , whether you can assent to this as a matter of faith ? if you had said , there had been only probabilities on the other side , i grant that you then say , revelation is to prevail ; but when you say you have certainty by ideas to the contrary , i do not see how it is possible for you to assent to a matter of faith as true , when you are certain from your ideas that it is not true : for how can you believe against certainty ? the evidence is not so great as when the ideas are clear and distinct , but the bar against assent is as strong ; because the mind is actually determined by certainty . and so your notion of certainty by ideas must overthrow the credibility of a matter of faith in all such propositions which are offered to be believed on the account of divine revelation . i shall now summ up the force of what i have said about this matter . your answer is , that your method of certainty by ideas , shakes not at all , nor in the least concerns the assurance of faith ▪ against this i have pleaded . ( 1. ) that your method of certainty shakes the belief of revelation in general . ( 2. ) that it shakes the belief of particular propositions or articles of faith , which depend upon the sense of words contained in scripture . because you do not say , that we are to believe all that we find there expressed ; but in case we have any clear and distinct ideas which limit the sense another way than the words seem to carry it , we are to judge that to be the true sense . but in case our ideas are not clear and distinct , yet you affirm as your proper doctrine , that we may come to certainty by ideas , although not in all respects perfectly clear and distinct . from whence i infer , that where you have attained to a certainty by your imperfect ideas , you must judge of a matter of faith , by those ideas , and consequently , if the union of two natures and one person , or three persons in one nature be repugnant to your ideas ( as i have shewed that they are ) you must by virtue of your own principles reject these from being matters of faith. and thus i hope i have proved what i undertook , viz. that your notion of certainty by ideas is inconsistent with these articles of the christian faith. but you have this comfort left , that you are not the first person who hath run himself into insuperable difficulties as to matters of faith , by this way of ideas . for des cartes himself did so in a remarkable manner : he was a person of a great reach and capacity , and spent many thoughts in laying the foundations of certainty from ideas , both as to incorporeal and corporeal substances ; and yet was miserably foiled as to both of them . his demonstrations from his ideas in his metaphysical meditations , did not meet with the entertainment he promised himself from the inquisitive part of mankind ; for his objective reality from his idea gave no satisfaction ; and his other argument was thought to have no force , unless it were taken off from the idea and placed upon the necessity of existence in the nature of the thing . as to corporeal substances , his fundamental mistake was in a wrong idea of matter , which he made to be the same with extension ; and upon this he built his systeme of nature . but against this first false step many things were objected by his adversaries , as may be seen by the late disputes in france about his principles ; they objected , that his notion or idea of matter made it necessary , and impossible for god to annihilate it ; and his defenders are driven to such shifts as to god's will and power , that an indifferent person might thereby see how dangerous it is to take up with ideas as to the ground of certainty , although neither himself nor his followers pretend to place it in any thing but clear and distinct ideas . but when they came to reconcile their ideas with matters of faith , they were so plunged , that they could see no way to get through their difficulties . for as monsieur huet observes , although des cartes professes great submission to divine revelation , yet when it came to the trial , he judged his opinions could not be repugnant to it , because he was certain of the truth of them ; which shews , that he judged of revelation by his rules of certainty , and whatever he pretended , he did not take his measures of truth from revelation . a late defender of des cartes in answer to this , produces the words used by him in his principles , wherein he owns , that in case of divine revelation if god declares any thing concerning himself or others which exceed our capacity , as the mysteries of the trinity and incarnation , he would not refuse to believe them , although he could not clearly understand them . this monsieur huet denies not , viz. that he made such a general profession of submission to revelation and owning the mysteries of faith ; but , saith he , when it comes to particular points , then ideas are to be the standard by which we are to judge of revelation . monsieur regis in his reply saith , that matters of faith and philosophical truths are of different kinds ; and that there can be no contrariety but between things of the same kind . which makes him run into that great absurdity , that although in a philosophical sense god cannot do things repugnant to reason , yet in the way of faith he may ; and all this to preserve the certainty by ideas , when nothing can be more repugnant to all kinds of certainty than such a supposition . but another great admirer of des cartes , thinks this way unreasonable ; but des cartes , he saith , hath shewn the right method of certainty by clear and distinct ideas , and therefore he calls it no less than a divine certainty ; and he adds , that truth cannot be contrary to it self ; and he laughs at the distinction of philosophical and theological truths ; or the two ways of certainty by knowledge and faith : for , truth is always one and the same , and changes not its countenance : and if truth be an agreement of words with things , how can the same words agree in one book and differ in another ? for the same god is the author of truth where-ever it is : and therefore he calls it , a most absurd opinion of those who say , that god who is immutable should teach that as truth in philosophy , which is false in divinity . but i return to you . you seem to be not a little concerned , that i say , that as you have stated your notion of ideas it may be of dangerous consequence to that article of the christian faith which i had endeavoured to defend . such an accusation , you say , brought into any court in england , would be thought to shew a great inclination to have the accused be suspected rather than any evidence of being guilty of any thing ; and so would immediately be dismissed without hearing any plea to it . but you must give me leave to say , that you have quite mistaken my design , which was not to accuse you , but to shew my own dissatisfaction , as to the way you had taken to clear your self . i hoped you would have said so much for your own vindication , as would have satisfied the world , that your notion of ideas was far from any tendency that way to which it was carried by him who made use of your expressions : but , instead of that you explained it in such a manner as made it far more suspicious that he had not perverted your meaning . and that made me to say , that as you had stated it , it may be of dangerous consequence . it may be , say you , this is no evidence , but only an inclination to accuse you . so far from it , that it shewed an inclination to favour you , when i only said it may be ; for now you see , that i think it is of such dangerous consequence , and i must think so till you have cleared it better . but the notion of ideas as you have stated it , relates to your whole book : why should you carry it farther than i intended it ? the stating of it i mentioned was in your first letter ; where you told us what you meant by nature and person . but you have found out two particulars wherein it may be of dangerous consequence , first in making so much use of the word ideas , and your placing certainty in ideas . as to the term of ideas , i have no objection to the use of the word it self ; provided it be used in a common sense , and no weight be laid upon it more than it can bear ; for i am for no new affected terms which are apt to carry mens minds out of the way ; they are like ignes fatui , which seem to give light , but lead those that follow them into bogs : like fontanges , which seem to set peoples heads that wear them higher , but their understandings are just what they were before . i always dislik'd the stoical improvements by new words , or giving new senses to old ones . but i told you , i should never have mention'd this way of ideas , but for the ill use i found made of them : and you might have enjoy'd the satisfaction you had in them long enough , unless i had found them imploy'd in doing mischief . which , as you humbly conceive amounts to thus much and no more ; that i fear ideas ; i. e. the term ideas may some time or other be of dangerous consequence . can you possibly think this was my meaning ? i know of no antipathy i have to the term ideas ; nor do i understand any mischief that lies in the bare use of the term. if it gives you any satisfaction i pray make what use you please of it , so you do not set it up in your way of ideas for a new method of certainty ; nor weaken mens belief as to matters of faith by it . these were my prejudices against your ideas , and they are increased by your defences ; for i can find nothing that hath any force to remove them . you tell me , my quarrel must be with the term ideas as of dangerous consequence : but why so ? it was the way of certainty by ideas which i insisted upon , and the new terms as imploy'd to that purpose . i confess , i say , the world had been strangely amuzed with ideas of late , and we have been told , what strange things might be done by the help of ideas , i. e. as to matter of certainty . but you tell me more than once , that i own , that these come only to be common notions of things , which i have no aversion from . this is a way of turning things upon me , which i could not expect from you. for those words are brought in by me on this occasion , you had said , that you see no such opposition , but that ideas and sound reason may stand together , i. e. reason rightly managing those ideas , so as to produce evidence by them . upon this , i used these words . but what need all this great noise about ideas and certainty ; true and real certainty by ideas , if after all it comes only to this , that our ideas only represent such things , from whence we bring arguments to prove the truth of things ? but the world hath been strangely amused , &c. judge now how fair and ingenuous this answer is . that which i bring in as a consequence of your assertion , you make to be my own sense as to your notion of ideas : when i all along distinguish the way of reason , by deducing one thing from another , from your way of certainty , in the agreement and disagreement of ideas ; and i therefore mention it as an argument of your own departing from your beloved notion of ideas . i never said any thing against reason rightly managing ideas , so as to produce evidence by them . i was glad you came so far towards my own apprehension as to the use of ideas , and i declare soon after that if you mean no more by your certainty from ideas , but a certainty from reason , i was not so unreasonable a man to disagree with you . and yet you spend many pages to justifie your use of the term ideas : which is all lost upon me . for in short , it is not your way of ideas , but your way of certainty by ideas , which i was unsatisfied about , and am so much the more by the method you have taken to defend your self . and this was the thing i found fault with , as you could not but see ; but you found it much easier to run into a long discourse , to no purpose , about the use of the word ideas . how far your use of the term is new i will not dispute with you ; be it new or old the thing you do pretend to by your ideas is that which i disliked , and am forced to do so still ; for you give me no manner of satisfaction about it , as will appear by the examination of what you say , about the new method of certainty , which is the matter in question : you desire to know whether there be any other or older method of certainty ? that is not the point , but whether yours be any at all ? which i deny . if there be no older , you say , the world is obliged to you for this new one : very true , if it were what it pretends . but you tell me , i ought to set the world right in a thing of that great concernment , and to overthrow yours , and thereby prevent the dangerous consequence of your unseasonable starting this new method of certainty . i did never pretend to inform the world of new methods , and therefore am not bound to go any farther than to that i found fault with , which was your new method ; and although i thought i had said enough before , to shew how far it was from what it pretended ; yet because you call me to it in such a manner , i shall endeavour more freely to represent to you the vnsatisfactoriness and inconsistency of it . for it is still to me a strange thing , that you should talk so much of a new method of certainty by ideas ; and yet allow , as you do , such a want of ideas , so much imperfection in them , and such a want of connexion between our ideas , and the things themselves . one would think , that he that owned these things rather design'd to prove there could be no certainty by ideas . and when i had objected these things in the conclusion of my former answer , you do not deny them ; and all the return you make is , that it is better to have some way of certainty ( though it will not lead us to it in every thing ) than no way at all . as though the dispute between us had been , whether any certainty be not better than none . no doubt any true certainty is desirable , but it is , as i have often said , of ill consequence to set up such a method of certainty , as if it hold , will overthrow our faith , and if it doth not , must deceive all those that follow it . and it is the certainty of faith which i defend against your pretended certainty of knowledge . but to let you see what ground i had to be unsatisfied with it , i shall now wave all the instances of ideas i insisted on before , as to substances and sensible qualities ; and i shall single out one remarkable idea , by which the uncertainty of your way of ideas will be fully discover'd . and that is the idea of space ; upon which a famous systeme of natural philosophy hath been built , and as upon a clear and distinct idea ; and yet you will by no means allow it to be so ; and think you have a clear idea to the contrary ; although those who will not allow it to be true cannot deny it to be consistent with it self , and that the ideas in it have an agreement with one another . as to space , you say , that we have it both by sight and touch , which inform us of the distance between bodies : which in several respects may be called distance , capacity and extension ; and so extension , you say , is an idea belonging to body only , but space may , as is evident , be consider'd without it . but here now arises a great difficulty to me in the way of certainty by ideas : viz. that some very thinking men in this way of ideas , have look'd on the idea of space , and extended matter to be the same ; for say they , it appears to us from clear ideas , that body and extension are the same thing , and therefore if there be extension in space there must be body . but , you say , those that do so , either change the signification of words , and so render it a doubtfull idea , or they confound very different ideas with one another , and so can never come to certainty by the agreement or disagreement of ideas . but you conclude , that the clear and distinct idea of simple space distinguishes it plainly and sufficiently from body . here we see you pretend to a clear and distinct idea . but it falls out very unluckily for the way of ideas , that the first starter of this way of certainty is as positive , that the idea of space and extended body are the same . so that here we have clear and distinct ideas both ways . and is not this an admirable method of certainty , when in one of the plainest ideas which depend upon our senses , the greatest defenders of ideas differ so fundamentally . what can other men hope for in this way of ideas , if such men can agree no better in one of the most evident to our senses ? but then we must consider , who hath the better reason ? this is not certainty by ideas , but by reason upon them , which is another thing : let us go to reason . is that reason built only on some intermediate idea , which makes it clear ? i find intermediate ideas on both sides , and urged with equal assurance . des cartes saith , that from extension we rightly conclude a body to be a substance ; because it is a repugnancy that there should be an extension of nothing ; and therefore , if there be extension in space there must be body . and he proves it from the idea of body ; for , if we cast off all such things as are not necessary to body , as hardness , colour , gravity , heat , and cold , and all other qualities , we shall find nothing to remain but extension , and therefore nothing but extension is in the idea of body , which being likewise in space the idea of body and space are the same . but say you on the other side , i appeal to every man 's own thoughts , whether the idea of space be not as distinct from that of solidity , as it is from the idea of a scarlet colour . 't is true , that solidity cannot exist without extension ; but this hinders not but they are distinct ideas . one appeals to thoughts , and the other to reason : had des cartes no thoughts ? yet his reason convinced him , that whatever thoughts he had , he must be perswaded by reason , which was the true idea . you say , that is a clear and distinct idea that a man's thoughts dictate to him to be so . no , saith des cartes , that only is the true idea , which a man comes to by the exercise of his reason ; and he look'd upon those others as meer ideas of imagination , and not rational ideas . so that here we have another work to do , and that no easie one , which is to distinguish the ideas of imagination from those of reason : and what way have you laid down to prevent so great a mistake ? of what rules have you to judge , how far imagination is to be allowed in the matter of ideas ? for in all objects of sense the impression is made upon the imagination ; which is the seat of ideas , that come in by sensation . now here lies a very considerable difficulty , how far reason is to judge of these ideas or imagination ? for if all our simple ideas of things without us come in by sensation , then one would think those ideas are to be allow'd which come in that way ; and so the impressions of fancy are to be the standard and rule of certainty , which i think you will not affirm . but what rule then have you when , and where , and how far , you are to correct the erroneous ideas of imagination ? i cannot deny but you were sensible of the difficulty from the ideas of imagination , and thus you propose it . to what purpose is all this stir ? knowledge , say you , is only the perception of the agreement or disagreement of our own ideas , but who knows what those ideas may be ? is there any thing so extravagant as the imagination of men's brains ? where is the head that hath no chimaera's in it ? or if there be a sober and wise man , what difference will there be by your rules between his knowledge , and that of the most extravagant fancy in the world : they both have their ideas , and perceive their agreement and disagreement one with another . let us now consider the answer you give to it , and by that we shall better judge of your way of certainty . your general answer is , that if our knowledge of our ideas terminate in our fancies , our assurance would go no farther than that of dreams , or the visions of a heated fancy . but our knowledge is real , only so far , as there is a conformity between our ideas , and the reality of things . all this is undoubtedly true . but you say , how shall the mind , when it perceives nothing but its own ideas , know that they agree with things themselves ? there indeed lies the difficulty , but how do you remove it ? there are two sorts of ideas , you say , we may be sure , agree with things . and these are worth the knowing . 1. the first are simple ideas , which since the mind can by no means make to it self , must necessarily be the product of things operating on the mind in a natural way . and producing therein those perceptions which by the wisdom and will of our maker they are adapted to . from whence it follows , that simple ideas are not fictions of our minds . all that can be proved from hence is no more , but that the objects of our senses do make those impressions upon them , that from them we may be certain there are such things without us , which produce those impressions . and this is all you mean when you say , that you are certain these ideas are no fictions of our brains . but let us apply this to the present case . our senses truly inform us of a distance between bodies ; and so far we are certain of an idea of space , but the question about the idea of space goes farther ; viz. whether the idea of space imply something or nothing ? how can nothing be extended ? if it be something extended it must be body ; and so space and body are the same . and so your simple ideas give no manner of satisfaction in this matter . 2. all our complex ideas , except those of substances , you say , being archetypes of the mind 's own making , not referr'd to the existence of any thing , cannot want any conformity necessary to real knowledge ; for that which is not designed to represent any thing but it self , can never be capable of a wrong representation , nor mislead us from the true apprehension of any thing by its dislikeness to it . where are we now ? what in the way to certainty still ? methinks it seems to be too intricate and winding to be that plain way . what is meant by these archetypes in the mind which cannot deceive us ? i confess here are such things said in order to certainty , which are above my understanding , if taken with respect to things ; as how we cannot but be infallibly certain , that all the knowledge we attain concerning these ideas is real , and reaches things themselves , and yet they are archetypes of the mind 's own making , not intended to be the copies of any thing , nor referr'd to the existence of any thing . how can the certainty by these ideas reach the things themselves , if they are archetypes of the mind , not referr'd to the existence of any thing ? but i suppose all this is meant of mathematical truths , and so reaches not the case , which is concerning the certainty of our knowledge of things that really exist . 3. you say , there is another sort of complex ideas , which being referr'd to archetypes without us may differ from them , and so our knowledge about them may come short of being real . now these were the things we desired to be made certain in ; and to find out such rules as would make our knowledge real . but for all that i can see , the hopes of any criterion is quite lost , as to the point in question : how shall the mind when it perceives nothing but its own ideas , know that they agree with the things themselves ? for upon these grounds we can have no certainty as to simple ideas , but only as to the power of making impressions on our senses ; but as to complex ideas as of substances , our knowledge about them may come short of being real , i. e. we cannot arrive to certainty about them in the way of ideas ; because , they may differ from the archetypes without us . and you confess , that our ideas are not very exact copies , and yet are the subjects of real , ( as far as we have any ) knowledge of them ; which will not be found to reach very far . but to make it real concerning substances , the ideas must be taken from the real existence of things . and if our complex ideas may deceive us as to the things from whence they are supposed to be taken , what an account of certainty in the way of ideas is here ? and yet you conclude this chapter in that triumphant manner ; i think i have shewn wherein it is that certainty , real certainty consists , which whatever it was to others was to me heretofore one of those desiderata's , which i found great want of : and for all that i can see may do so still . for here is nothing said to distinguish the strong impressions of fancy from the appearances of things , from that certainty of knowledge which comes from the things themselves . for , a confident opiniator will talk with greater assurance of the agreement and disagreement of things with his ideas ; than a man of far greater judgment and more modesty . and you have given us no rules to make a difference between opinion and rational certainty ; especially when the ideas of fancy are found to agree with one another . but i shall go a step farther to shew , that the agreement of ideas is no ground of certainty , and that from a supposition relating to the present case . we have seen how possible it is for an ingenious person skilled in the phaenomena of nature to contrive such an hypothesis , that one part may agree with another , so as that no discernible inconsistency may be found in it , and yet all this may be built on such a foundation , as cannot be consistent with your certainty by ideas ; nay , such as you are certain cannot be true . the hypothesis , i mean , is that of des cartes ; for allowing him his laws of motion , and his three elements , the phaenomena of nature , or the ideas of it agree with one another , and yet all this is built upon space being the same with body ; and consequently , that there can be no vacuum : upon which his laws of motion , and his solution of the phaenomena is all built . and therefore , when a learned man of our own objected that to him , and thought it of no great consequence to his philosophy ; he replied with some smartness , that he was mistaken , for he took it for one of the most certain principles of his philosophy . what certainty then can there be in ideas , when so absurd a principle as that shall be look'd on by so great a man , as so certain a thing in the way of ideas , as to build his whole system of natural philosophy upon it ? and his followers to this day stifly defend it , who are otherwise ingenious men. nothing now remains to be answer'd in your second letter , but what relates to the defence of what i had said in my book concerning nature and person . for i cannot but observe , that instead of clearing some pressing difficulties in my answer to your former letter , you run back to my book , and begin a new critique upon that part of it ; and take in the help of some ingenious persons of your acquaintance , to whom i must shew so much civility as to take notice of their objections . which i shall the rather do , because the doctrine of the trinity is expressed in the first article of our religion by one nature and three persons , and so it hath been understood by the christian church long before . and it is the sense of the christian church which i am bound to defend , and no particular opinions of my own . you tell me , that there hath not been one of your acquaintance who owned that he understood my meaning ; but confessed that the farther he look'd into what i had said , the more he was at a loss about nature and person . but i hope i am not to answer for other men's want of understanding in these matters : which requires greater application of mind , than most men are willing to allow themselves about them . but i am to judge no otherwise of their sense and capacity , than as you have represented them . one said i began with giving two significations of the word nature ; one of them , as it stood for properties ; and this he understood ; but the other wherein nature was taken for the thing it self , wherein those properties were , he said he did not understand . but he said he was not very well acquainted with greek , and aristotle was brought to explain and settle the sense of nature . but why did not this gentleman in the first place consider what it was i undertook to shew , which was , that we had an idea of nature , which came not in by our senses ; and in the very next words i said , that nature and substance are of an equal extent ; and so , that which is the subject of powers and properties is the nature , whether it be meant of bodily or spiritual substances . and although by sensation and reflection we know the powers and properties of things ; yet it is by reason we are satisfied there must be such a nature or substance , because it is impossible that they should subsist by themselves . methinks if the gentleman were so much at a loss as you represent him , you should have helped him out by your relative ideas : for hard things go down much better with some men's minds in the way of ideas , ( which is a sort of gilding the pills ) and i doubt not but you could have satisfied him , that the understanding may by virtue of a relative idea be very well satisfied of the being of nature , as well as substance , when i declared that i took them to be of equal extent ; as they were the subject of powers and properties . but he saith , that this he understood not , because nature extended to things that were not substances . did i not say , that nature was sometimes taken only for properties , but that there must be another sense proved , because there must be a subject wherein these properties are , and in that respect , i said , that nature and substance were of equal extent . but he doth not understand the deduction ; aristotle takes nature for a corporeal substance , therefore nature and substance are of an equal extent . what a hard fate doth that man lie under , that falls into the hands of a severe critick ! he must have a care of his but , and for , and them , and it ; for the least ambiguity in any of these will fill up pages in an answer , and make a book look considerable for the bulk of it . and what must a man do , who is to answer to all such objections about the use of particles ? but let any indifferent reader judge , how i am used in this place . my words are sometimes nature is taken for the thing it self in which those properties are ; and so aristotle took nature for a corporeal substance , which had the principles of motion in it self ; but nature and substance are of an equal extent . doth not any man of common sense see , that i oppose this to aristotle's sense of nature for a corporeal substance ? he confines it to that only ; i say , that it is of equal extent with substance whether bodily or spiritual : and those very words follow after . if you had really such a conversation with a gentleman , i am sorry for him ; and i think you did not deal so like a gentleman by him , to expose him thus to the world. but i perceive he is a philosopher too ; for he proves , that aristotle 's notion of nature for a corporeal substance will not hold . did i ever say that it would ? i am far enough from thinking , that a corporeal substance hath a principle of motion from it self ; but might not i mention aristotle's taking nature for a substance , although i presently add , his sense was too short and narrow , because nature and substance were of equal extent ? but did not his notion of nature imply that it was a principle of motion in it self ? whatever aristotle thought , the notion of nature doth not depend upon a principle of motion from it self ; but it was considered , not as in it self as the cause , but in it self as the subject . and that philosophical gentleman might be pleased to consider , that aristotle did not make motion to arise from matter , but asserted it to come from a first mover , and said , that those philosophers talked like men not well in their wits , who attributed motion to matter of it self ; as i could easily prove , if it were needful . and methinks you should not have been such a stranger to aristotle , to let your acquaintance run into such blunders , and then to print them for them . but the gentleman is farther plunged and knows not how to get out . he cannot for his life understand nature to be substance and substance to be nature ? where lies the difficulty ? is the repugnancy , in the words , or in the sense ? not in the words or sense either in greek or latin. for the greek , ( if i may have leave to mention that language in this case ) those who have been very well acquainted with the force of words therein , have made nature of the same importance with substance . so hesychius renders it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , substance ; but i shall not bring the testimony of criticks but of philosophers . and aristotle may be allowed to understand his own language , he saith positively , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; every substance is called nature , and the reason he gives for it is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because nature is a substance . it may be said , that aristotle said this , because he took nature for such a substance as had the power of motion in it self ; i do not deny , but he look'd on that as the proper acception of nature ; but from hence it follows , that whatever substance had such a principle of motion in it self was truly and properly nature ; not as exclusive of a superiour principle of motion , but as having an internal self-moving principle . and herein aristotle differed from some modern philosophers , who make all motion to come from the impulse of another body , and to be a meer mode of matter continued from one body to another . i confess aristotle was of another opinion from those gentlemen , and look'd on motion as an effect of an inward principle ; and not meerly of an external impulse : but whether aristotle were mistaken herein is not the question ; and it is possible he was not ; however , it plainly appears , that substance with a power of motion in it self , and nature , had the same sense ; and none of those who have been the most severe criticks upon aristotle have disputed , that i remember , against this sense of nature in him . one of them finds this fault , that it was but a repetition of what he had said in his physicks ; where he doth likewise treat of the sense of nature . and there he takes it for such a substance which hath the principle of motion and rest within it self and by it self ; which he opposes to artificial things , as a bed or a garment . and as much as this definition hath been run down by some men , if we set aside some affected obscurity in his philosophical writings , there is no such absurdity in it ; when he explains himself not to understand it of meer local motion , or change of place , but of all alterations incident to bodies . so that nature in his sense , was a substance endued with a principle of life and action . and all those things which did partake of nature in this sense , he said , were substances ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . for nature is always a subject and in a subject ; i. e. the substance it self is nature , and that which is in it is according to nature . and this sense of aristotle plutarch relies upon , as the true notion of nature which he saith is the principle of motion and rest ; because the beginning and ending of things depend upon it : but plutarch by no means approves of those mens opinion who made nature to be an original self-moving principle ; for , saith he , matter of it self cannot move without an efficient cause , no more than any metal can frame it self into a particular form without an artificer . from whence we see that aristotle's notion of nature was very consistent with an efficient cause of nature . but your gentleman saith , that to those who admit not matter and motion to be eternal , no nature in that sense will be left , since nature is said to be a corporeal substance which hath the principles of motion in it self , and such a sort of corporeal substance those men have no notion of at all , and consequently none of nature , which is such a corporeal substance . but if aristotle did not suppose matter to move it self , without an efficient cause , ( as certainly he did not ) then all this falls to the ground , and his notion of nature for a substantial principle of life and action may remain good . but it may be said , that this was one of his singular notions , and that no other philosophers took it so . which is so far from being true , that a great enemy of aristotle's confesses , that the name of nature among the writers before him extended to all kinds of beings , and not only to individual but to specifick natures . aristotle's fault lay in applying nature only to corporeal substances ; and whatever was above them he look'd on as above nature ; but the pythagoreans and platonists took nature to extend to spiritual as well as bodily substances . which appears by timaeus locrus his book of nature ; in the beginning whereof he divides things into two kinds , intellectual and corporeal ; and the former , whose nature was more excellent , he derives immediately from the best principle , viz. god himself . but to make this plainer , we are to consider , that there were four opinions , among the old philosophers about nature . some held nature to be the same with matter , and attributed the beginning of all things to that alone ; such were the followers of anaximander and democritus . others rejected this doctrine as absurd and impious , and held a divine being above matter , which gave the beginning to motion and framed the world , and they asserted spiritual as well as corporeal natures , and these were the followers of pythagoras and anaxagoras . others asserted the beginning of motion and of the world from a first cause ; but confined the sense of nature to the course of things established in this visible world by an universal providence at first . and this was the notion of aristotle and his followers to the time of strato who attributed all to meer nature . lastly , there were some who made nature to be the first principle which formed all things ; which sometimes they called god , and sometimes nature , as is obvious in all the writings of the stoicks ; vis illum naturam vocare ? non peccabis ; saith seneca : and in another place , quid aliud est natura , quam deus & divina ratio ? and again , nec deus sine naturâ est , nec natura sine deo , sed idem est utrumque , which he elsewhere calls , incorporalis ratio ingentium operum artifex . with which balbus in cicero agrees , when he defines nature from zeno , to be an intelligent fire that produces all things . for what he calls ignem artificiosum ad gignendum , &c. laertius calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and it is called in cicero , natura artifex , consultrix & provida , &c. which can agree to nothing but a spiritual substance ; and when he explains what nature is , he saith , that epicurus called all by the name of nature ; and divided it into matter and vacuity and the accidents of both : but we ( saith he of the stoicks ) by nature understand no inanimate things which have no principle within to unite them , as earth and stones ; but a living substance , as an animal , in which is no chance , but order and contrivance . and so plato said , that nature ordered all things with reason and vnderstanding . by which he understood the divide being . if we come lower down among the philosophers , we shall find nature taken for a principle of life . so sextus empiricus distinguishes the union of matter in stones and wood from that which is in plants , and this he calls nature , which is the lowest degree of it ; for afterwards , he speaks of rational and intellectual natures , and places god in the head of them . antoninus distinguishes nature in plants from a heap of the particles of matter in wood and stone . but in another place he distinguishes that which is meer nature in man , viz. what he hath in common with plants , from the nature of an animal in him ; and that again from the nature of a rational creature in him . here indeed he speaks of the properties of those natures ; but he still supposes , that where they are separate , they are founded in distinct substances . so that i hope , if the philosophers of old , of all kinds did understand the sense of nature and substance , the gentleman may not continue in such a peremptory humour of saying , that for his life he cannot understand nature to be substance , nor substance to be nature . for they all agreed in this , however they differed in their opinions of nature . but i have something farther to add concerning the sense of the christian church in this matter ; which i think is by no means to be despised . it is observed by damascen , that some of the philosophers made this difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; that the former was taken for simple essence , but the latter for essence with a specifical difference ; but that the christian writers took both of them for that which was common to more than one , as an angel , a man , a horse , &c. so st. chrysostom calls angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , st. basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; but they all agree , that incorporeal and invisible substances are real natures . and the reason damascen gives is , that they have both the same original ( and you know that it is a good way to find out the true idea ) for as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , both which are the same . so that if real existence belong to substance , and nature hath its name from thence too , then substance and nature must be of the same importance . and this notion of nature they do not take up meerly from the etymology of the word , but from the sense of it in scripture ; as when st. paul saith , they worshipped those which by nature are no gods ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the alexandrian copy hath it more clearly ; i. e. which are not really and substantially gods. they had the names of gods , and the divine properties were attributed to them ; but because they had not the divine essence , they are said not to be gods by nature . and what sense would this gentleman make of the apostle's words , who cannot for his life understand that nature is the same with substance ? he must understand this only of the properties which belong to god. but these properties must be somewhere , and so a substance must be supposed as the subject of them ; and what reason can there be to exclude that which is the subject of those properties ? for there must be a divine being , as well as properties ; and that being must have essential properties belonging to it ; and what imaginable reason can there be , why that should not be called the divine nature ? and if it be , then substance and nature are the same . i might easily pursue this farther , but i design to bring things into as little a compass as i can . but it may be there is something in our own language which hinders nature from being taken for a substance ; and for this i appeal to a late ingenious and honourable person and philosopher of our own ; i mean mr. boyle , who hath written a philosophical enquiry into the notion of nature ; and he tells us of the various acceptations of it . ( 1. ) for the author of nature . ( 2. ) for the essence of a thing . ( 3. ) for what comes to men by birth ; as a man is noble by nature . ( 4. ) for an internal principle of motion : as that a stone is carried downwards by nature . ( 5. ) for the established course of things ; as that nature makes the night to succeed the day . ( 6. ) for an aggregate of powers belonging to a living body ; as that nature is strong or weak . ( 7. ) for the system of the universe ; as when we say of a chimaera , there is no such thing in nature . ( 8. ) for a semi-deity ; which is the notion he opposes . but we may observe , that he allows god and all the real beings of the vniverse to have nature belonging to them ; and he saith , the word essence is of great affinity to it , if not of an adequate import . but the real essence of a thing is a substance ; and therefore nature and substance are of the like importance . the next thing fit to be considered is , how far your certainty by ideas and the certainty by reason differ from each other . the occasion of this debate stands thus . i had said in my book , that i granted , that by sensation and reflection we come to know the powers and properties of things ; but our reason is satisfied , that there must be something beyond these , because it is impossible that they should subsist by themselves . so that the nature of things properly belongs to our reason and not to meer ideas . in answer to this you said , that you can find no opposition between ideas and reason ; but ideas are the objects of the vnderstanding , and vnderstanding is one of the faculties imployed about them . to which i replied , no doubt of it . but you might easily see , that by reason i understood principles of reason , allow'd by mankind ; which i think are very different from ideas . but i perceive reason in this sense is a thing you have no idea of , or one as obscure as that of substance . if there be any thing which seems too sharp and reflecting in the manner of expression , i do not go about to defend it ; but the worst of it is , that your idea of reason is as obscure as that of substance . and whether there were not a just occasion for it , the reader must judge when the faculty was put for the principles of reason . could any man judge otherwise , but that you had a very obscure idea of reason , who could mistake the vnderstanding for it ? but reason , you say , taken for the faculty is as different from ideas in your apprehension . but what is that to the point in dispute , whether the notion of nature be to be taken from ideas or from reason ? you say , the vnderstanding is imploy'd about them . and what then ? i shewed that the nature of things belongs to reason and not to bare ideas ; because ideas come in by sensation and reflection ; by which we come to know the powers and properties of things ; but we cannot come to know the notion of nature as the subject of them , but by this reason that we are convinced they cannot subsist of themselves . and is this no more than to say , the vnderstanding is imployed about ideas ? but now you answer farther , that if reason be taken for the faculty or the principles of reason allowed by mankind , reason and ideas may consist together . this leads me to the examination of that which may be of some use , viz. to shew the difference of your method of certainty by ideas , and the method of certainty by reason . and the way of certainty by reason lies in two things ; 1. the certainty of principles . 2. the certainty of deductions . as to the former , the gentleman your defender in your book saith , that in your essay , in more places than one , you have spoken , and that pretty largely of self-evident propositions and maxims ; so that if i have ever read them , i cannot doubt , but you have ideas of those common principles of reason . what ideas you have of them must appear from your book . and i do there find a chapter of self-evident propositions and maxims ; which i cannot but think extraordinary for the design of it ; which is thus summed up in the conclusion , viz. that it was to shew , that these maxims , as they are of little use where we have clear and distinct ideas , so they are of dangerous use , where our ideas are not clear and distinct . and is not this a fair way to convince me that your way of ideas is very consistent with the certainty of reason ; when the way of reason hath been always supposed to proceed upon general principles ; and you assert them to be vseless and dangerous . your first design you say is to prove , that the consideration of these general maxims can add nothing to the evidence or certainty of knowledge ; which overthrows all that which hath been accounted science and demonstration , and must lay the foundation of scepticism . because our true grounds of certainty depend upon some general principle of reason . to make this plain , i shall put a case grounded upon your words , which are , that you have discoursed with very rational men , who have actually denied that they are men. these words , i. s. understands as spoken of themselves , and charges them with very ill consequences ; but i think they are capable of another meaning : however , let us put the case that men did in earnest question , whether they were men or not ; and then i do not see , if you set aside general maxims , how you can convince them that they are men. for , the way i look on as most apt to prevail upon such extraordinary sceptical men , is by general maxims and principles of reason . as in the first place , that nothing can have no properties ; which i take to be the fundamental principle of certainty , as to real beings . for , all our inward perceptions are only of some acts or properties , as of thinking , doubting , reasoning , &c. and if a man proceeds so far as to question every thing , in order to the discovering the true ground of certainty , he cannot be satisfied with finding out only some modes of being ; but that which he aims at is , satisfaction as to his real existence . but this wholly depends upon the truth and certainty of this fundamental maxim ; that nothing can have no operations ; and therefore , whatever thinks , or doubts , or reasons , must certainly be . and since by another fundamental maxim , it is impossible for the same thing to be and not to be ; he cannot entertain any possible doubt of his own existence . it may be said , that this reaches only to bare existence , and not to the being men. i answer , that for the certainty as to that , there are other general maxims of necessary use ; as , that all different sorts of beings are distinguished by essential properties ; that the essential properties of a man are to reason , discourse , &c. that these properties cannot subsist by themselves without a real substance : and therefore , where these properties are found , those who have them must be real and substantial men. you may possibly say , that these maxims are useless , because you affirm that nothing can be more evident to us , than our own existence ; and that we have an internal infallible perception that we are . but i answer , that these maxims do not at all appear to be useless , because the certainty we enquire after is a certainty of reason , and not of bare perception . and if it be a certainty of reason , some ground of reason must be assigned for it : but all that the perception reaches to , are those acts mention'd by you . i think , i reason , i feel pleasure and pain : but the question goes farther as to the subject of those acts , and the nature of that subject , whether it be a man or not . now here lies the main difficulty , whether without the help of these principles you can prove to any that doubt , that they are men ? and i shall now shew , that in your way of ideas you cannot . for , ( 1 ) you suppose that we must have a clear distinct idea of that which we are certain of in the way of ideas . ( 2 ) you deny that we have any such clear and distinct idea of man. 1. you suppose , that we must have a clear and distinct idea of that we are certain of . for in your chapter of maxims , you say , that every one knows the ideas that he has , and that distinctly and unconfusedly one from another . which always being so ( i pray mark that , and judge whether you do not make clear and distinct ideas necessary to certainty ) he can never be in doubt when any idea is in his mind , that it is there , and is that idea it is , and that two distinct ideas when they are in his mind are there , and are not one and the same idea : from whence you infer the necessity of certainty , when the ideas are clear and distinct . this is so plain and clear , that i wonder how you came to forget it , and to think that i did you wrong when i charged you with holding clear and distinct ideas necessary to certainty . but of that in the beginning of this discourse . 2. but let us now examine your idea of man , whether that be clear and distinct or not ; and if not , then according to your principles very rational men cannot be certain that they are men. for if they have no way of certainty but by ideas , and you allow no clear and distinct idea of man , then they can come to no certainty ; and i hope you will not deny them to be very rational men , if they follow the way of ideas . first , you shew , that there can be no demonstration in the way of principles what man is . secondly , that there are very different ideas of man , some , you say , make the idea of a man without a soul ; as children do . others add laughter and rational discourse , and these may demonstrate by general principles that ideots and infants are no men by this maxim , that it is impossible for the same thing to be , and not to be ; and you have discoursed with very rational men , who have actually denied that they are men. others take in the idea of body in general , and the powers of language and reason , and leave out shape ; and so a man may be a four-footed creature , or in whatever body or shape he found speech and reason joined , that was a man. but where is the clear and distinct idea of a man all this while ? we can have no certainty by principles , you say , and you offer none in the way of ideas ; for the ideas are very confused , imperfect and repugnant to each other ; and so in this new method of certainty by ideas , we cannot be so much as certain that we are men. but is it possible to suppose , that a rational man should talk of certainty by ideas , and not be able to fix the idea of a man ? one would have thought this had been only an omission in this place out of pure zeal against principles ; but certainly in other places this idea of a man must be made clear and distinct . so far from it , that in other places , you industriously set your self to disprove the common idea of a man. it could not possibly be , say you , that the abstract idea to which the name man is given , should be different in several men , if it were of natures making ; and that to one it should be animal rationale ; to another animal implume bipes latis unguibus . from whence it is plain , that you allow no clear and distinct idea of man ; and you endeavour to expose the sacred definition , as you call it , of animal rationale ; which was never exposed by any man without cause . but you conclude , that we are far from knowing certainly what man is ; though perhaps it will be judged great ignorance to doubt about it . and yet you think you may say , that the certain boundaries of that species are so far from being determined , and the precise number of simple ideas , which make that nominal essence so far from being setled and perfectly known , that very material doubts may still arise about it . so that i begin to think i. s. was in the right , when he made you say , that you had discoursed with very rational men who denied themselves to be men. but this is a little too hard to deny themselves to be men. if it had been only , who doubted whether they were men or not ; you could not deny them to be very rational men , because they went upon your grounds , that we can have no certainty either by principles , or by any clear and distinct ideas , what a man is . thus i have shew'd how inconsistent your way of ideas is with true certainty ; and of what use and necessity these general principles of reason are . i now come to the certainty of reason in making deductions . and here i shall briefly lay down the grounds of certainty , which the ancient philosophers went upon , and then compare your way of ideas with them . aristotle observes , that socrates first brought in definitions and inductions in order to certainty ; and went no farther . plato allowed no certainty , but only opinion , as to external objects ; but he said ▪ that certainty depended upon abstract and separate ideas , which were always the same . this he took , ( as i observed in my former letter ) from the pythagoreans , only changing numbers into ideas . for by numbers , they understood first principles , not gross and material ; but immaterial and eternal , as iamblichus saith ; and therefore moderatus gaditanus , one of the most understanding men among them saith , the pythagoreans brought in numbers , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for a more decent way of instruction , following the practice of geometricians , who make use of figures to represent things to the mind ; and therefore their doctrine of numbers was the philosophy of principles , or the general grounds of certainty ; but this was so abstruse and so little understood , that it soon lost its reputation , as porphyry observes , or was mixed with plantonism ; and therefore photinus joins the pythagorean and platonick principles together . but aristotle was a great enemy to these abstracted speculations , and therefore set himself so much on all occasions against ideas and numbers , especially in his metaphysicks . but instead thereof , he endeavour'd to bring down certainty to material things , and to real beings . in order to this , he saw it necessary to avoid confusion , by explaining doubtfull terms , and by ranking things under several heads , which he called categories ; wherein all things are reduced to substance , and accidents belonging to them ; to which he joins some general discourses about the right apprehension of things simply consider'd . but it is observable , that in all the categories from archytas the pythagorean downwards , ( who first placed them in that order , ) substance was first ranked , as the most proper idea of the mind , and all accidents or modes were consider'd with respect to that . and the french cartesians in their logick , place substance as the first object of their ideas : and do not leave us a relative idea , to be supposed only , because accidents cannot subsist without a subject . then follows the way of understanding the truth and falshood of propositions ; after which , he pursues the way of reasoning , or inferring one thing from another , which he calls syllogizing , wherein he professes to go upon this common principle of reason , that what things do agree in a third must agree among themselves . but being not content with the ordinary dialectical way , which proceeded upon the concessions of the party , he attempted to bring in true demonstration . to which he supposes general axioms necessary , and definitions , and postulata : and he distinguishes between a necessary conclusion , and a demonstration ; for the former may arise from the manner of reasoning ; but a demonstration supposes a necessary cause , and that the propositions are such as that the conclusion necessarily follows from them . so that demonstration according to him must be of an inseparable property , and by the most immediate and necessary cause . how far aristotle's notion of demonstration can be applied to physical matters is not my business to enquire ; it being only to shew what his method of certainty was . but besides aristotle , the stoicks took upon them to lay down the true method of certainty ; and they went another way to work about it , viz. ( 1. ) by finding out the criterion of truth and falshood . ( 2. ) by examining the consequences and deductions of reason . as to things which had some degree of evidence to sense or reason , they made the criterion necessary , but for those which had not , but must be proved , the examination of that proof was necessary in order to certainty . the criterion was agreed to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the measure whereby we are to judge of things . but as in the use of balances for weight , there must be one to hold them , and the balances themselves , and the position of them ; and as in the judging of a line , whether straight or crooked , there must be the artificer , the rule and the application of it ; so in judging of truth and falshood , there must be the faculty of understanding as the artificer , sense and reason as the rule ; and the inward ideas of the mind , which answer'd to the position of the balances , or the application of the rule . now that which they placed their notion of certainty in , was that inward and comprehensive idea , which was called by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . if it were a weak assent , they called it opinion ; for they made the assent voluntary , notwithstanding the criterion ; but if it were a firm and immoveable assent , that they called knowledge and certainty . but besides these comprehensive ideas they did allow of common notions , which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or anticipations : of which arrian speaks ; and simplicius saith , they are those wherein all are agreed , and are planted in us by right reason , and confirmed by time and observation . as to the other part , they took great pains about the true signification of words , the rank and order of things , the nature and kind of propositions , and the difference of signs , whereof some were monitory , and others demonstrative . and the proving a thing uncertain , by something granted to be certain , was that which they called demonstration . according to the principles of the eleatick school , the most simple and natural way of reasoning was supposed to be by drawing consequences upon suppositions , and the way the stoicks took to judge of reasoning , was by judging what approached nearest to the first principles of reasoning ; such as that every thing we talk about either must be or not be ; and in such disjunct propositions , one part or other must be taken , and then a train of consequences follows . and plutarch , no friend to the stoicks , thinks this faculty of drawing consequences , lays the best foundation for demonstration . for the principle of it , he saith , is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the connex way of reasoning ; that is as simplicius explains it , when two things are so joyned together as antecedent and consequent , that by position of the antecedent , the consequent follows , and by taking away the consequent , the antecedent is removed . thus i have , in as few words , as i could , laid together those old methods of certainty , which have obtained greatest reputation in the world. but your way of certainty by ideas is so wholly new , that here we have no general principles ; no criterion , no antecedents and consequents ; no syllogistical methods of demonstration ; and yet we are told of a better way of certainty to be attained , meerly by the help of ideas . but how comes there to be such a way of certainty by ideas , and yet the ideas themselves are so uncertain and obscure ? i confess , that the more i look into it , the farther it appears to be from a way of certainty to me . for in your chapter of the improvement of knowledge , you have these words ; for it being evident that our knowledge cannot exceed our ideas , where they are imperfect , confused or obscure , we cannot expect to have certain , perfect , or clear knowledge . and yet how often do you confess , that our ideas are imperfect , confused , and obscure ? how then is it possible to attain to any certainty by them ? and notwithstanding these plain words , you assert it over and over in your second letter , as appears in the beginning , that you do not place certainty in clear and distinct ideas , ( as i observed in the beginning . ) how can these things consist ? can certainty be had with imperfect and obscure ideas , and yet no certainty be had by them ? i cannot blame you for finding fault with common principles of reason , if both parts of a contradiction may be true : but i forbear . however i cannot but join other words of yours to shew how resolved you were to be inconsistent with your self : but obscure and confused ideas can never produce any clear or distinct knowledge ; because as far as any ideas are confused or obscure , so far the mind can never perceive clearly , whether thy agree or disagree . and yet in the same place , you say , that our knowledge consisting in the perception of the agreement or disagreement of any two ideas , its clearness or obscurity consists in the clearness or obscurity of that perception , and not in the clearness or obscurity of the ideas themselves . how is it possible for us to have a clear perception of the agreement of ideas , if the ideas themselves be not clear and distinct ? if the mind can never perceive clearly , the agreement or disagreement of obscure and confused ideas , how can its knowledge lie in the perception of that which is not to be perceived ? this is a thing which i cannot make consistent . but besides , i have another charge upon your way of certainty , viz. that you have no criterion to distinguish false and doubtfull ideas from true and certain ; how then can any man be secure that he is not imposed upon in this way of ideas ? the academicks went too far in the way to scepticism , but they differ'd from the scepticks in two things . 1. they asserted , that there was no absolute certainty to be had , which the scepticks would not . 2. they held a far greater probability in some things than others , and that men were bound to follow the greatest probability in what concern'd their own welfare : but the scepticks said , that they would do as others did , or follow inclination , and the laws of their country , but they held no opinion in their minds , as they said . the academicks went much upon ideas , or representations of things to their minds , but they did not proceed upon every idea , but they examin'd and weighed all the circumstances belonging to it , before they allow'd it to prevail upon them to give an assent as to a greater probability . carneades , one of the subtilest of them , as appears by sextus empiricus , distinguished a three-fold idea . 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a probable idea ; which the academicks called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . for , said he , neither that which appears false of it self ; nor that which is true , but doth not appear so , can perswade a man's mind . and of those things which do appear to be true , some have a very slender appearance , others have a mighty strong one , and therein he placed his criterion . 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an undistracted idea ; i. e. when no circumstances disturb or shake the first impression , so as to make us question the truth of it ; which sextus empiricus calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a concurrence of ideas and none disagreeing , and yet he would not allow this to be a ground of certainty but only of probability . 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a well examin'd idea , by the best reason a man hath and the greatest application of mind . and this was the foundation of the highest probability a man's mind could reach to . now to apply this to your case ; you tell us of a way of certainty by ideas , and never offer any such method for examining them , as the academicks required for their probability . as for instance , your first idea which you go upon , is that of solidity , which , you say , of all others seems the most intimately connected with and essential to body : and therefore must be of great moment . solidity , you say , consists in repletion and resistence ; and by this idea of solidity the extension of body , you say , is distinguished from that of space ; so that of pure space and solidity you have clear and distinct ideas . now here in the way of certainty i have two questions to ask . 1. how this idea comes to be clear and distinct to you , when others who go in the same way of ideas have quite another idea of it , and think they have as plain and distinct an idea that the extension of space and body are the same ? now , what criterion is there to come to any certainty in this matter ? i see none so much as offer'd , but only that they seem to you to be clear and distinct , but to others the contrary . so that here we are at a loss as to any certainty in the way of ideas . and the blind man who fansied the idea of scarlet to be like the sound of a trumpet , could hardly be convinced of his error in the way of ideas . this you mention to shew the different ideas men may fall into ; which i think is enough to shew that they have no way to certainty in themselves , if it be possible for men , even for philosophical and rational men , to fall into such contrary ideas about the same thing ; and both sides think their ideas clear and distinct . 2. but i have another question to propose ; viz. whether by this idea of solidity we may come to know what it is ? this is a very reasonable question in the way of certainty , which is to lead us to the certain knowledge of things . i pray therefore tell me from your idea , what it is , and wherein it consists ? the question you suppose might be very well asked ; and you give a most satisfactory answer to it . if any ask me what this solidity is , i send him to his senses to inform him . i had thought by the design of your book you would have sent him to his ideas for certainty ; and are we sent back again from our ideas to our senses ? what do these ideas signifie then ? but you say farther ; that if this be not a sufficient explication of solidity , you promise to tell him what it is , when he tells you , what thinking is , or explains to you what extension and motion are . are we not now in the true way of certainty ; when such things as these are given over , of which we have the clearest evidence by sensation and reflection ? for here you make it as impossible to come to certain , clear and distinct notions of these things , as to discourse into a blind man the ideas of light and colours . is not this a rare way of certainty ? thus i have shewed that you have no security against false and uncertain ideas , no criterion to judge them by ; no light into the nature of things by them , as will farther appear by what you say of the ideas of sensible qualities . to discover , say you , the nature of our ideas the better , and to discourse of them intelligibly , it will be convenient to distinguish them , as they are ideas or perceptions in our minds ; and as they are modifications of matter in the bodies that cause such perceptions in us : that so we may not think ( as perhaps is usually done ) that they are exactly the images and resemblances of something inherent in the subject : most of those of sensation being in the mind no more the likeness of something existing without us , than the names that stand for them are the likeness of our ideas , which yet upon hearing they are apt to excite in us . now here again our ideas deceive us , in the way of certainty . we desire to know something of the nature of those objects of which we have the ideas in our minds , because these we are told , will bring us to a certainty of knowledge . of what ? of what we feel ? no certainly , but of that which causes these inward perceptions . can we then by these ideas know the nature of things without us ? no , you say we cannot ; for most of those of sensation are no more the likeness of something without us , than names are for things which they stand for . so that these ideas are really nothing but names , if they be not representations of things ; and if they be not , how can we understand things by them ; and if we cannot , what certainty is attainable by them ? but i will do you no wrong ; and therefore i must consider what you say about demonstration : for it cannot be denied that you own the thing , although you deny it to be ex proecognitis & proeconcessis , and say , it is a mistake that they are supposed to be the foundations of all our knowledge and reasonings . we must therefore examine your way of demonstration without principles . certainty , you say , depends so wholly on intuition , that in demonstrative knowledge , this intuition is necessary in all the connexion of the intermediate ideas , without which we cannot attain knowledge or certainty . by intuition you mean self-evidence . for you say , in this the mind is at no pains of proving or examining , but perceives the truth as the eye doth light only by being directed towards it . for hence you must suppose self evidence to be in the ideas of your mind ; and that every intermediate idea which you take to demonstrate any thing by , must have a self-evident connexion with the other idea : which is such a way of demonstration , as the old philosophers never thought of . for upon this ground every demonstration carries its own light with it ; and can no more be questioned , than whether two and two make four ; and i would be glad to see any demonstration ( not about figures and numbers ) of this kind , which i think is not to be expected in the way of ideas . but because in this lies the chief point as to a way of certainty by ideas , i shall more carefully examine the grounds you proceed upon , and shew them to be very insufficient for the purpose you intend them . your principal ground is from mathematical demonstrations , and your examples are brought from them . but his is quite a different case from yours . for you grant , that those ideas on which mathematical demonstrations proceed , are wholly in the mind , and do not relate to the existence of things ; but our debate goes upon a certainty of the knowledge of things as really existing ; so that , although we should grant all that you say , about the intuition of ideas in mathematical demonstrations , yet it comes not at all to your business , unless you can prove that we have as clear and distinct ideas of beings , as we have of numbers and figures . and yet herein you are not consistent with your self ; for you design to prove demonstrations without general principles ; and yet every one knows , that general principles are supposed in mathematicks , and that person would be thought ridiculous , who should go about to prove , that general principles are of little , or of dangerous use in mathematical demonstrations . and so in morality , which you place among the sciences capable of demonstration ; you confess , that the way of demonstration therein is from principles , as those of the mathematicks , by necessary consequences . this is a very intelligible way of demonstration : but how then comes it to pass , that in the way of certainty by ideas as to other points of knowledge , you deny general maxims to be the foundation we are to proceed upon ? and the method you lay down , is this , that ideas of particular things are first in the mind , which are first received and distinguished , and so knowledge got by them ; but general ideas are fictions and contrivances of the mind , which carry difficulty with them ; but that it is true of our particular distinct ideas , that they are all known by their native evidence , are wholly independent , receive no light , nor are capable of proof one from another ; much less the more particular from the more general , or the more simple from the more compounded , the more simple and less abstract being the most familiar , and the easier and earlier apprehended . but which ever be the clearest ideas , the evidence and certainty of all such propositions is in this , that a man sees the same idea to be the same idea , and infallibly perceives two different ideas to be two different ideas . for when a man has in his vnderstanding the ideas of one and of two , the idea of yellow and of blue , he cannot but certainly know , that this idea of one is the idea of one , and not the idea of two ; and that the idea of yellow is the idea of yellow , and not of blue . for a man cannot confound the ideas in his mind , which he has distinct ; that would be to have them confused and distinct at the same time , which is a contradiction : and to have none distinct is to have no use of our faculties , to have no knowledge at all . and therefore , what idea soever is affirmed of it self ; or whatsoever two entire distinct ideas are denied one of another , the mind cannot but assent to such a proposition , as infallibly true , assoon as it understands the terms without hesitation , or need of proof , or regarding those made in more general terms , and called maxims . these are your own words , which i have set down at large , that you may not complain that i misrepresent your sense . and if i understand the force of them , you take off the way of demonstration from general principles and consequences deduced from them , and place it in the self-evidence of ideas . but that it is impossible to come to a demonstration about real beings , in this way of intuition of ideas , i shall now make appear from your self , which will farther discover the inconsistency of your notion of ideas . and the reasons i go upon are these ; 1. that you confess , that some of the most obvious ideas are far from being self-evident . 2. that there may be contradictory opinions about some ideas , which you account most clear and distinct . 3. that granting the ideas to be true , there is no self-evidence of the connexion of them , which is necessary to make a demonstration . 1. that some of the most obvious ideas , are far from being self-evident by your own confession . among these you cannot deny those of matter and motion , of time and duration , and of light , to be very considerable . but i shall prove from your self , that we can have no intuition of these things , which are so obvious to us ; and consequently can have no self-evident ideas of them . as to the idea of matter : that you tell us , consists in a solid substance every where the same ; and a body is a solid extended figured substance . now there are two things concerning matter , which i would be glad to come to a certain knowledge of . and those are , 1. the manner of cohesion of the parts of matter , concerning which you have these words . for since no body is no farther , nor otherwise extended , than by the vnion and cohesion of its solid parts , we shall very ill comprehend the extension of body , without understanding , wherein consists the vnion and cohesion of its parts , which seems to me as incomprehensible as the manner of thinking , and how it is performed . i would have any one intelligibly explain to me , how the parts of gold or brass ( that but now in fusion were as loose from one another , as the particles of water , or the sands of an hour-glass ) come in a few moments to be so united , and adhere so strongly one to another , that the utmost force of men's arms cannot separate them . a considering man will i suppose be here at a loss , to satisfie his own or another man's vnderstanding . and can you then imagine that we have intuition into the idea of matter ? or that it is possible to come to a demonstration about it by the help of any intervening idea ? the idea of solidity , or firm cohesion of parts cannot be said to come from the idea of matter it self , for then there could be no such thing as fluid matter . whence then comes the distinction between these ideas of solid and fluid matter ? that there is such a cohesion of the solid parts of matter is evident : now what other ideas do you compare and connect with this to make it evident , how this solidity and matter came to have this agreement with each other ? is it by the density or compactedness of the matter in a little compass ? but that is as hard to give an account of ; viz. how some parts of matter come to take up so much less room , and to stick closer than others . is it by bare rest of the parts ? but how comes the resistance of solid bodies to come only from rest ? is it from the pressure of the ambient air ? no you say , that in truth the pressure of an ambient fluid how great soever , can be no intelligible cause of the cohesion of the solid parts of matter . so that we are not to look for any thing like a demonstration of the cohesion of the parts of matter . 2. and as little are we to expect it , as to the divisibility of it ; which was the other thing i hoped to find demonstrated in the way of ideas . for you tell us , that the notion of body is cumbred with some difficulties which are very hard , and perhaps impossible to be explained , or understood by us . and among these you particularly instance in the divisibility of matter ; which you say , whether we grant or deny it to be in infinitum , it involves us in consequences , impossible to be explicated or made consistent . consequences that carry greater difficulty , and more apparent absurdity than any thing can follow from the notion of an immaterial knowing substance . so that i think it is vain to expect a demonstration in the way of ideas as to this matter . the next is that of motion . concerning which you tell us , that the definition of the schools is exquisite iargon : that of the atomists is but putting one synonymous word for another ; viz. that motion is a passage from one place to another : for passage may as well be defined a motion from one place to another . and the cartesian definition , that it is the successive application of the parts of the superficies of one body to those of another , will not prove a much better definition of motion when well examin'd . and what is there so evident as motion ? so that if our ideas fail us in so plain a case , what help can we hope from them in things more abstruse and remote from our senses ? as to time and duration , you say , that the answer of a great man ( to one who asked what time was , si non rogas , intelligo , which amounts to this , the more i set my self to consider it , the less i understand it ) might perhaps perswade one , that time , which reveals all other things , is it self not to be discover'd . this shews , that there is no self-evident idea of time. but here you offer to furnish us with as clear and distinct ideas , as of many other which are thought much less obscure . however , then it is plain , that we have not the knowledge by intuition , but by rational deduction . for you proceed from the idea of succession , to that of duration ; by observing a distance in the parts of succession ; and then from observing periodical motions , we get ideas of the measures of duration , as minutes , hours , days , years , &c. from hence we proceed to imagine duration not yet come ; and such to which we can always add ; from which comes the idea of eternity : and by considering any part of duration with periodical measures , we come to the idea of what we call time in general . so that the idea of time in general is so far from being known by intuition , that many steps are to be taken in order to it ; and some such as one would hardly have thought of . as how the idea of succession should arise from a train of ideas in our minds : you say it is , because we have no perception of duration , but by considering the train of ideas , that take their turns in our vnderstandings . what think you of those people that fail'd not in reckoning the succession of time right for many years together by knots , and notches on sticks , and figures , without ever so much as thinking of ideas , or any thing like them ? but besides , such arbitrary measures of time , what need any recourse to ideas , when the returns of days and months and years by the planetary motions , are so easie and so universal ? if a man hath no perception of duration when he sleeps , yet the time runs on , and nights have as much their share in succession as days have . and although , you say , it seems very clear to you , that men derive their ideas of duration from their reflection on the train of the ideas they observe to succeed one another , yet i think the contrary so clear , that men may have a clear idea of succession without it , that i rather wonder how you came to think of this way . but it is sufficient to my purpose , that you could never know this idea of time by self-evidence . the last i shall mention is light , and one would think , if any idea be self-evident , it should be that . but let us see what you say about it ; you explode the peripatetick definition of it as unintelligible ; and the cartesian you allow to be but little better . for when they make it to be a number of little globules striking briskly on the bottom of the eye , you say , to a man that understands it not before , these words would make the idea of light no more known to him , than if one should tell him , that light was nothing but a company of little tennis-balls , which fairies all day long strook with rackets against some men's foreheads while they pass by others . and is this a self-evident idea of light ? thus we have seen what account your self have given of these self-evident ideas , which are the ground work of demonstration . 2. but suppose an idea happen to be thought by some to be clear and distinct , and others should think the contrary to be so , what hopes of demonstration by clear and distinct ideas then ? as suppose a man entertain des cartes his idea of space , as the same with body , or extended matter , which he affirms to be clear and distinct ; the consequence from hence is , as your self confess , that he may from thence demonstrate that there can be no vacuum : but again , let us suppose another to have a clear and distinct idea of space from body , this man , you say , may demonstrate as easily that there may be a vacuum , or space without a body , as des cartes demonstrated the contrary . say you so ? what! demonstrations on both sides , and in the way of ideas too ? this is extraordinary indeed . but if we may be allow'd the use of common principles , we may be sure , that both parts of a contradiction cannot be true , and therefore there must be a fundamental mistake some where . you say , it is in wrong application of that general maxim , what is , is . but there is no fault in the principle , which is the true meaning of the other ; that it is impossible for the same thing to be and not to be , which undoubtedly holds true ; but it is in supposing the reality of the thing to be according to what you call a clear and distinct idea . so that the general principles of reason stand firm and good ; but your self-evidence of clear and distinct ideas is such a principle , we see , as serves for demonstrations of both parts of a contradiction . 3. but granting the ideas to be true , yet when their connexion is not self-evident , then an intermediate idea must complete the demonstration . but how doth it appear that this middle idea is self-evidently connected with them ? for you say , if that intermediate idea be not known by intuition , that must need a proof ; and so there can be no demonstration . which i am very apt to believe in this way of ideas ; unless these ideas get more light by being put between two others . this will best appear by a remarkable instance already mention'd , viz. in the ideas of space and body ; the question supposed is , whether they be the same or not ; some we see affirm it , and others deny it . so that here we must use an intermediate idea , and that is of motion , and we are to consider whether this hath a self-evident connexion , with the other ideas ? the motion of bodies , you say , that are in our view and neighbourhood , seems to you plainly to evince a vacuum . but how ? is it by intuition or self-evidence ? no , you do not pretend to it . but by reason : because there must be a void space equal to the bulk of that body , which moves within the bounds of such a superficies . and if there be a space without body there must be a vacuum . but gassendus attempted to prove motion impossible , if there were no vacuum : for every body must go into the place of another , and so in insinitum ; which he said was ridiculous and impossible . the cartesians answer'd , that the motion was circular . gassendus urged , that still it was impossible : for suppose a the first body , and x the last ; a cannot move , unless x can be moved : but x cannot move , because the place is filled with a. the cartesians say , this proves nothing , because in the same instant , that x goes into the places of a , that gives way . ioh. bapt. morinus ( professor of the mathematicks at paris , at the same time with gassendus ) answers to gassendus his argument , that the separation of two bodies and succession are at the same time ; and so there can be no vacuum . bernier defends gassendus his argument , and saith , that no motion can begin without a vacuum ; but other philosophers and mathematicians as stifly deny it . and is it possible to imagine , that there should be a self-evident connexion of ideas in this case ? but what hath reason now to do in this way of intuition ? yes , say you , reason is to discover the agreement or disagreement of ideas . but this is nothing but an imploying the faculty of reason in such a manner : and so in the beginning of your chapter of reason , you tell us , that it is sometimes taken for true and clear principles , and sometimes for clear and fair deductions from those principles ; but you take it for a saculty in man. but why , in a chapter of reason , are the other two senses neglected ? we might have expected here full satisfaction as to the principles of reason as distinct from the faculty , but you wholly avoid it ; and only shew how it is used in finding out the certain connexion of ideas in demonstration ; and the probable connexion in other things . so that the difference lies between us , as to this matter of reason , in these two things . ( 1. ) you affirm , that general principles and maxims of reason are of little , or no vse ; i say that they are of very great use , and the only proper foundations of certainty . ( 2. ) you say , that demonstration is by way of intuition of ideas , and that reason is only the faculty imploy'd in discovering and comparing ideas with themselves , or with others intervening ; and that this is the only way of certainty . i affirm , and have proved , that there can be no demonstration by intuition of ideas ; but that all the certainty we can attain to , is from general principles of reason , and necessary deductions made from them . but before i conclude this discourse , i must observe that you prove that demonstration must be by intuition , in an extraordinary manner , from the sense of the word . for you say , it is called demonstration , it being shewn to the vnderstanding , and the mind made see , that it is so . i have told you formerly , how very uncertain a way of arguing it is , which is taken from the original signification of words ; and if it would hold in this case , it would be most proper for ocular demonstrations , or by the finger . but in the philosophical sense of the word , demonstration was never taken for intuition , or the knowing of a thing by its self-evidence . but you assert the necessity of intuitive knowledge , in every step of a demonstration . whereas , aristotle saith , things that are self-evident cannot be demonstrated ; and that it is weakness and folly not to know what things are capable of demonstration , and what not . it seems there were some philosophers , who would have first principles demonstrated ; this , saith aristotle cannot be done without running in infinitum , which is absurd . whence it is plain , that demonstration was supposed to lie in some antecedent proof ; and where any thing was self-evident it was absurd to look for it : so that the way of intuition and demonstration , were thought inconsistent . for what a man sees by its own light , he needs no proof of . but you say , that in a demonstration the intervenient ideas are called proofs ; and where by the help of these the agreement or disagreement is plainly perceived , that is demonstration : and that in every step there is an intuitive knowledge of the agreement or disagreement it seeks with the next intermediate idea , which it uses as a proof ; for , if it were not so , that would need a proof . so that according to your method of demonstration , that which is used as a proof must need no proof , but must be known by immediate intuition . of which kind of demonstration , i would fain see any one instance in the knowledge of things , and not in abstracted and mathematical demonstrations . for it may be , it hath been the occasion of some great mistakes in the philosophy of this age , that ingenious and mathematical men have labour'd so much to accommodate the principles of that science to the nature of material things ; of which we have a remarkable instance in the system of des cartes . and supposing we could come to a certainty about the nature and tendency of bodies here within our reach , ( i mean with respect to the earth ) i do not know , how far the greatest mathematician can proceed in making demonstrations as to the nature and tendency of those bodies which are so much out of our reach , as the heavenly bodies are , both in themselves and with respect to one another . for , if the phaenomena depend upon a force given them by the great and wise creator , how can we know in what manner or degree that force is given to bodies at such a wonderfull distance from us , as the fixed stars are ? for , if god can alter the laws of motion in another system , as it is not denied ; how can we be mathematically certain , that the laws of motion in bodies , so much above us , are the very same that we find them here ? i do not by any means take off from the laudable endeavours of those who have gone about to reduce natural speculations to mathematical certainty : but i mention it to shew , that it is a very easie way for thinking men to deceive themselves , in talking so much of demonstrative certainty about natural things , when all their instances are brought from mathematical demonstrations . aristotle , whom i cannot despise so much as some do ( i do not say for want of reading him ) hath a discourse on purpose in the beginning of his books of animals , in what way natural things are to be handled ; and he saith , there are two ways . 1. by way of science . 2. by way of instruction , which must be suitable to the nature of the things . so that in natural history he saith , there must be certain bounds set for enquiry , without proceeding to strict demonstration . and , saith he , the manner of demonstration as to natural things , is different from what it is in speculative or mathematical things . in another place he laments the want of experiments as to natural history , ( although he made far more than any before him , and was better able to do it by the plentifull assistance of philip and alexander , while he lived at court ) and he looks on that as the best way of satisfying our reason about such things ; and our reasons , saith he , are then good , when they agree with the phaenomena . and he was so far from thinking he had made demonstrations in physicks , that in one place he saith , that in things not evident to sense , he thought it sufficient to shew the possibility of it ; and therefore he ought not to be run down for his modesty ; however his physical notions fall far short of demonstrations . in his morals , he saith , all principles must be suitable to the nature of the science ; for it would be absurd for a man to go about to prove the three angles of a triangle , equal to two right angles ; and take this for his principle , that the soul is immortal . for the proof must be proper and connected with it . and from hence he excludes plato's idea , from being a principle in morals . in his eudemia , the way of proceeding in morals , he saith , is by reasons , testimonies , and examples ; and he looks on it as great want of iudgment for men not to consider what reasons are proper for every science . so that according to him , morality is not uncapable of demonstration ; so it be upon moral principles : for that he lays down in the beginning of his ethicks , and afterwards that the same exactness is not to be required in all sorts of reasoning : but that it ought to be suitable to the matter it is about . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . if therefore the principles in morality be clear and proper , and the deductions be plain and natural , i do not see , but that it is as capable of demonstration as any other science ; if men were as willing to be convinced in morals , as they are in mathematicks . and therein i fully agree with you : but the way of demonstration by ideas will not do , either there or any where else . i mean by this intuitive knowledge in every step of the demonstration : when the intervening ideas are far from being capable of this intuitive certainty . and as to your argument from the notation of the word , it is certain , that after the philosophical use of it , it signified no more among some philosophers , than the conclusion of an argument ; whereby we are brought from something we did perceive , to somethiug we did not . not by way of intuition , but by a deduction of reason . and plato makes use of the word demonstration in his phoedrus , for such a reason which wise men would believe , and others would not . but there could be no intuitive certainty in such a demonstration . i have been longer a clearing this matter than i thought i should have been ; but it is the main point as to certainty by ideas , and what remains will admit of an easier dispatch . i now return to the difference between nature and person ; and i shall only single out what is material and pertinent ; and now leave the interlocutory gentlemen to maintain their conversation by themselves . i had said in my vindication , that nature may be consider'd two ways . ( 1. ) as it is in distinct individuals . ( 2. ) abstractly without respect to individual persons . ( 1. ) as it is in distinct individuals , as the nature of a man is equally in peter , iames and iohn , and this is the common nature with a particular subsistence belonging to each of them . for the nature of man , as in peter , is distinct from the same nature , as it is in iames and iohn ; otherwise they would be but one person , as well as have the same nature . which to my understanding is plain and clear reason . and if so , then here we have an identity of nature , and a distinction of persons in the same nature . but to this you object these three things : ( 1. ) that you cannot put together one and the same , and distinct ; and consequently there is no foundation for the distinction of nature and person . ( 2. ) that what i say about common nature , and particular subsistence and individuals , is wholly unintelligible to you and your friends . ( 3. ) that to speak truly and precisely of this matter , as in reality it is , there is no such thing as one common nature in several individuals ; for all that is truth in them is particular , and can be nothing but particular . but the meaning is , that every particular individual man or horse , &c. has such a nature or constitution as agrees , and is conformable to that idea which that general name stands for . this is the substance of what i can gather out of your discourse in several pages , but as to the general reflections i pass them over , having no other design , but to set truth in as good a light as i can . and if i have the misfortune not to be understood , i cannot help it ; i wish it were in my power to help other men's capacities as well as to help my own . but you say , the notionists and ideists , ( as they are called ) seem to have their apprehensive faculties very differently turned ? i do not think , that there is any different turn in their faculties ; but there may be a very wrong turn in the method of reasoning in those , who go in this way of ideas , from what there is in those who pursue the general principles of reason , and from thence draw particular conclusions . if any man takes it for granted , that your way of ideas is the only way to certainty ( and he must take it for granted , if he will believe it ) then i cannot see how he can apprehend one and the same common nature in different persons or individuals , because all his ideas are taken from particulars ; and therefore a common nature is no more but one common name ; and every individual is consider'd as ranked under those names . but herein lies the fundamental mistake , that you presume that we are not to judge of things by the general principles of reason , but by particular ideas . for if men set aside this new way of judging only by these ideas ; things would appear in another light to them : but i find it is to very little purpose to argue with such men , who are resolved to stick to this way of ideas ; for they can apprehend nothing but just in their own way . and let us say what we will , it is jargon , and unintelligible to them ; although very rational men have said the same things that we do , and have been thought by the rest of mankind to have spoken intelligibly . but now it seems nothing is intelligible , but what suits with this new way of ideas , however repugnant it be to the common principles of reason ; which must be the standard to mankind , whatever becomes of this way of ideas . and therefore in this debate , i shall proceed upon these principles of reason , which have been receiv'd among mankind ; and from them i hope to make it appear , that the difference of nature and person is not imaginary and fictitious , but grounded upon the real nature of things . the principles of reason , which i go upon are these ; 1. that nothing hath no properties . 2. that all properties being only modes or accidents must have a real subject to subsist in . 3. that properties essentially different , must subsist in different essences . 4. that where there is an agreement in essential properties and a difference in individual , there must be both an identity and diversity in several respects . now upon these principles i build my assertion , that there is one real and common nature or essence in mankind , and a difference of persons in the several individuals . for , that there are such essential properties in mankind which are not in brutes , i suppose you will not deny . now these essential properties must subsist somewhere ; for nothing can have no properties , and these properties cannot subsist ( where individuals are multiplied ) in any one individual : for that is to exclude all the rest from the essential properties which belong to them ; and if they have them in common , there must be some common subject wherein they subsist , and that can be nothing but the common essence of mankind . for the essence of brutes or plants have them not ; and therefore these essences must be really different from one another . but because individuals of the same kind , have something to distinguish , as well as to unite them , therefore there must be a different subsistence in every individual : and so one and the same , and yet distinct , may very easily and intelligibly consist together . but you say , i have not told you what nature is ; i think my discourse sufficiently shew'd it , if you had a mind to understand it ; for you could not but see that i meant the subject of the essential properties , whether you call it nature , substance , or essence . your objection about nature and substance being of equal extent , i hope , i have sufficiently removed in the foregoing discourse . you tell me , that it is more than you know , that the nature of a man is equal in peter , james and john. i am sorry for it . for i thought you had ideas of particular substances . but they may be drills or horses for any thing you know . i am again sorry , that you know particular men no better ; but that for ought you know , they may be drills or horses . but you know a horse that was called peter , and you do not know but the master of the same team might call other of his horses , james and john. suppose all this . and could you not in the way of ideas distinguish them from those of your acquaintance who had the same names ? i confess , this tempts me to think that ideists ( as you call them ) have a particular turn of their understandings about these matters . for i cannot but think , that those who were not very rational men , might understand the difference between men and horses ; without being told , that although horses might be called by their names ; yet that these were real men , and their constitution and nature was conformable to that idea , which the general name man stands for . but this is no more than to say , that he that has the nature of a man is a man , or what has the nature of a drill is a drill ; and what has the nature of a horse is a horse ; whether it be called peter , or not called peter . if this were really the discourse of your friends in private conversation , you have been very obliging to them to publish it to the world : for mankind are not so stupid , as not to know a man from a horse or a drill , but only by the specifick name of man. you may have a horse called peter if you please , and another iames , and a third iohn ; but for all that , there is no one that hath the understanding of a man , but will be able without your specifick names to tell the difference of your horse peter from your man peter ; and call them by what names you please the difference will not depend upon them , but upon the essential properties which belong to them ; and so it will be owned by all that have not this new turn of their vnderstandings . but i plainly see , that a new notion when it hath got deep into a man's head doth give a strange turn to his understanding ; so that he cannot see that , which every one else can , that hath not the same tincture upon his mind . and i remember an observation of yours , how dangerous it is to a man's reason to fix his fancy long upon one sort of thoughts . these ideas are a very odd sort of spectacles to our understandings , if they make them see and understand less , than people of very , ordinary capacities do . for even the man who had the horse with the name peter , and might have others by the names of james and john , would not a little wonder at a grave philosopher that should seriously say to him ; you see , friend , that your horses have the names of men , how do you know but that they are men ? know , saith the country-man , i hope you are wiser than to ask me such a question ? or what do you take me for , if i cannot tell the difference of men from horses whatever names they have . do not tell me of your specifick names , and conformity to your ideas , i know well enough the difference between my horse peter and my man peter without such gibberish . my man peter and i can sit and chop logick together , about our country affairs , and he can write and read , and he is a very sharp fellow at a bargain ; but my horse peter can do none of these things , and i never could find any thing like reason in him , and do you think i do not know the difference between a man and a beast ? i pursue this no farther lest the country-man should be too rude to the gentlemen , with whom you had this learned conversation , about the difference of men , and horses , and drills . but you or your friend , or both , are very hard set again about a common nature with a particular subsistence proper to each person . for such is your misfortune , you say , that for your life you cannot find it out . this is a hard case ; before , for your life you could not understand nature and substance to be the same ; and now again , for your life you cannot find out this . where lies the monstrous difficulty of it ? you say , you repeated , and this twenty times to your self ; and your weak vnderstanding always rejolts . at what ? my words are , nature may be considered , as it is in distinct individuals , as the nature of man is equally in peter , iames and iohn . and this is the common nature with a particular subsistence proper to each of them . you say , that the nature of man in peter is the nature of a man , if peter be supposed to be a man , but if it be the name of a horse , your knowledge vanishes . cannot you , for your life , know the difference between a man and a horse , by their essential properties , whatever their names be ? if so , there is a greater turn of mens vnderstandings , than i imagined . but again say you , let it be impossible to give that name to a horse ( who ever said or thought so ? ) yet you cannot understand these words , the common nature of a man is in peter ; for whatsoever is in peter exists in peter ; and whatever exists in peter is particular ; but the common nature of man is the general nature of man , or else you understand not what is meant by common nature ; and it confounds your vnderstanding to make a general a particular . to this i answer , that the common nature of man may be taken two ways . in the way of ideas , and in the way of reason . in your way of ideas it is not at all to be wondered at , that you cannot understand such a common nature , as i spake of , which subsists in several persons , because you say , you can have no ideas of real substances but such as are particular ; all others are only abstract ideas , and made only by the act of the mind . but i say , that in the way of reason you may come to a better understanding of this matter . which is by considering the nature of beings , and the causes of the differences amongst the several kinds of them . i had told you before , in my answer to your first letter , that we are to consider beings as god hath ordered them in their several sorts and ranks , and that he hath distinguished them by essential properties from each other , as appears by mankind , and brutes , and plants : and that although the individuals of the several kinds agree in essential properties , yet there is a real difference between them in several accidents that belong to them , as to time , place , qualities , relations , &c. now that wherein they agree is the common nature ; and that wherein they differ , is the particular subsistence . and if this be so hard to be understood , why was it not answered here in the proper place for it ? is not that a real nature that is the subject of real properties ? is not that nature really in all those who have the same essential properties ? and therefore the common nature of man must exist in peter , because he is a man , and so in iames and iohn : and yet every one of these is so distinguished from the other , that we may justly say he hath a particular subsistence with that common nature . and this is no making a general a particular ; but distinguishing one from the other , which is a distinction so easie and necessary , that i cannot but wonder at those who say , that for their lives they cannot find it out . i had said , for the nature of man as in peter , is distinct from that same nature , as it is in iames and iohn , otherwise they would be but one person as well as one nature . and what reply is made to this ? you cannot understand what this is a proof of . it is plain that i meant it of a particular subsistence ; and if you cannot for your life understand such easie things , how can i for my life help it ? read the words over again which are before them , and join them together . and this is the common nature with a particular subsistence proper to each of them ; for the nature of man as in peter is distinct from that same nature as it is in iames and iohn . but i am really ashamed to be put to explain such things ; i hope ideas do not give another turn to common sense . but you say , that otherwise they could not be three persons , is to prove it by a proposition unintelligible to you , because you do not yet apprehend what a person is . of that in its proper place . these words of mine follow , and this distinction of persons in them , is discerned both by our senses as to their different accidents , and by our reason because they have a separate existence , not coming into it at once and in the same manner . and is this unintelligible too ? you say , it will hold as well for three physical atoms , which are three distinct individuals , and have three distinct natures in them , as certainly as three distinct men. but are three atoms as much three persons as three men ? but you cannot discern the distinction by our senses as to their accidents , nor by your reason as to separate existence , because god might create them at once . therefore we cannot distinguish three humane persons that way ? in this reasoning in the way of ideas ? or in any way ? suppose we put the common nature of an animal for the common nature of man. what follows ? therefore three animals are three distinct persons , as well as three men ? i thought there was some cause for your disliking the common principles and methods of reasoning . i am forced to give but short touches at such things , which i cannot answer more largely , without being thought to make marks of distinction . come we now therefore to the second sense of nature , as it is taken abstractly without respect to individual persons ; and then i said , it makes an entire notion of it self . for however the same nature may be in different individuals , yet the nature in it self remains one and the same ; which appears from this evident reason , that otherwise every individual must make a different kind . is this to be understood any better ? no. an entire notion of it self is an expression never met with before . an entire idea of it self had been very plain and easie ; but this is not to talk with men in their own dialect . but if we put it so , the difficulty remains . what difficulty ? it then makes no more an entire notion than the nature of peter . is it not the same nature considered as common to all individuals , distinct from that nature as in peter ? i wish among all the ways of inlarging knowledge , you could think of some new way of conveying notions into mens minds , for i find your way of ideas will never do it . for you cannot be brought one step beyond the first cast of ideas . and you will not allow , that which i give for an evident reason , to prove any thing towards clear apprehensions of one common nature . but if nature be one and the same in different individuals , then there must be one common nature , which makes an entire notion of it self : if it be not one and the same , then every individual must make a distinct kind ? can any thing be more evident ? but you give one common answer ; i understand not any thing that is meant in this whole paragraph , as to the right apprehension of one common nature . and so i am very well content to leave it to the reader 's understanding . and now i come at last to the idea of a person . and here i am glad to find something you do understand : which is great news . this , say you , i understand very well , that supposing peter , james and john to be all three men , and man being a name for one kind of animals , they are all of the same kind . do you mean that they have the same common essence , or have only the same common name ? if you mean the former , there must be a common nature ; if only the latter , that cannot make them of the same kind . for kind signifies nothing but a meer name without it . if it be asked you , whether men and drills be of the same kind or not ? could you give no other answer , but that the specifick name man stands for one sort , and the specifick name drill for the other ; and therefore they are not of the same kind ? are those names arbitrary , or are they founded on real and distinct properties ? if they be arbitrary , they have no other difference , but what a dictionary gives them . if they are founded on real and distinct properties , then there must be a real difference of kinds founded in nature ; which is as much as i desire . but to go on . you understand too very well , that peter is not james , and james is not john , but that there is a difference in these individuals . you understand also , that they may be distinguished from each other by our senses , as to different features and distance of place , &c. but what follows , you say , you do not understand , viz. that supposing there were no such external difference , yet there is a difference between them as individuals of the same nature . for all that this comes to , as far as you can understand , is that the ground of the distinction between several individuals in the same common nature is that they are several individuals in the same common nature . you understand , it seems , that they are several individuals , that peter is not james , and james is not john ; and the question is , what this distinction is founded upon ? whether upon our observing the difference of features , distance of place , &c. or on some antecedent ground ? i affirm , that there is a ground of the distinction of individuals antecedent to such accidental differences as are liable to our observation by our senses . and the ground i go upon is this , that the true reason of identity in man is the vital union of soul and body : and since every man hath a different soul united to different particles of matter , there must be a real distinction between them , without any respect to what is accidental to them . for , if peter have a soul and body different from iames , and iames from iohn , they must have different principles of individuation , without any respect to features or place , &c. you say , you cannot suppose a contradiction , viz. that there is no difference of place between them . but that is not the point , whether when we consider them with respect to place , there can be such a thing as identity of place to two different bodies ? but whether we cannot consider two several individuals of mankind without particular regard to place ? which i say , we may , and for this reason ; because relation to place , is an external difference , but the real distinction of individuals doth not relate to any accident of the body ; because the individual consists of the union of soul and body ; and you cannot judge of the existence of the soul by the place of the body . you say , that when we see any thing to be in any place in any instant of time , we are sure ( be it what it will ) that it is that very thing , and not another which at that time exists in another place , how like and undistinguishing soever it may be in all other respects . and in this consists identity . but i think the identity of man depends neither upon the notion of place for his body ; nor upon the soul consider'd by it self , but upon both these , as actually united and making one person . which to me seems so clear and intelligible , that i can imagine no objection against it . i am certain , you produce none . my next words are , and here lies the true idea of a person , which arises from that manner of subsistence , which is in one individual , and is not communicable to another . in your answer to this , i pass over the trifling exceptions , about the dissyllable person , and the true idea and signification of the articulate sound ; and about here and herein , &c. being resolved to keep to what appears material . and the only thing of that kind is , that according to my sense of person , it will as well agree to bucephalus as to alexander ; and the difference will be as great , between bucephalus and podargus , as between alexander and hector , all being several individuals in the same common nature : but for your part you cannot understand that bucephalus and podargus are persons in the true signification of the word person in the english tongue . and whoever desired you should ? for i expresly say , that a person is a compleat intelligent substance , with a peculiar manner of subsistence . and again , for a person relates to something which doth distinguish it from another intelligent substance in the same nature . so that it is impossible to apply my notion of person to any irrational creatures , although they be bucephalus and podargus : and i think a man must strain hard to make such objections , so directly against that idea of a person which i set down . and it is very easie to understand the difference between a distinction of individuals as such , and of intelligent individuals , and that manner of subsistence in them , which makes them distinct persons . but you say , that i affirm , that an individual intelligent substance is rather supposed to the making of a person , than the proper definition of it ; and yet afterwards i make it to be the definition of a person , that it is a compleat intelligent substance . to this i answer , that in the former place i give an account of the reason of personality , which i say lies in the manner of subsistence , and not in the intelligent individual substance ; which is rather supposed to the making of a person : for that which critically distinguishes the person is the reason of personality ; but when we come to give a common definition of it , there is no such necessity of insisting upon the reason of the difference , but upon the common acception of it person . and upon that account i call it a complete intelligent substance , because , although the soul be so in it self ; yet we take person with relation to soul and body united together . and so the identity of person must take in both , not only here , but at the resurrection . and thus i have gone through all that i could find , that seem'd material in the dialogue between you and your friends as to this subject , and i assure you , i have omitted nothing which i apprehended had any appearance of difficulty in it . and i find not the least reason to be unsatisfied in the account i had given of the difference of nature and person : but i still think that it doth tend very much to the right apprehension of the doctrine of the trinity ; as i hope doth farther appear by the foregoing discourse . and now to come to a conclusion of this whole debate . ( for i intend not to draw this saw any longer : having done as much as i think sitting for my self to do . ) i saw no necessity of writing again for my own vindication as to your first charge , which i was contended to leave to the reader 's judgment . but in the conclusion of my former answer , i had said , that as you had stated your notion of ideas , it may be of dangerous consequence to that article of the christian faith , which i endeavour'd to defend . this you call a new charge against your book ; and you complain , that i do not specifie the particulars , wherein i apprehend it may be of such dangerous consequence ; and you blame me for this saying , without shewing that it is so : and that all the reason i give is , that it is made use of by ill men to do mischief : that when i say , it may be , it shews only an inclination to accuse , and proves nothing : that danger may be apprehended where no danger is ; that if any thing must be laid aside , because it may be ill used , you do not know what will be innocent enough to be kept : and lastly , that the imputation of a tendency to scepticism , and to the overthrowing any article of the christian faith are no small charge ; and that you cannot see any argument i have brought , that your notion of ideas tends to scepticism . these things laid together , made me think it necessary to do that which i was unwilling 〈◊〉 do , till you had driven me to it ; which was to shew , the reasons i had , why i look'd on your notion of ideas , and of certainty by them , as inconsistent with it self , and with some important articles of the christian faith. what i have now done , i thought it my duty to do , not with respect to my self , but to some of the mysteries of our faith ; which i do not charge you with opposing , but with laying such foundations as do tend to the overthrow of them ; of which we have had too much experience already ; and may have more , if your way of certainty by ideas should obtain . which i cannot think it will among such as are capable , and willing , to judge impartially . i have now done with this matter : and as some may think it the first part of wisdom not to begin in such disputes ( and i am of their mind if they did not touch the christian faith ) so they cannot but judge it the next ( as i do ) to know when to make an end. i am , sir , your faithfull friend , and servant , ed. wigorn. sept. 22. 1697. finis . errata . page 22. line 16. after thing , insert common . p. 103 margin , r. p. 253. p. 115. l. 14. r. plotinus . p. 130. l. 26. r. this . p. 175. l. 11. blot out it . books written by the right reverend father in god , edw. l. bishop of worcester , and sold by h. mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yuard . a rational account of the grounds of the protestant religion ; being a vindication of the lord archbishop of canterbury's relation of a conference , &c. from the pretended answer of t. c. 2d . edit . fol. origines britannicae , or the antiquities of the british churches , with a preface concerning some pretended antiquities relating to britain , in vindication of the bishop of st. asaph . folio . irenicum , a weapon-slave for the churches wounds . quarto . origines sacrae , or a rational account of the grounds of christian faith , as to the truth and divine authority of the script ▪ and the matters therein contained . 4 to . a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it . octavo . an answer to several late treatises occasioned by a book entituled , a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it ; part i. octavo . a second discourse in vindication of the protestant grounds of faith , against the pretence of infallibility in the roman church , in answer to the guide in controversie , by r h protestancy without principles , and reason and religion ; or the certain rule of faith , by e w. with a particular enquiry into the miracles of the roman church octavo . an answer to mr. cressy's epistle apologetical to a person of honour , touching his vindication of dr ▪ stillingfleet . octavo . a defence of the discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , in answer to a book entituled , catholicks no idolaters : octavo . several conferences between a roman priest ▪ a fanatick chaplain , and a divine of the church of england ; being a full answer to the late dialogues of t g octavo . a discourse concerning bonds of resignation of benefices in point of law and conscience , in octavo . a discourse concerning the illegality of the ecclesiastical commission , in answer to the vindication and defence of it : wherein the true notion of the legal supremacy is cleared ; and an account is given of the nature , original and mischief of the dispensing power . the unreasonableness of separation , or an impartial account of the history , nature and pleas of the present separation from the communion of the ch. of england . quarto the grand question concerning the bishops right to vote in parliament in cases capital stated and argued , from the parliament-rolls and the history of former times ; with an enquiry into their peerage , and the three estates in parliament . octavo . a discourse concerning the doctrine of christ's satisfaction ; or the true reasons of his sufferings ; with an answer to the socinian objections . to which is added , a sermon concerning the mysteries of the christian faith , preached april 7. 1691. with a preface concerning the true state of the controversie about christ's satisfaction . the second edition . 8 vo . twelve sermons preached upon several occasions vol. i. octavo . ten sermons preached upon several occasions . vol ii. octavo . a third volume will be shortly published . a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity : with an answer to the late socinian objections against it , from scripture , antiquity and reason and a preface concerning the different explications of the trinity , and the tendency of the present socinian controversie . the second edition , octavo . the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. lock 's letter concerning some passages relating to his essay of humane understanding , mentioned in the late discourse in vindication of the trinity . with a postscript in answer to some reflections made on that treatise in a late socinian pamphlet . the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocess in his primary visitation begun at worcester , september 11. 1690. 4 to . the effigies of the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester , engraven on a copper-plate by robert white . price 6 d. the rule of faith : or an answer to the treatise of mr. i. s. entituled , sure-footing , &c. by iohn tillotson , d. d. to which is adjoyned , a reply to mr. i. s's third appendix , &c. by edward stillingfleet d. d. a letter to mr. g. giving a true account of a late conference at the d. of p's . a second letter to mr. g. in answer to two letters lately published concerning the conference at the d. of p s. veteres vindicati : in an expostulary letter to mr. sclater of putney , upon his consensus veterum , &c. wherein the absurdity of his method , and the weakness of his reasons are shewn ; his false aspersions upon the church of england are wiped off , and her faith concerning the eucharist proved to be that of the primitive church : together with animadversions on dean boileu's french translation of , and remarks upon bertram . an answer to the compiler of nubes testium : wherein is shewn , that antiquity ( in relation to the points in controversie set down by him ) did not for the first five hundred years believe , teach and practice as the church of rome doth at present believe , teach and practice ; together with a vindication of veteres vindicati from the late weak and disingenuous attempts of the author of transubstantiation defended , by the author of the answer to mr. sclater of putney . a letter to father lewis sabran jesuit , in answer to his letter to a peer of the church of england ; wherein the postscript to the answer to the nubes testium is vindicated , and father sabran's mistakes farther discoverd . a second letter to father lewis sabran jesuit , in answer to his reply . a vindication of the principles of the author of the answer to the compiler of nubes testium in answer to a late pretended letter from a dissenter to the divines of the church of england . a discourse concerning the nature and grounds of the certainty of faith , in answer to i. s. his catholick letters . the council of trent examin'd and disprov'd by catholick tradition , in the main points in controversie between us and the church of rome ▪ with a particular account of the times and occasions of introducing them . part. i. to which a preface is prefixed concerning the true sense of the council of trent , and the notion of transubstantiation . an historical examination of the authority of general councils , shewing the false dealing that hath been used in the publishing of them ; and the difference amongst the papists themselves about their number . the second edition corrected . 4 to . the folly and unreasonableness of atheism demonstrated from the advantage and pleasure of a religious life : the faculties of human souls : the structure of animate bodies , and the origine and frame of the world ; in eight sermons : preached at the lecture , founded by the honourable robert boyle , esq in the first year , 1692. by richard bentley , d. d. chaplain in ordinary , and library-keeper to his majesty . of revelation , and the messias : a sermon preached at the publick commencement at cambridge , july the 5th . 1696. by richard bentley , d. d. chaplain in ordinary , and library-keeper to his majesty . the restoring of fallen brethren ; containing the substance of two sermons on gal vi. 1 , 2 preached at the performance of publick penance , by certain criminals , on the lord's day , usually called mid-lent-sunday , 1696. in the parish church of old-swinford in worcester-shire : by simon ford , d. d and rector there ; with a preface , by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester . the new-years-gift complete , in six parts , composed of prayers and meditations for every day in the week , with devotions for the sacrament , lent , and other occasions . the first part may be had by it self books written by the late reverend anthony horneck , d. d. preacher at the savoy . the great law of consideration ; or a discourse , wherein the nature , usefulness , and absolute necessity of consideration , in order to a truly serious , and religious life , is laid open , in 8 vo . the happy ascetick ; or the best exercise ; together with prayers suitable to each exercise : to which is added , a letter to a person of quality , concerning the holy lives of the primitive christians , in 8 vo . delight and judgment represented , in a discourse , concerning the great day of judgment ; and its power to damp and embitter sensual delights , sports , and recreations , in 8 vo . the exercise of prayer ; or , a help to devotion : containing prayers and devotions for several occasions . the antiquities of nottingham-shire , extracted out of records , original evidences , leiger-books , and other manuscripts , and authentick authorities ; beautified with maps , prospects , and portraictures : by robert thoroton dr. of physick , folio . some school-books sold by henry mortlok , at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . horatius , interpretatione & notis illustravit ludovicus des-prez , in usum delphini . huic editioni accessere vita horatii cum dacerii chronologia horatiana , & praefatio de satyra romana , 8vo . l. annaeus florus , in usum delphini , 8vo . leusdeni compendium graecum novi testamenti , in 8vo . quinta editio . janua linguarum trilinguis , sive johannis amos comenii janua linguarum , 8vo . graecae grammatices rudimenta in usum scholae westmonasteriensis busby's apolodorus , in usum scholae westmonast . nomenclatura brevis reformata , in usum scholae westmonasteriensis . an english introduction to the latin tongue , for the use of the lower forms in westminster school . graeca epigrammata , in usum scholae west . martialis epigram . in usum scholae west . juneval in usum scholae westmonasteriensis . a general examination of the common greek grammar , according to dr. busby's method , chiefly intended for grounding young beginners in the greek tongue , in the free-school in newark upon trent . a short exposition of the catechism of the church of england , with the church catechism it self , and order of confirmation in english and latin , the latin revised and much amended , by edw. boughen , d.d. fitted for the use of schools . an explanation of the additional rules for the genders of nouns in the oxford grammar , by way of question and answer : by iohn twells master of the free-school in newark , very proper to be bound up with the oxford grammar . with variety of other school-books . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61523-e120 2d . letter ▪ p. 2. answ. to first letter , p. 46. 2 d. letter , p. 48. p. 49. p. 50. first letter , p. 57. p. 80. letter ii. ● . ● , 9 , 10.12 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 23 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 47 , 50 , 56 , 61 , 107 , 114. essay , b. 4. ch . 6. sect. 3. first letter , p. 57. b. 4. ch . 11. sect. 1. letter p. 57. b. 4. ch . 2. sect. 15. princip . l. 1. n. 44 , &c. b. 4. ch . 18. sect. 8. b. 4. ch . 4. sect. 8. b. 4. ch . 12. sect. 14. b. 4. ch . 2. sect. 15. answ. to let 1. p. 36. let. 2. p. 36. answer to letter 1. p. 37. letter 2. p. 45. p. ●6 ▪ p. 41. p. 43 , 44. p. 4● . answer to letter 1. p. 38. letter 2. p. 46. letter 2 p. 95. answer to letter 1. p 83. postscript p. 3. p. 96. p. 131. p. 131. lett. ii. p. 170. 2. essay , b. 2. ch . 27. n. 3. n. 6. n. 9. n. 11. n. 16. n. 18. n. 26. letter 2. p. 96. n. 25. essay , e. 4. ch . 15. sect. 1. sect. 4. john 5.28 , 29. 2 cor. 5.10 . 1 cor. 15.16 . 17. 6. 4. john 20.25 . 1 cor. 15.20 , 23. 35. 36 , 37 , 38. sect. 4. sect. 6. 42. 43. 44. 53 , 5● . essay b. 2. c. 1. sect. 5. vindication of the trinity , p. 252. &c. p. 260. letter 1. p. 165. p. 216 answer to letter 1 ▪ p. 103. letter 2. p. 109. p. 100. answer to letter 1. p. 107. p. 103. letter 2. p. 112. letter 1. p. 27. essay b. 4. c. 6. sect. 1. letter 2. p. 113. p. 109. p. 109. p. 110. p. 111. p. 112. letter 1. p. 32. essay l. 2. ch . 27. sect. 26. letter 1. p. 216. essay , l. 2. ch . 27. sect. 9. essay , b. 4. ch . 18. sect. 5. evangel . medici art. 14. p. 170. ch. 18. sect. 10. sect. 8. censur . philos. cartes . c. 8. sect. 3. n. 4. philosophia scripturae interpres , c. 5. n. 56. c. 8. p. 58. p. 60. p. 63. p. 65 , 79. from p. 63. to p. 73. p. 87. p. 88. p. 171 , 172. essay , b. 2. ch . 13. sect. 2. sect. 12. sect. 14. princip . p. 11. n. 16. essay , l. 2. ch . 13. sect. 12. b. 4. ch . 4. sect. 1. sect. 2 , sect. 4 ▪ sect. 5. sect. 11. sect. 12. des cartes epist. ● 1. ep. 87 , 88. p. ●17 p. 118. p. 120. p. 119. p. 121. arist. metaph . l. 5. c. 4. p. rami schol. metaph l. 9. c. 4. physic. ausc. l. 2. c. 1. plut. de plac. phil. l. 1. c. 1. c. 3. letter ii. p. 119. fr. patrit . discuss . peripat . t. ii. l. 2. p. 207. nat quaest. l. 2. c. 45. de benef . l. 4. c. 7 , 8. de cons. ad helv. c. 8. cic. de nat. l. 2. plato in phileb . sext. empir . l. 8. c. 2. p. 324. anton. l. 6. sect . 14. l. 10. sect. 2. damasc. dial. c. 32. chrysost. hom. 22. in gen. theod. in gen. qu. 2. basil. in hex . or. 1. gal. 4.8 . mr. boyle of the notion of nature , p. 27. p. 35. discourse of the trinity , p. 25. p. 124. ibid. book 4 ch 7. sect. ●● . sect. 4. book 4. ch . 7. sect. 17. solid philos. asserted preface , sect. 16. reflex . 19. p. 378. book 4. ch . 9. sect. 3. book 4. ch . 7. sect. 4. book 4 ▪ ch . 7. sect. 16. sect. 17. sect. 18. book 3. ch . 6. sect. 26. sect. 17 ▪ aristot. metaph . l. 5. answer to the first lett. p. 32. iambl . in nicom . p. 5. porph vit . pythag. metaphys . l. 7. c. 15 , 16. l. 12 ▪ c. 4 , 5. arrian . l. 1. c. 22. l. 3. c 26. simplic . in epict . c. 33. plut. de ei delph . simplic . in epict. c. 58. essay , b. 4. ch . 12. sect. 14. book 4. ch . 2. sect. 15. sext. empiric . advers . mathem . l. 7. essay , b. 2. ch . 4. sect. 5. sect. 6. book ii. ch . 8. sect. 7. b. iv. ch 2. sect. 8. sect. 12. b. iv. ch . 3. sect. 18. ch. 7. sect. 10. sect. 9. sect. 10. book 3. ch . 10. sect. 15. book 2. ch . 23. sect. 24. sect. 25. book 2. ch . 23. sect. 24. ch. 23. sect. 31. book 3. ch . 4. sect. 8. sect. 9. book 2. ch . 14. sect. 2. sect. 32. sect. 4. book 3. ch . 4. sect. 10. book 4. ch . 7. sect. 12. book 4. ch . 2. sect. 7. essay , b. 2. ch . 13. sect. 22. joh. bapt. morini dissert . de atomis & vacuo , p. 14. bernier favilla ridiculi muris , p. 99. sect. 2. ch. 17. sect. ●● sect. 2. essay , b. 4. ch . 2. sect. 3. sect. 7 , 8. aristot. metaph . l. 4. c. 4. sect. 3. sect. 7. arist. de part. anim. l. 1. c. 1. ●● gen. a●●●● l. 3. c. 10. de meteor . l. 1. c. 7. moral . magn. l. 1. c. 1. eudem . l 1. c. 6. ethic ad nicom l. 1. c. 1 , 7. l. 2. c. 2. itaque argumenti conclusio quae est graecè 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ità definitur ; ratio quae ex rebus perceptis ad id quod non percipiebatur adducit . cicero in lucullo , c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , plato in phaedro . v. dialect . ciceron . adam bu●sii , l. 6. c. 10. p. 127. p. 131 , 132.134.138 , &c. p. 154. p. 144. p. 131. p. 132. p. 133. b. ii. ch 11. sect. 13. p. 114. p. 121. p. 135. answ to lett. l. p. 110. p. 137. p. 138. p. 140. p. 141. p. 144. p. 146. p. 147. p. 149. p. 152. p. 149. essay , b. 2. ch . 27. sect. 1. p. 155. p. 156. p. 159. p. 57. 59. 84. 85. 57. 84 85. 17● . 171. a relation of a conference held about religion at london by edw. stillingfleet ... with some gentlemen of the church of rome. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1687 approx. 309 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 37 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-03 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a30412 wing b5863 estc r4009 13677333 ocm 13677333 101255 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a30412) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 101255) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 839:8) a relation of a conference held about religion at london by edw. stillingfleet ... with some gentlemen of the church of rome. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. burnet, gilbert, 1643-1715. [8], 64 p. printed and are to be sold by randal talor ..., london : 1687. written also by gilbert burnet. cf. nuc pre-1956. reproduction of original in huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng transubstantiation -early works to 1800. 2003-10 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-12 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-01 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-01 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a relation of a conference held about religion , at london , by edw. stillingfleet , d. d. &c. with some gentlemen of the church of rome . london : printed , and are to be sold by randal taylor near stationers-hall . 1687. the preface . there is nothing that is by a more universal agreement decried , than conferences about controversies of religion : and no wonder , for they have been generally managed with so much heat and passion , parties being more concerned for glory and victory , than truth ; and there is such foul dealing in the accounts given of them , that it is not strange to see these prejudices taken up against them . and yet it cannot be denied , but if men of candor and calmness should discourse about matters of religion , without any other interest than to seek and follow truth , there could not be a more effectual and easie way found for satisfying scruples . more can be said in one hour than read in a day : besides that what is said in a discourse discreetly managed , does more appositely meet with the doubtings and difficulties any body is perplexed with , than is possibly to be found in a book : and since almost all books disguise the opinions of those that differ from them , and represent their arguments as weak , and their opinions as odious ; conferences between those of different perswasions do remedy all these evils . but after all the advantages of this way , it must be confessed that for the greater part men are so engaged to their opinions by interest and other ties , that in conferences most persons are resolved before-hand to yield to no conviction , but to defend every thing : being only concerned to say so much as may darken weaker minds that are witnesses , and give them some occasion to triumph ; at least conceal any foil they may have received , by wrapping up some pittiful shift or other , in such words , and pronouncing them with such accents of assurance , and perhaps scorn , that they may seem to come off with victory . and it is no less frequent to see men after they have been so baffled , that all discerning witnesses are ashamed of them , yet being resolved to make up with impudence what is wanting in truth , as a coward is generally known to boast most , where he has least cause ; publish about what feats they have done , and tell every body they see how the cause in their mouth did triumph over their enemies : that so the praise of the defeat given may be divided between the cause and themselves : and though in modesty they may pretend to ascribe all to truth and the faith they contended for , yet in their hearts they desire the greatest part be offered to themselves . all these considerations with a great many more did appear to us , when the lady t. asked us if we would speak with her husband and some others of the church of rome , as well for clearing such scruples as the perpetual converse with those of that religion had raised in the lady ; as for satisfying her husband , of whose being willing to receive instruction she seemed confident . yet being well assured of the ladies great candor and worth , and being willing to stand up for the vindication and honour of our church , whatever might follow on it , we promised to be ready to wait on her at her house upon advertisement : without any nice treating before-hand , what we should confer about . therefore we neither asked who should be there , nor what number , nor in what method , or on what particulars our discourse should run , but went thither carrying only one friend along with us for a witness . if the discourse had been left to our managing , we resolved to have insisted chiefly on the corruptions in the worship of the roman church : to have shewed on several heads that there was good cause to reform these abuses ; and that the bishops and pastors of this church , the civil authority concurring , had sufficient authority for reforming it . these being the material things in controversie , which must satisfie every person if well made out , we intended to have discoursed about them ; but being put to answer , we followed those we had to deal with . but that we may not forestall the reader in any thing that passed in the ladies chamber , which he will find in the following account , we had no sooner left her house , but we resumed among our selves all had passed , that it might be written down , what ever should follow , to be published if need were . so we agreed to meet again three days after , to compare what could be written down , with our memories . and having met , an account was read , which did so exactly contain all that was spoken , as far as we could remember , that after a few additions , we all three signed the narrative then agreed to . few days had passed , when we found we had need of all that care and caution , for the matter had got wind , and was in every bodies mouth . many of our best friends know how far we were from talking of it , for till we were asked about it , we scarce opened our mouths of it to any person . but when it was said that we had been baffled and foiled , it was necessary for us to give some account of it : not that we were much concerned in what might be thought of us , but that the most excellent cause of our church and religion might not suffer by the misrepresentations of this conference . and the truth was , there was so little said by the gentlemen we spoke with , that was of weight , that we had scarce any occasion given us of speaking about things of importance : so that being but faintly assaulted , we had no great cause of boasting , had we been ever so much inclined to it . at length being weary with the questions put to us about it , we shewed some of our friends the written account of it . and that those of the church of rome might have no pretence to complain of any foul dealing on our part , we caused a copy of it to be writ out , and on the 19. of april sent it the lady t. to be shewed to them . and one of us , having the honour to meet with her afterwards , desired her to let her husband and the others with him know , that as we had set down very faithfully all we could remember that they had said ; so if they could except at any part of this narrative , or would add any thing that they either did say which we had forgot , or should have said which themselves had forgot to say , we desired they might add it to the account we sent them . for we looked on it as a most unreasonable thing , that the credit of any cause or party should depend on their extemporary faculty of speaking , the quickness of their invention , or the readiness of their memory who discourse about it : though it will appear that in this conference they had all the advantage , and we all the disadvantage possible : since they knew and were resolved what they would put us to , of which we were utterly ignorant : save that about an hour before we went thither , we had an advertisement sent us by a third person , that it was like they would assault us about the articles of our church , particularly that of the blessed sacrament . having made this offer to the lady of adding what they should desire , craving only leave that if they added any thing that was not said , we might be also allowed to add what we should have answered if such things had been said , we resolved to publish nothing till they had a competent time given them , both to make such additions to the narrative , and to consider the paper whereby we hope we have made out according to our undertaking , that the doctrine of the church for the first seven or eight ages was contrary to transubstantiation : which we sent to the lady on the seventeenth of april to be communicated to them . and therefore , though our conference was generally talked of , and all persons desired an account of it might be published ; yet we did delay it till we should hear from them . and meeting on the twenty ninth of april with him who is marked n. n. in the account of the conference , i told him , the foolish talk was made by their party about this conference , had set so many on us , who all called to us to print the account of it , that we were resolved on it : but i desired he might any time between that and trinity sunday , bring me what exceptions he or the other gentlemen had to the account we sent them , which he confessed he had seen . so i desired , that by that day i might have what additions they would make either of what they had said but was forgot by us , or what they would now add upon second thoughts : but longer i told him i could not delay the publishing it . i desired also to know by that time whether they intended any answer to the account we sent them of the doctrine of the fathers about transubstantiation . he confessed he had seen that paper : but by what he then said , it seemed they did not think of any answer to it . and so i waited still expecting to hear from him . at length , on the twentieth of may , n. n. came to me and told me some of these gentlemen were out of town , and so he would not take on him to give any thing in writing ; yet he desired me to take notice of some particulars he mentioned , which i intreated he would write down , that he might not complain of my misrepresenting what he said . this he declined to do , so i told him i would set it down the best way i could , and desired him to call again that he might see if i had written it down faithfully , which he promised to do that same afternoon , and was as good as his word , and i read to him what is subjoyned to the relation of the conference , which he acknowledged was a faithful account of what he had told me . i have considered it i hope to the full , so that it gave me more occasion of canvassing the whole matter . and thus the reader will find a great deal of reason to give an entire credit to this relation , since we have proceeded in it with so much candor , that it is plain we intended not to abuse the credulity of any , but were willing to offer this account to the censure of the adverse party ; and there being nothing else excepted against it , that must needs satisfie every reasonable man that all is true that he has here offered to his perusal . and if these gentlemen or any of their friends publish different or contrary relations of this conference , without that fair and open way of procedure which we have observed towards them ; we hope the reader will be so just as to consider , that our method in publishing this account has been candid and plain , and looks like men that were doing an honest thing , of which they were neither afraid nor ashamed : which cannot in reason be thought of any surreptitious account that like a work of darkness may be let flye abroad , without the name of any person to answer for it on his conscience or reputation : and that at least he will suspend his belief till a competent time be given to shew what mistakes or errors any such relation may be guilty of . we do not expect the reader shall receive great instructions from the following conference , for the truth is , we met with nothing but shufling . so that he will find when ever we came to discourse closely to any head , they very dexterously went off from it to another , and so did still shift off from following any thing was suggested . but we hope every reader will be so just to us as to acknowledge it was none of our fault , that we did not canvass things more exactly , for we proposed many things of great importance to be discoursed on , but could never bring them to fix on any thing . and this did fully satisfie the lady t. when she saw we were ready to have justified our church in all things , but that they did still decline the entering into any matter of weight : so that it appeared both to her and the rest of the company , that what boastings soever they spread about as if none of us would or durst appear in a conference to vindicate our church , all were without ground ; and the lady was by the blessing of god further confirmed in the truth , in which we hope god shall continue her to her lifes end . but we hope the letter and the two discourses that follow , will give the reader a more profitable entertainment . in the letter we give many short hints , and set down some select passages of the fathers , to shew they did not believe transubstantiation . upon all which we are ready to joyn issue to make good every thing in that paper , from which we believe it is apparent the primitive church was wholly a stranger to transubstantiation . it was also judged necessary by some of our friends that we should to purpose , and once for all , expose and discredit that unreasonable demand of shewing all the articles of our church in the express words of scripture : upon which the first discourse was written . and it being found that no answer was made to what n. n. said , to shew that it was not possible the doctrine of transubstantiation could have crept into any age , if those of that age had not had it from their fathers , and they from theirs up to the apostles days , this being also since our conference laid home to me by the same person , it was thought fit to give a full account how this doctrine could have been brought into the church , that so a change may appear to have been not only possible , but also probable , and therefore the second discourse was written . if these discourses have not that full finishing and life which the reader would desire , he must regrate his misfortune in this , that the person who was best able to have written them , and given them all possible advantages out of that vast stock of learning and iudgment he is master of , was so taken up with other work cut out for him by some of these gentlemens friends , of which we shall see an excellent account very speedily , that it was not possible for him to spare so much time for writing these ; so that it fell to the others share to do it : and therefore the reader is not to expect any thing like those high strains of wit and reason which fill all that authors writings , but must give allowance to one that studies to follow him though at a great distance : therefore all can be said from him is , that what is here performed was done by his direction and approbation , which to some degree will again encourage the reader , and so i leave him to the perusal of what follows . the relation of the conference . d. s. and m. b. went to m. l. t 's , as they had been desired by l. t. to confer with some persons upon the grounds of the church of england separating from rome , and to shew how unreasonable it was to go from our church to theirs . about half an hour after them , came in s. p. t. mr. w. and three more . there were present seven or eight ladies , three other church-men , and one or two more . when we were all set d. s. said to s. p. t. that we were come to wait on them for justifying our church ; that he was glad to see we had gentlemen to deal with , from whom he expected fair dealing , as on the other hand he hoped they should meet with nothing from us , but what became our profession . s. p. said , they had protestants to their wives , and there were other reasons too to make them wish they might turn protestants ; therefore he desired to be satisfied in one thing : and so took out the articles of the church , and read these words of the sixth article of the holy scriptures ; [ so that whatsoever is not read therein , nor may be proved thereby , is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith , or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation . ] then he turned to the twenty eighth article of the lord's supper , and read these words , [ and the mean whereby the body of christ is received and eaten in the supper , is faith : ] and added , he desired to know whether that was read in scripture or not , and in what place it was to be found . d. s. said , he must first explain that article of the scripture ; for this method of proceeding was already sufficiently known and exposed ; he clearly saw the snare they thought to bring him in , and the advantages they would draw from it . but it was the cause of the church he was to defend , which he hoped he was ready to seal with his blood , and was not to be given up for a trick . the meaning of the sixth article was , that nothing must be received or imposed , as an article of faith , but what was either expresly contained in scripture , or to be deduced and proved from it by a clear consequence : so that if in any article of our church which they rejected , he should either shew it in the express words of scripture , or prove it by a clear consequence , he performed all required in this article . if they would receive this , and fix upon it as the meaning of the article , which certainly it was ; then he would go on to the proof of that other article he had called in question . m. w. said , they must see the article in express scripture , or at least in some places of scripture which had been so interpreted by the church , the councils or fathers , or any one council or father . and he the rather pitched on this article , because he judged it the only article , in which all protestants , except the lutherans , were agreed . d. s. said , it had been the art of all the hereticks from the marcionites days , to call for express words of scripture . it was well known , the arrians set up their rest on this , that their doctrine was not condemned by express words of scripture ; but that this was still rejected by the catholick church , and that theodoret had written a book , on purpose to prove the unreasonableness of this challenge ; therefore he desired they would not insist on that which every body must see was not fair dealing , and that they would take the sixth article entirely , and so go to see if the other article could not be proved from scripture , though it were not contained in express words . m. b. added , that all the fathers , writing against the arrians , brought their proofs of the consubstantiality of the son , from the scriptures , though it was not contained in the express words of any place . and the arrian council , that rejected the words equisubstantial and consubstantial , gives that for the reason , that they were not in the scripture . and that in the council of ephesus , s. cyril brought in many propositions against the nestorians , with a vast collection of places of scripture to prove them by ; and though the quotations from scripture contained not those propositions in express words ; yet the council was satisfied from them , and condemned the nestorians . therefore it was most unreasonable , and against the practice of the catholick church , to require express words of scripture , and that the article was manifestly a disjunctive , where we were to chuse whether of the two we would chuse , either one or other . s. p. t. said , or was not in the article . m. b. said , nor was a negative in a disjunctive proposition , as or was an affirmative , and both came to the same meaning . m. w. said , that s. austin charged the heretick to read what he said in the scripture . m. b. said , s. austin could not make that a constant rule , otherwise he must reject the consubstantiality which he did so zealously assert ; though he might in disputing urge an heretick with it on some other account . d. s. said , the scripture was to deliver to us the revelation of god , in matters necessary to salvation ; but it was an unreasonable thing to demand proofs for a negative in it ; for if the roman church have set up many doctrines , as articles of faith , without proof from the scriptures , we had cause enough to reject these if there was no clear proofs of them from scripture ; but to require express words of scripture for a negative , was as unjust , as if mahomet had said , the christians had no reason to reject him , because there was no place in scripture that called him an impostor . since then the roman church had set up the doctrine of transubstantiation , and the sacrifice of the mass , without either express scripture or good proofs from it , their church had good cause to reject these . m. w. said , the article they desired to be satisfied in was , if he understood any thing , a positive article , and not a negative . m. b. said , the positive article was , that christ was received in the holy sacrament ; but because they had ( as our church judged ) brought in the doctrine of the corporal presence without all reason , the church made that explanation , to cast out the other ; so that upon the matter it was a negative . he added , that it was also unreasonable to ask any one place to prove a doctrine by ; for the fathers in their proceedings with the arrians brought a great collection of places , which gave light to one another , and all concurred to prove the article of faith that was in controversie : so if we brought such a consent of many places of scripture as proved our doctrine , all being joyned together , we perform all that the fathers thought themselves bound to do in the like case . d. s. then at great length told them , the church of rome and the church of england differed in many great and weighty points ; that we were come thither to see , as these gentlemen professed they desired , if we could offer good reason for them to turn protestants , and as the ladies professed a desire to be further established in the doctrine of the church of england ; in order to which , none could think it a proper method to pick out some words in the obscure corner of an article , and call for express scriptures for them . but the fair and fit way was to examine whether the church of england had not very good reason to separate from the communion of the church of rome ; therefore , since it was for truth , in which our souls are so deeply concerned , that we enquired , he desired they would joyn issue to examine either the grounds on which the church of england did separate from the church of rome , or the authority by which she did it : for if there was both good reason for it , and if those who did it , had a sufficient authority to do it , then was the church of england fully vindicated . he did appeal to all that were present , if in this offer he dealt not candidly and fairly , and if all other ways were not shufling . which he pressed with great earnestness , as that only which could satisfie all peoples consciences . m. w. and s. p. t. said , god forbid they should speak one word for the church of rome ; they understood the danger they should run by speaking to that . d. s. said , he hoped they looked on us as men of more conscience and honesty , than to make an ill use of any thing they might say for their church ; that for himself he would die rather than be guilty of so base a thing , the very thought whereof he abhorred . m. b. said , that though the law condemned the endeavouring to reconcile any to the church of rome , yet their justifying their church when put to it , especially to divines , in order to satisfaction which they professed they desired , could by no colour be made a transgression ; and that as we engaged our faith to make no ill use of what should be said , so if they doubted any of the other company , it was s. p. his house , and he might order it to be more private if he pleased . s. p. said , he was only to speak to the articles of the church of england , and desired express words for that article . upon this followed a long wrangling , the same things were said over and over again . in the end m. w. said , they had not asked where that article was read ; that they doubted of it , for they knew it was in no place of scripture , in which they were the more confirmed , because none was so much as alledged , d. s. said , upon the terms in the sixth article he was ready to undertake the twenty eighth article to prove it clearly by scripture . m. w. said , but there must be no interpretations admitted of . m. b. said , it was certain the scriptures were not given to us , as parrots are taught to speak words ; we were endued with a faculty of understanding , and we must understand somewhat by every place of scripture . now the true meaning of the words , being that which god would teach us in the scriptures , which way soever that were expressed , is the doctrine revealed there ; and it was to be considered , that the scriptures were at first delivered ro plain and simple men , to be made use of by all without distinction : therefore we were to look unto them as they did ; and so s. paul wrote his epistles , which were the hardest pieces of the new testament , to all in the churches to whom he directed them . m. w. said , the epistles were written upon emergent occasions , and so were for the use of the churches to whom they were directed . d. s. said , though they were written upon emergent occasions , yet they were written by divine inspiration , and as a rule of faith , not only for those churches , but for all christians . but as m. w. was a going to speak , m. c. came in , upon which we all rose up till he was set ; so being set , after some civilities , d. s. resumed a little what they were about , and told they were calling for express scriptures to prove the articles of our church by . m. c. said , if we be about scriptures , where is the judge that shall pass the sentence who expounds them aright ; otherwise the contest must be endless . d. s. said , he had proposed a matter that was indeed of weight ; therefore he would first shew , that these of the church of rome were not provided of a sufficient or fit judge of controversies . m. c. said , that was not the thing they were to speak to ; for though we destroyed the church of rome all to nought , yet except we built up our own , we did nothing ; therefore he desired to hear what he had to say for our own church ; he was not to meddle with the church of rome , but to hear and be instructed if he could see reason to be of the church of england , for may be it might be somewhat in his way . d. s. said , he would not examine if it would be in his way to be of the church of england , or not , but did heartily acknowledge with great civility that he was a very fair dealer in what he had proposed , and that now he had indeed set us in the right way , and the truth was we were extream glad to get out of the wrangling we had been in before , and to come to treat of matters that were of importance . so after some civilities had passed on both sides , d. s. said , the bishops and pastors of the church of england , finding a great many abuses crept into the church , particularly in the worship of god , which was chiefly insisted upon in the reformation , such as the images of the blessed trinity , the worship whereof was set up and encouraged ; the turning the devotions we ought to offer only to christ , to the blessed virgin , the angels and saints ; that the worship of god was in an unknown tongue ; that the chalice was taken from the people , against the express words of the institution ; that transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the mass were set up ; that our church had good reason to judge these to be heinous abuses , which did much endanger the salvation of souls ; therefore , being the pastors of the church and being assisted in it by the civil powers , they had both good reason and sufficient authority to reform the church from these abuses , and he left it to m. c. to chuse on which of these particulars they should discourse . m. b. said , the bishops and pastors having the charge of souls were bound to feed the flock with sound doctrine , according to the word of god. so s. paul when he charged the bishops of ephesus to feed the flock , and to guard it against wolves or seducers ; he commends them to the word of gods grace , which is the gospel . and in his epistles to timothy and titus , wherein the rules of the pastoral charge are set down , he commands timothy , and in him all bishops and pastors , to hold fast the doctrine and form of sound words which he had delivered , and tells him , the scriptures were able to make the man of god perfect . if then the bishops and pastors of this church found it corrupted by any unsound doctrine , or idolatrous worship , they were by the law of god and the charge of souls for which they were accountable , obliged to throw out these corruptions , and reform the church ; and this the rather , that the first question proposed in the consecration of a bishop , as it is in the pontifical , is , wilt thou teach these things which thou understandest to be in the scripture , to the people committed to thee , both by thy doctrine and example ? to which he answers : i will. m. c. said , we had now offered as much as would be the subject of many days discourse , and he had but few minutes to spare : therefore he desired to be informed what authority those bishops had to judge in matters which they found not only in this church , but in all churches round about them , should they have presumed to judge in these matters . d. s. said , it had been frequently the practice of many nations and provinces to meet in provincial synods , and reform abuses . for which he offered to prove they had both authority and president . but much more in some instances he was ready to shew of particulars that had been defined by general councils , which they only applied to their circumstances ; and this was never questioned but provincial synods might do . m. c. desired to be first satisfied , by what authority they could cut themselves off from the obedience of the see of rome , in king henry the viii . his days . the pope then was looked on as the monarch of the christian world in spirituals , and all christendom was one church , under one head , and had , been so for many ages ; so that if a province or country would cut themselves from the body of this nation ; for instance , wales , that had once distinct princes , and say we acknowledge no right william the conquerour had , so that we reject the authority of those descended from him ; they might have the same plea which this our church had . for the day before that act of parliament did pass , after the 20. of henry the viii . the pope had the authority in spirituals , and they were his subjects in spirituals : therefore their declaring he had none , could not take his authority from him , no more than the long parliament had right to declare by any act , that the sovereign power was in the peoples hands , in pursuance of which they cut off the kings head. d. s. said , the first general councils , as they established the patriarchal power , so the priviledges of several churches were preserved entire to them , as in the case of cyprus ; that the british churches were not within the patriarchal jurisdiction of rome ; that afterwards the bishops of rome , striking in with the interests of the princes of europe , and watching and improving all advantages , got up by degrees through many ages into that height of authority , which they managed as ill as they unjustly acquired it , and particularly in england ; where , from king william the conqueror's days , as their illegal and oppressive impositions were a constant grievance to the people , so our princes and parliaments were ever put to struggle with them . but to affront their authority , thomas becket , who was a traitour to the law , must be made a saint , and a day kept for him , in which they were to pray to god for mercy through his merits . it continuing thus for several ages , in the end a vigorous prince arises , who was resolved to assert his own authority . and he , looking into the oaths the bishops swore to the pope , they were all found in a praemunire by them . then did the whole nation agree to assert their own freedom , and their kings authority . and 't was considerable , that those very bishops , that in queen maries days did most cruelly persecute those of the church of england , and advance the interests of rome , were the most zealous assertors and defenders of what was done by king henry the viii . therefore the popes power in england , being founded on no just title , and being managed with so much oppression , there was both a full authority and a great deal of reason for rejecting it . and if the maior generals , who had their authority from cromwell , might yet have declared for the king , who had the true title , and against the usurper ; so the bishops , though they had sworn to the pope , yet that being contrary to the allegiance they ow'd the king , ought to have asserted the kings authority , and rejected the pope's . m. b. said , it seemed m. c. founded the popes right to the authority he had in england chiefly upon prescription . but there were two things to be said to that ; first , that no prescription runs against a divine right . in the clearing of titles among men , prescription is in some cases a good title : but if by the laws of god the civil powers have a supream authority over their subjects , then no prescription whatsoever can void this . besides , the bishops having full authority and jurisdiction , this could not be bounded or limited by any obedience the pope claimed from them . further , there can be no prescription in this case , where the usurpation has been all along contested and opposed . we were ready to prove , that in the first ages all bishops were accounted brethren , colleagues , and fellow-bishops with the bishop of rome . that afterwards , as he was declared patriarch of the west , so the other patriarchs were equal in authority to him in their several patriarchates . that britain was no part of his patriarchate , but an exempt , as cyprus was . that his power as patriarch was only for receiving appeals , or calling synods , and did not at all encroach on the jurisdiction of other bishops in their sees ; and that the bishops in his patriarchate did think they might separate from him . a famous instance of this was in the sixth century , when the question was about the tria capitula , for which the western bishops did generally stand , and pope vigilius wrote in defence of them ; but iustinian the emperour having drawn him to constantinople , he consented with the fifth council to the condemning them . upon which at his return many of the western bishops did separate from him . and as victor , bishop of tunes tells us ( who lived at that time ) that pope was synodically excommunicated by the bishops of africk . it is true , in the eighth century the decretal epistles being forged , his pretentions were much advanced : yet his universal jurisdicton was contested in all ages , as might be proved from the known instance of hincmar , bishop of rheims , and many more . therefore , how strong soever the argument from prescription may be in civil things , it is of no force here . m. c. said , now we are got into a contest of 1700 years story , but i know not when we shall get out of it . he confessed there was no prescription against a divine right , and acknowledged all bishops were alike in their order , but not in their jurisdiction ; as the bishop of oxford was a bishop as well as the arch-bishop of canterbury , and yet he was inferiour to him in jurisdiction : but desired to know , what was in the popes authority that was so intolerable . d. s. said , that he should only debate about the popes jurisdiction , and to his question , for one particular , that from the days of pope paschal the ii. all bishops swear obedience to the pope , was intolerable bondage . m. c. said , then will you acknowledge that before that oath was imposed the pope was to be acknowledged ? adding , that let us fix a time wherein we say the pope began to usurp beyond his just authority , and he would prove by protestant writers that he had as great power before that time . m. b. said , whatever his patriarchal power was , he had none over britain : for it was plain , we had not the christian faith from the roman church , as appeared from the very story of austin the monk. s. p. t. said , did not king lucius write to the pope upon his receiving the christian faith ? m. c. said , he would wave all that , and ask , if the church of england could justifie her forsaking the obedience of the bishop of rome , when all the rest of the christian world submitted to it ? d. s. said , he wondered to hear him speak so : were not the greek , the armenian , the nestorian , and the abissen churches separated from the roman ? m. c. said , he wondered as much to hear him reckon the nestorians among the churches that were condemned hereticks . d. s. said , it would be hard for him to prove them nestorians . m. c. asked , why he called them so then ? d. s. answered , because they were generally best known by that name . m. w. said , did not the greek church reconcile it self to the roman church at the council of florence ? d. s. said , some of their bishops were partly trepanned , partly threatned into it ; but their church disowned them and it both , and continues to do so to this day . m. w. said , many of the greek church were daily reconciled to the church of rome , and many of the other eastern bishops had sent their obedience to the pope . d. s. said , they knew there was enough to be said to these things , that these arts were now pretty well discovered : but he insisted to prove , the usurpations of rome were such as were inconsistent with the supreme civil authority , and shewed the oath in the pontificale , by which , for instance , if the pope command a bishop to go to rome , and his king forbid it , he must obey the pope , and disobey the king. m. c. said , these things were very consistent , that the king should be supream in civils , and the pope in spirituals ; so that if the pope commanded a thing that were civil , the king must be obeyed and not he . m. b. said , by the words of the oath , the bishops were to receive and help the pope's legates both in coming and going . now suppose the king declared it treason to receive the legate , yet in this case the bishops are sworn to obey the pope , and this was a case that fell out often . d. s. instanced the case of queen mary . m. c. said , if he comes with false mandates he is not a legate . m. b. said , suppose , as has fallen out an hundred times , he comes with bulls , and well warranted , but the king will not suffer him to enter his dominions , here the bishops must either be traitors , or perjured . m. c. said , all these things must be understood to have tacite conditions in them , though they be not expressed , and gave a simile which i have forgot . d. s. said , it was plain , paschal the second devised that oath on purpose to cut off all those reserves of their duty to their princes . and therefore the words are so full and large , that no oath of allegiance was ever conceived in more express terms . m. b. said , it was yet more plain from the words that preceed that clause about legates , that they shall be an no counsel to do the pope any injury , and shall reveal none of his secrets . by which a provision was clearly made , that if the pope did engage in any quarrel or war with any prince , the bishops were to assist the popes as their sworn subjects , and to be faithful spies and correspondents to give intelligence . as he was saying this , l. t. did whisper d. s. who presently told the company , that the ladies , at whose desire we came thither , entreated we would speak to things that concerned them more , and discourse on the grounds on which the reformation proceeded ; and therefore since he had before named some of the most considerable ; he desired we might discourse about some of these . m. c. said , name any thing in the roman church that is expresly contrary to scriptures ; but bring not your expositions of scripture to prove it by , for we will not admit of these . m. b. asked , if they did not acknowledge that it was only by the mediation of christ that our sins were pardoned , and eternal life given to us . m. c. answered , no question of it at all . m. b. said , then have we not good reason to depart from that church , that in an office of so great and daily use as was the absolution of penitents , after the words of absolution enjoyns the following prayer to be used ( which he read out of their ritual ) [ the passion of our lord jesus christ , the merits of the blessed virgin mary , and of all the saints , and whatever good thou hast done , or evil thou hast suffered , be to thee for the remission of sins , the encrease of grace , and the reward of eternal life ] from whence , it plainly follows , that their church ascribes the pardon of all sins , and the eternal salvation of their penitents , to the merits of the blessed virgin and the saints , as well as the passion of our blessed saviour . m. c. said , here was a very severe charge put in against their church without any reason , for they believed that our sins are pardoned , and our souls are saved , only by the merits of jesus christ ; but that several things may concur in several orders or ways to produce the same effects : so although we are pardoned and saved only through jesus christ , yet , without holiness we shall never see god ; we must also suffer whatever crosses he tries us with . so that these , in another sense , procure the pardon of our sins , and eternal salvation . thus in like manner the prayers of the blessed virgin and the saints are great helps to our obtaining these : therefore though these be all joyned together in the same prayer , yet it was an unjust charge on their church to say they make them equal in their value or efficiency . m. b. said , the thing he had chiefly excepted against in that prayer , was , that these things are ascribed to the merits of the blessed virgin and the saints . now he had only spoken of their prayers , and he appealed to all if the natural meaning of these words was not that he charged on them , and the sense the other had offered was not forced . m. c. said , by merits were understood prayers , which had force and merit with god. m. b. said , that could not be , for in another absolution , in the office of our lady , they pray for remission of sins through the merits and prayers of the blessed virgin : so that by merits must be meant somewhat else than their prayers . m. c. said , that as by our prayers on earth we help one anothers souls , so by our giving alms for one another we might do the same ; so also the saints in heaven might be helpful to us by their prayers and merits . and as soon as he had spoken this he got to his feet , and said he was in great haste , and much business lay on him that day ; but said to d. s. that when he pleased , he would wait on him , and discourse of the other particulars at more length . d. s. assured him , that whenever he pleased to appoint it , he should be ready to give him a meeting . and so he went away . then we all stood and talked to one another , without any great order , near half a hour , the discourse being chiefly about the nags-head fable . d. s. appealed to the publick registers , and challenged the silence of all the popish writers all queen elizabeth's reign , when such a story was fresh and well known : and if there had been any colour for it , is it possible they could keep it up , or conceal it ? s. p. t. said , all the registers were forged , and that it was not possible to satisfie him in it , no more than to prove he had not four fingers on his hand : and being desired to read dr. bramhali's book about it , he said he had read it six times over , and that it did not satisfie him . m. b. asked him , how could any matter of fact that was a hundred years old be proved , if the publick registers , and the instruments of publick notaries were rejected ? and this the more , that this being a matter of fact which could not be done in a corner , nor escape the knowledge of their adversaries , who might have drawn great and just advantages from publishing and proving it ; yet that it was never so much as spoken of while that race was alive , is as ● an evidence as can be , that the forgery was on the other side . d. s. did clear the objection from the commission and act of parliament , that it was only for making the ordination legal in england , since in edw. 6. time the book of ordination was not joyned in the record to the book of common-prayer ; from whence bishop bonner took occasion to deny their ordination , as not according to law ; and added , that saunders , who in queen elizabeth's time denied the validity of our ordination , never alledged any such story . but as we were talking freely of this , m. w. said , once or twice , they were satisfied about the chief design they had in that meeting , to see if there could be alledged any place of scripture to prove that article about the blessed sacrament , and said somewhat that looked like the beginning of a triumph . upon which , d. s. desired all might sit down again , that they might put that matter to an issue : so a bible was brought , and d. s. being spent with much speaking , desired m. b. to speak to it . m. b. turned to the 6th chap. of iohn , vers . 54. and read these words , whose eateth my flesh , and drinketh my blood , hath eternal life , and added , these words were , according to the common interpretation of their church , to be understood of the sacramental manducation . this m. w. granted , only m. b. had said , all the doctors understood these words so , and m. w. said , that all had not done so , which m. b. did acknowledge , but said it was the received exposition in their church , and so framed his argument . eternal life is given to every one that receives christ in the sacrament . but by faith only we get eternal life ; therefore by faith only we receive christ in the sacrament . otherwise , he said , unworthy receivers must be said to have eternal life , which is a contradiction , for as such they are under condemnation ; yet the unworthy receivers have the external manducation : therefore that manducation that gives eternal life with it , must be internal and spiritual , and that is by faith. a person , whose name i know not , but shall henceforth mark him n. n. asked what m. b. meant , by faith only ? m. b. said , by faith he meant such a believing of the gospel , as carried along with it evangelical obedience : by faith only , he meant faith as opposite to sense . d. s. asked him if we received christ's body and blood by our senses ? n. n. said , we did . d. s. asked which of the senses , his taste , or touch , or sight , for that seemed strange to him ? n. n. said , we received christ's body with our senses , as well as we did the substance of bread ; for our senses did not receive the substance of bread : and did offer some things to illustrate this , both from the aristotelian and cartesian hypothesis . d. s. said , he would not engage in that subtlety which was a digression from the main argument , but he could not avoid to think it a strange assertion , to say we received christ by our senses , and yet to say he was so present there , that none of our senses could possibly perceive him . but to the main argument . m. w. denied the minor , that by faith only we have eternal life . m. b. proved it thus , the sons of god have eternal life , but by faith only we become the sons of god : therefore by faith only we had eternal life . m. w. said , except he gave them both major and minor in express words of scripture , he would reject the argument . m. b. said , that if he did demonstrate that both the propositions of his argument were in the strictest construction possible equivalent to clear places of scripture , then his proofs were good ; therefore he desired to know which of the two propositions he should prove , either that the sons of god have eternal life , or that by faith only we are the sons of god. m. w. said , he would admit of no consequences , how clear soever they seemed , unless he brought him the express words of scripture , and asked if his consequences were infallible . d. s. said , if the consequence was certain , it was sufficient ; and he desired all would take notice that they would not yield to clear consequences drawn from scripture , which he thought ( and he believed all impartial people would be of his mind ) was as great an advantage to any cause , as could be desired : so we laid aside that argument , being satisfied that the article of our church , which they had called in question , was clearly proved from scripture . then n. n. insisted to speak of the corporal presence , and desired to know upon what grounds we rejected it . m. b. said , if we have no better reason to believe christ was corporally present in the sacrament , than the jews had to believe that every time they did eat their pascha , the angel was passing by their houses , and smiting the first born of the aegyptians ; then we have no reason at all ; but so it is that we have no more reason . n. n. denied this , and said we had more reason . m. b. said , all the reason we had to believe it was , because christ said , this is my body ; but moses said of the paschal festivity , this is the lords passover ; which was always repeated by the jews in that anniversary . now the lords passover was the lords passing by the israelites when he slew the first born of aegypt . if then we will understand christs words in the strictly literal sense , we must in the same sense understand the words of moses : but if we understand the words of moses in any other sense , as the commemoration of the lords passover , then we ought to understand christs words in the same sense . the reason is clear ; for christ being to substitute this holy sacrament in room of the jewish pascha , and he using in every thing , as much as could agree with his blessed designs , forms as near the jewish customs as could be , there is no reason to think he did use the words , this is my body , in any other sense than the jews did , this is the lords passover . n. n. said , the disparity was great . first , christ had promised before-hand he would give them his body . secondly , it was impossible the lamb could be the lords passover in the literal sense , because an action that had been past some hundreds of years before could not be performed every time they did eat the lamb , but this is not so . thirdly , the jewish church never understood these words literally , but the christian church hath ever understood these words of christ literally . nor is it to be imagined that a change in such a thing was possible , for how could any such opinion have crept in , in any age , if it had not been the doctrine of the former age ? m. b. said , nothing he had alledged was of any force . for the first , christ's promise imported no more than what he performed in the sacramental institution . if then it be proved that by saying , this is my body , he only meant a commemoration , his promise must only relate to his death commemorated in the sacrament . to the second , the literal meaning of christ's words is as impossible as the literal meaning of moses's words ; for besides all the other impossibilities that accompany this corporal presence , it is certain christ gives us his body in the sacrament as it was given for us , and his blood as it was shed for us , which being done only on the cross above 1600 years ago , it is as impossible that should be literally given at every consecration , as it was that the angel should be smiting the aegyptians every paschal festivity . and here was a great mistake they went on securely in ; that the body of christ we receive in the sacrament , is the body of christ , as he is now glorified in heaven ; for by the words of the institution it is clear , that we receive his body as it was given for us when his blood was shed on the cross , which being impossible to be reproduced now , we only can receive christ by faith. for his third difference , that the christian church ever understood christ's words so , we would willingly submit to the decision of the church in the first six ages . could any thing be more express than theodoret , who arguing against the eutychians that the humanity and divinity of christ were not confounded nor did depart from their own substance , illustrates it from the eucharist in which the elements of bread and wine do not depart from their own substance . m. w. said , we must examine the doctrine of the fathers not from some occasional mention they make of the sacrament , but when they treat of it on design and with deliberation . but to theodoret he would oppose s. cyril of ierusalem , who in his fourth mist. catechism says expresly , though thou see it to be bread , yet believe it is the flesh and the blood of the lord jesus ; doubt it not , since he had said , this is my body . and for a proof , instances christ's changing the water into wine . d. s. said , he had proposed a most excellent rule for examining the doctrine of the fathers in this matter , not to canvase what they said in eloquent and pious treaties or homilies to work on peoples devotion , in which case it is natural for all persons to use high expressions ; but we are to seek the real sense of this mystery when they are dogmatically treating of it and the other mysteries of religion where reason and not eloquence takes place . if then it should appear , that at the same time both a bishop of rome and constantinople , and one of the greatest bishops in africk did in asserting the mysteries of religion go downright against transubstantiation , and assert that the substance of the bread and wine did remain ; he hoped all would be satisfied the fathers did not believe as they did . m. w. desired we would then answer the words of cyril . m. b. said , it were a very unreasonable thing to enter into a verbal dispute about the passages of the fathers , especially the books not being before us ; therefore he promised an answer in writing to the testimony of s. cyril . but now the matter was driven to a point , and we willingly undertook to prove , that for eight or nine centuries after christ the fathers did not believe transubstantiation , but taught plainly the contrary : the fathers generally call the elements bread and wine after the consecration , they call them mysteries , types , figures , symbols , commemorations , and signs of the body and blood of christ : they generally deliver , that the wicked do not receive christ in the sacrament , which shews they do not believe transubstantiation . all this we undertook to prove by undeniable evidences within a very few days or weeks . m. w. said , he should be glad to see it . d. s. said , now we left upon that point which by the grace of god we should perform very soon ; but we had offered to satisfie them in the other grounds of the separation from the church of rome : if they desired to be farther informed we should wait on them when they pleased . so we all rose up and took leave , after we had been there about three hours . the discourse was carried on , on both sides , with great civility and calmness , without heat or clamour . this is as far as my memory , after the most fixed attention when present , and careful recollection since , does suggest to me , without any biass or partiality , not having failed in any one material thing as far as my memory can serve me : this i declare as i shall answer to god. signed as follows , gilbert burnet . this narrative was read , and i do hereby attest the truth of it . edw. stillingfleet . being present at the conference , i do , according to my best memory , judge this a just and true narrative thereof . will. nailor . the addition which n. n. desired might be subjoined to the relation of the conference if it were published , but wished rather that nothing at all might be made publick that related to the conference . the substance of what n. n. desired me to take notice of , was , that our eating christ's flesh and drinking his blood doth as really give everlasting life , as almsgiving , or any other good works gives it , where the bare external action , if separated from a good intention and principle , is not acceptable to god. so that we must necessarily understand these words of our saviour with this addition of worthily , that whoso eats his flesh and drinks his blood in the sacrament worthily , hath everlasting life ; for , he said , he did not deny but the believing the death of christ was necessary in communicating , but it is not by faith only we receive his body and blood . for as by faith we are the sons of god , yet it is not only by faith , but also by baptism , that we become the sons of god ; so also christ saith , he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ; yet this doth not exclude repentance and amendment of life from being necessary to salvation : therefore the universality of the expression , whoso eats , does not exclude the necessity of eating worthily that we may have everlasting life by it . and so did conclude , that since we believe we have all our faith in the holy scriptures , we must prove from some clear scriptures , by arguments that consist of a major and minor , that are either express words of scripture or equivalent to them , that christ was no otherwise present in the sacrament , than spiritually , as he is received by faith. and added , that it was impertinent to bring impossibilities either from sense or reason against this , if we brought no clear scriptures against it . to this he also added , that when d. s. asked him by which of his senses he received christ in the sacrament , he answered , that he might really receive christ's body at his mouth , though none of his senses could perceive him , as a bole or pill is taken in a syrup or any other liquor ; so that i really swallow it over though my senses do not taste it : in like manner , christ is received under the accidents of bread and wine , so that though our senses do not perceive it , yet he is really taken in at our mouth , and goes down into our stomach . answer . having now set down the strength of n. n. his plea upon second thoughts , i shall next examine it . the stress of all lies in this , whether we must necessarily supply the words of christ with the addition of worthily : he affirms it , i deny it , for these reasons . christ in this discourse was to shew how much more excellent his doctrine was than was moses's law , and that moses gave manna from heaven to nourish their bodies , notwithstanding which they died in the wilderness : but christ was to give them food to their souls ; which if they did eat they should never die , for it should give them life : where it is apparent , the bread and nourishment must be such , as the life was , which being internal and spiritual , the other must be such also : and vers . 47. he clearly explains how that food was received , he that believeth on me hath everlasting life . now having said before that this bread gives life , and here saying that believing gives everlasting life , it very reasonably follows , that believing was the receiving this food ; which is yet clearer from verse 34. where the iews having desired him evermore to give them that bread , he answers , verse 35. i am the bread of life , be that comes to me shall never hunger , and he that believeth on me shall never thirst . which no man , that is not strangely prepossessed , can consider , but he must see it is an answer to their question , and so in it he tells them , that their coming to him , and believing , was the mean of receiving that bread. and here it must be considered , that christ calls himself bread , and says , that a man must eat thereof , which must be understood figuratively ; and if figures be admitted in some parts of that discourse , it is unjust to reject the applying the same figures to other parts of it . in fine , christ tells them this bread was his flesh which he was to give for the life of the world , which can be applied to nothing but the offering up himself on the cross. this did , as it was no wonder , startle the jews , so they murmured , and said , how can this man give us his flesh to eat ? to which christs answer is so clear , that it is indeed strange there should remain any doubting about it . he first tells them , except they eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man , they had no life in them . where on the way mark , that drinking the blood is as necessary as eating the flesh ; and these words being expounded of the sacrament , cannot but discover them extreamly guilty who do not drink the blood. for suppose the doctrine of the blood 's concomitating the flesh were true ; yet even in that case they only eat the blood , but cannot be said to drink the blood. but from these words it is apparent christ must be speaking chiefly , if not only of the spiritual communicating : for otherwise no man can be saved , that hath not received the sacrament . the words are formal and positive , and christ having made this a necessary condition of life , i see not how we dare promise life to any that hath never received it . and indeed it was no wonder that those fathers who understood these words of the sacrament , appointed it to be given to infants immediately after they were baptized ▪ for that was a necessary consequence that followed this exposition of our saviours words . and yet the church of rome will not deny , but if any die before he is adult , or if a person converted be in such circumstances that it is not possible for him to receive the sacrament , and so dies without it , he may have everlasting life : therefore they must conclude , that christs flesh may be eaten by faith even without the sacrament . again in the next verse he says , whoso eateth my flesh , and drinketh my blood , hath eternal life . these words must be understood in the same sense they had in the former verse , they being indeed the reverse of it . therefore since there is no addition of worthily necessary to the fence of the former verse , neither is it necessary in this . but it must be concluded christ is here speaking of a thing without which none can have life : and by which all have life : therefore when ever christs flesh is eaten , and his blood is drunk , which is most signally done in the sacrament , there eternal life must accompany it ; and so these words must be understood , even in relation to the sacrament , only of the spiritual communicating by faith. as when it is said , a man is a reasonable creature : though this is said of the whole man , body and soul ; yet when we see that upon the dissolution of soul and body no reason or life remains in the body , we from thence positively conclude the reason is seated only in the soul ; though the body has organs that are necessary for its operations : so when it is said we eat christs flesh , and drink his blood in the sacrament , which gives eternal life ; there being two things in it , the bodily eating and the spiritual communicating ; though the eating of christs flesh is said to be done in the worthy receiving , which consists of these two , yet since we may clearly see the bodily receiving may be without any such effects , we must conclude that the eating of christs flesh is only done by the inward communicating ; though the other , that is the bodily part , be a divine organ , and conveyance of it . and as reason is seated only in the soul , so the eating of christs flesh must be only inward and spiritual , and so the mean by which we receive christ in the supper is faith. all this is made much clearer by the words that follow , my flesh is meat indeed , and my blood is drink indeed . now christs flesh is so eaten , as it is meat ; which i suppose none will question , it being a prosecution of the same discourse . now it is not meat as taken by the body , for they cannot be so gross as to say , christs flesh is the meat of our body ; therefore since his flesh is only the meat of the soul and spiritual nourishment , it is only eaten by the soul , and so received by faith. christ also says , he that eateth my flesh and drinks my blood dwells in him and he in him . this is the definition of that eating and drinking he had been speaking of ; so that such as is the dwelling in him , such also must be the eating of him : the one therefore being spiritual , inward , and by faith , the other must be such also . and thus it is as plain as can be , from the words of christ , that he spake not of a carnal or corporal , but of a spiritual eating of his flesh by faith. all this is more confirmed by the key our saviour gives of his whole discourse , when the iews were offended for the hardness of his sayings , it is the spirit that quickneth ( or giveth the life he had been speaking of ) the flesh profiteth nothing , the words i speak unto you are spirit , and they are life . from which it is plain he tells them to understand his words of a spiritual life , and in a spiritual manner . but now i shall examine n. n. his reasons to the contrary . his chief argument is , that when eternal life is promised upon the giving of alms , or other good works , we must necessarily understand it with this proviso , that they were given with a good intention , and from a good principle : therefore we must understand these words of our saviour to have some such proviso in them . all this concludes nothing . it is indeed certain when any promise is past upon an external action , such a reserve must be understood . and so st. paul tells us , if he bestowed all his goods to feed the poor , and had no charity , it profited him nothing . and if it were clear our saviour were here speaking of an external action , i should acknowledge such a proviso must be understood ; but that is the thing in question ; and i hope i have made it appear our saviour is speaking of an internal action , and therefore no such proviso is to be supposed . for he is speaking of that eating of his flesh , which must necessarily and certainly be worthily done , and so that objection is of no force . he must therefore prove , that the eating his flesh is primarily and simply meant of the bodily eating in the sacrament ; and not only by a denomination , from a relation to it : as the whole man is called reasonable , though the reason is seated in the soul only what he says to shew that by faith only we are not the sons of god , since by baptism also we are the sons of god , is not to the purpose : for the design of the argument , was to prove that by faith only we are the sons of god , so as to be the heirs of eternal life . now the baptism of the adult ( for our debate runs upon those of ripe years and understanding ) makes them only externally , and sacramentally the sons of god : for the inward and vital sonship follows only upon faith. and this faith must be understood of such a lively and operative faith , as includes both repentance and amendment of life . so that when our saviour says , he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved , that believing is a complex of all evangelical graces ; from which it appears , that none of his reasons are of force enough to conclude that the universality of these words of christ ought to be so limited and restricted . for what remains of that which he desired might be taken notice of , that we ought to prove that christs body and blood was present in the sacrament only spiritually and not corporally by express scriptures , or by arguments whereof the major and minor were either express words of scripture , or equivalent to them : it has no force at all in it . i have in a full discourse examined all that is in the plea concerning the express words of scripture ; and therefore shall say nothing upon that head , referring the reader to what he will meet with on that subject afterwards . but here i only desire the reader may consider , our contest in this particular is concerning the true meaning of our saviours words , this is my body , in which it is very absurd to ask for express words of scripture , to prove that meaning by . for if that be setled on , as a necessary method of proof , then when other scriptures are brought to prove that to be the meaning of these words ; it may be asked how can we prove the true meaning of that place we bring to prove the meaning of this by ? and so by a progress for ever we must contend about the true meaning of every place . therefore when we enquire into the sense of any controverted place ; we must judge of it by the rules of common sense and reason , of religion and piety , and if a meaning be affixed to any place contrary to these , we have good reason to reject it . for we , knowing all external things only by our senses , by which only the miracles and resurrection of christ could be proved , which are the means god has given us to converse with , and enjoy his whole creation ; and evidence our senses give being such , as naturally determines our perswasions , so that after them we cannot doubt : if then a sense be offered to any place of scripture that does overthrow all this , we have sufficient reason on that very account to reject it . if also any meaning be fastened on a place of scripture that destroys all our conceptions of things , is contrary to the most universally receiv'd maxims , subverts the notions of matter and accidents , and in a word , confounds all our clearest apprehensions ; we must also reject every such gloss , since it contradicts the evidence of that which is god's image in us . if also a sense of any place of scripture be proposed that derogates from the glorious exaltation of the humane nature of our blessed saviour , we have very just reasons to reject it , even though we could bring no confirmation of our meaning from express words of scripture : therefore this dispute being chiefly about the meaning of christ's words , he that shews best reasons to prove that his sense is consonant to truth , does all that is necessary in this case . but after all this , we decline not to shew clear scriptures for the meaning our church puts on these words of christ. it was bread that christ took , blessed , brake , and gave his disciples . now the scripture calling it formally bread , destroys transubstantiation . christ said , this is my body , which are declarative , and not imperative words , such as , let there be light , or , be thou whole . now all declarative words suppose that which they affirm to be already true , as is most clear ; therefore christ pronounces what the bread was become by his former blessing , which did sanctifie the elements : and yet after that blessing it was still bread . again , the reason and end of a thing is that which keeps a proportion with the means toward it ; so that christ's words , do this in remembrance of me , shew us , that his body is here only in a vital and living commemoration and communication of his body and blood. farther , christ telling us , it was his body that was given for us , and his blood shed for us , which we there receive ; it is apparent , he is to be understood present in the sacrament ; not as he is now exalted in glory , but as he was on the cross when his blood was shed for us . and in fine , if we consider that those to whom christ spake were jews , all this will be more easily understood : for it was ordinary for them to call the symbol by the name of the original it represented . so they called the cloud between the cherubims , god and iehovah , according to these words , o thou that dwellest between the cherubims : and all the symbolical apparitions of god to the patriarchs and the prophets , were said to be the lord appearing to them . but that which is more to this purpose , is , that the lamb that was the symbol and memorial of their deliverance out of egypt , was called the lord's passover . now though the passover then was only a type of our deliverance by the death of christ , yet the lamb was in proportion to the passover in egypt , as really a representation of it , as the sacrament is of the death of christ. and it is no more to be wondered that christ called the elements his body and blood , though they were not so corporally , but only mystically , and sacramentally ; than that moses called the lamb the lord 's passover . so that it is apparent it was common among the jews to call the symbol and type by the name of the substance and original . therefore our saviour's words are to be understood in the sense and stile that was usual among these to whom he spake , it being the most certain rule of understanding any doubtful expression , to examine the ordinary stile and forms of speech in that age , people , and place , in which such phrases were used . this is signally confirmed by the account which maimonides gives us of the sense in which eating and drinking is oft taken in the scriptures . first , he says , it stands in its natural signification , for receiving bodily food : then because there are two things done in eating , the first is the destruction of that which is eaten , so that it loseth its first form ; the other is the increase and nourishment of the substance of the person that eats : therefore he observes that eating has two other significations in the language of the scriptures : the one is destruction and desolation ; so the sword is said to eat , or as we render it , to devour ; so a land is said to eat its inhabitants , and so fire is said to eat or consume : the other sense it is taken in does relate to wisdom , learning , and all intellectual apprehensions , by which the form ( or soul ) of man is conserved from the perfection that is in them , as the body is preserved by food . for proof of this , he cites divers places out of the old testament , as isa. 55. 2. come buy and eat , and prov. 25. 27. and prov. 24. 13. he also adds , that their rabbins commonly call wisdom , eating ; and cites some of their sayings , as , come and eat flesh in which there is much fat , and that whenever eating and drinking is in the book of the proverbs , it is nothing else but wisdom or the law. so also wisdom is often called water , isa. 55. 1. and he concludes , that because this sense of eating occurs so often , and is so manifest and evident , as if it were the primary and most proper signification of the word , therefore hunger and thirst do also stand for a privation of wisdom and understanding , as amos. 8. 21. to this he also refers that of thirsting , psal. 42. 3. and isa. 12. 3. and ionathan paraphrasing these words , ye shall draw water out of the wells of salvation , renders it . ye shall receive a new doctrine with joy from the select ones among the iust , which is farther confirmed from the words of our saviour , iohn 7. 37. and from these observations of the learnedest and most judicious among all the rabbins , we see that the iews understood the phrases of eating and eating of flesh in this spiritual and figurative sense of receiving vvisdom and instruction . so that this being an usual form of speech among them , it is no strange thing to imagine how our saviour , being a iew according to the flesh , and conversing with iews , did use these terms and phrases in a sense that was common to that nation . and from all these set together , we are confident we have a great deal of reason , and strong and convincing authorities from the scriptures , to prove christ's words , this is my body , are to be understood spiritually , mystically , and sacramentally . there remains only to be considered what weight there is in what n. n. says . he answered to d. s. that christ might be received by our senses though not perceived by any of them , as a bole is swallowed over , though our taste does not relish or perceive it . that great man is so very well furnished with reason and learning to justifie all he says , that no other body needs interpose on his account . but he being now busie , it was not worth the giving him the trouble , to ask how he would reply upon so weak an answer , since its shallowness appears at the first view : for is there any comparison to be made between an object that all my senses may perceive , if i have a mind to it , that i see with mine eyes , and touch , and feel in my mouth , and if it be too big , and my throat too narrow , i will feel stick there ; but only to guard against its offensive taste , i so wrap or convey it , that i relish nothing ungrateful in it : and the receiving christ with my senses , when yet none of them either do , or can , though applied with all possible care , discern him ? so that it appears d. s. had very good reason to say , it seemed indeed strange to him , to say , that christ was received by our senses , and yet was so present that none of our senses can perceive him : and this answer to it is but mere trifling . here follows the paper we promised , wherein an account is given of the doctrine of the church for the first eight centuries in the point of the sacrament , which is demonstrated to be contrary to transubstantiation ; written in a letter to my lady t. madam , your ladiship may remember , that our meeting at your house on the third instant , ended with a promise we made , of sending you such an account of the sense of the fathers for the first six ages , as might sufficiently satisfie every impartial person , that they did not believe transubstantiation . this promise we branched out in three propositions : first , that the fathers did hold , that after the consecration the elements of bread and wine did remain unchanged in their substance . the second was , that after the consecration they called the elements the types , the antitypes , the mysteries , the symbols , the signs , the figures , and the commemorations of the body and blood of christ ; which certainly will satisfie every unprejudiced person , that they did not think the bread and wine were annihilated , and that in their room , and under their accidents , the substance of the body and blood of christ was there . thirdly , we said , that by the doctrine of the fathers the unworthy receivers got not the body and the blood of christ ; from which it must necessarily follow , that the substance of his body and blood is not under the accidents of bread and wine ; otherwise all these that unworthily receive them eat christ's body and blood . therefore , to discharge our selves of our promise , we shall now give your ladiship such an account of the doctrine of the fathers on these heads , as we hope shall convince those gentlemen , that we had a good warrant for what we said . the first proposition is , the fathers believed that after the consecration the elements were still bread and wine . the proofs whereof we shall divide into three branches : the first shall be , that after the consecration they usually called them bread and wine . secondly , that they expresly assert , that the substance of bread and wine remained . thirdly , that they believed the sacramental bread and wine did nourish our bodies . for proof of the first , we desire the following testimonies be considered : iustin martyr says , these who are called deacons distribute the blessed bread and wine and water to such as are present , and carry it to the absents , and this nourishment is by us called the eucharist . and a little after , we do not receive these as common bread , or common drink ; for as by the word of god iesus christ our saviour being made flesh , had both flesh and blood for our salvation , so we are taught , that that food by which our blood and flesh are nourished , by its change , being blessed by the word of prayer which he gave us , is both the flesh and the blood of the incarnate iesus . thus that martyr , that wrote an hundred and fifty years after christ , calls the elements bread and wine , and the nourishment which being changed into flesh and blood nourishes them . and saying , it is not common bread and vvine , he says , that it was still so in substance ; and his illustrating it with the incarnation , in which the humane nature did not lose nor change its substance in its union with the eternal word , shews , he thought not the bread and wine lost their substance when they became the flesh and blood of christ. the next witness is irenaeus , who writing against the valentinians , that denied the father of our lord jesus to be the creator of the world , and also denied the resurrection of the body , confutes both these heresies by arguments drawn from the eucharist . to the first he says , if there be another creator than the father of our lord , then our offering creatures to him , argues him covetous of that which is not his own , and so we reproach him rather than bless him . and adds , how does it appear to any of them , that that bread over which thanks are given , is the body of his lord , and the cup of his blood , if he be not the son of the creator . and he argues against their saying , our bodies should not rise again that are fed by the body and blood of christ : for , says he , that bread which is of the earth , having had the invocation of god over it , is no more common bread , but the eucharist , consisting of two things , an earthly and an heavenly ; so our bodies that receive the eucharist are no more corruptible , having the hope of the resurrection . tertullian ( lib. 1. adv . marc. c. 14. ) proving against marcion , that christ was not contrary to the creator , among other proofs which he brings to shew , that christ made use of the creatures , and neither rejected water , oil , milk , or hony , he adds , neither did he reject bread , by which he represents his own body . and further says , ( lib. 3. adv . marc. c. 19. ) christ calls bread his body , that from thence you may understand , that he gave the figure of his body to the bread. origen says , ( lib. 8. cont . celsum . ) we eat of the loaves set before us , with thanks giving and prayers over what is given to us , which by the prayer are become a certain holy body , that sanctifies those who use them with a sound purpose . st. cyprian says , ( epist. 76. ) christ calls the bread that was compounded of many grains ioyned together , his body , to shew the union of our people which he bore upon himself ; and calls the wine which is pressed out of many grapes and berries , his blood : he signifies our flock which is joyned together in the mixture of an united multitude . and writing against those who only put water in the chalice , ( epist. 63. ) he says , since christ said , i am the true vine , the blood of christ is not only water but wine , neither can we see his blood by which we are redeemed and quickened in the chalice when wine is not in it , by which the blood of christ is shewed . and that whole epistle is all to the same purpose . epiphanius ( in anchorat ) says , christ in the supper rose and took these things , and having given thanks , said , this is my , &c. now we see it is not equal to it , nor like it , neither to his incarnate likeness , nor his invisible deity , nor the lineaments of his members , for it is round , and without feeling as to its vertue . and this he says , to shew how man may be said to be made after the image of god , though he be not like him . gregory nyssen , ( in orat. de bap. christ. ) shewing how common things may be sanctified , as water in baptism , the stones of an altar and church dedicated to god ; he adds , so also bread in the beginning is common , but after the mystery has consecrated it , is said to be , and is the body of christ ; so the mystical oyl , so the wine before the blessing , are things of little value , but after the sanctification of the spirit , both of them work excellently . he also adds , that the priest by his blessing is separated and sanctified ; from which it appears , he no more believed the change of the substance of the bread and wine , than of the consecrated oil , the altar , or the priest. ambrose ( lib. de bened. patriarc . cap. 9. ) speaking of bread , which was asher's blessing , says , this bread christ gave his apostles , that they might divide it to the people that believed , and gives it to us to day , which the priest consecrates in his words , this bread is made the food of the saints . st. chrysostome ( homil. 24. in epist. ad cor. ) on these words , the bread which we brake , is it not the communion of the body of christ ? says , what is the bread ? the body of christ. what are they made who take it ? the body of christ. from whence it appears , he thought the bread was so the body of christ , as the worthy receivers are ; which is not by the change of their substance , but by the sanctification of their natures . st. ierom ( epist. ad hedib . ) says , let us hear the bread which christ brake and gave his disciples , to be the body of our lord. and he says , ( comment . s. mat. c. 26. ) after the typical pascha was fulfilled , christ took bread that comforts the heart of man , and went to the true sacrament of the pascha , that as melchisedeck in the figure had done offering bread and wine , so he might also represent the truth of his body and blood. where he very plainly calls the elements bread and wine , and a representation of christ's body and blood. st. austin ( as he is cited by fulgentius de baptismo and divers others ) in his exhortation to these that were newly baptized , speaking of this sacrament , says , that which you see is the bread , and the cup which your eyes witness : but that which your faith must be instructed in , is , that the bread is the body of christ , and the cup is his blood. and then he proposes the objection , how that could be ? and answers it thus ; these things are therefore called sacraments , because one thing is seen , and another is understood : what you see has a bodily appearance , but what you understand has a spiritual fruit ; and if you will understand the body of christ , hear what the apostle says to the faithful , ye are the body of christ and his members : if therefore you be the body and members of christ , your mystery is placed on the table of the lord , and you receive the mystery of the lord. and at large prosecutes this , to shew how the faithful are the body of christ , as the bread is made up of many grains ; from whence it appears , that he believed , that the conscrated elements were still bread and wine . and speaking of st. paul's breaking bread at troas , he says , ( epist. 86. ) being to break bread that night , as it is broken in the sacrament of the body of christ. he also says , ( serm. 9. de divers . ) the eucharist is our daily bread ; but let us so receive it , that not only our belly but our mind be refreshed by it . besides , in a great many places st. austin calls the eucharist , the sacrament of bread and wine . and speaking of things , made use of to signify somewhat else , he adds for one , ( lib. 3. de trinit . c. 10. ) the bread that is made for this , is consumed in our receiving the sacrament . he also says , ( lib. 17. de civ . dei. ) to eat bread is in the new testament , the sacrifice of christians . he likewise says , ( lib. cont. donat. c. 6. ) both iudas and peter received a part of the same bread out of the same hand of our lord. and thus from twelve witnesses that are beyond all exception , it does appear , that the fathers believed the elements to be still bread and wine after the consecration . we have not brought any proofs from the fathers that are less known or read , for then we must have swelled up this paper beyond what we intend it . one thing is so considerable , that we cannot forbear to desire it be taken notice of , and that is , that we see those great fathers and doctors of the church call the consecrated elements , without any mincing of the matter , bread & wine ; but when they call it the body and blood of christ , they often use some mollifying and less hardy expression . so st. austin says , ( serm. 53. de verb. dom. ) almost all call the sacrament his body . and again says , ( lib. 3. de trinit . c. 4. ) we call that only the body and blood of christ , which being taken of the fruits of the earth , and consecrated by the mystical prayer , we rightly receive for our spiritual health in the commemoration of the passion of our lord for us . and he says , ( epist. 23. ad bonifac. ) after some sort the sacrament of the body of christ is his body , and the sacrament of his blood is the blood of christ. and also says , ( serm. 2. in psal. 33. ) he carried himself in his own hands in some sort , when he said , this is my body . st. chrysostom says , ( epist. ad caesar. ) the bread is thought worthy to be called the body of our lord. and on these words , the flesh lusteth against the spirit , among the improper acceptions of flesh , says , ( comm. in epist. ad galat. c. 5. ) the scriptures use to call the mysteries by the name of flesh , and sometimes the whole church , saying , she is the body of christ. tertullian says , ( lib. 4. cont . marc. c. 40. ) christ calls the bread his body , and a little after , he names the bread his body . isidore hispal . says , ( orig. lib. 6. c. 9. ) we call this after his command the body and blood of christ , which being made of the fruits of the earth , is sanctified and made a sacrament . theodoret says , ( dialog . 1. ) in the giving of the mysteries , christ called the bread his body , and the mixed cup his blood. and says , ( dialog . 1. ) he who called his natural body corn and bread , and also calls himself a vine , likewise honoured these visible symbols with the names of his body and blood. but we now go to bring our proofs for the next branch of our first proposition ; in which we assert , that the fathers believed that the very substance of the bread and wine did remain after the consecration . by which all the proofs brought in the former branch will receive a further evidence ; since by these it will appear the fathers believed the substance of the elements remained ; and thence we may well conclude , that wherever we find mention made of bread and wine after consecration , they mean of the substance , and not of the accidents of bread and wine . for proof of this , we shall only bring the testimonies of four fathers , that lived almost within one age , and were the greatest men of the age. their authority is as generally received , as their testimonies are formal and decisive : and these are pope gelasius , st. chrysostom , ephrem patriarch of antioch , and theodoret , whom we shall find delivering to us the doctrine of the church in their age , with great consideration upon a very weighty occasion : so that it shall appear that this was for that age the doctrine generally received both in the churches of rome and constantinople , antioch , and asia the less . we shall begin with gelasius , who , though he lived later than some of the others , yet , because of the eminence of his see , and the authority those we deal with must needs acknowledge was in him , ought to be set first : he says , ( in lib. de duab . nat . christ. ) the sacraments of the body and blood of christ are a divine thing ; for which reason we become , by them , partakers of the divine nature ; and yet the substance or nature of bread and wine does not cease to be ; and the image and likeness of the body and blood of christ are indeed celebrated in the action of the mysteries : therefore it appears evidently enough , that we ought to think that of christ our lord , which we profess and celebrate , and receive in his image , that as they ( to wit , the elements ) pass into that divine substance , the holy ghost working it , their nature remaining still in its own property . so that principal mystery , whose efficiency and virtue these ( to wit , the sacraments ) represent to us , remains one entire and true christ ; those things of which he is compounded ( to wit , his two natures ) remaining in their properties . these words seem so express and decisive , that one would think the bare reading them , without any further reflections , should be of force enough . but before we offer any considerations upon them , we shall set down other passages of the other fathers , and upon them altogether make such remarks as , we hope , may satisfy any that will hear reason . st. chrysostom treating of the two natures of christ against the apollinarists , ( epist. ad caesar. monach . ) who did so confound them , as to consubstantiate them , he makes use of the doctrine of the sacrament to illustrate that mystery by , in these words ; as before the bread is sanctified , we call it bread ; but when the divine grace has sanctified it by the mean of the priest , it is freed from the name of bread , and is thought worthy of the name of the lord's body , though the nature of bread remains in it : and yet it is not said there are two bodies , but one body of the son ; so the divine nature being joyned to the body , both these make one son , and one person . next this patriarch of constantinople , let us hear ephrem the patriarch of antioch give his testimony , as it is preserved by photius , ( cod. 229. ) who says thus : in like manner ( having before treated of the two natures united in christ ) the body of christ , which is received by the faithful , does not depart from its sensible substance , and yet remains inseparated from the intellectual grace : so baptism becoming wholly spiritual , and one , it preserves its own sensible substance , and does not lose that which it was before . to these we shall add , what theodoret ( dialog . 1. ) on the same occasion says against those , who from that place , the word was made flesh , believed , that in the incarnation the divinity of the word was changed into the humanity of the flesh. he brings in his heretick arguing about some mystical expressions of the old testament , that related to christ : at length he comes to shew , how christ called himself bread and corn ; so also in the delivering the mysteries , christ called the bread his body , and the mixed cup his blood ; and our saviour changed the names , calling his body by the name of the symbol , and the symbol by the name of his body . and when the heretick asks the reason why the names were so changed , the orthodox answers , that it was manifest to such as were initiated in divine things ; for he would have those who partake of the mysteries , not look to the nature of those things that were seen , but by the change of the names , to believe that change that was made through grace ; for he who called his natural body corn and bread , does likewise honour the visible symbols with the name of his body and blood ; not changing the nature , but adding grace to nature : and so goes on to ask his heretick , whether he thought the holy bread was the symbol and type of his divinity , or of his body and blood ? and the other acknowledging they were the symbols of his body and blood : he concludes , that christ had a true body . the second dialogue is against the eutychians ; who believed , that after christ's assumption , his body was swallowed up by his divinity : and there the eutychian brings an argument to prove that change from the sacrament ; it being granted , that the gifts before the priest's prayer were bread and wine . he asks how it was to be called after the sanctification ? the orthodox answers , the body and blood of christ ; and that he believed he received the body and blood of christ. from thence the heretick , as having got a great advantage , argues ; that as the symbols of the body and blood of our lord were one thing before the priestly invocation , and after that were changed , and are different from what they were : so the body of our lord , after the assumption , was changed into the divine substance . but the orthodox replies , that he was catched in the net he laid for others ; for the mystical symbols , after the sanctification , do not depart from their own nature ; for they continue in their former substance , figure and form , and are both visible and palpable , as they were before ; but they are understood to be that which they are made , and are believed and venerated , as being those things which they are believed to be . and from thence he bids the heretick compare the image with the original , for the type must be like the truth , and shews that christ's body retains its former form and figure , and the substance of his body , though it be now made immortal and incorruptible . thus he . and having now set down very faithfully the words of these fathers , we desire it may be considered , that all these words are used to the same effect , to prove the reality of christ's body , and the distinction of the two natures , the divine and the human , in him . for , though st. chrysostom lived before eutyches his days , yet in this point the eutychians and the apollinarists , against whom he writes , held opinions so like others , that we may well say , all these words of the fathers we have set down are to the same purpose . now , first it is evident , that if transubstantiation had been then believed , there needed no other argument to prove against the eutychians that christ had still a real body , but to have declared that his body was corporally present in the eucharist ; which they must have done , had they believed it , and not spoken so as they did ; since that alone well proved , had put an end to the whole controversy . further , they could never have argued from the visions and apparitions of christ , to prove he had still a real body ; for if it was possible the body of christ could appear under the accidents of bread and wine , it was as possible the divinity should appear under the accidents of an humane body . thirdly , they could never have argued against the eutychians , as they did , from the absurdity that followed upon such a substantial mutation of the humane nature of christ into his divinity , if they had believed this substantial conversion of the elements into christ's body , which is liable unto far greater absurdities . and we can as little doubt , but the eutychians had turned back their arguments on themselves , with these answers , if that doctrine had been then received . it is true , it would seem from the last passage of theodoret , that the eutychians did believe some such change ; but that could not be , for they denied the being of the body of christ , and so could not think any thing was changed into that which they believed was not . therefore we are to suppose him arguing from some commonly received expressions , which the father explains . in fine , the design of those fathers being to prove , that the two natures might be united without the change of either of their substances in the person of christ , it had been inexcusable folly in them , to have argued from the sacramental mysteries being united to the body and blood of christ , if they had not believed they retained their former substance ; for had they believed transubstantiation , what a goodly argument had it been , to have said , because after the consecration the accidents of bread and wine remain , therefore the substance of the humanity remained still , tho united to the divine nature in christ ? did ever man in his wits argue in this fashion ? certainly , these four bishops , whereof three were patriarchs , and one of these a pope , deserved to have been hissed out of the world , as persons that understood not what it was to draw a consequence , if they had argued so as they did , and believed transubstantiation . but if you allow them to believe ( as certainly they did ) that in the sacrament the real substances of bread and wine remained , tho after the sanctification , by the operation of the holy ghost , they were the body and blood of christ , and were to be called so ; then this is a most excellent illustration of the mystery of the incarnation , in which the human nature retains its proper and true substance , tho after the union with the divinity , christ be called god , even as he was man , by virtue of his union with the eternal word . and this shews how unreasonable it is to pretend , that because substance and nature are sometimes used even for accidental qualities , they should be therefore understood so in the cited places ; for if you take them in that sense , you destroy the force of the argument , which from being a very strong one , will by this means become a most ridiculous sophisin . yet we are indeed beholden to those that have taken pains to shew , that substance and nature stand often for accidental qualities ; for tho that cannot be applied to the former places , yet it helps us with an excellent answer to many of those passages with which they triumph not a little . having so far considered these four fathers , we shall only add to them the definition of the seventh general council at constantinople , ann. 754. christ appointed us to offer the image of his body , to wit , the substance of the bread. the council is indeed of no authority with these we deal with : but we do not bring it as a decree of a council , but as a testimony , that so great a number of bishops did in the eighth century believe , that the substance of the bread did remain in the eucharist , and that it was only the image of christ's body : and if in this definition they spake not more consonantly to the doctrine of the former ages , than their enemies at nice did , let what has been set down , and shall be yet adduced , declare . and now we advance to the third branch of our first assertion , that the fathers believed that the consecrated elements did nourish our bodies ; and the proofs of this will also give a further evidence to our former position ; that the substance of the elements does remain : and it is a demonstration that these fathers , who thought the sacrament nourished our bodies , could not believe a transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of christ. for the proof of this branch we desire the following testimonies be considered . first , iustin martyr , as was already cited , not only calls the eucharist our nourishment , but formally calls it that food by which our flesh and blood through its transmutation into them are nourished . secondly , irenaeus ( lib. 5. adv . heret . c. 2. ) proving the resurrection of the body by this argument , that our bodies are fed by the body and blood of christ , and that therefore they shall rise again ; he hath these words , he confirmed that cup , which is a creature , to be his blood , by which he encreases our blood ; and the bread , which is a creature , to be his body , by which he encreases our body : and when the mixed cup and the bread , receive the word of god , it becomes the eucharist of the body and blood of christ , by which the substance of our flesh is encreased and subsists . how then do they deny the flesh to be capable of the gift of god , which is eternal life , that is nourished by the body and blood of christ , and is made his member . we hope it will be observed , that as these words are express and formal ; so the design on which he uses them will admit of none of those distinctions they commonly rely on . tertullian says , ( lib. de resur . c. 8. ) the flesh is fed with the body and blood of christ. st. austin ( serm. 9. de divers . ) after he had called the eucharist our daily bread , he exhorts us so to receive it , that not only our bellies , but our minds might be refreshed by it . isidore of sevil says , the substance of the visible bread nourishes the outward man ; or , as bertram cites his words , all that we receive externally in the sacrament of the body and blood of christ , is proper to refresh the body . next , let us see what the 16th council of toledo says in anno 633. condemning those that did not offer in the eucharist entire loaves , but only round crusts ; they did appoint one entire loaf carefully prepared to be set on the altar , that it might be sanctified by the priestly benediction , and order , that what remained after communion , should be either put in some bag , or , if it was needful , to eat it up , that it might not oppress the belly of him that took it with the burden of an heavy surcharge ; and that it might not go to the digestion , but that it might feed his soul with spiritual nourishment . from which words , one of two consequences will necessarily follow ; either that the consecrated elements do really nourish the body , which we intend to prove from them ; or that the body of christ is not in the elements , but as they are sacramentally used , which we acknowledg many of the fathers believed . but the last words we cited of the spiritual nourishment , shew those fathers did not think so ; and if they did , we suppose those we deal with will see , that to believe christ's body is only in the elements when used , will clearly leave the charge of idolatry on that church in their processions , and other adorations of the host. but none is so express as origen , ( comment . in mat. c. 15. ) who on these words , 't is not that which enters within a man which defiles a man , says , if every thing that enters by the mouth , goes into the belly , and is cast into the draught ; then the food that is sanctified by the word of god , and by prayer , goes also to the belly , as to what is material in it , and from thence to the draught ; but by the prayer that was made over it , it is useful in proportion to our faith , and is the mean that the understanding is clear-sighted and attentive to that which is profitable ; and it is not the matter of bread , but the word pronounced over it , which profits him that does not eat in a way unworthy of our lord. this doctrine of the sacraments being so digested that some parts of it turned to excrement , was likewise taught by divers latin writers in the 9th age , as rabanus maurus arch-bishop of mentz , and heribald bishop of auxerre . divers of the greek writers did also hold it , whom for a reproach their adversaries called stercoranists . it is true , other greek fathers were not of origen's opinion , but believed that the eucharist did entirely turn into the substance of our bodies . so cyril of ierusalem says , ( mystic . catech. 5. ) that the bread of the eucharist does not go into the belly , nor is cast into the draught , but is distributed thorough the whole substance of the communicant , for the good of body and soul. the homily of the eucharist , in a dedication that is in st. chrysostom's works , ( tom. 5. ) says , do not think that this is bread , and that this is wine ; for they pass not to the draught , as other victuals do : and comparing it to wax put to the fire , of which no ashes remain ; he adds , so think that the m●teries are consumed with the substance of our bodies . iohn damascene is of the same mind , who says , ( lib. 4. de orthod . fide c. 14. ) that the body and the blood of christ passes into the consistence of our souls and bodies , without being consumed , corrupted , or passing into the draught , god forbid , but passing into our substance for our conservation . thus it will appear , that tho those last-cited fathers did not believe as origen did , that any part of the eucharist went to the draught ; yet they thought it was turned into the substance of our bodies , from which we may well conclude , they thought the substance of bread and wine remained in the eucharist after the consecration , and that it nourished our bodies . and thus we hope we have sufficiently proved our first proposition in all its three branches . so leaving it , we go on to the second proposition , which is ; that the fathers call the consecrated elements the figures , the signs , the symbols , the types , and antitypes , the commemoration , representation , the mysteries , and the sacraments of the body and blood of christ. tertullian proving against marcion , ( lib. 4 cont . marc. c. 40. ) that christ had a real body , he brings some figures that were fulfilled in christ , and says , he made the bread which he took and gave his disciples to be his body , saying , this is my body , that is , the figure of my body ; but it had not been a figure of his body had it not been true , for an empty thing , such as a phantasm , cannot have a figure . now had tertullian , and the church in his time , believed transubstantiation , it had been much more pertinent for him to have argued , here is corporally present christ's body , therefore he had a true body , than to say , here is a figure of his body , therefore he had a true body ; such an escape as this is not incident to a man of common sense , if he had believed transubstantiation . and the same father , in two other places before cited , says , christ gave the figure of his body to the bread , and that he represented his own body by the bread. st. austin says , ( com. in psal. 3 ) he commended and gave to his disciples , the figure of his body and blood. the same expressions are also in bede , alcuine , and druthmar , that lived in the eighth and ninth centuries . but what st. austin says elsewhere ( lib. 3. de doct. chr. c. 16. ) is very full in this matter , where , treating of the rules by which we are to judg what expressions in scripture are figurative , and what not , he gives this for one rule : if any place seem to command a crime or horrid action , it is figurative ; and to instance it , cites these words , except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man , you have no life in you ; which ( says he ) seems to command some crime , or horrid action , therefore it is a figure , commanding us to communicate in the passion of our lord , and sweetly and profitably to lay up in our memory , that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us . which words are so express and full , that whatever those we deal with may think of them , we are sure we cannot devise how any one could have delivered our doctrine more formally . parallel to these are origen's words , ( homil. 7. in lev. ) who calls the understanding the words of our saviour , of eating his flesh and drinking his blood according to the letter , a letter that kills . the same st. austin calls the eucharist , a sign of christ's body , in his book against adimantus , ( lib. cont . adimant . manich . c. 12. ) who studied to prove that the author of the old and new testament was not the same god ; and among other arguments , he uses this , that blood in the old testament is called the life or soul , contrary to the new testament : to which st. austin answers , that it was so called , not that it was truly the soul or life , but the sign of it ; and to shew , that the sign does sometimes bear the name of that whereof it is a sign , he says , our lord did not doubt to say , this is my body , when he was giving the sign of his body . where , if he had not believed the eucharist was substantially different from his body , it had been the most impertinent illustration that ever was , and had proved just against him , that the sign must be one and the same with that which is signified by it . for the sacrament being called the type , the antitype , the symbol and mystery of christ's body and blood : the ancient liturgies , and greek fathers use these phrases so frequently , that since it is not so much as denied , we judg we need not laboriously prove it . therefore we pass over this , believing it will be granted ; for if it be denied , we undertake to prove them to have been used not only on some occasions , but to have been the constant style of the church . now that types , antitypes , symbols , and mysteries , are distinct from that which they shadow forth , and mystically hold out , we believe can be as little disputed . in this sense all the figures of the law are called types of christ by the fathers , and both the baptismal water and the chrism are called symbols and mysteries . and tho there was not that occasion for the fathers to discourse on baptism so oft , which every body received but once , and was administred ordinarily but on a few days of the year , as they had to speak of the eucharist , which was daily consecrated ; so that it cannot be imagined , there should be near such a number of places about the one as about the other ; yet we fear not to undertake to prove , there be many places among the ancients , that do as fully express a change of the baptismal water , as of the eucharistical elements . from whence it may appear , that their great zeal to prepare persons to a due value of these holy actions , and that they might not look on them as a vulgar ablution , or an ordinary repast , carried them to many large and high expressions , which cannot bear a literal meaning . and since they with whom we deal are fain to fly to metaphors and allegories for clearing of what the fathers say of baptism , it is a most unreasonable thing to complain of us for using such expositions of what they say about the eucharist . but that we may not leave this without some proof , we shall set down the words of facundus , ( desens . conc. chalced. lib. 9. ) who says , the sacrament of adoption , that is baptism , may be called adoption , as the sacrament of his body and blood , which is in the consecrated bread and cup , is called his body and blood ; not that the bread is properly his body , or the cup properly his blood , but because they contain in them the mystery of his body and blood ; and hence it was that our lord called the bread that was blessed , and the cup which he gave his disciples , his body and blood. therefore as the believers in christ , when they receive the sacrament of his body and blood , are rightly said to have received his body and blood ; so christ , when he received the sacrament of the adoption of sons , may be rightly said to have received the adoption of sons . and we leave every one to gather from these words , if the cited father could believe transubstantiation , and if he did not think that baptism was as truly the adoption of the sons of god , as the eucharist was his body and blood , which these of rome acknowledg is only to be meant in a moral sense . that the fathers called this sacrament the memorial and representation of the death of christ , and of his body that was broken , and his blood that was shed , we suppose will be as little denied , for no man that ever looked into any of their treatises of the eucharist , can doubt of it . st. austin says , ( epist. 23. ad bonifac. ) that sacraments must have some similitude of these things of which they be the sacraments , otherwise they could not be sacraments . so he says , the sacrament of the body of christ is after some manner his blood. so the sacrament of faith ( that is baptism ) is faith. but more expresly , speaking of the eucharist as a sacrifice of praise , he says , ( lib. 20. cont . faust. manich. c. 21. ) the flesh and blood of this sacrifice was promised before the coming of christ by the sacrifices of the types of it : in the passion of christ , it was done in the truth it self : and after his ascent , is celebrated by the sacrament of the remembrance of it . but he explains this more fully on the 98th psalm , where he having read , ver . 5. worship his footstool ; and seeking for its true meaning , expounds it of christ's body , who was flesh of this earth , and gives his flesh to be eaten by us for our salvation , which , since none eats , except he have first adored it ; he makes this the footstool which we worship without any sin , and do sin if we do not worship it . so far the church of rome triumphs with this place . but let us see what follows , where we shall find that which will certainly abate their joy ; he goes on and tells us , not to dwell on the flesh , lest we be not quickened by the spirit ; and shews how they that heard our lord's words were scandalized at them as hard words ; for they understood them , says he , foolishly , and carnally , and thought he was to have cut off some parcels of his body to be given them : but they were hard , not our lord 's saying ; for had they been meek , and not hard , they should have said within themselves , he says not this without a cause , but because there is some sacrament hid there ; for had they come to him with his disciples , and asked him , he had instructed them : for he said it is the spirit that quickens , the flesh profiteth nothing : the words that i have spoken to you are spirit and life . and adds , understand spiritually that which i have said ; for it is not this body which you see , that you are not to eat ; or to drink this blood which they are to shed , who shall crucify me : but i have recommended a sacrament to you , which being spiritually understood , shall quicken you ; and tho it be necessary that it be celebrated visibly , yet it must be understood invisibly . from which it is as plain as can be , that st. austin believed that in the eucharist we do not eat the natural flesh , and drink the natural blood of christ ; but that we do it only in a sacrament , and spiritually , and invisibly . but the force of all this will appear yet clearer , if we consider that they speak of the sacrament as a memorial that exhibited christ to us in his absence : for tho it naturally follows , that whatsoever is commemorated must needs be absent ; yet this will be yet more evident , if we find the fathers made such reflections on it . so gaudentius says , ( tract . in exod. ) this is the hereditary gift of his new testament , which that night he was betrayed to be crucified , he left as the pledg of his presence : this is the provision for our iourney with which we are fed in this way of our life , and nourished till we go to him out of this world ; for he would have his benefits remain with us : he would have our souls to be always sanctified by his precious blood , and by the image of his own passion . primasius ( comm. in 1 epist. ad cor. ) compares the sacrament to a pledg , which one , when he is dying , leaves to any whom he loved . many other places may be brought , to shew how the fathers speak of memorials and representations , as opposite to the truth and presence of that which is represented . and thus we doubt not but we have brought proofs , which , in the judgment of all that are unprejudiced , must demonstrate the truth of this our second proposition , which we leave , and go on to the third , which was ; that by the doctrine of the fathers , the unworthy receivers did not receive christ's body and blood in the sacrament . for this our first proof is taken from origen , ( com. in mat. c. 15. ) who after he had spoken of the sacraments being eaten , and passing to the belly , adds , these things we have said of the typical and symbolical body ; but many things may be said of the word that was made flesh , and the true food , whom whosoever eats , he shall live for ever ; whom no wicked person can eat : for if it were possible that any who continues wicked , should eat the word that was made flesh , since he is the word , and the living bread , it had never been written , whoso eats this bread , shall live for ever . where he makes a manifest difference between the typical and symbolical body received in the sacrament , and the incarnate word , of which no wicked person can partake . and he also says , ( hom. 3. in mat. ) they that are good , eat the living bread that came down from heaven ; and the wicked eat dead bread , which is death . zeno , bishop of verona , that , as is believed , lived near origen's time , ( tom. 2. spir. dach . ) says , ( as he is cited by ratherius bishop of verona ) there is cause to fear , that he in whom the devil dwells , does not eat the flesh of our lord , nor drink his blood , tho he seems to communicate with the faithful ; since our lord hath said , he that eats my flesh , and drinks my blood , dwells in me , and i in him . st. ierom on the 66th of isaiah , says , they that are not holy in body and spirit , do neither eat the flesh of iesus , nor drink his blood ; of which he said , he that eats my flesh , and drinks my blood , hath eternal life . and on the 8th chapter of hosea , he says , they eat not his flesh , whose flesh is the food of them that believe . to the same purpose he writes in his comments on the 22d of ieremy , and on the 10th of zechariah . st. austin says , ( tract . 26. in ioan. ) he that does not abide in christ , and in whom christ does not abide , certainly does not spiritually eat his flesh , nor drink his blood , tho he may visibly and carnally break in his teeth the sacrament of the body and blood of christ : but he rather eats and drinks the sacrament of so great a matter to his iudgment . and speaking of those , who by their uncleanness become the members of an harlot ; he says , ( lib. 21. de civ . dei c. 25. ) neither are they to be said to eat the body of christ , because they are not his members . and besides , he adds , he that says , whoso eats my flesh , and drinks my blood , abides in me , and i in him ; shews what it is , not only in a sacrament , but truly to eat the body of christ , and drink his blood. to this we shall add , that so oft cited passage ; ( tract . 54. in ioan. ) those did eat the bread that was the lord ; the other ( he means iudas ) the bread of the lord against the lord. by which he clearly insinuates , he did believe the unworthy receivers did not receive the lord with the bread : and that this hath been the constant belief of the greek church to this day , shall be proved , if it be thought necessary , for clearing this matter . and thus far we have studied to make good what we undertook to prove : but if we had enlarged on every particular , we must have said a great deal more ; to shew from many undeniable evidences , that the fathers were strangers to this new mystery . it is clear from their writings , that they thought christ was only spiritually present ; that we did eat his flesh , and drink his blood only by faith , and not by our bodily senses ; and that the words of eating his flesh , and drinking his blood , were to be understood spiritually . it is no less clear , that they considered christ present only as he was on the cross , and not as he is now in the glory of the father : and from hence it was , that they came to order their eucharistical forms so , as that the eucharist might represent the whole history of christ from his incarnation to his assumption . besides , they always speak of christ as absent from us , according to his flesh and human nature , and only present in his divinity and by his spirit ; which they could not have said , if they had thought him every day present on their altars in his flesh and human nature ; for then he were more on earth than he is in heaven , since in heaven he is circumscribed within one place . but according to this doctrine he must be always in above a million of places upon earth ; so that it were very strange to say he were absent , if they believed him thus present . but to give yet further evidences of the fathers not believing this doctrine , let us but reflect a little on the consequences that necessarily follow it : which be , 1. that a body may be , by the divine power , in more places at once . 2. that a body may be in a place without extension or quantity ; so a body of such dimensions , as our blessed lord's body , can be in so small a room as a thin wafer ; and not only so , but that the whole body should be entirely in every crumb and point of that wafer . 3. that a body can be made or produced in a place that had a real being before , and yet is not brought thither , but produced there . 4. that the accidents of any substance , such as colour , smell , taste , and figure , can remain without any body or substance in which they subsist . 5. that our senses may deceive us in their clearest and most evident representations . 6. great doubts there are what becomes of the body of christ after it is received ; or , if it should come to be corrupted , or to be snatched by a mouse , or eat by any vermine . all these are the natural and necessary effects of this doctrine , and are not only to be perceived by a contemplative and searching understanding , but are such as stare every body full in the face : and hence it is , that since this was submitted to in the western church , the whole doctrine of philosophy , has been altered , and new maxims and definitions were found out , to accustom the youth while raw and easy to any impression , to receive these as principles , by which their minds being full of those first prejudices , might find no difficulty to believe this . now it is certain , had the fathers believed this , they who took a great deal of pains to resolve all the other mysteries of our faith , and were so far from being short or defective in it , that they rather over-do it ; and that not only about the mysteries of the trinity and incarnation , but about original sin , the derivation of our souls , the operation of the grace of god in our hearts , and the resurrection of our bodies , should yet have been so constantly silent in those mysteries , tho they ought rather to have been cleared than the other . because in the other heads the difficulties were more speculative and abstracted , and so scruples were only incident to men of more curious and diligent enquiries . but here it is otherwise , where the matter being an object of the senses , every man's senses must have raised in him all or most of those scruples : and yet the fathers neither in their philosophical treatises , nor in their theological writings , ever attempt the unridling those difficulties . but all this is only a negative , and yet we do appeal to any one that has diligently read the fathers , st. austin in particular ; if he can perswade himself , that when all other mysteries , and the consequences from them , were explained with so great care and even curiosity , these only were things of so easy a digestion , that about them there should have been no scruple at all made . but it is yet clearer , when we find the fathers not only silent , but upon other occasions delivering maxims and principles so directly contrary to these consequences , without any reserved exceptions or provisions for the strange mysteries of transubstantiation : they tell us plainly , creatures are limited to one place , and so argued against the heathens believing their inferiour deities were in the several statues consecrated to them : from this they prove the divinity of the holy ghost , that he did work in many places at once , and so could not be a creature , which can only be in one place . nay , they do positively teach us , that christ can be no more on earth , since his body is in heaven , and is but in one place . they also do tell us , that that which hath no bounds nor figure , and cannot be touched nor seen , cannot be a body , and that all bodies are extended in some place , and that bodies cannot exist after the manner of spirits . they also tell us in all their reasonings against the eternity of matter , that nothing could be produced that had a being before it was produced . they also teach us very formally , that none of the qualities of a body could subsist , except the body it self did also subsist . and for the testimonies of our senses , they appeal to them on all occasions as infallible ; and tell us , that it tended to reverse the whole state of our life , the order of nature , and to blind the providence of god ; to say , he has given the knowledg and enjoyment of all his works to liars and deceivers , if our senses be false . then we must doubt of our faith , if the testimony of the eyes , hands and ears were of a nature capable to be deceived . and in their contests with the marcionites and others about the truth of christ's body , they appeal always to the testimony of the senses as infallible : nay , even treating of the sacrament , they say , it was bread as their eyes witnessed , and truly wine , that christ did consecrate for the memory of his blood ; telling , that in this very particular we ought not to doubt the testimony of our senses . but to make this whole matter yet plainer ; it is certain , that had the church in the first ages believed this doctrine , the heathens and jews who charged them with every thing they could possibly invent , had not passed over this , against which all the powers of reason , and the authorities of sense , do rise up . they charge them for believing a god that was born , a god of flesh , that was crucified and buried . they laughed at their belief of a iudgment to come , of endless flames , of an heavenly paradise , and the resurrection of the flesh. the first apologists for christianity , iustin , tertullian , origen , arnobius , and cyril of alexandria , give us a full account of those blasphemies against our most holy faith ; and the last hath given us what iulian objected in his own words , who having apostatized from the faith in which he was initiated , and was a reader in the church , must have been well acquainted with , and instructed in their doctrine and sacraments . he then who laughed at every thing , and in particular at the ablution and sanctification in baptism , as conceiving it a thing impossible that water should cleanse and wash a soul : yet neither he , nor celsus , nor any other ever charged on the christians any absurdities from their belief of transubstantiation . this is , it is true , a negative argument ; yet when we consider the malice of those ingenious enemies of our faith , and their care to expose all the doctrines and customs of christians , and yet find them in no place charge the strange consequences of this doctrine on them ; we must from thence conclude , there was no such doctrine then received : for if it had been , they , at least iulian , must have known it ; and if they knew it , can we think they should not have made great noise about it ? we know some think their charging the christians with the eating of human flesh , and thyestian suppers , related to the sacrament : but that cannot be , for when the fathers answer that charge , they tell them to their teeth it was a plain lie : and do not offer to explain it with any relation to the eucharist , which they must have done if they had known it was founded on their doctrine of receiving christ's body and blood in the sacrament . but the truth is , those horrid calumnies were charged on the christians from the execrable and abominable practices of the gnosticks , who called themselves christians ; and the enemies of the faith , either believing these were the practices of all christians , or being desirous to have others think so , did accuse the whole body of christians as guilty of these abominations . so that it appears , those calumnies were not at all taken up from the eucharist , and there being nothing else that is so much as said to have any relation to the eucharist , charged on the christians , we may well conclude from hence , that this doctrine was not received then in the church . but another negative argument is , that we find heresies rising up in all ages against all the other mysteries of our faith , and some downright denying them , others explaining them very strangely ; and it is indeed very natural to an unmortified and corrupt mind , to reject all divine revelation , more particularly that which either choaks his common notions , or the deductions of appearing reasonings ; but most of all , all men are apt to be startled , when they are told , they must believe against the clearest evidences of sense ; for men were never so meek and tame , as easily to yeild to such things . how comes it then that for the first seven ages there were no heresies nor hereticks about this ? we are ready to prove , that from the eighth and ninth centuries , in which this doctrine began to appear , there has been in every age great opposition made to all the advances for setting it up , and yet these were but dark and unlearned ages , in which implicit obedience , and a blind subjection to what was generally proposed , was much in credit . in those ages , the civil powers being ready to serve the rage of church-men against any who should oppose it , it was not safe for any to appear against it . and yet it cannot be denied , but from the days of the second council of nice , which made a great step towards transubstantiation , till the fourth council of lateran , there was great opposition made to it by the most eminent persons in the latin church ; and how great a part of christendom has departed from the obedience of the church of rome in every age since that time , and upon that account , is well enough known . now , is it to be imagined , that there should have been such an opposition to it these nine hundred years last past , and yet that it should have been received the former eight hundred years with no opposition , and that it should not have cost the church the trouble of one general council to decree it , or of one treatise of a father to establish it , and answer those objections that naturally arise from our reasons and senses against it ? but in the end there are many things which have risen out of this doctrine as its natural consequences , which had it been sooner taught and received , must have been apprehended sooner , and those are so many clear presumptions of the novelty of this doctrine ; the elevation , adoration , processions , the doctrine of concomitants , with a vast superfaetation of rites and rubricks about this sacrament are lately sprung up . the age of them is well known , and they have risen in the latin church out of this doctrine , which had it been sooner received , we may reasonably enough think must have been likewise ancienter . now for all these things , as the primitive church knew them not , so on the other hand , the great simplicity of their forms , as we find them in iustin martyr , and cyril of ierusalem , in the apostolical constitutions , and the pretended denis the areopagite , are far from that pomp which the latter ages that believed this doctrine brought in ; the sacraments being given in both kinds , being put in the hands of the faithful , being given to the children for many ages , being sent by boys or common persons to such as were dying , the eating up what remained , ( which in some places were burnt , in other places were consumed by children , or by the clergy ; ) their making cataplasms of it ; their mixing the consecrated chalice with ink to sign the excommunication of hereticks . these , with a great many more , are such convictions to one , that has carefully compared the ancient forms with the rubricks and rites of the church of rome , since this doctrine was set up , that it is as discernable as any thing can be , that the present belief of the church of rome is different from the primitive doctrine . and thus far we have set down the reasons that perswade us that transubstantiation was not the belief of the first seven or eight centuries of the church . if there be any part of what we have asserted , questioned , we have very formal and full proofs ready to shew for them ; though we thought it not fit to enter into the particular proofs of any thing , but what we undertook to make out when we waited on your ladyship . now there remains but one thing to be done , which we also promised ; and that was to clear the words of st. cyril of ierusalem . we acknowledg they were truly cited ; but for clearing of them , we shall neither alledg any thing to the lessening the authority of that father , though we find but a slender character given of him by epiphanius and others : nor shall we say any thing to lessen the authority of these catechisms , though much might be said . but it is plain , st. cyril's design in these catechisms , was only to possess his neophites with a just and deep sense of these holy symbols . but even in his 4th catechism he tells them , not to consider it as meer bread and wine , for it is the body and blood of christ. by which it appears he thought it was bread still , though not meer bread. and he gives us elsewhere a very formal account in what sense he thought it was christ's body and blood ; which he also insinuates in this 4th catechism : for in his first mist. catechism , when he exhorts his young christians to avoid all that belonged to the heathenish idolatry , he tells , that on the solemnities of their idols they had flesh and bread , which by the invocation of the devils were defiled , as the bread and wine of the eucharist before the holy invocation of the blessed trinity was bare bread and wine ; but the invocation being made , the bread becomes the body of christ. in like manner , says he , those victuals of the pomp of satan , which of their own nature are common or bare victuals , by the invocation of the devils become prophane . from this illustration , which he borrowed from iustin martyr his second apology , it appears , that he thought the consecration of the eucharist was of a like sort or manner with the profanation of the idolatrous feasts ; so that as the substance of the one remained still unchanged , so also according to him must the substance of the other remain . or , if this will not satisfy them , let us see to what else he compares this change of the elements by the consecration : in his third mist. catechism , treating of the consecrated oil , he says ; as the bread of the eucharist after the invocation of the holy ghost , is no more common bread , but the body of christ ; so this holy ointment is no more bare ointment , nor , as some may say , common ; but it is a gift of christ , and the presence of the holy ghost , and becomes energetical of his divinity . and from these places let it be gathered what can be drawn from st. cyril's testimony . and thus we have performed like wise what we promised , and have given a clear account of st. cyril's meaning from himself ; from whose own words , and from these things which he compares with the sanctification of the elements in the eucharist , it appears he could not think of transubstantiation ; otherwise he had neither compared it with the idol-feasts , nor the consecrated oil , in neither of which there can be supposed any transubstantiation . having thus acquitted our selves of our engagement before your ladyship ; we shall conclude this paper with our most earnest and hearty prayers to the father of lights , that he may of his great mercy redeem his whole christian church from all idolatry ; that he may open the eyes of those , who being carnal , look only at carnal things , and do not rightly consider the excellent beauty of this our most holy faith , which is pure , simple , and spiritual : and that he may confirm all those whom he has called to the knowledge of the truth ; so that neither the pleasures of sin , nor the snares of this world , nor the fear of the cross , tempt them to make shipwrack of the faith and a good conscience . and that god may pour out abundance of his grace on your ladyship , to make you still continue in the love and obedience of the truth , is the earnest prayer of , madam , your ladyship 's most humble servants . edward stillingfleet , gilbert burnet . london , apr. 15. 1676. a discourse , to shew how unreasonable it is , to ask for express words of scripture in proving all articles of faith : and that a just and good consequence from scripture is sufficient . it will seem a very needless labour to all considering persons , to go about the exposing and baffling so unreasonable and ill-grounded a pretence , that whatever is not read in scripture , is not to be held an article of faith. for in making good this assertion , they must either fasten their proofs on some other ground , or on the words of our article ; which are these , holy scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation : so that whatsoever is not read therein , nor may be proved thereby , is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith , or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation . now it is such an affront to every mans eyes and understanding , to infer from these words , that all our articles must be read in scripture , that we are confident every man will cry shame on any that will pretend to fasten on our church any such obligation from them . if these unlucky words , nor may be proved thereby , could be but dash'd out , it were a won cause . but we desire to know what they think can be meant by these words ? or what else can they signify , but that there may be articles of faith , which though they be not read in scripture , yet are proved by it . there be some propositions so equivalent to others , that they are but the same thing said in several words ; and these , though not read in scripture , yet are contained in it , since wheresoever the one is read , the other must necessarily be understood . other propositions there are , which are a necessary result either from two places of scripture , which joined together yield a third , as a necessary issue ; according to that eternal rule of reason and natural logick , that where-ever two things agree in any third , they must also agree among themselves . there be also other propositions that arise out of one single place of scripture by a natural deduction ; as if jesus christ be proved from any place of scripture the creator of the world , or that he is to be worshipped with the same adoration that is due to the great god , then it necessarily follows , that he is the great god ; because he does the works , and receives the worship of the great god. so it is plain , that our church by these words , nor may be proved thereby , has so declared her self in this point , that it is either very great want of consideration , or shameless impudence , to draw any such thing from our articles . but we being informed , that by this little art , as shuffling and bare so ever as it must appear to a just discerner , many have been disordered , and some prevailed on ; we shall so open and expose it , that we hope it shall appear so poor and trifling that every body must be ashamed of it . it hath already shewed it self in france and germany , and the novelty of it took with many , till it came to be canvassed ; and then it was found so weak , that it was universally cried down and hiss'd off the stage . but now that such decried wares will go off no-where , those that deal in them , try if they can vent them in this nation . it might be imagined , that of all persons in the world they should be the furthest from pressing us to reject all articles of faith that are not read in scripture ; since whenever that is received as a maxim , the infallibility of their church , the authority of tradition , the supremacy of rome , the worship of saints , with a great many more must be cast out . it is unreasonable enough for those who have cursed and excommunicated us , because we reject these doctrines , which are not so much as pretended to be read in scripture , to impose on us the reading all our articles in these holy writings . but it is impudent to hear persons speak thus , who have against the express and formal words of scripture , set up the making and worshipping of images ; and these not only of saints , ( though that be bad enough ) but of the blessed trinity , the praying in an unknown tongue , and the taking the chalice from the people . certainly this plea in such mens mouths is not to be reconciled to the most common rules of decency and discretion . what shall we then conclude of men that would impose rules on us , that neither themselves submit to , nor are we obliged to receive by any doctrine or article of our church ? but to give this their plea its full strength and advantage , that upon a fair hearing all may justly conclude its unreasonableness , we shall first set down all can be said for it . in the principles of protestants the scriptures are the rule by which all controversies must be judged . now they having no certain way to direct them in the exposition of them , neither tradition , nor the definition of the church : either they must pretend they are infallible in their deductions , or we have no reason to make any account of them , as being fallible and uncertain , and so they can never secure us from error , nor be a just ground to found our faith of any proposition so proved upon : therefore no proposition thus proved , can be acknowledged an article of faith. this is the breadth and length of their plea , which we shall now examine . and first ; if there be any strength in this plea , it will conclude against our submitting to the express words of scripture as forcibly : since all words , how formal soever , are capable of several expositions . either they are to be understood literally , or figuratively ; either they are to be understood positively , or interrogatively : with a great many other varieties , of which all expressions are capable . so that if the former argument have any force , since every place is capable of several meanings ; except we be infallibly sure which is the true meaning , we ought by the same parity of reason to make no account of the most express and formal words of scripture ; from which it is apparent , that what noise soever these men make of express words of scripture ; yet if they be true to their own argument , they will as little submit to these , as to deductions from scripture : since they have the same reason to question the true meaning of a place , that they have to reject an inference and deduction from it . and this alone may serve to satisfy every body that this is a trick , under which there lies no fair dealing at all . but to answer the argument to all mens satisfaction , we must consider the nature of the soul , which is a reasonable being ; whose chief faculty is to discern the connexion of things , and to draw out such inferences as flow from that connexion . now , though we are liable to great abuses both in our judgments and inferences ; yet if we apply thefe faculties with due care , we must certainly acquiesce in the result of such reasonings ; otherwise this being god's image in us , and the standard by which we are to try things , god has given us a false standard ; which when we have with all possible care managed , yet we are still exposed to fallacies and errors . this must needs reflect on the veracity of that god , that has made us of such a nature , that we can never be reasonably assured of any thing . therefore it must be acknowledged , that when our reasons are well prepared according to those eternal rules of purity and vertue , by which we are fitted to consider of divine matters ; and when we carefully weigh things , we must have some certain means to be assured of what appears to us . and though we be not infallible , so that it is still possible for us by precipitation , or undue preparation , to be abused into mistakes ; yet we may be well assured that such connexions and inferences as appear to us certain , are infallibly true . if this be not acknowledged , then all our obligation to believe any thing in religion will vanish . for that there is a god ; that he made all things , and is to be acknowledged and obeyed by his creatures ; that our souls shall out-live their union with our bodies , and be capable of rewards and punishments in another state ; that inspiration is a thing possible ; that such or such actions were above the power of nature , and were really performed . in a word , all the maxims on which the belief , either of natural religion , or revealed , is founded , are such as we can have no certainty about them , and by consequence are not obliged to yield to them ; if our faculty of reasoning in its clear deductions is not a sufficient warrant for a sure belief . but to examin a little more home their beloved principle , that their church cannot err : must they not prove this from the divine goodness and veracity , from some passages of scripture , from miracles and other extraordinary things they pretend do accompany their church ? now in yielding assent to this doctrine upon these proofs , the mind must be led by many arguments , through a great many deductions and inferences . therefore we are either certain of these deductions , or we are not . if we are certain , this must either be founded on the authority of the church expounding them , or on the strength of the arguments . now we being to examine this authority , not having yet submitted to it ; this cannot determine our belief till we see good cause for it . but in the discerning this good cause of believing the church infallible , they must say that an uncontroulable evidence of reason is ground enough to fix our faith on , or there can be no certain ground to believe the church infallible . so that it is apparent we must either receive with a firm persuasion what our souls present to us as uncontroulably true ; or else we have no reason to believe there is a god , or to be christians , or to be , as they would have us , romanists . and if it be acknowledged there is cause in some cases for us to be determined by the clear evidence of reason in its judgments and inferences ; then we have this truth gained , that our reasons are capable of making true and certain inferences , and that we have good cause to be determined in our belief by these ; and therefore inferences from scripture ought to direct our belief . nor can any thing be pretended against this , but what must at the same time overthrow all knowledg and faith , and turn us sceptical to every thing . we desire it be in the next place considered , what is the end and use of speech and writing , which is to make known our thoughts to others ; those being artificial signs for conveying them to the understanding of others . now every man that speaks pertinently ; as he designs to be understood , so he chooses such expressions and arguments as are most proper to make himself understood by those he speaks to ; and the clearer he speaks , he speaks so much the better : and every one that wraps up his meaning in obscure words , he either does not distinctly apprehend that about which he discourses , or does not design that those to whom he speaks , should understand him , meaning only to amuse them . if likewise he say any thing from which some absurd inference will easily be apprehended , he gives all that hear him a sufficient ground of prejudice against what he says . for he must expect that as his hearers senses receive his words or characters , so necessarily some figure or notion must be at th● same time imprinted on their imagination , or presented to their reason ; this being the end for which he speaks ; and the more genuinely that his words express his meaning , the more certainly and clearly they to whom he directs them apprehend it . it must also be acknowledged , that all hearers must necessarily pass judgments on what they hear , if they do think it of that importance as to examin it . and this they must do by that natural faculty of making judgments and deductions , the certainty whereof we have proved to be the foundation of all faith and knowledg . now the chief rule of making true judgments , is , to see what consequences certainly follow on what is laid before us : if these be found absurd or impossible , we must reject that from which they follow as such . further ; because no man says every thing that can be thought or said to any point , but only such things as may be the seeds of further enquiry and knowledg in their minds to whom he speaks ; when any thing of great importance is spoken , all men do naturally consider what inferences arise out of what is said by a necessary connexion : and if these deductions be made with due care , they are of the same force , and must be as true as that was from which they are drawn . these being some of the laws of converse , which every man of common sense must know to be true ; can any man think , that when god was revealing by inspired men his counsels to mankind , in matters that concerned their eternal happiness , he would do it in any other way than any honest man speaks to another , that is , plainly and dinstinctly . there were particular reasons why prophetical visions must needs be obscure : but when christ appeared on earth , tho many things were not to be fully opened till he had triumphed over death and the powers of darkness ; yet his design being to bring men to god , what he spoke in order to that , we must think he intended that they to whom he spake it might understand it , otherwise why should he have spoken it to them ? and if he did intend they should understand him , then he must have used such expressions as were most proper for conveying this to their understandings ; and yet they were of the meaner sort , and of very ordinary capacities , to whom he addressed his discourses . if then such as they were , might have understood him ; how should it come about that now there should be such a wondrous mysteriousness in the words of christ and his apostles ? ( for the same reason by which it is proved that christ designed to be understood , and spake sutably to that design , will conclude as strongly that the discourses of the apostles in matters that concern our salvation , are also intelligible . ) we have a perfect understanding of the greek tongue ; and , tho some phrases are not so plain to us which alter every age , and some other passages that relate to some customs , opinions or forms , of which we have no perfect account left us , are hard to be understood : yet what is of general and universal concern , may be as well understood now as it was then ; for sense is sense still . so that it must be acknowledged , that men may still understand all that god will have us believe and do in order to salvation . and therefore if we apply and use our faculties aright , joyning with an unprejudiced desire and search for truth , earnest prayers , that god by his grace may so open our understandings , and present divine truths to them , that we may believe and follow them : then both from the nature of our own souls , and from the design and end of revelation , we may be well assured that it is not only very possible , but also very easy for us to find out truth . we know the pompous objection against this , is , how comes it then that there are so many errors and divisions among christians ? especially those that pretend the greatest acquaintance with scriptures ? to which the answer is so obvious and plain , that we wonder any body should be wrought on by so fallacious an argument . does not the gospel offer grace to all men to lead holy lives , following the commandments of god ? and is not grace able to build them up , and make them perfect in every good word and work ? and yet how does sin and vice abound in the world ? if then the abounding of error proves the gospel does not offer certain ways to preserve us from it , then the abounding of sin will also prove there are no certain ways in the gospel to avoid it . therefore as the sins mankind generally live in , leave no imputation on the gospel ; so neither do the many heresies and schisms conclude that the gospel offers no certain ways of attaining the knowledg of all necessary truth . holiness is every whit as necessary to see the face of god as knowledg is , and of the two is the more necessary ; since low degrees of knowledg , with an high measure of holiness , are infinitely preferable to high degrees of knowledg with a low measure of holiness . if then every man have a sufficient help given him to be holy , why may we not much rather conclude he has a sufficient help to be knowing in such things as are necessary to direct his belief and life , which is a less thing ? and how should it be an imputation on religion , that there should not be an infallible way to end all controversies , when there is no infallible way to subdue the corrupt lusts and passions of men , since the one is more opposite to the design and life of religion than the other ? in sum ; there is nothing more sure than that the scriptures offer us as certain ways of attaining the knowledg of what is necessary to salvation , as of doing the will of god. but as the depravation of our natures makes us neglect the helps towards an holy life ; so this and our other corruptions , lusts and interests , make us either not to discern divine truth , or not embrace it . so that error and sin are the twins of the same parents . but as every man that improves his natural powers , and implores and makes use of the supplies of the divine grace , shall be enabled to serve god acceptably ; so that tho he fail in many things , yet he continuing to the end in an habit and course of well-doing , his sins shall be forgiven , and himself shall be saved : so upon the same grounds we are assured , that every one that applies his rational faculties to the search of divine truth , and also begs the illumination of the divine spirit , shall attain such knowledg as is necessary for his eternal salvation : and if he be involved in any errors , they shall not be laid to his charge . and from these we hope it will appear , that every man may attain all necessary knowledg , if he be not wanting to himself . now when a man attains this knowledg , he acquires it , and must use it as a rational being , and so must make judgments upon it , and draw consequences from it ; in which he has the same reason to be assured , that he has to know the true meaning of scripture ; and therefore as he has very good reason to reject any meaning of a place of scripture , from which by a necessary consequence great absurdities and impossibilities must follow : so also he is to gather such inferences as flow from a necessary connexion with the true meaning of any place of scripture . to instance this in the argument we insisted on , to prove the mean by which christ is received in the sacrament , is faith ; from these words , whoso eats my flesh , and drinks my blood , hath eternal life . if these words have relation to the sacrament , which the roman church declares is the true meaning of them ; there cannot be a clearer demonstration in the world. and indeed they are necessitated to stand to that exposition ; for if they will have the words , this is my body , to be understood literally , much more must they assert the phrases of èating his flesh , and drinking his blood , must be literal : for if we can drive them to allow a figurative and spiritual meaning of these words , it is a shameless thing for them to deny such a meaning of the words , this is my body : they then expounding these words of st. iohn of the sacrament , there cannot be imagined a closer contexture than this which follows . the eating christ's flesh , and drinking his blood , is the receiving him in the sacrament ; therefore every one that receives him in the sacrament , must have eternal life . now all that is done in the sacrament , is either the external receiving the elements , symbols , or , as they phrase it , the accidents of bread and wine , and under these the body of christ ; or the internal and spiritual communicating by faith. if then christ received in the sacrament , gives eternal life , it must be in one of these ways ; either as he is received externally , or as he is received internally , or both ; for there is not a fourth : therefore if it be not the one at all , it must be the other only . now it is undeniable , that it is not the external eating that gives eternal life . for st. paul tells us , of some that eat and drink unworthily , that are guilty of the body and blood of the lord , and eat and drink iudgment against themselves . therefore it is only the internal receiving of christ by faith , that gives eternal life ; from which another necessary inference directs us also to conclude , that since all that eat his flesh , and drink his blood , have eternal life : and since it is only by the internal communicating that we have eternal life , therefore these words of eating his flesh , and drinking his blood , can only be understood of internal communicating ; therefore they must be spiritually understood . but all this while the reader may be justly weary of so much time and pains spent to prove a thing which carries its own evidence so with it , that it seems one of the first principles and foundations of all reasoning ; for no proposition can appear to us to be true , but we must also assent to every other deduction that is drawn out of it by a certain inference . if then we can certainly know the true meaning of any place of scripture , we may and ought to draw all such conclusions as follow it with a clear and just consequence : and if we clearly apprehend the consequence of any proposition , we can no more doubt the truth of the consequence , than of the proposition from which it sprung : for if i see the air full of a clear day-light , i must certainly conclude the sun is risen ; and i have the same assurance about the one that i have about the other . there is more than enough said already for discovering the vanity and groundlesness of this method of arguing . but to set the thing beyond all dispute , let us consider the use which we find our saviour and the apostles making of the old testament , and see how far it favours us , and condemns this appeal to the formal and express words of scriptures . but before we advance further , we must remove a prejudice against any thing may be drawn from such presidents , these being persons so filled with god and divine knowledg , as appeared by their miracles and other wonderful gifts , that gave so full an authority to all they said , and of their being infallible , both in their expositions and reasonings , that we whose understandings are darkened and disordered , ought not to pretend to argue as they did . but for clearing this , it is to be observed , that when any person divinely assisted , having sufficiently proved his inspiration , declares any thing in the name of god , we are bound to submit to it ; or if such a person , by the same authority , offers any exposition of scripture , he is to be believed without farther dispute . but when an inspired person argues with any that does not acknowledg his inspiration , but is enquiring into it , not being yet satisfied about it ; then he speaks no more as an inspired person : in which case the argument offered is to be examined by the force that is in it , and not by the authority of him that uses it . for his authority being the thing questioned , if he offers an argument from any thing already agreed to ; and if the argument be not good , it is so far from being the better by the authority of him that useth it ; that it rather gives just ground to lessen or suspect his authority , that understands a consequence so ill , as to use a bad argument to use it by . this being premised . when our saviour was to prove against the sadducees the truth of the resurrection from the scriptures , he cites out of the law , that god was the god of abraham , isaac , and jacob ; since then god is not the god of the dead , but of the living : therefore abraham , isaac and jacob did live unto god. from which he proved the souls having a being distinct from the body , and living after its separation from the body , which was the principal point in controversy . now if these new maxims be of any force , so that we must only submit to the express words of scripture , without proving any thing by consequence ; then certainly our saviour performed nothing in that argument : for the sadducees might have told him , they appealed to the express words of scripture . but alas ! they understood not these new-found arts , but submitting to the evident force of that consequence , were put to silence , and the multitudes were astonished at his doctrine . now it is unreasonable to imagine that the great authority of our saviour , and his many miracles made them silent ; for they coming to try him , and to take advantage from every thing he said , if it were possible to lessen his esteem and authority , would never have acquiesced in any argument because he used it , if it had not strength in it self ; for an ill argument is an ill argument , use it whoso will. for instance ; if i see a man pretending that he sits in an infallible chair , and proving what he delievers by the most impertinent allegations of scripture possible ; as if he attempt to prove the pope must be the head of all powers civil and spiritual from the first words of genesis ; where it being said , in the beginning , and not in the * beginnings , in the plural , ( from which he concludes there must be but one beginning and head of all power , to wit , the pope . ) i am so far from being put to silence with this , that i am only astonished how any man of common sense , tho he pretended not to infallibility , could fall into such errors : for an ill argument , when its fallacy is so apparent , must needs heap contempt on him that uses it . having found our saviour's way of arguing to be so contrary to this new method these gentlemen would impose on us ; let us see how the apostles drew their proofs for matters in controversy from scriptures : the two great points they had most occasion to argue upon , were , iesus christ being the true messiah , and the freedom of the gentiles from any obligation to the observance of the mosaical law. now let us see how they proceeded in both these . for the first : in the first sermon after the effusion of the holy ghost , s. peter proves the truth of christ's resurrection from these words of david , thou wilt not leave my soul in hell , nor suffer thine holy one to see corruption . now he shews that these words could not be meant of david , who was dead and buried ; therefore being a prophet , he spake of the resurrection of christ. if here were not consequences and deductions , let every one judg . now these being spoken to those who did not then believe in christ , there was either sufficient force in that argument to convince the jews , otherwise these that spake them were very much both to be blamed , and despised , for offering to prove a matter of such importance by a consequence . but this being a degree of blasphemy against the holy ghost , we must acknowledg there was strength in their argument ; and therefore articles of faith , whereof this was the fundamental , may be proved from scripture by a consequence . we might add to this all the other prophecies in the old testament , from which we find the apostles arguing to prove this foundation of their faith , which every one may see do not contain in so many words that which was proved by them . but these being so obvious , we choose only to name this , all the rest being of a like nature with it . the next controversy debated in that time , was the obligation of the mosaichal law. the apostles by the inspiration of the holy ghost made a formal decision in this matter : yet there being great opposition made to that , st. paul sets himself to prove it at full length in his epistle to the galatians , where , besides other arguments , he brings these two from the old testament ; one was , that abraham was justified by faith before the giving the law ; for which he cites these words , abraham believed god , and it was counted to him for righteousness : from which , by a very just consequence , he infers , that as abraham was blessed , so all that believe are blessed with him ; and that the law of moses , that was 430 years after , could not disannul it , or make the promise of none effect ; therefore we might now be justified by faith without the law , as well as he was . another place he cites , is , the iust shall live by faith , and he subsumes , the law was not of faith ; from which the conclusion naturally follows : therefore the just lives not by the law. he must be very blind that sees not a succession of many consequences in that epistle of st. paul's ; all which had been utterly impertinent , if this new method had any ground for its pretension , and they might at one dash have overthrown all that he had said . but men had not then arrived at such devices as must at once overturn all the sense and reason of mankind . we hope what we premised will be remembred , to shew that the apostles being infallibly directed by the holy ghost , will not at all prove , that tho this way of arguing might have passed with them , yet it must not be allowed us : for their being infallibly directed , proves their arguments and way of proceeding was rational and convincing , otherwise they had not pitched on it . and the persons to whom these arguments were offered , not acquiescing in their authority , their reasonings must have been good , otherwise they had exposed themselves and their cause to the just scorn of their enemies . having therefore evinced that both our saviour and his apostles did prove by consequences drawn from scripture , the greatest and most important articles of faith ; we judg that we may with very great assurance follow their example . but this whole matter will receive a further confirmation : if we find it was the method of the church of god in all ages to found her decisions of the most important controversies on consequences from scriptures . there were very few hereticks that had face and brow enough to set up against express words of scripture ; for such as did so , rejected these books that were so directly opposite to their errors ; as the manichees did the gospel of st. matthew . but if we examine the method either of councils in condemning hereticks , or of the fathers writing against them , we shall always find them proceeding upon deductions and consequences from scripture , as a sufficient ground to go upon . let the epistle both of the council of antioch to samosatenus , and denis of alexandria's letter to him , be considered ; and it shall be found how they drew their definitions out of deductions from scripture . so also alexander , patriarch of alexandria , in his epistle , in which he condemned aerius , proceeds upon deductions from scripture ; and when the council of nice came to judg of the whole matter , if we give credit to gelasius , they canvassed many places of scripture , that they might come to a decision ; and that whole dispute , as he represents it , was all about inferences and deductions from scripture . it is true , f. maimbourg in his romantick history of arrianism ( hist. de l. arrian . l. 1. ) would perswade us , that in that council the orthodox , and chiefly the great saints of the council , were for adhering closely to what they had received by tradition , without attempting to give new expositions of scripture , to interpret it any other way than as they had learned from these fathers , that had been taught them by the apostles . but the arrians , who could not find among these that which they intended to establish , maintained on the contrary , that we must not confine our selves to that which hath been held by antiquity , since none could be sure about that . therefore they thought that one must search the truth of the doctrine only in the scriptures , which they could turn to their own meaning by their false subtilties . and to make this formal account pass easily with his reader , he vouches on the margin , sozom. cap. 16. when i first read this , it amazed me to find a thing of so great consequence not so much as observed by the writers of controversies ; but turning to sozomen , i found in him these words , speaking of the dispute about arrius his opinions , the disputation being , as is usual , carried out into different enquiries ; some were of opinion that nothing should be innovated beyond the faith that was originally delivered ; and these were chiefly those whom the simplicity of their manners bad brought to divine faith without nice curiosity . others did strongly , or earnestly contend that it was not fit to follow the ancienter opinions , without a strict trial of them . now in these words we find not a word either of orthodox or arrian ; so of which side either one or other were , we are left to conjecture . that jesuit has been sufficiently exposed by the writers of the port-royal , for his foul dealing on other occasions ; and we shall have great cause to mistrust him in all his accounts , if it be found that he was quite mistaken in this ; and that the party which he calls the orthodox were really some holy , good men ; but simple , ignorant , and easily abused : and that the other party which he calls the arrian , was the orthodox , and more judicious , who readily foreseeing the inconvenience which the simplicity of others would have involved them in , did vehemently oppose it ; and pressed the testimonies of the fathers might not be blindly followed . for proof of this , we need but consider that they anathematized these , who say that the son was the work of the father , as athanasius ( de decret . synod . nicen. ) tells us , which were the very words of denis of alexandria , of whom the arrians ( athan. epist. de sententia dion . alex. ) boasted much , and cited these words from him ; and both athanasius ( de synod . arim. ) and hilary ( hil. lib. de synod . ) acknowledg that those bishops that condemned samosatenus , did also reiect the consubstantial , and st. basil ( epist. 41. ) says , denis sometimes denied , sometimes acknowledged the consubstantial . yet i shall not be so easy as petavius and others of the roman church are in this matter , who acknowledg that most of the fathers before the council of nice said many things that did not agree with the rule of the orthodox faith ; but am fully perswaded , that before that council , the church did believe that the son was truly god , and of the same divine substance with the father : yet on the other hand it cannot be denied , but there are many expressions , in their writings which they had not so well considered ; and thence it is that st. basil ( epist. 14. ) observes how denis in his opposition to sabellius had gone too far on the other hand . therefore there was a necessity to make such a symbol as might cut off all equivocal and ambiguous forms of speech . so we have very good reason to conclude it was the arrian party , that studied under the pretence of not innovating , to engage many of the holy , but simpler bishops , to be against any new words or symbols , that so they might still lurk undiscovered . upon what grounds the council of nice made their decree and symbol , we have no certain account , since their acts are lost . but the best conjecture we can make , is from st. athanasius , who , as he was a great assertor of the faith in that council , so also he gives us a large account of its creed , in a particular treatise ( lib. de decret . concil . nicen. ) in which he justifies their symbol at great length out of the scriptures , and tells us very formally they used the word consubstantial , that the wickedness and craft of the arrians might be discovered , and proves by many consequences from scripture , that the words were well chosen ; and sets up his rest on his arguments from the scriptures , tho all his proofs are but consequences drawn out of them . it is true , when he has done that , he also adds , that the fathers at nice did not begin the use of these words , but had them from those that went before them ; and cites some passages from theognistus , denis of alexandria , denis of rome , and origen . but no body can imagin this was a full proof of the tradition of the faith. these were but a few later writers , nor could he have submitted the decision of the whole controversy to two of these , denis of alexandria and origen , ( for the other two , their works are lost ) in whose writings there were divers passages that favoured the arrians , and in which they boasted much . therefore athanasius only cites these passages , to shew the words of these symbols were not first coined by the council of nice . but neither in that treatise , nor in any other of his works , do i ever find that either the council of nice , or he who was the great champion for their faith , did study to prove the consubstantiality to have been the constant tradition of the church : but in all his treatises he at full length proves it from scripture . so from the definition of the council of nice , and athanasius his writings , it appears the church of that age thought that consequences clearly proved from scripture were a sufficient ground to build an article of faith on . with this i desire it be also considered , that the next great controversy , that was carried on chiefly by s. cyril against the nestorians , was likewise all managed by consequences from scripture , as will appear to any that reads s. cyril's writings , inserted in the acts of the council of ephesus , chiefly his treatise to the queens ; and when he brought testimonies from the fathers against nestorius , which were read in the council , ( act. conc. eph. action 1. ) they are all taken out of fathers that lived after the council of nice , except only s. cyprian , and peter of alexandria . if then we may collect from s. cyril's writings the sense of that council , as we did from s. athanasius that of the council of nice ; we must conclude that their decrees were founded on consequences drawn from scripture ; nor were they so solicitous to prove a continued succession of the tradition . in like manner , when the council of chalcedon condemned eutyches , pope leo's epistle to flavian was read , and all assented to it : so that upon the matter , his epistle became the decree of the council , and that whole epistle from beginning to end , is one entire series of consequences proved from scripture and reason : ( act. conc. chalced. action 1. ) and to the end of that epistle are added in the acts of that council , testimonies from the fathers , that had lived after the days of the council of nice . theodoret ( theod. in dial. ) and gelasius also ( gelas. de diab . naturis . ) who wrote against the eutychians , do through their whole writings pursue them with consequences drawn from scripture and reason , and in the end set down testimonies from fathers : and to instance only one more , when s. austin wrote against the pelagians , how many consequences he draws from scripture , every one that has read him , must needs know . in the end let it be also observed , that all these fathers when they argue from places of scripture , they never attempt to prove that those scriptures had been expounded in that sense they urge them in by the councils or fathers who had gone before them ; but argue from the sense which they prove they ought to be understood in . i do not say all their consequences or expositions were well-grounded ; but all that has been hitherto set down , will prove that they thought arguments drawn from scripture , when the consequences are clear , were of sufficient authority and force to end all controversies . and thus it may appear that it is unreasonable , and contrary to the practice both of the ancient councils and fathers , to reject proofs drawn from places of scripture , though they contain not in so many words that which is intended to be proved by them . but all the answer they can offer to this , is , that those fathers and councils had another authority to draw consequences from scripture , because the extraordinary presence of god was among them , and because of the tradition of the faith they builded their decrees on , than we can pretend to , who do not so much as say we are so immediately directed , or thar we found our faith upon the successive tradition of the several ages of the church . to this i answer ; first , it is visible , that if there be any strength in this , it will conclude as well against our using express words of scripture , since the most express words are capable of several expositions . therefore it is plain , they use no fair dealing in this appeal to the formal words of scripture , since the arguments they press it by , do invalidate the most express testimonies as well as deductions . let it be further considered , that before the councils had made their decrees , when heresies were broached , the fathers wrote against them , confuting them by arguments made up of scripture-consequences ; so that before the church had decreed , they thought private persons might confute heresies by such consequences . nor did these fathers place the strength of their arguments on tradition , as will appear to any that reads but what st. cyril wrote against nestorius , before the council of ephesus ; and pope leo against eutyches , before the council of chalcedon ; where all their reasonings are founded on scripture . it is true , they add some testimonies of fathers to prove they did not innovate any thing in the doctrine of the church : but it is plain , these they brought only as a confirmation of their arguments , and not as the chief strength of their cause ; for as they do not drive up the tradition to the apostles days , setting only down some later testimonies ; so they make no inferences from them , but barely set them down . by which it is evident , all the use they made of these , was only to shew that the faith of the age that preceded them , was conform to the proofs they brought from scripture ; but did not at all found the strength of their arguments from scripture , upon the sense of the fathers that went before them . and if the council of nice had passed the decree of adding the consubstantials to the creed , upon evidence brought from tradition chiefly , can it be imagined that st. athanasius , who knew well on what grounds they went , having born so great a share in their consultations and debates , when he in a formal treatise justifies that addition , should draw his chief arguments from scripture and natural reason ; and that only towards the end , he should tell us of four writers , from whom he brings passages to prove this was no new or unheard-of thing . in the end , when the council had passed their decree , does the method of their dispute alter ? let any read athanasius , hilary , or st. austin writing against the arrians : they continue still to ply them with arguments made up of consequences from scripture ; and their chief argument was clearly a consequence from scripture , that since christ was , by the confession of the arrians , truly god , then he must be of the same substance , otherwise there must be more substances , and so more gods , which was against scripture . now , if this be not a consequence from scripture , let every body judg . it was on this they chiefly insisted , and waved the authority of the council of nice , which they mention very seldom , or when they do speak of it , it is to prove that its decrees were according to scripture . for proof of this , let us hear what st. austin says ( lib. 3. cont. max. 19. ) writing against maximinus an arrian bishop , proving the consubstantiality of the son : this is that consubstantial which was established by the catholick fathers in the council of nice , against the arrians ; by the authority of truth , and the truth of authority , which heretical impiety studied to overthrow , under the heretical emperor constantius , because of the newness of the words , which were not so well understood , as should have been : since the ancient faith had brought them forth ; but many were abused by the fraud of a few . and a little after he adds , but now neither should i bring the cou●il of nice , nor yet the council of arrimini , thereby to prejudg in this matter ; neither am i bound by the authority of the latter , nor you by the authority of the former . let one cause and reason contest and strive with the other from the authorities of the scriptures , which are witnesses common to both , and not proper to either of us . if this be not our plea , as formally as can be , let every reader judg ; from all which we conclude , that our method of proving articles of faith by consequences drawn from scripture , is the same that the catholick church in all the best ages made use of : and therefore it is unreasonable to deny it to us . but all that hath been said will appear yet with fuller and more demonstrative evidence , if we find , that this very pretence of appealing to formal words of scriptures , was on several occasions taken up by divers hereticks , but was always rejected by the fathers as absurd and unreasonable . the first time we find this plea in any bodies mouth , is upon the question , whether it was lawful for christians to go to the theaters , or other publick spectacles ? which the fathers set themselves mightily against , as that which would corrupt the minds of the people , and lead them to heathenish idolatry . but others that loved those diverting sights , pleaded for them upon this ground , as tertullian ( lib. de spect. c. 3. ) tells us in these words ; the faith of some being either simpler or more scrupulous , calls for an authority from scripture , for the discharge of these sights ; and they became uncertain about it , because such abstinence is no-where denounced to the servants of god , neither by a clear signification , nor by name ; as , thou shalt not kill , nor worship an idol : but he proves it from the first verse of the psalms ; for though that seems to belong to the iews , yet ( says he ) the scripture is always to be divided broad , where that discipline is to be guarded according to the sense of whatever is present to us . and this agrees with that maxim he has elsewhere , ( lib. adv . gnost . c. 7. ) that the words of scripture are to be understood , not only by their sound , but by their sense ; and are not only to be heard with our ears , but with our minds . in the next place , the arrians designed to shroud themseles under general expressions ; and had found glosses for all passages of scripture . so that when the council of nice made all these ineffectual , by putting the word consubstantial into the creed ; then did they in all their councils , and in all disputes , set up this plea , that they would submit to every thing that was in scripture , but not to any additions to scripture . a large account of this we have from athanasius , who ( de synod . arim. & seleuc. ) gives us many of their creeds . in that proposed at arimini , these words were added to the symbol , for the word substance , because it was simply set down by the fathers , and is not understood by the people , but breeds scandal , since the scriptures have it not , therefore we have thought fit it be left out , and that there be no more mention made of substance concerning god , since the scriptures no-where speak of the substance of the father and the son. he also tells us , that at sirmium they added words to the same purpose to their symbol , rejecting the words of substance or consubstantial , because nothing is written of them in the scriptures , and they transcend the knowledg and understanding of men. thus we see how exactly the plea of the arrians agrees with what is now offered to be imposed on us . but let us next see what the father says to this : he first turns it back on the arrians , and shews how far they were from following that rule which they imposed on others . and if we have not as good reason to answer those so , who now take up the same plea , let every one judg . but then the father answers , it was no matter though one used forms of speech that were not in scripture , if he had still a sound or pious understanding ; as on the contrary an her●tical person , though be uses forms out of scripture , he will not be the less suspected , if his understanding be corrupted ; and at full length applies that to the question of the consubstantiality . to the same purpose , st. hillary ( de synod . adv . arrian . ) setting down the arguments of the arrians against the consubstantiality , the third objection is , that it was added by the council of nice , but ought not to be received , because it is no-where written . but he answers ; it was a foolish thing to be afraid of a word , when the thing expressed by the word has no difficulty . we find likewise in the conference st. austin had with maximinus the arrian bishop , ( lib. 1. cont . max. arr. epist. ) in the very beginning the arrian tells him , that he must hearken to what he brought out of the scriptures , which were common to them all ; but for words that were not in scripture , they were in no case received by them . and afterwards he says , ( lib. 3. c. 3. ) we receive with a full veneration every thing that is brought out of the holy scriptures , for the scriptures are not in our dominion that they may be mended by us . and a little after adds , truth is not gathered out of arguments , but is proved by sure testimonies , therefore he seeks a testimony of the holy ghost's being god. but to that st. austin makes answer , that from the things that we read , we must understand the things that we read not . and giving an account of another conference ( epist. 72. ) he had with count pascentius that was an arrian , he tells , that the arrian did most earnestly press that the word consubstantial might be shewed in scripture , repeating this frequently , and canvassing about it invidiously . to whom st. austin answers , nothing could be more contentious than to strive about a word , when the thing was certain ; and asks him where the word unbegotten ( which the arrians used ) was in scripture ? and since it was no-where in scripture , he from thence concludes , there might be a very good account given why a word that was not in scripture , might be well used . and by how many consequences he proves the consubstantiality we cannot number , except that whole epistle were set down . and again , in that which is called an epistle , ( epist. 78. ) but is an account of another conference between that same person and st. austin , the arrian desired the consubstantiality might be accursed , because it was no-where to be found written in the scriptures ; and adds , that it was a grievous trampling on the authority of the scripture , to set down that which the scripture had not said ; for if any thing be set down without authority from the divine volumes , it is proved to be void ; against which st. austin argues at great length , to prove that it necessarily follows from other places of scripture . in the conference between photinus , sabellius , arrius , and athanasius , first published by cassander , ( oper. cass. ) as a work of vigilius , but believed to be the work of gelasius an african ; where we have a very full account of the pleas of these several parties . arrius challenges the council of nice for having corrupted the faith with the addition of new words , and complains of the consubstantial , and says , the apostles , their disciples , and all their successors downward , that had lived in the confession of christ to that time , were ignorant of that word : and on this he insists with great vehemency , urging it over and over again , pressing athanasius either to read it properly set down in scripture , or to cast it out of his confession ; against which athanasius replies , and shews him how many things they acknowledged against the other hereticks , which were not written ; shew me these things , ( says he ) not from conjectures or probabilities , or things that do neighbour on reason , not from things that provoke us to understand them so , nor from the piety of faith , persuading such a profession ; but shew it written in the pure and naked property of words , that the father is unbegotten , or impassible . and then he tells arrius , that when he went about to prove this , he should not say , the reason of faith required this , piety teaches it , the consequence from scripture forces me to this profession . i will not allow you , says he , to obtrude these things on me ; because you reject me when i bring you such like things , for the profession of the consubstantial . in the end he says , either permit me to prove the consubstantial by consequences , or if you will not , you must deny all those things which you your self grant . and after athanasius had urged this further , probus , that fate judg in the debate , said , neither one nor other could shew all that they believed properly and specially in scripture : therefore he desired they would trifle no longer in such a childish contest , but prove either the one or rhe other by a just consequence from scripture . in the macedonian controversy against the divinity of the holy ghost , we find this was also their plea ; a hint of it was already mentioned in the conference betwixt maximinus the arrian bishop , and st. austin , which we have more fully in st. greg. nazianz. ( orat. 37. ) who proving the divinity of the holy ghost , meets with that objection of the macedonians , that it was in no place of scripture , to which he answers , some things seemed to be said in scripture that truly are not , as when god is said to sleep ; some things truly are , but are no-where said , as the fathers being unbegotten , which they themselves believed , and concludes , that these things are drawn from those things out of which they are gathered , though they be not mentioned in scripture . therefore he upbraids those for serving the letter , and joyning themselves to the wisdom of the jews , and that leaving things , they followed syllables : and shews how valid a good consequence is ; as if a man , says he , speaks of a living creature that is reasonable , but mortal ; i conclude it must be a man : do i for that seem to rave ? not at all ; for these words are not more truly his that says them , than his that did make the saying of them necessary : so he infers , that he might , without fear , believe such things as he either found or gathered from the scriptures , though they either were not at all , or not clearly in the scriptures . we find also in a dialogue between an orthodox and a macedonian , that is in athanasius's works , but believed to be written by maximus , after he had proved by a great many arguments that the attributes of the divine nature , such as the omniscience and omnipresence were ascribed to the holy ghost . in end the macedonian flies to this known refuge , that it was no-where written , that he was god , and so challenges him for saying , that which was not in scripture . but the orthodox answers , that in the scriptures the divine nature was ascribed to the holy ghost , and since the name follows the nature , he concludes , if the holy ghost did subsist in himself , did sanctifie , and was increated , he must be god whether the other would or not . then he asks , where it was written , that the son was like the father in his essence ? the heretick answers , that the fathers had declared the son consubstantial as to his essence but the orthodox replies , ( which we desire may be well considered ) were they moved to that from the sense of the scripture , or was it of their own authority or arrogance , that they said any thing that was not written . the other confesses it was from the sense of the scripture , that they were moved to it ; from this the orthodox infers , that the sense of the scripture teaches us , that an uncreated spirit that is of god , and quickens and sanctifies , is a divine spirit , and from thence he concludes , he is god. thus we see clearly , how exactly the macedonians and these gentlemen agree , and what arguments the fathers furnish us with against them . the nestorian history followed this tract , and we find nestorius both in his letters ( act. syn. eph. ) to cyril of alexandria , to pope celestin , and in these writings of his that were read in the council of ephesus , ( action 1. ) gives that always for his reason of denying the blessed virgin to have been the mother of god , because the scriptures did no-where mention it , but call her always the mother of christ , and yet that general council condemned him for all that ; and his friend iohn , patriarch of antioch , earnestly pressed him by his letters not to reject but to use that word , since the sense of it was good , and it agreed with the scriptures ; and it was generally used by many of the fathers , and had never been rejected by any one . this was also eutyches his last refuge , ( act. 6. syn. constantin . in act. 2. chalcedon . ) when he was called to appear before the council at constantinople , he pretended sickness , and that he would never stir out of his monastery ; but being often cited , he said to those that were sent to him , in what scripture were the two natures of christ to be found ? to which they replied , in what scripture was the consubstantial to be found : thus turning his plea back on himself , as the orthodox had done before on the arrians . eutyches also when he made his appearance , he ended his defence with this , that he had not found that ( to wit , of the two natures ) plainly in the scripture , and that all the fathers had not said it . but for all that , he was condemned by that council which was afterwards ratified by the universal council of chalcedon . yet after this repeated condemnation the eutychians laid not down this plea , but continued still to appeal to the express words of scripture ; which made theodoret write two discourses to shew the unreasonableness of that pretence , they are published in athanasius his works ( tom. 2. op . athan. ) among these sermons against hereticks : but most of these are theodoret's , as appears clearly from photius ( bibl. cod. 46. ) his account of theodoret's works ; the very titles of them lead us to gather his opinion of this plea : the 12th discourse , which by photius's account , is the 16th , has this title , to those that say we ought to receive the expression , and not look to the things signified by them , as transcending all men . the 19th , or according to photius , the 23d , is , to those who say we ought to believe simply as they say , and not consider what is convenient or inconvenient . if i should set down all that is pertinent to this purpose , i must set down the whole discourses ; but i shall gather out of them such things as are most proper . he first complains of those who studied to subvert all humane things , and would not suffer men to be any longer reasonable , that would receive the words of the sacred writings without consideration , or good direction , not minding the pious scope for which they are written : for if ( as they would have us ) we do not consider what they mark out to us , but simply receive their words , then all that the prophets and apostles have written , will prove of no use to those that hear them , for then they will hear with their ears , but not understand with their hearts ; nor consider the consequence of the things that are said , according to the curse in isaias . — and after he had applied this to those who misunderstood that place , the word was made flesh , he adds , shall i hear a saying , and shall i not enquire into its proper meaning , where then is the proper consequence of what is said , or the profit of the hearer ? would they have men changed into the nature of bruits ? if they must only receive the sound of words with their ears , but no fruit in their soul from the understanding of them . contrariwise did st. paul tell us , they who are perfect have their senses exercised to discern good and evil ; but how can any discern aright , if he do not apprehend the meaning of what is said ? and such he compares to beasts , and makes them worse than the clean beasts , who chew the cud ; and , as a man is to consider what meats are set before him , so he must not snatch words stripp'd of their meaning , but must carefully consider what is suitable to god , and profitable to us , what is the force of truth , what agrees with the law , or answers to nature ; he must consider the genuineness of faith , the firmness of hope , the sincerity of love , what is liable to no reproach , what is beyond envy , and worthy of favour ; all which things concur in pious meditations . and concludes thus , the sum of all is , he that receives any words , and does not consider the meaning of them , how can he understand those that seem to contradict others ? where shall he find a fit answer ? how shall he satisfie those that interrogate him , or defend that which is written ? these passages are out of the first discourse , what follows is out of the second . in the beginning he says , though the devil has invented many grievous doctrines , yet he doubts if any former age brought forth any thing like that then broached . former heresies had their own proper errors ; but this that was now invented renewed all others , and exceeded all others . which , says he , receives simply what is said , but does not enquire what is convenient , or inconvenient : but shall i believe without judgment , and not enquire what is possible , convenient , decent , acceptable to god , answerable to nature , agreeable to truth , or is a consequence from the scope , or suitable to the mystery , or to piety ; or what outward reward , or inward fruit accompanies it ; or must i reckon on none of these things . but the cause of all our adversaries errors , is , that with their ears they hear words , but have no understanding of them in their hearts ; for all of them ( and names divers ) shun a trial , that they be not convinced , and at length shews what absurdities must follow on such a method . instancing those places about which the contest was with the arrians , such as these words of christ , the father is greater than i. and shews what apparent contradictions there are , if we do not consider the true sense of places of scripture that seem contradictory , which must be reconciled by finding their true meaning ; and concludes , so we shall either perswade , or overcome our adversary ; so we shall shew that the holy scripture is consonant to its self ; so we shall justly publish the glory of the mystery , and shall treasure up such a full assurance as we ought to have in our souls ; we shall neither believe without the word , nor speak without faith. now i challenge every reader , to consider if any thing can be devised , that more formally , and more nervously overthrows all the pretences brought for his appeal to the express words of scripture . and here i stop ; for though i could carry it further , and shew that other hereticks shrowded themselves under the same pretext , yet i think all impartial readers will be satisfied , when they find this was an artifice of the first four grand heresies , condemned by the first four general councils , and from all has been said , it is apparent how oft this very pretence has been baffled by universal councils and fathers . yet i cannot leave this with the reader , without desiring him to take notice of a few particulars that deserve to be considered . the first is , that which these gentlemen would impose on us has been the plea of the greatest hereticks have been in the church . those therefore who take up these weapons of hereticks , which have been so oft blunted and broken in their hands , by the most universal councils , and the most learned fathers of the catholick church ; till at length they were laid aside by all men , as unfit for any service , till in this age some jesuits took them up in defence of an often baffled cause , do very unreasonably pretend to the spirit or doctrine of catholicks , since they tread a path so oft beaten by all hereticks , and abhorred by all the orthodox . secondly , we find the fathers always begin their answering this pretence of hereticks , by shewing them how many things they themselves believed , that were no-where written in scripture . and this i believe was all the ground m. w. had for telling us in our conference that st austin bade the heretick read what he said . i am confident that gentleman is a man of candour and honour , and so am assured he would not have been guilty of such a fallacy , as to have cited this for such a purpose , if he had not taken it on trust from second hands . but he who first made use of it , if he have no other authority of st. austin's , which i much doubt , cannot be an honest man ; who , because st. austin , to shew the arrians how unjust it was to ask words for every thing they believed , urges them with this , that they could not read all that they believed themselves , would from that conclude , st. austin thought every article of faith must be read in so many words in scripture . this is such a piece of ingenuity as the jesuits used in the contest about st. austin's doctrine , concerning the efficacy of grace : when they cited as formal passages out of st. austin , some of the objections of the semipelagians , which he sets down , and afterwards answers , which they brought without his answers , as his words , to shew he was of their side . but to return to our purpose ; from this method of the fathers we are taught to turn this appeal to express words , back on those who make use of it against us ; and to ask them where do they read their purgatory , sacrifice of the mass , transubstantiation , the pope's supremacy , with a great many more things in the express words of scripture . thirdly , we see the peremptory answer the fathers agree in , is , that we must understand the scriptures , and draw just consequences from them , and not stand on words or phrases ; but consider things : and from these we are furnished with an excellent answer to every thing of this nature they can bring against us . it is in those great saints , athanasius , hilary , gregory nazianzen , austin , and theodoret , that they will find our answer as fully and formally as need be ; and to them we refer our selves . but , fourthly , to improve this beyond the particular occasion that engaged us to all this enquiry , we desire it be considered that when such an objection was made , which those of the church of rome judge is strong to prove , we must rely on somewhat else than scripture , either on the authority of the church , or on the certainty of tradition . the first councils and fathers had no such apprehension . all considering men , chiefly when they are arguing a nice point , speak upon some hypothesis or opinion with which they are prepossessed , and must certainly discourse consequently to it . to instance it in this particular ; if an objection be made against the drawing consequences from scripture , since all men may be mistaken ; and therefore they ought not to trust their own reasonings . a papist must necessarily upon his hypothesis say , it is true , any man may err , but the whole church , either when assembled in a council with the holy ghost in the midst of them , or when they convey down from the apostles , through age to age , the tradition of the exposition of the scriptures cannot err , for god will be with them to the end of the world. a protestant must on the other hand , according to his principles , argue , that since man has a reasonable soul in him , he must be supposed endued with a faculty of making inferences : and when any consequence is apparent to our understandings , we ought and must believe it as much as we do that from which the consequenee is drawn . therefore we must not only read , but study to understand the true meaning of scripture : and we have so much the more reason to be assured of what appears to us to be the true sense of the scriptures , if we find the church of god in the purest times , and the fathers believing as we believe . if we should hear two persons that were unknown to us , argue either of these two ways , we must conclude , the one is a papist , the other a protestant , as to this particular . now i desire the reader may compare what has been cited from the fathers upon this subject : and see if what they write upon it does not exactly agree with our hypothesis and principles . whence we may very justly draw another conclusion that will go much further than this particular we now examine ; that in seeking out the decision of all controversies , the fathers went by the same rules we go by , to wit , the clear sense of scriptures , as it must appear to every considering mans understanding , backed with the opinion of the fathers that went before them . and thus far have i followed this objection ; and have , as i hope , to every reader 's satisfaction made it out , that there can be nothing more unreasonable , more contrary to the articles and doctrine of our church , to the nature of the soul of man , to the use and end of words and discourse , to the practice of christ and his apostles , to the constant sense of the primitive church , and that upon full and often renewed contest with hereticks upon this very head : then to impose on us an obligation to read all the articles of our church in the express words of scripture . so that i am confident this will appear to every considering person , the most trifling and pitiful objection that can be offered by men of common sense and reason . and therefore it is hoped , that all persons who take any care of their souls , will examine things more narrowly than to suffer such tricks to pass upon them , or to be shaken by such objections . and if all the scruple these gentlemen have , why they do not joyn in communion with the church of england , lies in this ; we expect they shall find it so entirely satisfied , and removed out of the way , that they shall think of returning back to that church where they had their baptism and christian education , and which is still ready to receive them with open arms , and to restore such as have been over-reached into error and heresie , with the spirit of meekness . to which i pray god of his great mercy dispose both them and all others , who upon these or such like scruples have deserted the purest church upon earth ; and have turned over to a most impure and corrupt society . and let all men say , amen . a discourse to shew that it was not only possible to change the belief of the church concerning the manner of christ's presence in the sacrament ; but that it is very reasonable to conclude , both that it might be done , and that it was truly changed . there is only one particular of any importance , that was mentioned in the conference , to which we forgot to make any answer at all , which was spoken by n. n. to this purpose ; how was it possible , or to be imagined that the church of god could ever have received such a doctrine as the belief of transubstantiation , if every age had not received it , and been instructed in it by their fathers , and the age that went before it ? this by a pure forgetfulness was not answered ; and one of these gentlemen took notice of it to me , meeting with me since that time , and desired me to consider what a friend of n. n. has lately printed on this subject , in a letter concerning transubstantiation , directed to a person of honour : in which , a great many pretended impossibilities of any such innovation of the doctrine are reckoned up ; to shew it a thing both inconceivable and unpracticable , to get the faith of the church changed in a thing of this nature . this same plea has been managed with all the advantages possible , both of wit , eloquence , and learning , by mr. arnaud of the sorbon ; but had been so exposed and baffled by mr. claud , who , as he equals the other in learning , eloquence , and wit , so having much the better of him in the cause and truth he vindicates , has so foiled the other in this plea , that he seeing no other way to preserve that high reputation which his other writings , and the whole course of his life had so justly acquired him ; has gone off from the main argument on which they begun , and betaken himself to a long and unprofitable enquiry into the belief of the greek church , since her schism from the latine church . the contest has been oft renewed , and all the ingenious and learned persons of both sides , have looked on with great expectations . every one must confess , mr. arnaud has said all can be said in such a cause ; yet it seems he finds himself often pinched , by the bitter ( i had almost said scurrilous ) reproaches he casts on mr. claud , which is very unbecoming the education and other noble qualities of that great man , whom for his book of frequent communion , i shall ever honour . and it is a thing much to be lamented , that he was taken off from these more useful labours , wherein he was engaged so much to the bettering this age , both in discovering the horrid corruption of the jesuits and other casuists , not only in their speculations about casuistical divinity , but in their hearing confessions , and giving easie absolutions , upon trifling penances , and granting absolutions before the penance was performed , and in representing to us the true spirit of holiness and devotion was in the primitive church . but on the other hand , as mr. claud leaves nothing unsaid in a method fully answerable to the excellence of that truth he defends ; so he answers these reproaches in a way worthy of himself , or rather of christ and the gospel . if those excellent writings were in english , i should need to say nothing to a point that has been so canvassed ; but till some oblige this nation by translating them , i shall say so much on this head , as i hope shall be sufficient to convince every body of the emptiness , weakness and folly of this plea. and first of all , in a matter of fact concerning a change made in the belief of the church , the only certain method of enquiry , is , to consider the doctrine of the church in former ages ; and to compare that with what is now received ; and if we see a difference between these , we are sure there has been a change ; though we are not able to shew by what steps it was made ; nay , though we could not so much as make it appear probable that such a change could be made . to instance this in a plain case , of the change of the english language since the days of william the conqueror ; that there has no such swarm of foreigners broke in upon this island , as might change our language : one may then argue thus ; every one speaks the language he heard his parents , his nurses , and others about him speak , when he was a child ; and this he continues to speak all his life , and his children speak as they heard him speak : upon which , a man of wit and phancy might say a great many things , to shew it impossible any such change should ever have been made , as that we now should speak so as not to understand what was said five or six hundred years ago . yet if i find chaucer , or any much ancienter book , so written , that i can hardly make a shift to understand it , from thence , without any further reasoning how this could be brought about , i naturally must conclude our language is altered . and if any man should be so impertinent , as to argue , that could not be ; for children speak as their nurses and parents taught them , i could hardly answer him in patience ; but must tell him it is altered , without more ado . if a child were amused with such pretended impossibilities , i would tell him , that strangers coming among us , and our travelling to parts beyond the seas , made us acquainted with other languages ; and englishmen finding in other tongues , some words and phrases , which they judged more proper than any they had , being also fond of new words , there was an insensible change made in every age , which , after five or six ages , is more discernible . just so , if i find most of all the fathers either delivering their opinions clearly in this matter , against the doctrine of the roman church , or saying things utterly inconsistent with it , i am sure there has been a change made ; though i could not shew either the whole progress of it , or so much as a probable account how it could be done . if men were as machines or necessary agents , a certain account might be given of all the events in all ages ; but there are such strange labyrinths in the minds of men , that none can trace them by any rational computation of what is likely . there is also such a diversity between men and men , between ages and ages , that he should make very false accounts , that from the tempers and dispositions of men in this age , should conclude what were possible or impossible many years ago . in this age , in which printing gives notice of all things so easily and speedily , and by the laying of stages for the quick and cheap conveying pacquers , and the publishing mercuries , gazets , and iournals , and the education of almost all persons to read and write letters , and the curiosity by which all people are whetted to enquire into every thing ; the state of mankind is quite altered from what it was before , when few could read or write , but clergy-men ; so that they must be the notaries of all courts ; who continue from that , to be called clerks to this day ; and that some crimes , otherwise capital , were not punished with death , if the guilty person could but read . when people were so ignorant of what was doing about them , when neither printing , nor stages for pacquets , were in being , at least in europe , and when men were fast asleep in their business , without amusing themselves what was doing about them in the world ; it is the most unjust and unreasonable thing in nature , to imagine , that such things as are now next to impossible , were not then not only possible , but easie . so that all such calculations of impossibilities from the state and temper of this age , when applied to the ages before ours , is the most fallacious way of reckoning that can be . for instance , how improbable , or next to impossible , is this following story , that the bishops of the imperial city of the roman empire , whose first true worth , together with the greatness of that city , which was the head and metropolis of the roman empire , got them much esteem and credit in the world , should from small and low beginnings , have crept up to such a height of power , that they were looked on as the head of all power , both civil and spiritual ; and that as they overthrew all other ecclesiastical jurisdiction , the bishops of that see engrossing it to themselves : so they were masters of almost all the crowns of europe , and could change governments , raise up , and assist new pretenders , call up , by the preachings of some poor beggarly friars , vast armies , without pay , and send them whither they pleased : that they could draw in all the treasure and riches of europe to themselves ; that they brought princes to lie thus at their feet , to suffer all the clergy , who had a great interest in their dominions , by the vast endowments of churches and abbeys , beside the power they had in all families and consciences , to be the sworn subjects of these bishops , and to be exempted from appearing in secular courts , how criminal soever they were ? that all this should be thus brought about without the expence of any vast treasure , or the prevailing force of a conquering army , meerly by a few tricks , that were artificially managed , of the belief of purgatory , the power of absolving , and granting indulgences , and the opinion of their being st. peter's successors , and christ's vicars on earth . and that all this while when on these false colours of impostures in religion , those designs were carried on , the popes were men of the most lewd and flagitious lives possible ; and those who served them in their designs , were become the scandal and scorn of christendom ; and yet in all these attempts , they prevailed for above seven or eight ages . now if any man will go about to prove this impossible , and that princes were always jealous of their authority and their lives , people always loved their money and quiet , bishops always loved their jurisdiction , and all men when they see designs carried on with colours of religion , by men , who in the most publick and notorious instances , shew they have none at all , do suspect a cheat , and are not to be wheedled . therefore all this must be but a fable and a forgery , to make the popes and their clergy odious . will not all men laugh at such a person , that against the faith of all history , and the authority of all records , will deny a thing that was set up over all europe for many ages ? if then all this change in a matter that was temporal , against which the secular interests of all men did oppose themselves , was yet successful , and prevailed ; how can any man think it unreasonable , that a speculative opinion might have been brought into the church , by such arts , and so many degrees , that the traces of the change should be lost ? we find there have been many other changes in sacred things , which will seem no less strange and incredible ; but that we are assured whatsoever really has been , may be : and if things full as unaccountable have been brought about , it is absurd to deny , that other things might not have run the same fate . it is known , that all people are more uneasie to changes in things that are visible , and known to every body , than in things that are speculative , and abstracted , and known and considered but by a few : they are likewise more unwilling to part with things they are in possession of , and reckon their rights , than to suffer new opinions to be brought in among them ; and let their religion swell by additions . for it is undoubted that it is much more easie to imagine how a new opinion should be introduced , than how an ancient practice and right should be taken away . if then it be apparent , that there have been great changes made in the most visible and sensible parts of religious worship , by taking away some of the most ancient customs and rights of the people , over the whole western church , then it cannot be thought incredible , that a new speculative opinion might have by degrees been brought in . this i shall instance in a few particulars . the receiving the chalice in the sacrament , was an ancient constant custom , to which all the people had been long used ; and one may very reasonably on this hypothesis , argue , that could not be ; for would the people , especially in dark ages , have suffered the cup of the blood of christ to be taken from them , if they had not known that it had been taken from their fathers ? upon which it is easie to conceive how many speculative impossibilities an ingenious man may devise ; and yet we know they were got to part with it by degrees ; first , the bread was given dipt in the cup , for an age or two ; and then the people judged they had both together : this step being made , it was easie afterwards to give them the bread undipt , and so the chalice was taken away quite from the laity , without any great opposition , except what was made in bohemia . next to this , let us consider how naturally all men are apt to be fond of their children , and not to suffer any thing to be denied them , by which they conceive they are advantaged : upon which one may reckon , once we are sure it was the universally received custom , for many ages , over the whole latine church , that all children had the eucharist given them immediately after they were baptized . and the rubrick of the roman missal ordered , they should not be suffered to suck after they were baptized , before they had the eucharist given them , except in in cases of necessity . this order is believed to be a work of the eleventh century ; so lately was this thought necessary in the roman church . all men know how careful most parents , even such as have not much religion themselves , are , that nothing be wanting about their children ; and it was thought simply necessary to salvation , that all persons had the eucharist . how many imaginary difficulties may one imagine might have obstructed the changing this custom ? one would expect to hear of tumults and stirs , and an universal conspiracy of all men to save this right of their children ? yet hugo de sancto victore tells us , how it was wearing out in his time ; and we find not the least opposition made to the taking it away . a third thing , to which it is not easie to apprehend how the vulgar should have consented , was , the denying them that right of nature and nations , that every body should worship god in a known tongue . in this island , the saxons had the liturgy in their vulgar tongue ; and so it was also over all the world : and from this might not one very justly reckon up many high improbabilities , to demonstrate the setting up the worship in an unknown tongue , could never be brought about , and yet we know it was done . in end , i shall name only one other particular , which seems very hard to be got changed , which yet we are sure was changed ; this was , the popular elections of the bishops and clergy , which , as is past dispute , were once in the hands of the people ; and yet they were got to part with them , and that at a time when church-preferments were raised very high in all secular advantages ; so that it may seem strange , they should then have been wrought upon to let go a thing , which all men are naturally inclined to desire an interest in ; and so much the more , if the dignity or riches of the function be very considerable ; and yet though we meet in church-history many accounts of tumults that were in those elections , while they were in the peoples hands ; yet i remember of no tumults made to keep them , when they were taken out of their hands . and now i leave it to every reader 's conscience , if he is not perswaded by all the conjectures he can make of mankind , that it is more hard to conceive , how these things , that have been named , of which the people had clear possession , were struck out , than that a speculative opinion , how absurd soever , was brought in , especially in such ages as these were , in which it was done . this leads me to the next thing , which is , to make some reflections on those ages , in which this doctrine crept into the church . as long as the miraculous effusion of the holy ghost continued in the church , the simplicity of those that preached the gospel , was no small confirmation of that authority that accompanied them ; so that it was more for the honour of the gospel , that there were no great scholars or disputants to promote it : but when that ceased , it was necessary the christian religion should be advanced by such rational means as are suitable to the soul of man : if it had begun only upon such a foundation , men would not have given it a hearing ; but the miracles which were at first wrought , having sufficiently alarm'd the world , so that by them men were inclined to hearken to it : then it was to be tried by those rules of truth and goodness , which lie engraven on all mens souls . and therefore it was necessary , those who defended it , should both understand it well , and likewise know all the secrets of heathenism , and of the greek philosophy . a knowledge in these being thus necessary , god raised up among the philosophers divers great persons , such as iustin , clement , origen , and many others , whose minds being enlightned with the knowledge of the gospel , as well as endued with all other humane learning , they were great supports to the christian religion . afterwards many heresies being broached about the mysteries of the faith , chiefly those that relate to the son of god , and his incarnation , upon which followed long contests : for managing these , a full understanding of scripture was also necessary ; and that set all persons mightily to the study of the scriptures . but it is not to be denied , great corruptions did quickly break in , when the persecutions were over ; and the church abounded in peace and plenty ; not but that the doctrine was preserved pure long after that : there were also many shining lights , and great fathers , in that and in the following age ; yet from the fathers of these two ages , and from the great disorders were in some of their councils , as in the case of athanasius , and the second ephesin council , we may clearly see how much they were degenerating from the primitive purity . many contests were about the precedency of their sees , great ambition and contention appeared in their synods , which made nazianzen hate and shun them , expecting no good from them . these and such like things brought very heavy judgments and plagues on the church , and the whole roman empire , in the fifth century : for vast swarms of armies out of germany and the northern nations brake in upon the western empire , and by a long succession of new invaders all was sackt and ruined . the goths were followed by the vandals , the alains , the gepides , the franks , the sweves , the huns , and , in the end , the lombards . those nations were for the greatest part arrians , but all were barbarous and rude ; and their hatred of the faith , joyned to the barbarity of their tempers , set them with a strange fury on destroying the most sacred things . and to that we owe the loss of most of the primitive writings , and of all the authentical records of the first persecutions ; scarce any thing remaining , but what eusebius had before gathered together out of a former destruction was made of such things under dioclesian . nor did the glory of the eastern empire long survive the western , that fell before these invaders : but in europe , by the impression of the bulgars ; and in asia , by the conquests made , first by the saracens , then by the turks , their greatness was soon broken ; though it lasted longer under that oppressed condition , than the other had done . thus was both the greek and the latin church brought under sad oppression and much misery . and every body knows , that the natural effect that state of life brings over the greatest minds , when there is no hope of getting from under it , is to take them off from study and learning ; and indeed to subdue their spirits as well as their bodies . and so it proved , for after that , an ignorance and dulness did to that degree overspread all europe , that it is scarce to be expressed . i do not deny , but there might be some few instances of considerable men , giving an allowance for the time they lived in . for the laity , they were bred up to think of nothing but to handle their arms , very few could so much as read ; and the clergy were not much better ; read they could , but in many that was all ; a corrupt latin they understood , which continued to be the vulgar tongue in italy a great while after : they had heard of greek and hebrew , but understood them as little as we do the mexican or peruvian tongue . they had scarce any knowledge of the greek fathers ; a few very ill translations of some of them was all they had . the latin fathers were read by some of the more learned , but for any distinct understanding of scriptures , or the natures of things , god knows they had it not . i design a short discourse , and therefore shall not stay to make this out , which every body that has but looked a little on the writings of these ages , knows to be true . another effect of their ignorance was , that they were easily imposed on by suppostitious writings , that went under the names of the fathers , but were none of theirs . gelasius threw out a great many that were breaking out in his time ; but the trade was prosperous , and went on to that height , that it cost the criticks of these two last ages much pains to distinguish true from forged , and the genuine from what was interpolated . and indeed the popes were much beholden to the forgery of the decretal epistles , in which work a great many epistles were published by isidore in the eighth century , as the epistles of the popes of the first four centuries after christ : by which they were represented as giving orders , and making definitions over the whole church in a full form , and with the stile of an absolute authority . these were rejected by many , but mightily supported by all the flatterers of the court of rome : so that they were in the end , after some contest , generally received , and held presidents to the succeeding popes , who wrote very skilfully after that copy . many other forgeries were also much cherished , which i shall instance only in one other particular , that relates to what is now in my eye . a sermon of arnold of bonneval ( which is now proved clearly to be his ) was published in st. cyprian's works as his sermon of the supper of our lord , though this arnold lived about nine hundred years after him . now such a sermon being generally read as st. cyprian's , no wonder it gave that doctrine of transubstantiation great credit . these writings are now discovered to be such forgeries , that all considering men of their own church are ashamed of them , and disown them . so do baronius and bellarmin the decretals ; and sirmondus , launnoy , and many more , reject other forgeries . yet here is a high pitch of impudence that most of all their writers of controversie are guilty of , to cite these very writings ( which are now universally agreed to be spurious ) still under those great names , which forgery gave them . as the author of that letter about transubstantiation , cites a passage from st. cyprian's sermon de coena domini , though it is agreed to by sixtus senensis , possevin , bellarmin , raynaud , and labbe , to be none of his ; and the publishers of the office of the sacrament , in the table at the end of it , acknowledge it was written by arnold of bonneval , a friend of st. bernard's . after these authorities it is indeed strange , that such sophisticated stuff should be over and over again offered to us . and it was no wonder , such forgeries were generally received , when that church gave them such authority , as to take many lessons out of the most spurious legends and put them in their breviary . of all these dark ages , the tenth was certainly the midnight of the church : we have scarce any writer for that whole age , so that it is generally called the iron age , an age of darkness and wickedness ; and therefore a very fit time for superstition and errour to work in . and thence we may well infer , that in ages that were so exceeding ignorant , and in which men scarce thought of religion , it was no hard thing to get any errour received and established . but this is not all . these were also ages of great licentiousness and disorder ; for though the barbarous nations were afterwards converted to the orthodox faith , ( though by the way it were easie to shew these conversions had nothing like the first conversion of the world to christianity in them ) yet their barbarity remained with them , and the church-men became so corrupt and vicious , that they could not have a face to reprove them for those vices of which themselves were scandalously guilty . from the sixth century downward what a race of men have the popes been ? chiefly in the ninth and tenth century . and indeed any religion that remained in the world had so retired into cloysters and monasteries , that very little of it remained . these houses were seminaries of some devotion , while they were poor and busied at work , according to their first foundation ; but when they were well endowed , and became rich , they grew a scandal to all christendom . all the primitive discipline was laid down , children were put into the highest preferments of the church , and simony over-run the church . these are matters of fact , that cannot be so much as questioned , nor should i , if put to prove them , seek authorities for them any where else than in baronius ; who , for all his design to serve the interest of that church , yet could not prevaricate so far , as to conceal things that are so openly and uncontestedly true . now , from the darkness and corruption of these ages , i presume to offer some things to the readers consideration . first , ignorance always inclines people to be very easie to trust those , in whom they have confidence ; for being either unwilling to trouble themselves with painful and sollicitous enquiries , or unable to make them , they take things on trust , without any care to search into them ▪ but this general maxim must needs be much more certain , when subjection to the church , and the belief of every thing established , was made a very substantial part of religion , or rather that alone which might compense all other defects . secondly , ignorance naturally inclines people to superstition , to be soon wrought on , and easily amused , to be full of fears , and easie to submit to any thing that may any way overcome these fears . a right sense of god and divine matters , makes one have such a taste of religion , that he is not at all subject to this distemper , or rather monster , begotten by the unnatural commixture of some fear of god and love of sin , both being disordered by much ignorance ; hence sprang most of the idolatrous rites of heathenism , and all people so tempered are fit for the like humour to work upon . thirdly , the interests of churchmen , led them mightily to study the setting this opinion on foot . this alone set them as high , as mortal men could be , and made them appear a most sacred sort of a creature . all the wonders of the prophets and apostles were but sorry matters to it : what was moses calling fo● manna from heaven and water fromm the rock ? elijah's bringing sometimes fire and sometimes rain from heaven ? what ●●re the apostles raising the dead , giving sight to the blind , and feet to the lanie ? to the annihilating the substance of bread and wine , and bringing in their stead , not some other common matter , but the flesh and blood of the ever-blessed jesus . he who could do this , no wonder he were reverenced , enriched , secure from all danger , exempt from all civil jurisdiction , and cherished with all imaginable respect and kindness . so that it is no strange thing , that churchmen were much inclined to favour an opinion , that favoured their interests so much . fourthly , the churchmen of these ages were very likely to be easily drawn to anything , which might so much advance their designs ; that were grown very high , especially from the days of pope gregory the great . they were struggling with the civil powers for dominion , and pursued that for many years , and spared neither labour nor the lives of men to attain it . and it is not to be thought , but men who did prodigally throw away many thousands in a quarrel , would without very nice disputing , cherish any opinion that might contribute toward that end . and as this was of great use to them , so they very much needed both it , and all such like shifts ; for they had none of that sublime sanctity , nor high learning , or lofty eloquence , which former churchmen had , and by which they had acquired great esteem in the world. now the churchmen in these days , having a great mind to preserve or rather to encrease that esteem ; but wanting those qualities which on a reasonable account might have acquired it , or preserved it , must needs think of somewhat else to do it by ; and so found out many arts for it , such as the belief of purgatory , the priestly absolution upon confession , together with the reserved cases , indulgences , and the pope's power of taking souls out of purgatory . and if it be not full as unreasonable , to think the pope should be believed vested with a power of pardoning sin , and redeeming from purgatory , as that transubstantiation should have been received , let any man judge . fifthly , there was such a vast number of agents and emissaries sent from rome , to all the parts of europe , to carry on their designs , that we can hardly think it possible any thing could have withstood them . in such ages , by giving some terrible name to any thing , it was presently disgraced with the vulgar ; a clear instance of this was the fate of the married clergy . gregory the seventh , who as cardinal benno ( who knew him ) represents him , was one of the worst men that ever was born , and first set on foot the pope's pretensions to the civil authority , and the power of deposing princes , and putting others in their places ; did prosecute the married clergy with great vehemency . this he could not do on any pious or chaste account , being so vile a man as he was : but being resolved to bring all princes to depend on him , there was no way so like to attain that , as to have all the clergy absolutely subject to him : this could not be hoped for , while they were married , and that the princes and several states of europe had such a pawn of their fidelity , as their wives and children ; therefore because the persons of the clergy were accounted sacred , and liable to no punishment , that there might be nothing so nearly related to them , wherein they might be punished , as their wives and children , he drave this furiously on ; and , to give them some ill-favoured name , called them nicolaitans , which are represented in the revelation so vile and odious . this was the most unjust thing in the world : they might have called them pharisees or sadducees as well , for all the ancient writers tell us , that nicolas having a beautiful wife was jealous , and the apostles challenging him of it , he said , he was so far from ▪ it ; that he was willing to make her common , and thence some set up the community of wives , and were from him called the nicolaitans . but because women and marriage were in the case , and it was a hateful word , this was the name by which the married clergy were every where made so odious ; and though it was much the interest of princes to have had the marriage of the clergy to be left free , yet the popes were too hard for them in it . thus were the agents of rome able to prevail in every thing they set then selves to . so the opposers of this doctrine were called by the hateful names of stercoranists and panites . sixthly , when all religion was placed in externals , and splendid rites and ceremonies came to be generally looked on as the whole business of religion , peoples minds were by that much disposed to receive any thing , that might introduce external pomp and grandeur into their churches ; being willing to make up in an outward appearance of worshipping the person of christ , what was wanting in their obedience to his gospel . and now i appeal to any honest man , if upon the suppositions i have laid down , it be at all an unaccountable thing , that a great company of ignorant and debauched clergymen , should set themselves to cherish and advance a belief , which would redeem them from all the infamy their other vices were ready to bring upon them ; and they resolving on it , if it was hard for them , especially in a course of some ages , to get an ignorant , credulous , superstitious , and corrupt multitude , to receive it without much noise or ado . i believe no man will deny , but upon these suppositions the thing was very like to succeed . now that all these suppositions are true ( to wit ) that both clergy and laity in those ages , chiefly in the ninth , tenth , and eleventh centuries , were ignorant , and vicious to the height ; is a thing so generally known , and so universally confessed by all their own historians , that i hardly think any man will have brow enough to deny it . but there are many other things , which will also shew how possible , nay feasible such a change may be . first , this having never been condemned by a formal decision in any former age , it was more easie to get it brought in ; for no council or father could condemn or write against any errour , but that which was maintained or abetted by some man , or company of men , in or before their time . since then this had not been broached in the former ages , the promoters of it had this advantage , that no former decision had been made against them ; for none ever thought of condemning any heresie before it had a being . secondly , this errour did in the outward sound agree with the words of the institution , and the forms used in the former liturgies , in which the elements were said to be changed into the true and undefiled body of christ. a doctrine then that seemed to establish nothing contrary to the ancient liturgies , might easily have been received , in an age , in which the outward sound and appearance was all they looked to . thirdly , the passage from the believing any thing in general , with an indistinct and confused apprehension , to any particular way of explaining it , is not at all hard to be conceived , especially in an age , that likes every thing the better , the more mysterious it seem . in the preceding ages , it was in general received , that christ was in the sacrament , and that by the consecration the elements were changed into his body and blood. and although many of the fathers did very formally explain in what sense christ was present , and the elements were changed ; yet there having been no occasion given to the church , to make any formal decision about the manner of it , every one thought he was left at liberty to explain it as he pleased . and we may very reasonably suppose , that many did not explain it at all , especially in these ages , in which there was scarce any preaching or instructing the people . by this means the people did believe christ was in the sacrament , and that the elements were changed into his body and blood , without troubling themselves to examine how it was , whether spiritually or corporally . things being brought to this , in these ages , by the carelesness of the clergy , the people were by that , sufficiently disposed to believe any particular manner of that presence , or change , their pastors might offer to them . fourthly , there being no visible change made in any part of the worship , when this doctrine was first brought in , it was easie to innovate , in these ages , in which people looked only at things that were visible and sensible : had they brought in the adoration , processions , or other consequences of this doctrine along with it , it was like to have made more noise ; for people are apt to be startled when they see any notable change in their worship : but this belief was first infused in the people , and berengarius was condemned . the council of lateran had also made the decree about it , before ever there were any of those signal alterations attempted . and after that was done , then did honorius decree the adoration ; ( greg. decret . lib. 3. tit . 42. cap. 10. ) and urban the fourth , upon some pretended visions of eve , iulian , and isabella , did appoint the feast of the body of christ , called now generally , the feast of god , or corpus christi feast , which was confirmed by pope clement the fifth , ( lib. 3. tit . 16. ) in the council of vienna ; and ever since that time they have been endeavouring by all the devices possible , to encrease the devotion of the people to the host. so that mr. arnaud in many places acknowledges they are most gross idolaters if their doctrine be not true ; which i desire may be well considered , since it is the opinion of one of the most considering and wisest , and most learned persons of that communion , who has his whole life set his thoughts chiefly to the examining of this sacrament , and knows as well as any man alive , what is the real sense of the worshippers in that church . but to return to that i am about , it is very unreasonable to think that the people in those dark ages , did concern themselves in the speculative opinions were among divines , so that the vulgar could not busie themselves about it , but when this opinion was decreed , and generally received and infused in the laity , for almost one age together , then we need not wonder to see notable alterations following upon it , in their worship , without any opposition or contest ; for it was very reasonable such consequences should have followed such a doctrine . but that before that time there was no adoration of the elements , is a thing so clear , that it is impudence to deny it ; there was no prostration of the body , or kneeling to be made , either on lords days , or all the time between easter and pentecost , by the twentieth canon of the council of nice . none of the ancient liturgies do so much as mention it ; but the contrary is plainly insinuated by s. cyril of ierusalem . none of that great number of writers about divine offices , that lived in the seventh , eighth , ninth , and tenth centuries , published by hittorpius , so much as mention it : though they be very particular in giving us an account of the most inconsiderable parts of the divine offices , and of all the circumstances of them . honorius when he first decreed it , does not alledge presidents for it ; but commands the priests to tell the people to do it ; whereas , if it had been appointed before , he must rather have commanded the priests to have told the people of their sacrilegious contempt of the body of christ , notwithstanding the former laws and practice of the church : but it is apparent his way of enjoyning it , is in the style of one that commands a new thing , and not that sets on the execution of what was sormerly used : yet this was more warily appointed by honorius , who enjoyned only an inclination of the head to the sacrament ; but it was set up bare-faced by his successor gregory the ninth , who appointed ( as the historians tell us , ( naucler . ad an . 1240. krantz . sex . lib. 8. cap. 10. ) though it be not among his decretals ) a bell to be rung , to give notice at the consecration and elevation , that all who heard it , might kneel , and join their hands in adoring the host. so that any passages of the fathers that speak of adoration or veneration to the sacrament , must either be understood of the inward adoration the communicant offers up to god the father , and his blessed son , in the commemoration of so great a mystery of love , as appeared in his death , then represented and remembred . or these words are to be taken in a large sense , and so we find , they usually called the gospels , their bishops , baptism , the pascha , and almost all other sacred things , venerable . and thus from many particulars it is apparent , that the bringing in the doctrine of transubstantiation is no unaccountable thing . but i shall pursue this yet further , for the reader 's full satisfaction , and shew the steps by which this doctrine was introduced . we find in the church of corinth the receiving the sacrament was looked on , but as a common entertainment , and was gone about without great care or devotion , which s. paul charges severely on them ; and tells them what heavy judgments had already fallen on them , for such abuses , and that heavier ones might be yet looked for , since they were guilty of the body and blood of the lord , by their unworthy receiving . upon this the whole christian church was set to consider , in very good earnest , how to prepare themselves aright for so holy an action ; and the receiving the sacrament , as it was the greatest symbol of the love of christians , so it was the end of all penitence , that was enjoyned for publick or private sins , but chiefly for apostacy , or the denying the faith , and complying with idolatry in the times of persecution . therefore the fathers considering both the words of the institution , and s. paul's epistle to the corinthians , did study mightily to awaken all to great preparation and devotion , when they received the sacrament . for all the primitive devotion about the sacrament , was only in order to the receiving it ; and that modern worship of the church of rome , of going to hear mass without receiving , was a thing so little understood by them , that as none were suffered to be present in the action of the mysteries , but those who were qualified to receive ; so if any such had gone out of the church without participating , ( 9 apost . cnn. and 2 can. antioch ) they were to be separated from the communion of the church , as the authors of disorder in it . upon this subject the fathers employed all their eloquence ; and no wonder , if we consider that it is such a commemoration of the death of christ as does really communicate to the worthy receiver his crucified body , and his blood that was shed , ( mark , not his glorified body , as it is now in heaven ) which is the fountain and channel of all other blessings , but is only given to such , as being prepared according to the rules of the gospel , sincerely believe all the mysteries of faith , and live suitably to their belief , both the advantages of worthy receiving , and the danger of unworthy receiving being so great , it was necessary for them to make use of all the faeulties they had , either for awakening reverence and fear , that the contemptible elements of bread and wine , might not bring a cheapness and disesteem upon these holy mysteries , or for perswading their communicants to all serious and due preparation , upon so great an occasion . this being then allowed , it were no strange thing , though in their sermons , or other devout treatises , they should run out to meditations that need to be mollified with that allowance that must be given to all panegyricks or perswasives : where many things are always said , that if right understood , have nothing in them to startle any body ; but if every phrase be examined grammatically , there would be many things found in all such discourses , that would look very hideously . is it not ordinary in all the festivities of the church , as s. austin observed on this very occasion , to say , this day christ was born , or died , or rose again in ? and yet that must not be taken literally . beside , when we hear or read any expressions that sound high or big , we are to consider the ordinary stile of him that uses these expressions ; for if upon all other occasions he be apt to rise high in his figures , we may the less wonder at some excesles of his stile . if then such an orator as s. chrysostome was , who expatiates on all subjects , in all the delighting varieties of a fertile phancy , should on so great a subject , display all the beauties of that ravishing art in which he was so great a master , what wonder is it ? therefore great allowances must be made in such a case . further , we must also consider the tempers of those to whom any discourse is addressed . many things must be said in another manner to work on novices , or weak persons , than were fit or needful for men of riper and stronger understandings . he would take very ill measures , that would judge of the future state , by these discourses in which the sense of that is infused in younger or weaker capacities ; therefore though in some catechisms that were calculated for the understandings of children and novices , such as s. cyril's , there be some high expressions used , it is no strange thing ; for naturally all men on such occasions , use the highest and biggest words they can invent . but we ought also to consider , what persons have chiefly in their eye , when they speak to any point . for all men , especially when their fancies are inflamed with much servor , are apt to look only to one thing at once ; and if a visible danger appear of one side , and none at all on the other , then it is natural for every one to exceed on that side , where there is no danger . so that the hazard of a contempt of the sacrament being much and justly in their eye , and they having no cause to apprehend any danger on the otherside , of excessive adoring or magnifying it : no wonder , if in some of their discourses , an immoderate use of the counterpoise , had inclined them to say many things of the sacrament , that require a fair and can did interpretation . yet after all this , they say no more , but that in the sacrament they did truly and really communicate on the body and blood of christ ; which we also receive and believe . and in many other treatises , when they are in colder blood , examining things , they use such expressions and expositions of this , as no way favour the belief of transubstantiation ; of which we have given some account in a former paper . but though that were not so formally done , and their writings were full of passages that needed great allowances , it were no more than what the fathers that wrote against the arrians , confess the fathers before the council of nice , were guilty of ; who writing against sabellius , with too much veliemence , did run to the opposite extream . so many of s. ciril's passages against nestorius , were thought to favour eutychianism . so also theodoret , and two others , writing against the entychians , did run to such excesses , as drew upon them the condemnation of the fifth general council . the first time we find any contestor canvassing about the sacrament , was in the controversie about images , in the eighth century , that the council of constantinople , in the condenming of images , declared , there was no other image of christ to be received , but the blessed sacrament ; in which , the substance of bread and wine was the image of the body and blood of christ ; making a difference between that which is christs body by nature , and the sacrament , which is his body by institution . now it is to be considered , that whatever may be pretended of the violence of the greek emperors over-ruling that council in the matter of condemning images ; yet there having been no contest at all about the sacrament , we cannot in reason think they would have brought it into the dispute , if they had not known these two things were the received doctrine of the church : the one , that in the sacrament , the substance of bread and wine did remain ; the other , that the sacrament was the image or figure of christ ; and from thence they acknowledged , all images were not to be rejected , but denied any other images besides that in the sacrament . now the second council of nice , being resolved to quarrel with them as much as was possible , do not at all condemn them for that which is the chief testimony for us ( to wit ) that the sacrament was still the substance of bread and wine ; and damascene , the zealous defender of images , clearly insinuates his believing the substance of bread and wine remained , and did nourish our bodies . let it be therefore considered , that when that council of nice was in all the bitterness imaginable canvassing every word of the council of constantinople , they never once blame them for saying , the substance of bread and wine was in the sacrament . it is true , they condemned them for saying the sacrament was the image of christ , denying that any of the fathers had called it so ; alledging that the symboles were called antit pes by the fathers , only before the consecration , and not after ; in which they followed damascene , ( de fid. orth . lib. 4. cap. 14. ) who had fallen in the same errour before them . but this is so manifest a mistake in matter of fact , that it gives a just reason for rejecting the authority of that council , were there no more to be said against it : for this was either very gross ignorance , or effronted impudence , since in above twenty fathers that were before them , the sacrament is called the figure and antitype of christ's body ; and at the same time , that damascene , who was then looked on as the great light of the east , did condemn the calling the sacrament , the figure of christ's body . the venerable bede , ( bed. in psal. 3. & mark 14. ) that was looked on as the great light of the west , did according to the stile of the primitive church , and in s. austin's words , call it , the figure of christ's body . i shall not trace the other forgeries and follies of that pretended general council , because i know a full account of them is expected from a better pen ; only in this particular i must desire the reader to take notice , that the council of constantinople did not innovate any thing in the doctrine about the sacrament , and did use it as an argument in the other controversie concerning images , without any design at all about the eucharist . but on the other hand , the second council of nice did innovate and reject a form of speech , which had been universally received in the church , before their time ; and being engaged with all possible spight against the council of constantinople , resolved to contradict every thing they had said , as much as could be : so that in this we ought to look on the council of constantinople , as delivering what was truly the tradition of the church , and on the second council of nice , as corrupting it . about thirty years after that council , paschase radbert abbot of corbie , wrote about the sacrament , and did formally assert the corporal presence , in the ninth century . the greatest patrons of this doctrine , such as bellarmin and sirmondus , both jesuites , confess , he was the first that did fully and to purpose explain the verity of christ's body and blood in the eucharist . and paschase himself , in his letter to his friend frudegard , regrates that he was so flow in believing and assenting to his doctrine ; and does also acknowledge , that by his book he had moved many to the understanding of that mystery ; and it is apparent by that letter , that not only frudegard , but others were scandalized at his book , for he writes , i have spoken of these things more fully , and more expresly , because i understand that some challenge me , that in the book i have published of the sacraments of christ , i have ascribed either more or some other thing than is consonant to truth to the words of our lord. of all the writers of that age , or near it , only one ( and his name we know not , the book being anonymous ) was of paschase's opinion . but we find all the great men of that age were of another mind , and did clearly assert , that in the sacrament , the substance of bread and wine remained , and did nourish our bodies as other meats do . these were rabanus maurus , archbishop of mentz , amalarius , archbishop of treves , or as others say , metz , heribald , bishop of auxerre , bertram , iohn scot erigena , walafridus strabo , florus and christian druthmar . and three of these set themselves on purpose to refute paschase . the anonymous writer that defends him , says , that raban did dispute at length against him in an epistle to abbot egilon , for saying it was that body that was born of the virgin , and was crucified , and raised again , that was daily offered for the life of the world. that is also condemned by raban in his penitential , cap. 33. who refers his reader to that epistle to abbor egilon . and for bertram , he was commanded by charles the bald , then emperor , to write upon that matter , which in the beginning of his book he promises to do , not trusting to his own wit , but following the steps of the holy fathers . it is also apparent by his book , that there were at that time different perswasions about the body of christ in the sacrament ; some believing it was there without any figure ; others saying , it was there in a figure and mystery . upon which he apprehended , there must needs follow a great schism . and let any read paschase's book , and after that bertram's , and if he have either honesty , or at least , shame remaining in him , he must see it was in all points the very same controversie that was canvassed then between them , and is now debated between the church of rome and us. now that raban and bertram were two of the greatest and most learned men of that age , cannot be denied : raban passes without contest amongst the first men of the age ; and for bertram , we need neither cite what trithemius says of him , nor what the disciples of s. austin , in the port-royal , have said to magnifie him , when they make use of him to establish the doctrine of the efficacy of grace . it is a sufficient evidence of the esteem he was in , that he was made choice of by the bishop of france , to defend the latin church against the greeks ; and upon two very important controversies that were moved in that age ; the one being about predestination and grace , the other , that which we have now before us , he , though a private monk , raised to no dignity , was commanded by the emperor to write of both these ; which no man can imagine had been done , if he had not been a man much 〈◊〉 and esteemed ; and way in which he writes , is solid and worthy of the reputation he ha 〈…〉 quired : he proves both from the words of institution , and from st. paul , that the sacrame●● was still bread and wine . he proves from s. austin , that these were mysteries and figures of christ's body and blood. and indeed considering that age , he was an extraordinary writer . the third that did write against paschase , was iohn scot , otherwise called erigena , who was likewise commanded to write about the sacrament , by that same emperor . he was undoubtedly the most learned and ingenious man of that age , as all our english historians tell us , chiefly william of malmsbury : he was in great esteem both with the emperor , and our great king alfred . ( lib. 2. de gest. reg. ) he was accounted a saint and a martyr ; his memory was celebrated by an anniversary on the tenth of november . he was also very learned in the greek , and other oriental tongues , which was a rare thing in that age. this erigena did formally refute paschase's opinion , and assert ours . it is true , his book is now lost , being 200 years after burned by the c. of vercel ; but though the church of lyons does treat him very severely in their book against him , and fastens many strange opinions upon him , in which there are good grounds to think they did him wrong ; yet they no where challenge him for what he wrote about the sacrament ; which shews they did not condemn him for that ; though they speak of him with great animosity , because he had written against predestination and grace efficacious of it self , which they defended . it seems most probable that it was from his writings , that the homily read at easter by the saxons here in england , does so formally contradict the doctrine of transubstantiation . and now let the reader judge , if it be not clear that paschase did innovate the the doctrine of the church in this point , but was vigorously opposed by all the great men of that age. for the following age , all historians agree , it was an age of most prodigious ignorance and debauchery , and that amongst all sorts of people , none being more signally vicious than the clergy ; and of all the clergy , none so much as the popes , who were such a succession of monsters , that baronius cannot forbear making the saddest exclamations possible concerning their cruelties , debaucheries , and other vices : so that , then , if at any time , we may conclude all were asleep , and no wonder if the tares paschase had sown , did grow up ; and yet of the very few writings of the age that remain , the far greater number seem to favour the doctrine of bertram . but till berengarius his time , we hear nothing of any contest about the eucharist . so here were 200 years spent in an absolute ignorance and forgetfulness of all divine things . about the middle of the 11th cent. bruno bishop of angiers , and berengarius , who was born in tours , but was arch-deacon and treasurer of the church of angiers , did openly teach , that christ was in the sacrament only in a figure . we hear little more of bruno ; but berengarius is spoken of by many historians , ( sigebert , platma , antonin . sabellicus , chron. mont. cassin . sigonius , vignier , guitmond , and chiefly william of malmsbury ) as a man of great learning and piety , and that when he was cited to the council at rome , before nicolaus the second , none could resist him ; that he had an excellent faculty of speaking , and was a man of great gravity ; that he was held a saint by many : he did abound in charity , humility , and good works , and was so chaste , that he would not look at a beutiful woman . and hildebert bishop of mans , whom s. bernard commends highly , made such an epitaph on him , that notwithstanding all the abatements we must make for poetry , yet no man could write so of an ordinary person . this berengarius wrote against the corporal presence , calling it a stupidity of paschase's and lanfrank's , who denied that the substance of bread and wine remained after consecration . he had many followers , as sigebert tells us , ( edit . antwerp . 1608. ) and william of malmsbury , and matthew paris , tell us his doctrine had overspred all france . it were too long to shew with what impudent corrupting of antiquity those who wrote against him , did stuff up their books . divers councils were held against him , and he through fear , did frequently waver ; for when other arguments proved too weak to convince him , then the faggot , which is the sure and beloved argument of that church , prevailed on his fears ; so that he burnt his own book , and signed the condemnation of his own opinion at rome ; this he did , as lanfrank upbraids him , not for love of the truth , but for fear of death : which shews he had not that love of the truth , and constancy of mind he ought to have had . but it is no prejudice against the doctrine he taught , that he was a man not only subject to , but overcome by so great a temptation ; for the fear of death is natural to all men . and thus we see , that in the 9th century our doctrine was taught by the greatest writers of that time , so that it was then generally received , and not at all condemned either by pope or council . but in the 11th century , upon its being defended , it was condemned . can there be therefore any thing more plain , than that there was a change made , and that what in the one age was taught by a great number of writers , without any censure upon it , was in another age anathematized ? is there not then here a clear change ? and what has been done , was certainly possible , from whence we conclude with all the justice and reason in the world , that a change was not only possible , but was indeed made . and yet the many repeated condemnations of berengarius , shew , his doctrine was too deeply rooted in the minds of that age , to be very easily suppressed ; for to the end of the 11th century , the popes continued to condemn his opinions , even after his death . in the beginning of the 12th century , honorius of autun , who was a considerable man in that age , did clearly assert the doctrine of the sacraments nourishing our bodies , and is acknowledge by thomas waldensis , to have been a follower of berengarius his heresie . and about the 18th year of that age , that doctrine was embraced by great numbers in the south of france , who were from ther several teachers called petrobrusrans , henricians , waldenses , and from the countrey , where their number were greatest , albigenses ; whose confession , dated the year 1120 , bears , that the eating of the sacramental bread , was the eating of iesus christ in a figure ; iesus christ having said , as oft as ye do this , do it in remembrance of me . it were needless to engage in any long account of these people ; the writers of those times have studied to represent them in as hateful and odious characters , as it was possible for them to devise ; and we have very little remaining that they wrote . yet as the false witnesses that were suborned to lay heavy things to our blessed saviour . charge , could not agree among themselves ; so for all the spite with which these writers prosecute those poor innocents , there are such noble characters given , even by these enemies , of their piety , their simplicity , their patience , constancy , and other virtues ; that as the apologists for christianity , do justly glory in the testimonies pliny , lucian , tacitus , iosephus , and other declared enemies give ; so any that would study to redeem the memory of those multitudes , from the black aspersions of their foul-mouthed enemies , would find many passages among them to glory much in , on their behalf , which are much more to be considered than those virulent calumnies with which they labour to blot their memories : but neither the death of peter de bruis , who was burnt , nor all the following cruelties , that were as terrible as could be invented by all the fury of the court of rome , managed by the inquisitions of the dominicans , whose souls were then as black as their garments , could bear down or extinguish that light of the truth , in which what was wanting in learning , wit , or order , was fully made up in the simplicity of their manners , and the constancy of their sufferings . and it were easie to shew , that the two great things they were most persecuted for , were their refusing subjection to the see of rome , and their not believing the doctrine of the corporal presence ; nor were they confined to one corner of france only , but spred almost all europe over . in that age steven bishop in eduen is the first i ever find cited to have used the word transubstantiation , who expresly says , ( de sacram. altar . c. 13. ) that the oblation of bread and wine is transubstantiated into the body and blood of christ : some place him in the beginning , some in the middle of that age ; for there were two bishops of that see , both of the same name ; the one , anno 1112. the other 1160. and which of the two it was , is not certain ; but the master of the sentences was not so positive , and would not determine , ( lib. 4. dist . 11. ) whether christ was present formally , substantially , or some other way . but in the beginning of the 13th century , one amalric , or almaric , who was in great esteem for learning , did deny transubstantiation , saying , that the body of christ was no more in the consecrated bread , than in any other bread , or any other thing ; ( anno 1215. c. 1. ) for which he was condemned in the 4th council of lateran , and his body , which was buried in paris , was taken up and burnt ; and then was it decreed , that the body and blood of christ were truly contained under the kinds ( or species ) of bread and wine , the bread being transubstantiated into the body , and the wine into the blood. all the while this doctrine was carried on , it was managed with all the ways possible , that might justly create a prejudice against them who set it forward ; for besides many ridiculous lying wonders , that were forged to make it more easily believed by a credulous and superstitious multitude , the church of rome did discover a cruelty and blood-thirstiness which no pen is able to set out to the full . what burnings and tortures , and what croissades as against infidels and mabumetans , did they set on against those poor innocent companies , whom they with an enraged , wolvish and barbarous bloodiness studied to destroy ? this was clearly contrary to the laws of humanity , the rules of the gospel , and the gentleness of christ : how then could such companies of wolves pretend to be the followers of the lamb ? in the primitive church , the bishops that had prosecuted the priscillanists before the emperor maximus , to the taking away their lives , were cast out of the communion of the church ; but now did these that still pretended to be christ's vicars , shew themselves in antichrist's colours , dipt in blood . if then any of that church that live among us , plead for pity , and the not executing the laws , and if they blame the severity of the statutes against themselves , let them do as becomes honest men , and without disguise , disown and condemn those barbarities , and them that were the promoters and pursuers of them ; for those practices have justly filled the world with fears and jealousies of them , that how meekly soever they may now whine under the pretended oppression of the laws , they would no sooner get into power , but that old leaven not being yet purged out of their hearts , they would again betake themselves to fire and faggot , as the unanswerable arguments of their church : and so they are only against persecution , because they are not able to persecute ; but were they the men that had the power , it would be again a catholick doctrine and practice : but when they frankly and candidly condemn those practices and principles , they will have somewhat to plead , which will in reason prevail more than all their little arts can do to procure them favour . it was this same council of lateran , that established both cruelty , persecution and rebellion into a law , appointing , that all princes should exterminate all hereticks , ( this is the mercy of that church which all may look for , if ever their power be equal to their malice ) and did decree , ( cap. 3. ) that if any temporal lord , being admonished by the church , did neglect to purge his lands , he should be first excommunicated , and if he continued a year in his contempt and contumacy , notice was to be given of it to the pope , who from that time forth should declare his vassals absolved from the fidelity they owed him , and expose his lands to be ivaded by catholicks , who might possess them without any contradiction , having exterminated the hereticks out of them , and so preserve them in the purity of the faith. this decree was made on the account of raimond count of tholouse , who favoured the albigenses , that were his subjects ; and being a peer of france according to the first constitution under hugo capet king of france , was such a prince in his own dominions , as the princes of germany now are . he was indeed the king of france his vassal ; but it is clear from the history of that time , that the king of france would not interpose in that business . yet the popes in this same council of lateran , did , by the advice of the council , give to simon montfort ( who was general of the croissade , that the pope sent against that prince ) all the lands that were taken from the count of tholouse . so that there was an invasion both of the count of tholouse , and of the king of france his rights . for if that prince had done any thing amiss , he was only accountable to the king , and the other peers of france . this decree of the council is published by dom. luc. dachery ; ( tom. 7. spic . and tom. 11. of the council , print . anno 1672. p. 233. ) so that it is plain , that the pope got here a council to set up rebellion by authority , against the express rules of the gospel . this almost their whole church accounts a general council , a few only among us excepted , who know not how io approve themselves good subjects , if they own that a general council , which does so formally establish treasonable and seditious principles . for if it be true , that a general council making a definition in an article of faith , is to be followed and submitted to by all men , the same arguments will prove that in any controverted practical opinion , we ought not to trust our own reasons , but submit to the definition of the church ; for if in this question a private person shall rest on his own understanding of the scriptures , and reject this decree , why may he not as well in other things assume the same freedom ? it is true , the words of the decree seem only to relate to temporal lords that were under soveraign princes , such as the count of tholouse ; and therefore crowned heads need fear nothing from it : but though the decree runs chiefly against such , yet there are two clauses in it that go further ; one is in these words , saving always the right of the principal lord , provided he make no obstacle about it , nor cast in any impediment . whence it plainly follows , that if the soveraign , such as the king of france , in the case of tholouse , did make any obstacle , he forfeited his right . the other clause is in these words , the same law being nevertheless observed about those who have no principal lords . in which are clearly included all those soveraigns , who depend and hold their crowns immediately from god. now it is apparent , the design of these words so couched , was once to bring all soveraigns under that lash , before they were aware of it ; for had they named emperors and kings , they might reasonably have expected great opposition from them ; but insinuating it so covertly , it would pass the more easily : yet it is plain , nothing else can be meant , or was intended by it ; so that it is clear , that the 4th council of lateran , as it established transubstantiation , so did also decree both persecution and rebellion : therefore the reader may easily judge , what account is to be made of that council , and what security any state can have of those who adhere to it . our saviour when he states the opposition between the children of god , and the children of the devil , he gives this for the character of the latter , that they did the works of their father ; and these he mentions are lying and murdering : we have seen sufficient evidence of the murdering spirit which acted in that church , when this doctrine was set up . but to compleat that black character , let us look over to the council of constance , which decreed that bold violation of the command of christ , drink ye all of it ; by taking the chalice from the laity : and there we find perfidy , which is the basest and worst kind of lying , also established by law : for it was decreed by them , ( sess. 19. ) that all safe conducts notwithstanding , or by what bonds soever any prince had engaged himself , the council was no way prejudiced , and that the iudge competent might enquire into their errors ; and proceed otherwise duly against them , and punish them according to iustice , if they stubbornly refuse to retract their errours , although trusting to their safe conduct , they had come to the place of iudgment , and had not come without it ; and declare , that whoever had promised any such thing to them , having done what in him lay , was under no further obligation . upon which , sigismund broke his faith to iohn hus and ierome of prague , and they were burnt . so that their church , having in general councils decreed both perfidy and cruelty , it is casie to infer by what spirit they are acted , and whose works they did . if then they did the works of the devil , who was a liar and murderer from the beginning , they cannot be looked on as the children of god , but as the children of the devil . if this seem too severe , it is nothing but what the force of truth draws from me , being the furthest in the world from that uncharitable temper of aggravating things beyong what is just ; but the truth must be heard , and the lamb of god could call the scribes and pharisees , a generation of vipers and children of the devil . therefore if a church be so notoriously guilty of the most infamous violation of all the laws of humanity , and the security which a publick faith must needs give , none is to be blamed for laying open and exposing such a society to the just censure of all impartial persons , that so every one may see what a hazard his soul runs by engaging in the communion of a church that is so foully guilty : for these were not personal failings , but were the decrees of an authority which must be acknowledged by them infallible , if they be true to their own principles . so that if they receive these as general councils , i know not how they can clear all that communion from being involved in the guilt of what they decreed . thus far we hope it hath been made evident enough , that there are no impossibilities in such a change of the doctrine of the church about this sacrament , as they imagine . and that all these are but the effects of wit and fancy , and vanish into nothing when closely canvassed . i have not dwelt so long on every step of the history i have vouched , as was necessary , designing to be as short as was possible , and because these things have been at full length set down by others , and particularly in that great and learned work of albertin a french minister concerning this sacrament ; in which the doctrines of the primitive church , and the steps of the change that was made , are so laid open , that no man has yet so much as attempted the answering him : and those matters of fact are so uncontestedly true , that there can be little debate about them , but what may be very soon cleared , and i am ready to make all good to a tittle when any shall put me to it . it being apparent then , that the church of rome has usurped an undue and unjust authority over the other states and nations of christendom , and has made use of this dominion to introduce many great corruptions both in the faith , the worship , and government of the church ; nothing remains but to say a little to justify this churches reforming these abuses . and , first , i suppose it will be granted , that a national church may judge a doctrine to be heretical , when its opposition to the scripture , reason , and the primitive doctrine is apparent : for in that case the bishops and pastors being to feed and instruct the church , they must do it according to their consciences , otherwise how can they discharge the trust , god and the church commit to their charge ? and thus all the ancient hereticks , such as samosatenus , arrius , pelagius , and a great many more were first condemned in provincial councils . secondly , if such heresies be spread in places round about , the bishops of every church ought to do what they can to get others concur with them in the condemning them ; but if they cannot prevail , they ought nevertheless to purge themselves and their own church , for none can be bound to be damned for company . the pastors of every church owe a charity to their neighbour churches , but a debt to their own , which the stubborness of others cannot excuse them from . and so those bishops in the primitiue church , that were invironed with arrians , did reform their own churches when they were placed in any sees that had been corrupted by arrianism . thirdly , no time can give prescription against truth , and therefore had any errour been ever so antiently received in any church , yet the pastors of that church finding it contrary to truth ought to reform it : the more antient or inveterate any errour is , it needs the more to be looked to . so those nations that were long bred up in arrianism , had good reason to reform from that erronr . so the church of rome will acknowledge that the greek church , or our church ought to forsake their present doctrines , though they have been long received . fourthly , no later definitions of councils or fathers ought to derogate from the ancienter decrees of councils , or opinions of the fathers ; otherwise the arrians had reason to have justified their submitting to the councils of sirmium , arimini , and millan , and rejecting that of nice : therefore we ought in the first place to consider the decrees and opinions of the most primitive antiquity . fifthly , no succession of bishops how clear soever in its descent from the apostles , can secure a church from errour . which the church of rome must acknowledge , since they can neither deny the succession of the greek church , nor of the church of england . sixthly , if any church continues so hardned in their errours that they break communion with another church for reforming ; the guilt of this breach must lie at their door who are both in the errour , and first reject the other , and refuse to reform or communicate with other churches . upon every one of these particulars ( and they all set together , compleat the plea for the church of england ) i am willing to joyn issue , and shew they are not only true in themselves , but must be also acknowledged by the principles of the church of rome : so that if the grounds of controversie , on which our reformation did proceed , were good and justifiable , it is most unreasonable to say our church had not good right and authority to make it . it can be made appear that for above two hundred years before the reformation , there were general complaints among all sorts of persons , both the subtle school-men , and devout contemplatives , both ecclesiasticks and laicks did complain of the corruptions of the church , and called aloud for a reformation both of faith and manners : even the council of pisa a little before luther's days , did decree , there should be a reformation both of faith and manners , and that both of the head and members . but all these complaints turned to nothing , abuses grew daily , the interests of the nephews and other corrupt intrigues of the court of rome was always obstructing good motions and cherishing ill customs , for they brought the more grist to their mill. when a reformation was first called for in germany , instead of complying with so just a desire , all that the court of rome thought on , was how to suppress these complaints , and destroy those who made them . in end , when great commotions were like to follow , by the vast multitudes of those who concurred in this desire of reforming , a council was called , after the popes had frequently prejudged in the matter , and pope leo had with great frankness condemned most of luther's opinions . from that council no good could reasonably be expected , for the popes had already engaged so deep in the quarrel , that there was no retreating , and they ordered the matter so , that nothing could be done but what they had a mind to : all the bishops were at their consecration their sworn vassals : nothing could be brought into the council without the legates had proposed it . and when any good motions were made by the bishops of spain or germany , they had so many poor italian bishops kept there on the pope's charges , that they were always masters of the vote : for before they would hold a session about any thing , they had so canvassed it in the congregations , that nothing was so much as put to the hazard . all these things appear even from cardinal pallavicini's history of that council . while this council was sitting , and some years before , many of this church were convinced of these corruptions , and that they could not with a good conscience joyn any longer in a worship so corrupted ; yet they were satisfied to know the truth themselves and to instruct others privately in it , but formed no separated church ; waiting for what issue god in his providence might bring about . but with what violence and cruelty their enemies , who were generally those of the clergy , pursued them , is well enough known : nor shall i repeat any thing of it , lest it might be thought an invidious aggravating of things that are past . but at length , by the death of king henry the eight , the government fell in the hands of persons well affected to the reformation . it is not material what their true motives were , for iehu did a good work when he destroyed the idolatry of baal , though neither his motives nor method of doing it are justifiable : nor is it to the purpose to examine , how those bishops that reformed could have complied before with the corruptions of the roman church and received orders from them . meletius , and felix , were placed by the arrians , the one at antioch in the room of eustatbius , the other at rome , in liberius his room , who were both banished for the faith : and yet both these were afterwards great defenders of the truth ; and felix was a martyr for it , against these very hereticks with whom they complied in the beginning . so whatever mixture of carnal ends might be in any of the secular men , or what allay of humane infirmity and fear might have been in any of the ecclesiasticks ; that can be no prejudice to the cause : for men are always men , and the power of god does often appear most eminently , when there is least cause to admire the instruments he makes use of . but in that juncture of affairs the bishops and clergy of this church seeing great and manifest corruptions in it , and it being apparent that the church of rome would consent to no reformation to any good purpose , were obliged to reform , and having the authority of king and parliament concurring , they had betrayed their consciences and the charge of souls for which they stood engaged , and were to answer at the great day , if they had dallied longer , and not warned the people of their danger , and made use of the inclinations of the civil powers for carrying on so good at work . and it is the lasting glory of the reformation , that when they saw the heir of the crown was inflexibly united to the church of rome , they proceeded not to extream courses against her ; for what a few wrought on by the ambition of the duke of northumberland were got to do , was neither the deed of the nation , nor of the church , since the representatives of neither concurred in it . but the nation did receive the righteous heir : and then was our church crowned with the highest glory it could have desired , many of the bishops who had been most active in the reformation , sealing it with their blood , and in death giving such evident proofs of holy and christian constancy , that they may be justly matched with the most glorious martyrs of the primitive church . then did both these churches appear in their true colours , that of rome weltring in the blood of the saints and insatiately drinking it up : and our church bearing the cross of christ and following his example . but when we were for some years thus tried in the fire , then did god again bless us with the protection of the rightful and lawful magistrate . then did our church do as the primitive church had done under theodosius , when she got out from a long and cruel persecution of the arrians under those enraged emperours constantius and valens . they reformed the church from the arrian doctrine , but would not imitate them in their persecuting spirit . and when others had too deep resentments of the ill usage they had met with under the arrian tyranny , nazianzen and the other holy bishops of that time did mitigate their animosities : so that the churches were only taken from the arrians , but no storms were raised against them . so in the beginning of queen elizabeth's reign , it cannot be denied that those of that church were long suffered to live at quiet among us with little or no disturbance , save that the churches were taken out of their hands . nor were even those who had bathed themselves in so much blood made examples , so entirely did they retain the meekness and lenity of the christian spirit . and if after many years quiet , those of that religion when they met with no trouble from the government , did notwithstanding enter into so many plots and conspiracies against the queen's person and the established government , was it any wonder that severe laws were made against them , and those emissaries who under a pretence of coming in a mission , were sent as spies and agents among us to fill all with blood and confusion ? whom had they blame for all this but themselves ? or was this any thing but what would have been certainly done in the gentlest and mildest government upon earth ? for the law of self-preservation is engraven on all mens natures , and so no wonder every state and government sees to its own security against those who seek its ruine and destruction : and it had been no wonder if upon such provocations there had been some severities used which in themselves were uniustifiable : for few take reparation in an exact equality to the damage and injury they have received . but since that time they have had very little cause to complain of any hard treatment ; and if they have met with any , they may still thank the officious insolent deportment of some of their own church , that have given just cause of jealousie and fear . but i shall pursue this discourse no further , hoping enough is already said upon the head that engaged me to it , to make it appear , that it was possible the doctrine of the church should be changed in this matter , and that it was truly changed . from which i may be well allowed to subsume , that our church discovering that this change was made , had very good reason and a sufficient authority to reform this corruption , and restore the primitive doctrine again . and now being to leave my reader , i shall only desire him to consider a little of how great importance his eternal concerns are , and that he has no reason to look for endless happiness , if he does not serve god in a way suitable to his will. for what hopes soever there may be for one who lives and dies in some unknown error , yet there are no hopes for those that either neglect or despise the truth , and that out of humour or any other carnal account give themselves up to errours , and willingly embrace them , certainly god sent not his son in the world , nor gave him to so cruel a death , for nothing . if he hath revealed his counsels with so much solemnity , his designs in that must be great and worthy of god : the true ends of religion must be the purifying our souls , the conforming us to the divine nature , the uniting us to one another in the most tender bonds of love , truth , justice and goodness , the raising our minds to a heavenly and contemplative temper , and our living ●s pilgrims and strangers on this earth , ever waiting and longing for our change . now we dare appeal all men to shew any thing in our religion or worship , that obstructs any of these ends ; on the contrary , the sum and total of our doctrine is , the conforming our selves to christ and his apostles , both in faith and life , so that it can scarce be devised what should make any body that hath any sense of religion , or regard to his soul , forsake our communion , where he finds nothing that is not highly suitable to the nature and ends of religion , and turn over to a church that is founded on and cemented in carnal interests : the grand design of all their attempts being to subject all to the papal tyranny , which must needs appear visibly to every one whose eyes are opened . for attaining which end they have set up such a vast company of additions to the simplicity of the faith and the purity of the christian worship , that it is a great work even to know them . is it not then a strange choice ? to leave a church that worships god so as all understand what they do and can say , amen ; to go to a church where the worship is not understood , so that he who officiates is a barbarian to them : a church which worships god in a spiritual and unexceptionable manner ; to go to a church that is scandalously ( to raise this charge no higher ) full of images and pictures , and that of the blessed trinity , before which prostrations and adorations are daily made . : a church that directs her devotions to god , and his son jesus christ ; to go to a church that without any good warrant not only invocates saints and angels , but also in the very same form of words , which they offer up to god and jesus christ , which is a thing at least full of scandal , since these words must be strangely wrested from their natural meaning , otherwise they are high blasphemies : a church that commemorates christ's death in the sacrament , and truly communicates in his body and blood , with all holy reverence and due preparation ; to go to a church that spends all her devotion in an outward adoring the sacrament , without communicating with any due care , but resting in the priestly absolution allows it upon a single attrition : a church that administers all the sacraments christ appointed , and as he appointed them ; to go to a church that hath added many to those he appointed , and hath maimed that he gave for a pledge of his presence when he left this earth . in a word , that leaves a church that submits to all that christ and his apostles taught , and in a secondary order to all delivered to us by the primitive church ; to go to a church that hath set up an authority that pretends to be equal to these sacred oracles , and has manifestly cancelled most of the primitive constitutions . but it is not enough to remain in the communion of our church ; for if we do not walk conform to that holy faith taught in it , we disgrace it . let all therefore : that have zeal for our church , express it chiefly in studying to purify their hearts and lives , so as becomes christians , and reformed christians , and then others that behold us , will be ashamed when they see such real confutations of the calumnies of out adversaries , which would soon be turned back on them with a just scorn , if there were not too many advantages given by our divisions , and other . but nothing that is personal ought to be charged on our church : and whoever object any such things , of all persons in the world , they are the most inexcusable , who being so highly guilty themselves , have yet such undaunted brows , as to charge those things on us which if they be practised by any among us , yet are disallowed ; but among them have had all encouragement and authority possible from the corruptions both of their popes , and casuists . but here i break off , praying god he may at length open the eyes of all christendom that they may see and love the truth , and walk according to it . amen . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a30412-e4340 more nevochim par. 1. c. 30. notes for div a30412-e5720 apolog. 2. lib. 4. adv . her. c. 34. notes for div a30412-e9840 * boniface the 8th , extrav . lib. 1. c. 1. de majoritate & obedientia . after he had studied to prove that the temporal and material sword , as well as the spiritual , was in the power of st. peter , from these words , behold two swords , and our saviour's answer , it is enough . in the end he concludes whosoever therefore resists this power thus ordained of god , resists the ordinance of god : except with manichee he make two beginnings , which we define to be false and heretical : for moses testifies , that not in the beginnings , but in the beginning god created the heaven and the earth . therefore we declare , say , define and pronounce , that it is of necessity to salvation to every human creature , to be subject to the pope of rome : and it is plain this subjection must be , that he had been pleading thorough that whole decretal , which is the subjection of the temporal sword to the spiritual . notes for div a30412-e13990 ord. rom. in pascha . greg. nazian . orat. 1. apol. & 20. orat. chrisost. l. 2. de sacr . c. 10. a vindication of the answer to some late papers concerning the unity and authority of the catholic church, and the reformation of the church of england. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1687 approx. 351 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 69 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61635 wing s5678 estc r39560 18429927 ocm 18429927 107642 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61635) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 107642) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1643:33) a vindication of the answer to some late papers concerning the unity and authority of the catholic church, and the reformation of the church of england. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 118 [i.e. 130], [2] p. printed for richard chiswell ..., london : mdclxxxvii [1687] attributed to stillingfleet by wing and nuc pre-1956 imprints. advertisement: p. [1]-[2] at end. errata: p. 118. numerous errors in paging. imperfect: stained, with print show-through. reproduction of original in the huntington library. includes bibliographical references. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng church of england -apologetic works. catholic church -controversial literature. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-04 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a vindication of the answer to some late papers concerning the unity and authority of the catholick church , and the reformation of the church of england . london , printed for richard chismell , at the rose and crown in s. paul's church-yard , mdclxxxvii . a vindication of the answer to some late papers , &c. it was so tempting a piece of honour , to appear as the champion of the royal papers , that i rather wonder that no more , than that these , have shewed themselves to the world , under so inviting a character . which seems to have betray'd them into more than usual security ; presuming , i suppose , that they are to be looked on , as a sort of heralds in controversis , whose bearing the royal arms , will keep them from being touched themselves , though they bid defiance to others . but where truth lies at stake , every one hath a right to put in for it ; and whose game soever any person plays , those ought to carry it who have the best cards to shew : i mean , that in debates of this nature and consequence , other considerations ought to be so far laid aside , that the strongest reason should prevail . but lest i be again thought to have a mind to flourish before i offer to pass ; as the champion speaks in his proper language ; i shall apply my self to the matter before us . only taking notice that i am now glad to enter the lists upon even ground . for although i thought i behaved my self with due respect and decency before , yet i perceive the measure of those things is so nice and arbitrary , that it is very hard to escape censures , where the distance is so great . but those who live in the country may mean and intend as well to their prince , as those who live at court , though they do not make so fine legs , nor are of so pleasing an address . the plain truth is ; controversie is quite another thing from courtship and poetry . it is like a trial at law , which ought to depend on evidence and proof , though the king himself be concerned in it . and as we must give honour to whom honour , so truth to whom truth is due : and this without respect of persons ; it being a case long since decided , that truth is greater than the king. if i thought there were no such thing in the world as true religion , and that the priests of all religions are alike , i might have been as nimble a convert , and as early a defender of the royal papers , as any one of these champions . for why should not one who believes no religion , declare for any ? but since i do verily believe not only that there is such a thing as true religion , but that it is only to be found in the books of holy scripture , i have reason to enquire after the best means of understanding the sense of those books , and thereby , if it may be , to put an end to the controversies of christendom . this was the noble design of the two royal papers ; which are written with far greater strenght , and spirit , and closeness , than these which are published in defence of them . but notwithstanding all their fair appearance , i could not be convinced by the reason contained in them , ( and much less by the defence of them ) which i endeavour'd to represent as far as i could judge , with modesty and civility . but if i have offended in any thing against the strict rules of good manners , i hope i may be the more easily forgiven , since their casuists allow involuntary faults to be in their own nature venial . the method proposed by the paper for ending controversies , was by finding out a principle for doing it , as visible as that the scripture is in print . this i could no● but extreamly approve , as a very satisfactory method of proceeding ; and the consequence i said would be , that all men of sense would soon give over disputing ; for none who dare to believe what they see , can call that in question . the author of the r●ply saith , i mistook the meaning of the words , which he saith was this , that what ever motives render it visible that a book in print is scripture , i. e. the word of god , the same or other motives are as powerful to render this other truth as visible , that none can be that church , but that which is called the roman-catholick church . the desender saith , the church is more visible than scripture , because the scripture is seen by the church ; for which he brings s. augustin 's authority . and if by saying that the scripture is in print , be understood a tking out of question ; then he denies it to be visible that the scripture , is in print ; because many men do call scripture in question at this day ; and to question whether the book in print be scripture , is manifestly to question whether scripture be in print . the words of the royal paper are plain , but these interpretations of them so forced and unnatural , that there needs no other confutation of them , but to compare their confused comment with the text. it is as visible , as that the scripture is in print ; that is , it is a thing evident to sense ; for so it is that the book called the scripture or the bible is in print . now what is it which is affirmed in the paper to be thus evident ? viz. this proposition , that none can be that one church which christ has here on earth , but that which is called the roman catholick church . but if it be certain ( as i doubt not to make it appear ) that what is called the roman-catholick church , is but a part of that one church which christ has here on earth , then the plain result of this proposition must be , that it is a thing evident to sense that a part is the whole . now this looked so oddly , that these gentlemen were resolved that this should not be the sense of the plain words ; and therefore have endeavoured to put another sense , ( if it may be called so ) upon them . and if their church can but interpret scripture at this rate , we are in a hopeful way to have a speedy and happy end of controversies . as to the consequence i drew from hence , that if controversies could be determined by a principle as visible as that scripture is in print , all men of sense would soon give over disputing , for none who dare believe what they see would call that in question ; one saith , the sooner the hetter . so say i too , upon good grounds . but what would then become of the noble science of controversie ? the other saith , that catholicks and protestants are both men of sense , and yet they dispute about the scripture which is in print . and what then ? this is to shew that the scriptures being in print is one thing , and the authority of the scripture is another . the one is a common object of sense in which all are agreed ; the other is liable to many disputes , and therefore could not be meant in the papers . but they have a notable cavil against mens believing what they see , because faith is of things not seen . this cavil had been as good against our blessed saviour , when he said to thomas , because thou hast seen , thou hast believed . i hope upon second thoughts , they will not tell him , that this was improperly spoken , and not like a schoolman . call it what you will , the single question is , whether your church will allow us to judge of things according to the plain evidence of sense ? one saith , it is impossible that any man should be commanded not to believe what he sees . believing here is the judgment of the mind upon the representation of sense ; and will he secure us that the church can never require us to judge otherwise than according to the evidence of sense ? i wish he would make his words good , for i assure him he would remove a terrible block out of our way . my senses plainly tell me , what i see and feel and taste is as much bread after consecration as it was before ; how then comes it to pass that my judgment that it was bread before , was very good ; but although there be the very same evidence afterwards , without the least alteration to sense , yet then i am to judge just contrary , i. e. that it is not bread , which i see and feel and taste just as i did before ? but he saith , what is seen is only the form , shape and sigure of bread and wine , and that they believe to be there . but alas ! this doth not reach to the point . for the question is not about external appearances , but about the iudgment of the mind upon the evidence of sense . i will make this matter plainer , that they may know where the difficulty lies . when christ's body appeared to the disciples after his resurrection , there was no dispute among them concerning the form , shape and figure of his body , but the doubt was , whether from these they were to conclude that it was christ's real body or not ? if not , they could not believe from the evidence of sense that christ's body was risen from the dead ; if they were , let them tell us how christ's body comes to be so much changed and to lose those essential properties of a body which it once had and was judged by ; and farther , what ground there is for us now not to allow that judgment of sense which christ himself appealed to , after the institution of the sacrament ? for if christ had therein declared that our senses are not to be our rule of judging concerning his body ; he would certainly not have appealed so soon after to the senses of his disciples concerning that very body ; and neither he nor his disciples have given the least intimation , that what we see and feel to be one body , we must believe to be quite another which we can neither see nor feel . did not two angels appear to lot in the figure and shapes of men ; and the holy ghost descend in the form of a dove ? and were they who saw them , to believe according to the evidence of sense ? i answer , that there is a great deal of difference to be made between invisible powers appearing under bodily shapes , and a natural , visible , palpable extended body losing the properties of a body abd becoming invisible , impalpable and indivisible ; and withal there is a great difference , between spiritual powers uniting the real particles of matter into a body , and the making the form , figure , and shape of a real body to be where there is no substance of a body . we do not pretend to judge by our senses of invisible substances under outward appearances ; but of the truth of a bodily substance by all the appearances of a body , under all the circumstances necessary for the right judgment of sense . the other saith , he knows of no church which allows not people to believe all they see . may we then believe that to be still bread which we see to be so ? no , he saith , the what of a thing is not the object of sense . i perceive then our senses are very impertinent things ; and only give an account of the circumstances and not of the substances of things . but i pray did not the disciples perceive the what of christ's body by their senses ? how do we know the what of any bodily substance but by them ? it is meer collusion to say our senses do not judge of substances ; for our bare senses judge of nothing , but are the means of conveying the impressions or representations inward , whereby our minds do pa●s judgment upon things . and either we cannot know the substance of any thing sensible , or we must know the what of it ( as he speaks , ) by our senses . we now come to the main business ; which for the clearer proceeding i shall put under three distinct heads . i. concerning the unity of the catholick church . ii. concerning the authority of it . iii. concerning the reformation of the church of england . i. of the unity of the catholick church . and here the point to be discussed , is , viz. whether that which is called the roman-catholick church , be that one church which christ has here on earth ? ( 1. ) the first thing i objected against it was , that a part cannot be the whole ; but that which is called the roman-catholick church is but a part ; and therefore it cannot be the one catholick church of christ here on earth . here , to prevent cavilling , i must declare that i meant not the roman diocese or province , but all the churches which live in communion with and subjection to the bishop of rome as head of the church ; and look on it as necessary to salvation so to do . and this i still assert to be but a part of the catholick church and a corrupt one too . the author of the defence saith , all this riddle of part and whole comes from my inadvertence . how so ? because i confound the roman diocese with the roman-catholick church . no , i assure him i did take it in their own sense , for all that embrace the matters of faith which are received in the roman communion . and he need not fear my doing otherwise ; for i intend to discourse of no other church but this ; and this i deny , as so taken , to be the one catholick church . doth not catholic signifie all the parts ? i am sure it ought to do so ; but i say it doth not , when roman is joyned to catholick ; for then it excludes all those from being parts of the catholic church , which do not joyn in the roman communion ; and this i say is unreasonable . and here i expected some proof in so material a point ; but there is not a word farther , than that catholic comprehends all ; but i say again , roman catholic excludes all that are not in its communion . as suppose any one should say the german ocean is the whole sea ; and to prove it , should reason as this gentlemen doth ; ocean is the whole sea , is it not ? and is it the less the ocean , because german is added to it ? no ; the ocean is just as large as ever it was ; but the adding german to it restrains the sense of ocean to it within certain bounds ; and excludes many parts of the great ocean , which are without those limits . just so it is in adding roman to catholic ; catholic alone comprehends all the parts of the church , but roman added to it confines the sense of it to those who embrace the faith received in the roman communion ; and this excludes all other parts of the catholic church : and so makes a part to be the whole . ( 2. ) i objected farther , that if this had been the catholic church meant in the creeds , this limitation ought to have been expressed in the creeds , and put to persons to be baptized ; which being never done in the roman church it self , i thence inferr'd that it did not believe it self to be the one catholic church , which we profess to believe in the creeds . here the author of the reply answers , that catholic and roman catholic were in the language of antiquity one and the same thing ; and this point being never called in question in the time when the creeds were published , there was no occasion to put roman into the creeds ; no more than of putting in consubstantial with the father till it was denied . this were a substantial way of answering the difficulty , if it would in any measure hold . but i shall now prove just the contrary to have been the sense of authority by plain and undeniable instances in matters of fact , in most of the ages of the christian church ; from the very next to the apostolical , down to the council of trent . to which i shall only premise this , which i think no roman catholic will deny me , viz. that the roman catholic church doth imply obedience to the bishop of rome as supream visible head of the church under christ. for bellarmin and others , make not only faith and sacraments necessary to the being of the church , but submission to l●wful pastors , and especially to the pope as christ's only vicar upon earth ; and he placeth the essential unity of the catholic church in the conjunction of the members , under christ and h●s vicar , as head of the church . and from hence he excludes schismaticks out of the catholic church , though they have unity of faith and sacraments and hope and spirit . and the roman catechism makes union with the pope as visible head of the church necessary to the unity of the catholi● church . and the proofs i bring shall not be from short or doubtful sentences , but from remarkable passages and notorious acts of the church . in the first age of the church the name catholic was as little known , as the authority of the roman church ; it not being once found in the apostolical writings ; for the inscriptions of the catholic epistles are of latter times . and if they were allowed to be apostolical , they would be far from proving any thing to this purpose , since the roman church is never mentioned in these epistles , unless under the name of babylon ; and i suppose they would not like the title of the catholic babylonish church . but in all the directions of the apostles concerning unity of faith , there is not one which gives the least intimation , that the roman church in any sense was to be the rule or standard of faith or communion . in the second age we find two remarkable instances that the communion of the catholic church was not to be taken from conjunction with the bishop of rome as head of it . the first is from the bishop of rome's approving the prophecies of montanus , prisca and maximilla . this would hardly appear credible , if tertullian had not expresly affirmed it ; and he farther saith that had it not been for praxeas a heretick , he had taken them into the communion of the catholic church ; and he prevailed with him to revoke his communicatory letters already past . what a case had the catholic church been in at this time , if the bishop of rome had been look'd on as the centre of catholic communion , and if he had not been better informed by praxeas a heretick ? the second in the same age is when victor took upon him to excommunicate the eastern bishops for not celebrating easter at the same time they did at rome . if now the eastern bishops did own the roman-catholic and catholic church to be the same , they must shew it at such a time by their regard to the pope's sentence as head of the catholic church : but they owned no such authority he had over them ; and instead of it polycrates bishop of ephesus , with a council of bishops joyning with him about a. d. 197 wrote a smart epistle to victor , wherein they let him know they would go on in their way , notwithstanding his threats , and that it was better to obey god than man. from whence it is observable , that they followed their own judgment against the pope's ; and that they believed the pope required things of them so contrary to the will of god , that they resolved to disobey him . and his requiring their compliance was no argument of his authority , but of his us●rpation . in the third age happen'd a famous contest between stephen bishop of rome , and the eastern and african bishops , about re-baptizing hereticks . i meddle not now with the controversie it self , but with the sense of those bishops upon occasion of it as to the roman-catholic church . the bishop of rome did at least threaten to excommunicate the african bishops . and if firmilian may be believed , he did actually excommunicate the asian bishops how did these primitive bishops behave themselves under this sentence ? they charge stephen with insolence , folly , contempt of his brethren , and breaking the peace of the catholic church ; and cutting himself off from the unity of it . the words are , abscindere se à charitatis unitate , & alienum se per omnia fratribus facere . now i desire to know , whether these bishops believed the necessary conjunction of roman and catholic together ? and whether bishop of rome were thought to be the centre of communion in the catholic church ? it is plain , they made him the cause of the schism , and thought themselves never the less in the catholic church for being out of the roman communion . in the fourth age the government and subordination of the catholic church was established in the council of nice according to ancient custom ; but we read not a word of the roman catholic church there ; or any priviledge or authority the bishop of rome had , but within his own province , and such as the bishops of antioch and alexandria had in theirs . and when the bishop of rome in that age interposed to restore some bishops cast out of communion by the eastern bishops , they declared against it as a violation of the rules of the catholic church ; and this became the occasion of the first breach between the eastern and western churches . in the same age liberius , bishop of rome , joyned with the eastern bishops in casting athanasius out of the catholic church , and subscribed the arian confession of faith ; as both hilary and s ierome witness ; and it appears from his seventh epistle , and the old lesson in the roman breviary , 19 kal. sept. which hath been since expunged for telling tales in the fifth age happened a greater breach ●etween the bishops of rome and the eastern churches for acacius the bishop of constantinople , not complying with what the bishops of rome desired from him , was solemnly excommunicated by fe●● iii. but notwithstanding this , the emperour and eastern bishops continued still in his communion ; and they complained that the proceedings against him were against the rules of the church , and savoured of great pride , as appears by the epistles of gel●sius , who succeeded felix . and upon this a notorious sc●● happened , which the eastern churches charged the church of rome with ; and believed themselves to be still in the communion o● the catholic church . in the sixth age vigilius bishop of rome gives an undeniable evidence of the difference between communion with the catholic church and with the bishop of rome . when he went to constantinople , upon iustinian's summons , about the three chapters , not only the church of rome , but that of africa , sardinia , istria , i●●yricum and others , earnestly entreated him not to consent to the condemning them ; accordingly when he came to constantinople he was so warm and zealous in the cause , that he forthwith excommunicates the patriarch and his adherents ; among whom the empress her self was one : but soon after he was so much mollified , that he not only took off his sentence , but privately agreed with the emperour to condemn the three chapters . which was discovered to the western churches by rusticus and sebasti●nus , who were then with him : whereupon they cried out upon him for prevaricating and betraying the council of chalcedon ; and the african bishops not only condemned his judgment , but excommunicated him and all that consented to it ; and so did the bishops of illyricum . which schism continued many years , as appears by the epistles of pelagius ii. and gregory . vigilius finding how the matter was resented in the western churches , yields to a general council ; which the emperour summon'd at constantinople ; in the mean time he publishes an edict against the three chapters . vigilius to recover his credit with the western bishops , denounces excommunication against those that yielded to it ; but the greeks despised his censure , and immediately went to celebrate divine offices . when the council sate he refused to come ; which they regarded not , but went on and condemned the three chapters without him ; but when the council was ended he complied with it ; as now appears from the authentic acts lately published . let any man now judge , whether communion with the bishop of rome were then looked on a● a necessary condition of being in the catholic church , either by the eastern or western churches . in the seventh age there is a necessity to make a distinction between the communion with the bishop of rome , and with the catholic church ; because honorius then bishop of rome is condemned by the sixth general council , for contradicting the apostolical doctrine , and the definitions of councils , and for following the false doctrines of hereticks . and the same judgment is confirmed by the seventh and eighth councils , which are received for general in the church of rome . and leo i● . in his epistle to the emperour , wherein he confirms the sixth council , expresly anathematizes his predecessor honorius for no less tha● betraying the catholic faith. and in the profession of faith made by every new bishop of rome ( extant in the diurnus ) honorius is anathematized by name . was it then the roman catholic church which joyned in communion with honorius ? in the eighth age the bishop of rome approved the second council of nice ; but notwithstanding the western churches stifly opposed it , as contrary to faith ; which they could not have done , if at that time the pope had been looked on as the head and center of catholic communion . in the ninth age happened the great breach between the two patriarchs of rome and constantinople , which in consequence engaged the eastern and western churches against each other . and although the restoring of photius after the death of ignatius seemed to put an end to it ; yet the difference increased chie●ly upon two points , that of iurisdiction and the addition to the creed , made by the western church , which the council under photius did anathematize ; and the whole greek church , with the four patriarchs , joyned in it ; as arguing imperfection in the creed and the tradition of their fore-fathers . and upon these two points this schism began ; although photius did charge the latin church with other things ; which made nicolaus i. to employ the best pens they had to defend the latins against the greeks . one of which was ratramnus lately ●ublished ; who lived at that time ; and it is observable in him , that he supposes both to be still parts of the catholic church ; and he often distinguishes the latin church or the whole roman communion , from the catholic church ; which he saith , was extended from the east to the west , from the north to the south . in the eleventh age this schism brake forth with greater violence , in the time of leo ix . and michael cerularius patriarch of constantinople . to the former occasions of difference , a new one was added , never mention'd in photius his time , viz. the use of unleavened bread in the sacrament , by the latin church . of this , with other things , michael cerularius complained ; the pope sends three nuntio's to constantinople , who behaved themselves rudely and insolently towards the patriarch ; as he shews in his epistles to the patriarch of antioch , published lately by co●elerius ; there he declares he would not treat with them about religion without the other patriarchs ; upon which they pronounced them obstinate , and proceeded to excommunicate the whole greek church for not complying with them . and the patriarch returned the kindness and anathematized them . the form of the anathema against the greeks is printed with humbertus ; and the short of it is , whosoever contradicts the roman see is to be excluded catholic communion , and be made anathema maranatha . this was plain dealing ; but it was the eleventh age before things came to this height . and yet in that very anathema one of the reasons assigned , was because the greeks like the donatists con●●ned the catholic church to themselves . in the thirteenth age innocent iii. writes to the greek emperour to bring the greeks back to the unity of the church ; the patriarch of constantinople writes back again to know what he meant by it , and how he could call the roman church , the one catholic church , since christians made but one flock under their several pastors , christ himself being head over all . the pope answers , the church is called catholic two ways . 1. as it consists of all particular churches , and so he grants the roman church is not the catholic church , but a part of it , though the chief . 2. as it holds under it all particular churches ; and so , he saith , the roman church only is the catholic church . and so he makes owning the roman church to be mother and mistress of all churches , as he there saith , to be a necessary condition of catholic communion . and thus it becomes the roman catholic church . but this was a very new notion of the catholic church , which in the fathers of the church was taken in one of these two senses . 1. with respect to faith ; and so catholic was the same with sound and of a right faith , in opposition to the notorious heresies of the first ages . so it was used by ig●●tius , against the heresies of that time , which denied iesus to be christ ; therefore , saith he , whereever christ iesus is , there is the catholic church . after him polycarp is called by the church of sm●rna , bishop of the catholic church in smyrna . so the council of antioch speaking of the deposition of pa●lus samosatenus say , they must set another bishop over the catholic church there . ●lemens alexandrinus saith , the catholic church is ancienter than heresies ; that it hath the unity of the faith , and subsists only in the truth . pacianus observes , that in those ages the hereticks went by other names , but the sound christians were known by the name of catholics , which had been of very ancient us● in the church , though not found in scripture ; as fulgenti●s likewise observes . but lactantius takes notice that the hereticks had gotten the trick of using that name ; and then his rule is to discern the true catholic church by the true religion . for he not only saith before , that the catholic church is to be known by the true worship of god ; but when he comes to lay down the notes of the true church , the first of them is religion . so i find in an old lactantius , printed at rome , a. d. 1470. but , for what reason i know not , it is le●t out in the latte●● editions . in the conference between the donatists and the catholic bishops , both sides challenged the name of catholics to themselves ; and the roman judge determined , it should belong to them who were found to have truth on their side . pope innocent iii. in a council at rome declares , that all the churches in the world are called one from the unity of the catholic faith. and in the canon before , he mentions the roman church as distinct from the catholic , but comprehended under it while it adheres to the catholic faith. which was not then understood to be what the roman church declares to be so ; but what was universally received in the church from the apostles times , and was delivered in the creeds to the persons to be admitted by baptism into the catholic church . 2. with respect to persons and places . and so catholic was first taken in opposition to the iewish confinement of salvation to themselves ; and of gods appointed worship to one temple . so ignatius faith , the ●hurch is one body , made up of jews and gentiles . and the church of smyrna writes to all the members of the catholic church in all places : and the council of antioch writes to the whole catholic church under heaven . s. cyril saith , the church is called catholic from its universal spreading and teaching the whole doctrine of christ to all sorts of persons . athanasius saith , it is called catholic , because it is dispersed over the world. theophylact saith , the catholic church is a body made up of all ●hurches , whereof christ is the head. and the african bishops from the first beginning of the dispute with the donatists laid great weight upon this , that the catholic church was to be taken in its largest extent ; or else the promises could not be fulfilled ; as may be seen in optatus , who saith , the church is called catholic , not only from its having the true faith , but from its being every where dispersed . and s. augustine hath written whole books to prove it . in the conference with the donatists , the catholic bishops , and especially s. augustin , plead , that they are called catholics because they hold communion with the whole world of christians ; and not with th●se only of a particular title or denomination . for therein they made the schism of the donatists consist ; not barely in a causeless separation ; but in confining the catholic church to themselves , who at best were but a part of it . and because the notion which innocent iii. gives , is liable to the same charge , it cannot be excused from the same guilt . thus we have found the author of this notion of the roman catholic church , viz. for such as own the supremacy of the church of rome , as he explains it more fully in the same epistle . but yet this notion of the catholic church was not uniniversally received after innocent iii. for in the fifteenth age , in the council of florence , cardinal bessarion disputing with the greeks about the authority of the roman church , in making an addition to the creed , saith , that how great soever the power of the roman church be , he grants it is less than that of a general council , or the catholic church . from whence it follows , that the notion of the catholic church cannot be taken from owning the roman church to be mistress of all churches ; for then the catholic church is bound to submit to the decrees of the roman church about matters of faith. in the beginning of the same age the council of ●onstance met , and in the fourth session declared , that a general ouncil represents the catholic church , and hath its power immediately from christ ; and that in matters of faith , unity of the ●hurch , and reformation , all persons , even popes ●hemselves are bound to submit to it . and truly it was but necessary for them to take off from the popes authority in matters of faith , since they charge ioh. xxiii . with no less than frequent and pertinacious denying the immortality of the soul. was not this man fit to be an infallible head of the catholic church , and the true center of christian communion ? bellarmin saith , this article was not proved , but only commonly believed , because of the dissoluteness of his life . but this is but a poor defence ; since this article stands upon record against him in all the editions of the council of constance ; which i have compared ; even that at rome , said to be collated with manuscripts . and why should so scandalous an article be suffered to stand , unless there were such a consent of copies that it could not for shame be removed ? the doctrine of the council of constance was confirmed by the council of basil , and is to this day maintained by the clergy of france , as appears by their declaration made a. d. 1682. from whence it follows , that the church is not called catholic from relation to the roman church ; but to the whole body of christians : and that the unity of it , is not to be taken from the respect it bears to an external visible head which may sail , but to christ as the essential head of the church . this is the express doctrine of the cardinal de alliaco , ioh. major , almain , gerson and many others ; and follows from the decree of the council of constance . thus i have briefly deduced the sense of the christian church in this matter from the apostolical times ; and that not meerly from the sayings of particular men ; but from publick , solemn , and undoubted acts of the church . which i have the rather done , because the defender saith , we have no antiquity on our sido in this ●ause , but as much as since luther . i think i have produced a little more , and too much for him to answer . it is time now to consider what proof the replier brings , that catholic and roman-catholic in the sense of antiquity were one and the same thing . he produces the testimonies of tertullian and cyprian , wherein the church of rome is called the catholic church . who doubts that in those days there was a catholic church at rome ? for every particular church which agreed in the catholic faith was then called the catholic church of such a place . and innumerable instances of this kind may be gathered out of antiquity ; both as to the city of rome , and other cities as well as that ; and surely they were not all catholic churches in his sense ; when he agrees there is but one catholic church ; nay more , even parochial churches were called catholic , as he may find in ●otelerius . s ambrose's testimony signifies no more , than that satyrus coming into a place suspected for the luciferian schism , asked if the bishop joyned with the catholic bishops , i. e. with the roman church . which is no more than whether he agreed with his own church ; for satyrus was a roman born . but this would prove any other church to be the one catholic church altogether as well as the roman . the patriarch of constantinople writes to hormisda , that he would not hereafter recite in the diptychs the names of those who were excommunicated by the apostolical see. and what follows ? but he saith , they were sever'd from the communion of the catholic church . and so were those excommunicated by the patriarch of constantinople . but the words are , who do not in all things consent with the see apostolic ; but the plain meaning is , of those who were cast out of communion , for the words are too , sequestrates à communione ecclesiae catholicae . and doth this prove the roman church to have any more relation to the catholic , than the church of the meanest bishop in the catholic church ? as to the calling of catholics romanists by the gothic arians ; that relates to the roman empire , and not to the roman church . and now let any impartial reader judge whether the sense of antiquity be not admirably cleared by these passages , as to the making out roman and catholic to be the same . but to proceed . ( 3. ) i said farther , that if the roman church believed it self to be the catholick church , it must void the baptism of those who are out of its communion ; but since baptism doth enter persons into the catholic church , by its own confession , the catholic church which is owned in the creeds , must be of larger extent than the roman . in answer to this , they both tell me this point hath been over-ruled long ago by the catholic church ; the baptism of hereticks being allowed to be good . but since it is granted , that baptism doth enter persons into that catholic church we believe in the creeds , doth it not evidently follow , that the catholic church in the creeds is larger than the roman communion ? for it takes in those which the other doth not . doth not the catholic church take in all that are admitted into the catholick church ? but many more by their own confession are admitted into it than are of the roman communion , and therefore it unavoidably follows , that the roman catholick church cannot be the catholic church believed in the two creeds . and although according to s. augustine , the validity of baptism depends on the right form of words and not the good disposition of him that administers ; yet baptism where it is valid must have its due effect , which is entering persons into the catholic church . but say they , doth not heresie , &c. cast them out of the catholic church ? suppose it doth , yet if heresie do cast them out , they were in the church till they were cast out of it . their being allowed to be in it doth my business ; let them prove them cast out by heresie when they please . but the defender saith , i suppose what i should prove , and then prove it by means of that supposition . here i am to seek ; for do i not prove from their own supposition and not from mine , that baptism doth enter persons into the catholic church ? and therefore from thence i prove , that themselves cannot believe the catholic and roman church to be all one ; since they allow many multitudes to be entred into the catholic church , which they deny to be of the roman church . yet he goes on , that such persons are not truly members either of the catholic or roman-●atholic church . no ? then baptism doth not admit persons into the catholic church . which is very new doctrine , and fit only for new converts , and is directly contrary to the roman catechism , which saith , baptism is the gate by which we enter into the church . they were so far ●embers , saith he , as baptism could make them . and that i hope was to make them members of christs body ; or else what becomes of the council of trent , which so expresly asserts , and that with an anathema , the validity and efficacy of the sacraments in general ? and of baptism in particul●● ? and there is a special anathema against those who say that children baptized are not to be reckon'd inter fideles , and i hope those are members of the catholic church . is there remission of sins , communion with the holy spirit granted out of the catholic church ? yet these are the effects of baptism , owned by all persons in the church of rome ; or else they cannot themselves be of the roman communion . what is it then i pray to be as much members of the church as baptism could make them ? what can make them more members than baptism doth ? according to their own doctrine . but they are as far off the roman church as they are off the catholic . say you so ? then no more is requisite to make a man a member of the roman ●hurch , than is necessary to his baptism . this great news , a●● would be very welcome to the christian world. i have h●●rd of many projects of accommodation ; but none seem to be like this . for then no more is necessary to make us members of the roman church than of the catholic , i. e. owning the creed and our baptismal vow . nay , hold there , saith he , the profession of the catholic faith is necessary to make one a true member of the roman-catholic church . this is the meaning of a whole page , or else it has none : suppose this to be true ; and it proves what i intend . for either this catholic faith is the same which was required to baptism , or not . if the same , then no more is required than owning the creeds , to make a member of the roman-catholic church ; if not the same , then those who are members of the catholic church by baptism , are not members of the roman catholic till a farther profession of the roman faith ; and consequently the catholic church and the roman-catholic are not the same , since those may be members of the catholic church , who are not of the roman-catholic . can any thing be plainer ? and the replier is so much a gentleman , to own the truth of it . for these are his words , that baptism enters persons into the catholic church , who though they be out of the communion of the roman church , yet having the true form of baptism are members of the catholic church . therefore the catholick church and roman-catholic cannot be the same . which was all i intended to prove . but he saith , that as baptism enters them into the catholic church , so heresie , apostasie , or infidelity casts them out ; or else the old hereticks , which he reckons up , were still members of the catholic church . i answer , that my argument was not concerning the old hereticks , who rejected any article of the ●reed , which was delivered at baptism , and the owning of it required in order to it ; but concerning the roman-catholic church , which makes the owning new articles of faith necessary in order to its communion ; and if this church reject any from its communion who do own the articles of the creeds , it follows from thence , that it is not the catholic church into which persons are admitted by baptism . but no man if an heretick , though baptized , can remain in the church . if he be convicted of renouncing the creed , upon the owning whereof he was received to baptism , he casts himself out of the church ; for he doth not stand to his promise . if you mean that any thing which the roman-catholic church declares to be heresie , casts a man out of the catholic church , i do utterly deny it , and i see no reason brought to prove it . ( 4. ) i argued , that in a divided state of the church there may be different communions , and yet both may remain parts of the catholic church ; for which i instanced in the excommunications of old about keeping easter , and the differences between the eastern and western churches ; but to appropriate the title of the one catholic church to any one of the divided parties , so as to exclude the rest , was to charge that party with the schism , as in the case of the novatians and donatists ; and consequently , to apply the one catholic church to the roman , was to make it guilty of the present schism in the christian world. both the defender and replier behave themselves in their answers to this , as if they did not understand what i aimed at ; and therefore run out into things by the bye , as if they thought there were no difference between saying something to a book , and giving an answer to it . what i can pick up , which seems material , i will set down distinctly . the replier takes notice that i said , that before the unhappy divisions of the christian church it had been no difficulty to have shewed that one visible church which christ had here upon earth ; to which he answers , that there were divisions in the apostles times , and the same means which were then used to preserve the unity of the catholic church , did equally serve for after ages and continue to this day , and so the unity of the catholic church is still as visible as ever it was . this in few words i take to be the force of what he saith . but certainly there was a time when the unity of the ●atholic ●hurch was a little more discernable than now it is . doth not the scripture tell us , the multitude was of one heart and one soul ? are all christians so at this day ? i grant afterward there were schisms and heresies in the apostolical churches . but the apostles had an infallible spirit , which they manifested by the power of miracles going along with it , by which means the heresies were laid open and the schisms stopped . but what were those heresies ? such as contradicted the articles of the creed , as about the truth of christ's incarnation , and the resurrection of the dead &c. and therefore the apostles by the assistance of that infallible spirit did write epistles to the churches , to declare that which was to be the standing faith of all ages ; and by an unquestionable tradition ( in the church of rome ) they summ'd up these fundamental points of faith in that which is therefore called the apostles creed . this was therefore the standard whereby to judge of faith and heresie ; and by this , they proceeded in the ages succeeding the apostles . afterwards , some did not bare faced contradict the articles of the creed , but broached such doctrines as did by consequence overthrow them ; as the arians by making a creature god , the nestorians and e●tychians denying in effect the truth of christ's incarnation ; against these the general councils assembled and the eastern and western churches joyned in condemning them ; not from their own authority as supreme or infallible judges ; but as the most authentic witnesses of the true apostolical doctrine . and thus the creed was enlarged by general consent through the whole catholic church , and that which was called the nicene creed was made the standard of catholic communion . but to prevent any mischief by overcharging the creed , the general council of ephesus did absolutely forbid any farther additions to be made to it , and the council of chalcedon ratified that prohibition . all that they pretended to , was only to give the true sense of the articles therein received about the incarnation of christ , and the same was declared by the fifth and sixth general councils ; whereof the one was to clear the council of chalcedon from favouring nestorianism , and the other to shew that the humane nature in christ was perfect , as to the affections of the soul as well as the body . but after this , a mighty breach happen'd between the eastern and western churches ; and setting aside the different customs in both ( which might easily have been composed ) there were two things , which made this breach irreconcileable . 1. the western churches taking upon them to make a new addition to the creed ; as to the spirit 's proceeding from the son ; without asking the consent of the eastern churches . 2. the bishop of rome's assuming to himself an authority of headship over the catholic church . they did not deny him a primacy of order , as he had the first patriarchal see ; but when he took upon him to exercise jurisdiction in the other patriarchates as well as his own , and sent legates for that purpose , they rejected his authority , and so the breach continued . but the defender saith , the popes supremacy , if his memory fail him not , was not so much as made a pretence till near 200 years after the schism began , nor any where more acknowledged than in greece , nor by any body more than by him that began the schism . if his memory fail him not , i am sure , something else doth . for nothing can be more notorious from the very epistles of the popes on occasion of this schism , than that this was at the bottom of all ; whatever pretences might be made use of sometimes to palliate the matter . let him but read the epistles of leo i. to anatolius and concerning him ; the epistles of gregory i. about the title of oecumenical patriarch ; the epistles of nicolaus i. concerning photius ; of leo ix . concerning michael cerularius , and i think he will be of another opinion ; and that the controversie about supremacy , to the scandal of the christian world , was the true occasion of that dreadful schism . but all the eastern churches i said however different among themselves to this day , look on the pope's supremacy as an innovation to the church . to which the replier saith , the eastern churches were divided from the roman-catholic church by such doctrines as are inconsistent with the church of england which professes to hold with the four first general councils . i will not deny but the breach as to the nestorians began on the account of the council of ephesus ; but whether the christians under the turk and persians in asia are truely nestorians is another question : i think not , for this reason . in the beginning of this century , the patriarch of those christians called his most learned men about him to consider what their doctrine really was , and how far they differ'd from the roman church about christ ; since the missionaries from thence , still charged them with heresie : and they declared the difference to be only in words and the manner of explication . for however they say that every nature hath a person inseparable from it ( by which they mean no more than a subsistence ) yet from the union of these two in christ , they hold that there is but one persona they c●ll it , or one son resulting from the union of both natures . and as long as they hold a real union of both natures and one filiation ( as they speak ) resulting from it , it is beyond my understanding that they should be guilty of the nestorian heresie . and this account was given to paul 5. by one sent from their patriarch , and ordered to be printed by him at rome . but is it not really a very hard case for 300000 families , who as is there said were under that patriarch , to be excluded the catholic church , and consequently from salvation , for not right understanding the subtilties of the distinction between nature and person ; as , whether subsistence can be separated from individual nature ; or whether an hypostatical union doth imply that the individual nature doth lose its own subsistence ? i appeal to the conscience of any good christian , whether he thinks christ and his apostles did ever make the knowledge of these things necessary to salvation ; which the subtilest of their schoolmen are never able to explain to the capacities of the sar greatest part of mankind . the like may be said , as to those called eutychians , i do not doubt but the confusion of both natures in christ was a doctrine justly condemned by the council of chalcedon , because he could not be true man , if the nature of man were lost in him ; but i think there is no reason to condemn those for that heresie , who declare they reject the doctrine of eutyches , and that they hold two natures in christ making up one personated nature without mixture or confusion , as their patriarch explained their doctrine to leonardus abel bishop of sidon , when gregrory 13. sent his nuncio into those parts , on purpose to understand their doctrines . and the latter missionaries confirm the same thing ; that they do not deny two natures in christ , but say that two natures are as parts making up by their union one nature with a person . and herein they say , dioscorus , whom they follow , differ'd from eutyches . and must such infinite numbers of this perswasion in the eastern and western parts be excluded from the catholic church for not knowing the difference between a person resulting from the union , of two natures ; and one nature without a person arising from two natures without mixture or confusion ? a late writer of the roman communion is so ingenuous to acknowledge that the heresies charged on the eastern churches are imaginary and that they differ only in terms , from that which is owned to be the catholic faith. and faustus naironus hath lately published a book at rome to prove that the maronites have been all along good catholics ; although the popes in their bulls from the time of innocent iii. have still charged them with heresie . as to the greeks , there is yet less reason to charge them with heresie ; since they adhere to the four general councils ; and out of zeal for the decree of the council of ephesus , will not allow the addition which the western church made to the creed . so that upon the whole matter , there is nothing to exclude the eastern churches from being parts of the catholic church , but denying the popes supremacy . but he tells us , some of these ( if his authors deceive him not ) as the egyptians and ethiopians have often made overtures to the pope for peace and communion , owning him for supreme head of the church , provided only they might not be obliged to renounce eutyches and dioscorus . i am extremely afraid his authors have deceived him , i wish he had named them that others might beware of them . i suppose he means that which baronius printed at the end of his sixth tome , of a solemn embassy from the patriarch of alexandria and all the provinces of egypt to own the pope as supreme head of the church ; which was soon after found to be a meer cheat and imposture . how far the ethiopians are from owning the popes authority he may find in ludolphus , or balthasar tellez . it is true the pope sent a patriarch into the east upon a division among themselves ; but after a while , he was forced to withdraw to the remotest parts of persia , and to leave their own patriarch in full power . the bishop of sidon relates , what ill success he had with the patriarch of the iacobites . and it is well known how soon the greeks returned to their old opposition after the council of florence . i had therefore reason to say , that all the churches of the east however different among themselves agreed in rejecting the pope's supremacy , and to this day look on it as an innovation in the church . as to what he afterwards speaks of their blasphemies against the divinity and humanity of christ , i now leave the world to judge of them ; and if they be true , all men must condemn the popes missionaries for notorious liers ; for the judgment i make of them , is from the relations they have given us . and if these be true , i can by no means allow them to be excluded from being parts of the catholic church ; and so that must be of far greater extent than the roman-catholic church . but to go on . i observed that which i thought a material difference in the schisms of the church , some i said were consistent with both parties remaining in the catholic church ; for which i instanced in the bishops of rome excommunicating the bishops of asia , about easter ; and those of asia and africa about re-baptizing . others were for excluding all out of the church but themselves , as the novatians and donatists . the replier tells me he doth not think this difference at all material . for what reason ? because the church is the last tribunal in all differences ; and whosoever separates from her is to be reputed as a heathen or a publican . it seems then the bishops of asia for not keeping easter with pope victor , were as very heathens and publicans as the novatians and donatists . i hope this gentleman after all , will not make the church so severe in all its censures , to cut men presently off from being members of the catholic church . i had learnt from s. augustin , that excommunications are sometimes used by way of discipline to bring persons to a sense of their fauits , and not to cut them off from the people of god. but suppose excommunications should always cut persons off from the catholic church , is it not to be supposed that they are just and reasonable ? suppose the matter doth not deserve it , or there be false suggestions , or a precipitate sentence ; is it really all one , if the church happens to excommunicate ? but beside all this , suppose one bishop in the church takes upon him to excommunicate others for little or no cause , and against the advice of his brethren ; which was the case of victor about the asian bishops ; must they be cut off from the catholic church as effectually , as if they had been guilty of the greatest heresie or schism ? but not to affix too severe a censure on the replier , in the next page he doth acknowledge a material difference ; which he saith was , that the whole church was not yet engaged , and till a decision be made by the whole church , the parts may excommunicate each other , and remain parts of the church still . now this , in my opinion , makes very much for me . for in this divided state of the christian world , the whole church is not engaged as to any decision of the present differences ; and therefore no parts can be cut off by other parts from the catholic church . for , since the breaches of christendom , there hath been no representative of the catholic church ; and is not like to be ; and so the divided parts remain parts of the catholic church still . the council of trent was so far from it , that the famous abbot of s. ●yprian called it a cabal of schoolmen influenced by the pope . and there is a great deal of difference between the decision of schoolmen and of the catholic church . i cannot but still think it material to observe , that in schisms of the most dangerous nature , the fault was laid on that part which appropriated the title of the catholic church to it self , as in the novatians and donatists . here the defender puts in his exceptions ; for he saith , it sounds , as if i would have that title never rightly applied , but to those who do not challenge it ; in likelihood because they have no pretence to it . the insinuation is , as if i were willing any should be called the catholic ●hurch , but that which is . but in earnest , i am as much against any one part being called the whole , as another . and from the case of the novatians and donatists i have learnt to charge the schism on those , who at best being but a part challenge the whole to themselves . but he cannot understand how it comes to be presumption , and a cause of schism in one part of a division to assume it . i am very sorry for it , that he cannot understand it to be a presumption in a part , to call it self the whole . he saith , in a division , it is not well intelligible how more than one part can bear it . i say it is not at all intelligible how any part can bear it . what thinks he of the novatians and donatists ? was it not presumption in them to arrogate the title of the catholic church to themselves ? and were they not therefore guilty of the schism ? in the ancient church there were two sorts of schisms , which i think it material to observe . 1. a factious schism . 2. a sacrilegious schism . ( 1. ) a factious schism ; when men out of opposition to their lawful governours , in the church set up separate assemblies . which by the fathers are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as by s. basil in his epistle to amphilochius , where he distinguisheth heresie , schism and unlawful meetings . heresie is against some necessary point of faith ; schism is a separation from the catholic church about matters of discipline ; and unlawful assemblies are such as are set up against the rules of the church . those who were guilty of these were received upon due submission ; those who were guilty of schism were to renounce their schism ; and those who were guilty of heresie , were to be re-baptized . this was s. basil's judgment , and is followed by balsamon , zonaras and arist●nus . and s. basil himself saith , this was the sense of the fathers before him . ( 2. ) a sacrilegious schism is that which robs the church of god of that which belongs to it , i. e. which excludes all but their own number from being true members of the church . and this was the schism charged on the novatians and donatists . this s. augustine very often charges upon the latter , as a very high piece of schism ; for , saith he , while they confine the church to their own communion , they are guilty of manifest sacrilege , both against christ and his ●hurch . and whosoever follow their steps , and exclude any parts of the church from being so , and confine the church to their own communion , they are guilty of the same sacrilegious schism ; which is of a higher nature than a meer factious schism . but the defender saith , the language of the world has always preserved the title of catholic to one part , and given the name of sect or part cut off to the other . by the language of the world , he must mean of that part which excludes the rest . which he calls the world by the very same figure by which a part challenges to be the whole . but in consequence to this , for all that i can yet see , these who were excluded out of the catholic church , must be taken in by baptism . and s. cyprian , firmilian , and s. basil saw this well enough . i confess it was after carried , that hereticks were to be distinguished , and those only to be re-baptized who renounced the baptismal faith , in father , son and holy ghost . and the meaning , i suppose wa● , that nothing but that exclude persons out of the catholic church ; and those hereticks whose baptism was allow'd , were of an inferiour sort ; and by not disowning their baptism , they shew'd they looked on them only as corrupted parts of the church . and so did the councils of nice and arles ; which did not utterly reject re-baptization , but only of those who preserved the baptismal faith. it was not therefore the sense of the ancient church , that upon every dissension in matters of faith from the general doctrine of the church , one party must be excluded from the catholic church , and that title belong to the other . but he proceeds , that this presumption cannot be the cause of schisms , which must happen before the presumption . this is very easily answered . for a breach there must be before ; but the schism belongs to those who were the true causes of the breach . if therefore any one part assumes to it self the right of the whole , and requires the owning it from all that joyn in communion with it , this very act makes it justifiable ( not to separate from the catholic church ) but not to joyn in communion with that part on such unreasonable terms . well , saith he , suppose the dividing parts do still continue parts of the catholic whole ; cannot the roman-catholic be that whole , i. e. suppose there be many parts , why may not one of them be the whole ? for still , the roman-catholic is but a part , though catholic be the whole ; as though the ocean be the whole , yet the british , or gallican , or spanish , or atlantick ocean , is but a part of the whole ocean . i am ashamed to pursue so clear a point any farther . but he hath one fetch behind still , viz. that it is one faith which makes the catholic church one ; if therefore the roman catholic church be a part of this catholic whole , the other parts must believe as she does , or else they cannot be parts . i will endeavour to make this clear to him , and so end this dispute . the church is a society of persons who own and profess the christian faith ; therefore faith is necessary to the very being of a church ; for unless they believe the christian doctrine , they cannot be the christian church . this faith which is necessary to make them christians , is to be embraced by all who are members of this church ; their entrance is by baptism ; the faith is the creed delivered to those who are to be baptized ; which being universally received by christians , that makes the common bond of union in the parts of this great body ; and this is the one faith of the catholic church . but if he thinks the roman-catholic church can make all its decisions a part of this one faith , he is extreamly mistaken . as will more fully appear in the following discourse . ii. of the authority of the catholic church . the whole and sole design of the first paper , as the replier tells me , was to evince this point . that all controversial p●ints of faith , either about holy scripture , or other subjects , do fall under the iudgment and decision of the church . but , under favour , that is not the whole design of it ; for this implies no more than that the church may , if it pleases , decide them ; but the desi n is , to prove , that in all matters of faith the churches authority is without farther examination to be submitted to ; so that all that christians have to do is but to enquire into two things . 1. where the church is . 2. whether the church hath declared its judgment or not . and several things are objected in the papers against the not submitting to the churches judgment , viz. that every one will be his own iudge ; which is not allowed in common matters , much less in matters of faith ; that no such authority is given to every particular man by scripture ; but the churches authority is there established ; and was owned in the primitive church in the creeds , and about the canonical books ; and since the church had once such a power , there is no reas●n to suppose it lost ; but upon differences happening , the churches iudgment is to be submitted to . this is the whole strength and force of the first paper ; and it is about a subject of the highest importance , both as to the satisfaction of particular persons , and the peace of the christian world. and the clearing thes . two points will go a very great way towards the putting an end to controversies . 1. that in all disputes we are to search no farther , but presently to yield to the judgment of the church . 2. that the roman-catholic church is that church . how far i am from being satisfied with the latter doth already appear ; i now set my self to consider the other . and here are these things necessary to be debated , 1. whether christ and his apostles did establish such a standing judicature in the church , to which all christians were bound to submit in matters of faith ? 2. whether the primitive church did own such a judicature ; and did accordingly govern their faith ? 3. whether it be an unreasonable thing to suppose the contrary , viz. that christ should leave men to judge for themselves in matters which concern their salvation , according to the scriptures ? ( 1. ) whether christ and his apostles did establish such a standing judicature in the church to put an end to all controversies which should arise about matters of faith ? we do not question but christ might have done it if he had pleased ; and there is no doubt he foresaw all those inconveniences which are now objected against the want of it ; but the point before us , is , whether christ , who alone could do it , hath declared this to be his will and pleasure ? we are then to consider , that this being a point of so great consequence , the commission for such a court of judicature in the church ought to be delivered in the plainest and clearest words that may be ; for otherwise this were to beget controversies instead of putting an end to them . when god under the law , established a supreme court of appeal as to the differences which might arise about the law , he tells them where that court should fit , and commands the people to go up thither and hear their sentence and submit to it . this was a plain and clear declaration of the will of god ; and they had no more to do but to go up to the place which god did chuse , viz. ierusalem . and there was never any dispute aft●rwards among the israelites what they were to do when differences happened ; for an appeal lay to the court of ierusalem , and the sentence of that court they were to stand to on pain of death . our blessed saviour knew this constitution among the jews , when he founded his church ; and if he had intended any such thing therein , he would not have fallen short of the exactness of the law in the things necessary in order to the establishment of it ; i. e. he would not have failed to have told us , who were to make up that supreme court , and where it was to sit. for these things were necessary to the end of it . shall we then say that christ was not yet resolved where it should be ? or , that it was not fit to let it be known so soon ? but why not , when he made promises to the apostles of being with them to the end of the world ? there can be no pretence , why he should not then declare , where the supreme and standing court of his church was to be ; which was in all ages to give rules to the rest of the church , and to determine all points of faith which came before them . but did the apostles determine this matter after christ's ascension ? if they had done it , we must have yielded , because they had an infallible spirit : but we find nothing like it in all their writings . they mention heresies often , and damnable ones they saw creeping into the church , they lamented the schisms and divisions in the churches of their own planting , and used frequent and vehement exhortations to peace and unity . but why not a word of the infallible judge of controversies all this while ? s. paul wrote to the church of rome it self , and even there mentions dissensions that were among them , as well as in any other church . what , could not he tell them they were to make rules and give judgment for the whole church ? did s. paul envy this privilege to s. peter's see , and therefore took no notice of it ? that i suppose will not be said of him , though he once withstood him to the face . but , how happen the rest of the apostles not to do it ? nay , how came s. peter himself , writing for the benefit of the whole church , in a catholic epistle , never to give the least intimation concerning it ? these things make it appear incredible to me , that christ or his apostles appointed any such thing ; especially , when the apostles in their infallible writings give such directions to particular christians as they do ; to prove all things , and to hold fast that which is good ; to try the spirits whether they be of god o● not . what had they to do to try the spirits , or to prove any thing themselves , if the judgment of the matters of faith were so given to the church , that others without farther enquiry are bound to submit to its sentence ? and if christ and his apostles knew nothing of such an infallible judge ; we have no reason to hearken to any , who after their time should pretend to it . for the promise of infallibility must be made by him ; and such a commission can be derived only from the immediate authority of christ himself . but the defender saith , the holy scripture assures us that the church is the foundation and pillar of truth . i confess , i cannot be assured from hence , that the church hath such an authority as is here pleaded for , suppose it be understood of the whole church . for how was it possible the church at that time should be the foundation and pillar of truth , when the apostles had the infallible spirit , and were to guide and direct the whole church ? it seems therefore far more probable to me , that those words relate to timothy , and not to the church , by a very common elleipsis , viz. how he ought to behave himself in the church of god , which is the house of the living god , as a pillar and support of truth : and to that purpose this whole epistle was written to him ; as appears by the beginning of it , wherein he is charged not to give heed to fables , and to take care that no false doctrine were taught at ephesus . now , saith the apostle , if i come not shortly , yet i have written this epistle that thou maist know how to behave thy self in the church , which is the house of god , as a pillar and support of tru●h . what can be more natural and easie , than this sense ? and that there is no novelty in it appears from hence , that gregory nyssen expresly delivers this to be the meaning ; and many others of the fathers apply the same phrases to the great men of the church . s. basil useth the very same expressions concerning musonius . s. chrysosrom calls the apostles the immovable pillars of the true faith. theodoret saith concerning s. peter and s. iohn , that they were the towers of godliness , and the pillars of truth . ●regory nazianzen calls s. basil , the ground of faith , and the rule of truth : and elsewhere , the pillar and ground of the church ; which titles he gives to another bishop at that time . and so it appears in the greek catena , mentioned by heinsius , s. basil read these words or understood them so ; when he saith , the apostles were the pillars of the new jerusalem , as it is said , the pillar and ground of the church . i forbear more , since these are sufficient to shew that they understood this place as relating to timothy , and not to the church . as to what he brings of scriptures not being of private i●terpretation ; it is so remote from the sense and scope of the place , which relates wholy to divine inspiration , that this is a great instance of that private interpretation which ought to be avoided , viz. of minding only the words , without regard to the sense of scripture . it was said in the papers , tha● christ left his power to his church , even to forgive sins in heaven ; and left his spirit with them , which they exercised after the resurrection . it was farther answered , that all this makes nothing for the roman-catholic church not then in being , unless she were heir-general to the apostles ; that the ordinary power of the keys relates not to this matter ; that the promise of the spirit made to the apostles , implied many gifts not pretended to by this heir-general , as the gift of tongues , spirit of discerning , prophecie , miraculous cures and punish ments . if no more be understood of divine assistance , that is promised as much to keep men from sin as error ; but the church of rome pretends only to the latter ; and yet it is granted too , that it may err in matters of great consequence to the peace of the christian world , as in the deposing doctrine this is the substance of the answer ; let us now see what they reply . the force of what the desender saith is this , that though the roman church were not then in being , yet as soon as it was , it was a part of the catholic church , to which the promises were made ; and therefore the roman-catholic church being the one church of christ , these promises must have their effect in her . this is all i can make of it ; though it cost me more pains to lay their things together with an appe●●ance of strength , than to give an answer to them . the roman church it seems had not the promises made to it ; but as soon as it was a church , she was a part of the catholic church . this is very intelligible . let us then go on . but how come the promises made to the catholic church to belong to the roman-catholic ? how comes the roman-catholic to be the one church of christ on ea●th ? but this is running forwards and backwards . and 〈◊〉 g●od is to be done , without supposing roman and catho●●● to be terms equivalent . he tells me , i am over-hasty in removing the power of working miracles out of the church . for , he saith , god still works miracles in the roman church ; and if i would put the whole issue on miracles , he would undertake the proof . there is nothing in this case like working of miracles among us , for our satisfaction . for miracles are a sign to unbelievers . but it is a pleasant thing , that they should go about to convince us by those things , which they laugh at one another for pretending to . i will give them an instance past contradiction . did not the iansenists pretend to a miracle at port-royal by one of the thorns of our saviours crown ? and did not the iesuits expose the very pretence as idle and ridiculous ? as appears by f. annat's book on that occasion . the late author of the prejudices against the jansenists , upon occasion of that miracle , lays down some good rules for discerning true miracles and false . ( 1. ) that such miracles are not sufficient to convince , which may be effected by a created power , unless they be attested by such miracles which can only be effected by a divine power ; such as resurrection from the dead . ( 2. ) we must not only attend to the nature , but to the end of miracles ; which , he saith , is the true worship of god , and the love of vertue . and by these rules i shall be content to examine all his miracles , when ever he produces them . the assistance which christ promised , he tells us , was to all his . doctrine , and to all time . but what a sad thing is it , that we have nothing but his bare saying for the proof of it ! never man more needed infallibility than this defender does , when he undertakes to prove it . what! can christ afford no assistance to his church without infallibility ? what thinks he of the assistance of divine grace ? doth that make all infallible that have it ? and is not that assistance by vertue of divine promises ? is this to ask which of the parts of his promise he will not perform ? we doubt not he will perform all he hath promised , but we desire to see where he hath made the promise . we ask nothing unreasonable , and therefore out of pity to our weakness , shew these promises of standing infallibility to us ; and do not take it still for granted without proving it . but the replier saith , the promises of christ imply whatever is necessary to the church for the support and government of her self to the worlds end . is infallibility then necessary for the support and government of the catholic church ? if not , then the promises of support and government ●elate not to the matter . but no less a man than s. augustine , frequently affirms , that the promises made by christ to the church , are only made to good and not to bad men in it ; and that the case of wicked men in the church , and of hereticks and schismaticks out of it is alike ; i. e. that both have true sacraments , but neither any right to the promises . and this he doth not assert by chance , but it is the very foundation of his answer to the donatists , in the answer which himself valued the most . and he concludes with saying , that some are in the house of god , so as to be that house of god which was built upon a rock , and had th promises made to it ; and these are the saints dispersed over the world , and joyned together in the communion of the same sacraments ; others are so in the house , as not to belong to the frame of it ; but are as the chaff among the wheat ; and are rather of the house than any part of it . if this be good doctrine in s. augustin , what becomes of all the promi●es made to the church , with respect to the external government and support of it ? i might name multitudes of places more , wherein he argues , that wicked ●en do not belong to the one church ; and are not the sp●se of christ : for christ saith to them , i know you n●t ; and her●●ticks , he saith , are but one sort of bad men. if therefore the promises of the catholic church do not belong to one , neither can 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other . i had therefore reason ●o ask , where god hath ever promised to keep men more from error than sin ? and how it comes to pass that very bad men are allow'd in the church of rome to have this pr●●●ise of infallibility ? the defender slides off from this to a matter he was better prepared to answer . but the replier tells us of some of the proph●ts who were great sinners ; i suppose he means balaam and caiaphas . but however , this doth not reach to the matter of the new testament , wherein doing the will of god is laid down as the best means of knowing the truth . but he offers at a reason why impeccability is not so necessary as infallibility , because without this the church could not subsist ; for if once she make shipwrack of her faith , she is no more a church , an effe● not so proper to sin. there is a great difference between absolute impeccability and notorious offenders ; the question i put was not concerning perfect saints , but great sinners ; why they should believe that christ would give an infallible assistance to keep such men from erring , when notwithstanding the assistance of grace , they run on in a course of wickedness ? he saith , one is necessary for the church , and not the other . then there may be a holy catholic infallible church made up of none but great sinners . and was this such a church as christ purchased with his own blood ; and whom he re●●●med from all impiety to be a peculiar people , zealous of good works ? if they say , the grace of god ill never fail to keep some from great sins ; why may not the same hold as to great errors ? and that be as much as the promises extend to . b●t if the church once makes shipwrack of faith , she is no more a church . how comes faith to be separated from a good conscience ? i am sure s. paul joyns them together . is no error consistent with the being of a church ? not an error about the seat of infallibility ? not an error about the immaculate conception ? nor about the vision of god before the day of iudgment ? not about the son 's being of the same substance with the father ? not about christ's having a will proper to his humane nature ? then there can be no such thing as the roman-catholic church in the opinion of those who are for personal infallibility of the pope , since the heads of their church have erred about these things . the true church can never make shipwrack of that faith which makes her a true church : but other kind of errors cannot overthrow her being . i urged farther , that notwithstanding the pretence to infallibility , they allow the church may err in matters of practice of the highest importance , as about deposing princes and absolving subjects from their allegiance ; but not about the least matter of faith ; which made it very suspicious to be rather a politick device than a thing they really believed . here the defender ( i fear wilfully ) mistakes my meaning ; for he argues as if he thought i were proving , that the church of rome hath defined the deposing doctrine as a matter of faith ; and great pains he takes to prove it hath not . and all to no purpose . for i insisted only , that in this point , they confessed their church had grosly erred as to a matter of practice , though it had not expresly declared it as an article of faith. i desire him to speak out ; hath it not erred notoriously as to practice in this matter ? whether they have made any such declaration or not , as to oblige all others of their communion to embrace the doctrine ; it is undeniably true , that their popes and councils have owned it and acted according to it , to the mighty disturbance of the peace of the christian world. now the question i put was this , since it is granted they have so notoriously erred in matters of practice , why should any believe them infallible in points of faith ? i. e. that so many popes , so many councils , should act upon this principle , as believing it to be true , and yet preserve their infallibility in not declaring it to be true . this i confess is an extraordinary thing ; and the defender seems in earnest to think they were kept from it by an over-ruling assistance of the divine spirit . which is just as if a man were set upon in the road by some pretending to be his friends , who should take from him all that he had , and afterwards he should admire the providence of god , that these men should not declare it lawful to do it . it is granted that so many popes did great mischief to the world , and especially to christian princes , by acting according to this doctrine , and that they actually owned it in councils , and made canons on purpose for it , but yet an over-ruling assistance kept them from making it a point of faith. they declared their own belief by their practice and canons ; they required the observance of them under pain of being cut off from the church if they did it not ; and gregory vii . saith , they cut themselves off who question this power ; but they were deceived , notoriously deceived in this matter , yet they might be infallible still . did not these popes declare that to be christs doctrine which is not ? but not authoritatively . what i pray doth this mean ? did they not declare this power by vertue of the authority given them by christ over the church ? and declare those excommunicate who did not obey their sentence ? is not this proceeding authoritatively ? suppose the popes had in the same manner declared that hereticks should be re-baptized ; i. e. made canons for it , and required the observance of them ; i desire to know whether this had not been authoritative declaring it , though they affixed no anathema to those who held the contrary ? is it possible for any man to believe , that if there were such a thing as infallibility in the guides of the church , that christ would suffer them to run into such pernicious errors , and in such an authoritative manner , and yet make good his promise of keeping them from error by not suffering them to define this doctrine as an article of faith ? but this will appear to be a very slender evasion , if men will reflect on the nature of the matter it self ; for it is about the exercise of the pope's power over princes ; and can it be supposed that since they challenged it , they would ever suffer it to be debated in councils ; but they would still have it pass as an inseparable right of their supremacy derived from s. peter . and all that they would allow in this case , is a bare recognition ; and that was made in the councils of lyons and lateran . and the deposing power in the church , was sufficiently owned in the councils of constance and trent . but there are two sorts of articles of faith to be considered in the church of rome . 1. some are defined with an anathema against dissenters ; and so we do not say the deposing power is made an article of faith. 2. some are received upon the common grounds of faith , though not expresly declared . and whatever doctrine being denied would overthrow them , may be justly look'd on as a presumptive article of faith. as the denying the deposing power must charge the church of rome representative and virtual with such acts , as are utterly inconsistent with the promises of divine assistance supposed to be made to it . therefore all those who sincerely believe those promises to belong to the church of rome so taken , must in consequence believe so many popes and councils could not be so grosly mistaken in the ground of their actings . and i find those who do now most contend that this doctrine was never defined , do yet yield , that both popes and councils believed it to be true , and acted accordingly . but if nothing will be allowed to be points of faith , but what passes under the decision of councils approved by the pope as such , i pray tell me , which of the general councils determined the popes supremacy as a point of faith ? where was the roman catholic churches infallibility defined ? are these points of faith with you , or not ? if they be , then there may be points of faith among you which never passed any conciliar definitions ; or such authoritative declaration as the defender means . ( 2. ) i now come to consider the sense of the primitive church about this matter of an infallible judge of controversies . which i am obliged to do , not only because it is said in the papers , that the church exercised this power after the apostles ; but because the defender brings tertullian as rejecting the scripture from being a sufficient rule for controversies ; and s. augustine , as setting up the authority of the church above the scripture in matters of proof . but i confess two lame sayings of fathers make no great impression on me . i am for searching the sense of the primitive church in so weighty a point as this , after another manner ; ( but as briefly as may be ) i. e. by the general sense of the fathers of the first ages about the controversies then on foot , that i may not deceive my self or others in a matter of this consequence . the point is , whether according to the sense of the primitive church , when any controversie about faith doth arise , a person be bound to submit to the churches sentence as infallible ; or he be required to make use of the best means he can to judge concerning it , taking the scriptures for his infallible rule ? now to judge the sense of the primitive church about this point , there can be no method more proper or convincing than to consider what course the christian church did take in the controversies then started , which were great and considerable . and if it had been then believed that christ had left such an infallible authority in the church to have put an end to them ; it had been no more possible to have avoided the mention of it , than if a great cause in law were to be decided among us , that neither party should ever take notice of the iudges in westminster-hall . there were two very great controversies in the primitive church , which continued a long time under different names ; and we are now to observe what method the catholic writers of the church took for establishing the true faith. and these were concerning the humanity , and the divinity of christ. that concerning the humanity of christ begun very early ; for s. iohn mentions those who denied that iesus was come in the flesh ; i. e. that he really took our nature upon him . and this heresie did spread very much after the apostles times . ignatius made it a great part of the business of his epistles to warn the churches he wrote to , and to arm them against it . and what way doth he take to do it ? doth he ever tell them of the danger of using their own judgment ; or of not relying on the authority of the church in this matter ? i cannot find one passage tending that way in all his epistles . but instead thereof , he appeals to the words of our saviour in the evangelist , touch me , and see if i be a body , or a spirit : his words are an incorporeal daemon ; but it was usual with the ancient fathers to repeat the sense of places , and not the very words . and a little after he saith , that these hereticks were not perswaded , neither by the prophets , nor by the law , nor by the gospel . and he advises the church of smyrna to attend to the prophets , but especially to the gospel ; in which the passion and resurrection of christ are declared . irenaeus disputes warmly and frequently against this heresie ; and he appeals to the testimony of the apostles in thei● writings ; especially to the gospels of s. iohn and s. ●a●thew ; but not omitting the other gospels and the epistles of s. paul and s. iohn . and he calls the scriptures , the * immoveable rule of truth ; the † foundation and pillar of our faith ; and saith , that * they contain the whole will of god. it is t●ue , he makes use of tradition in the church , to those who rejected the scriptures ; and he finds fault with those who took words and pieces of scripture to serve their turn ; but he directs to the right use of it , and doth not seem to question the sufficiency thereof , for the satisfaction of humble and teac●able minds in all the points of faith , which were then controverted . tertullian undertakes the same cause in several books and several ways . one is by shewing that the opinion of the hereticks was novel ; not being consistent with the doctrine delivered by the apostles , as appeared by the unanimous consent of the apostolical churches ; which did all believe christ had a true and real body . and this way he made use of , because those hereticks either rejected , or interpolated , or perverted the books of scripture . but this way of prescription look'd like out-lawing of hereticks and never suffering them to come to a fair trial. therefore in his other books he goes upon three substantial grounds . ( 1. ) that the books of scripture do certainly deliver the doctrine of the christian church concerning christs having a true body . ( 2. ) that these books of scripture were not counterfeit , nor corrupted and adulterated ; but preserved genuine and sincere in the apostolical churches . ( 3. ) that the sense which the hereticks put upon the words of scripture was forced and unreasonable ; but the sense of the church was true and natural . so that tertullian did conclude , that there was no way to end this controversie but by finding out the true sense of scripture . but the author of the defence brings in tertullian , as representing all trial of doctrine by scripture , as good for nothing but to turn the brain or the stomach ; and that the issue is either uncertain or none . i grant tertullian hath those words ; but for truths sake i wish he had not left out others , viz. that those hereticks do not receive some scriptures ; and those they do receive they add and alter as they please . and what , saith he , can the most skilful in scriptures do with those who will defend or deny what they think fit ? with such indeed , he saith , it is to little purpose to dispute out of scriptures . and no doubt he was in the right ; for the rule must be allow'd on both sides ; or else there can be nothing but a wrangling about it . the first thing then here , was to settle the rule , and for this the testimony of the apostolical churches was of great use . but to imagine that tertullian rejected all trial of doctrines by scripture , is to make him to write to little purpose afterwards ; when he combates with all sorts of hereticks out of scripture , as appears by his books against marcion , praxeas , hermogenes and others . and tertullian himself saith , that if we bring hereticks only to scripture , they cannot stand . not because they went only upon reason ; but in the end of the same treatise he saith , they made use of scriptures too , but such as were to be confuted by other scriptures . and therefore he makes the hereticks to decline , as much as in them lay , the light of the scriptures ; which he would never have charged on others , if he thought himself that controversies could not be ended by them . clemens alexandrinus speaking of the same heresies , makes the controversie to consist chiefly about the scriptures , whether they were to be embraced and followed , or not . he saith . none of the heresies among christians had so darken'd the truth , but that those who would might find it ; and the way he advises to , is a diligent search of the scriptures ; wherein the demonstration of our faith doth consist ; and by which , as by a certain criterion , we are to judge of the truth and falshood of opinions . which he there insists upon at large . he speaks indeed of the advantage of the church above heresies , both as to antiquity and unity ; but he never makes the iudgment of the church to be the rule of faith , as he doth the scriptures . in the dialogue against the marcionists , supposed to be origen's , this controversie is briefly handled , the point is brought to the sense of scripture ; as in that place , the word was made flesh ; from which , and other places the catholic argues the truth of christ's humane nature ; especially from christ's appealing to the sense of his disciples about the truth of his body after the resurrection . all his demonstrations are out of scripture , and by the meer force of them he overthrows this heresie . and it was nothing but the clear evidence of scripture , without any infallible judgment or assistance of the guides of the church , which did at last suppress this heresie . for no council was called about it , but as the authority of the new testament prevailed , so this heresie declined , and by degrees vanished out of the christian world. and it is observable , that the greatest and worst of heresies were supprest , while no other authority was made use of against them but that of the holy scriptures . so theodoret takes notice , that before his time these heresies by divine grace were extinct . so that the scriptures were then found an effectual means for putting an end to some of the most dangerous heresies which ever were in the christian church . the other great controversie of the first age , was about the divinity of christ ; which begun with the ebionites and cerinthians , and was continued down by succession , as appears by theodoret's account of heresies in his second book . those who first embraced this heresie rejected the whole new testament , and received only the nazarene gospel . but after a while artemon had the boldness to assert that the apostles deliver'd the same doctrine in their writings , and then the controversie was reduced to the sense of scripture . paulus samosatenus follow'd artemon , as photinus afterwards follow'd him . but theodoret again observes , that all those heresies against the divinity of christ were in his time so extinct , that not so much as any remainders of them were left ; but saith he , the true doctrines of the gospels prevail and spread themselves over the world. and we may find what course was taken for putting an end to this controversie , by the management of it with paulus samosatenus . in the fragment of an epistle of dionysius of alexandria , we read the testimonies of scripture which he produced against him ; and more at large in the epistle of the six bishops to him ; who makes use of the very same places of scripture which are most applied to that purpose to this day . to which they only add , that this had been the doctrine of the christian church from the beginning ; and all catholic churches agreed in it . but here is no such thing thought of as i●sallibility in the guides of the church ; for there is great difference between the consent of the christian church , as a means to find out the sense of scripture , and the authority of church guides declaring the sense by vertue of an insallible assistance ; the one is but a moral argument , and the other is a foundation of faith. theodoret further observes , that there was another set of heresies distinct from the two former in the primitive church , which related chiefly to matters of discipline and manners ; and most of these , he saith , were so far destroyed , t●at there were none th●n left , who were followers of nicolas , nepos , or patroclus , and very few novatians , or montanists , or quartodecemans ; so that truth had prevail●d over the world , and the heresies were either quite rooted out , or only some dry and withered branches remained of them in remote and obscure places . which being affirmed by a person of so much judgment and learning , as theodoret was , gives us a plain and evident proof , that the sense of scripture may be so fully clear'd , without an infallible church , as to be effectual for putting an end to controversies . and altho we own a great esteem and reverence for the four general councils ; yet we cannot but observe , that controversies were so far from being ended by them , that they broke out more violently after them . as the arian controversy after the council of nice ; the nestorian after that at eph●sus ; and these gentlemen believe that heresy continues still in the east : the eutychian controversy gave greater disturbance after the council of chalced●n , than before , and continued so to do for many ages : which is an argument that the infallibility of councils , or of the guides of the church , was not a doctrine then received in the church . but i proceed to shew what means were used in the primitive church for putting an end to controversies . of which we have a remarkable instance in the dispute about rebaptizing hereticks . this was managed between st. cyprian and other bishops of africa and asia , on one side , and the bishop of rome on the other . he pleaded custom and tradition : the other , that custom without truth was but ancient error ; and that the matter ought to be examined by scripture ; and many reasons they bring from thence ; because christ said in his gospel , i am truth ; and the only way to prevent errors , is to have recourse to the head and fountain of divine tradition , i. e. to the holy scriptures ; which st. cyprian calls the evangelical and apostolical tradition . so that we have the clear opinion of the african bishops , that this controversy ought to be decided by scripture . but here the replier saith , that right stood for the bishops of rome , and a general council determined the point , and the whole church came to an acquiescence . if the council was in the right , the bishop of rome was not ; if st. cyprian represent his opinion truly , and he saith he did it in his own words , which are , si quis a quacunque haeresi venerit ad nos , nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum est . now , no council ever determin'd so , that whatsoever the heresy was , none should ●e rebaptized . for the councils of arles and nice both disallow'd the baptism of some hereticks ; and therefore , if the council put an end to the controversy , it was by deciding against the bishop of rome , as well as st. cyprian . the donatists afterwards made use of st. cyprians authority in this controversy , which gave occasion to st. augustin , to deliver that noted sentence , concerning scripture and fathers , and councils , viz that anonical scripture is to be preferr'd before any other writings , for they are to be believed without examination ; but the writings of bishops are to be examined and corrected by other bishops and councils , if they see cause ; and lesser councils by greater , and the greatest councils , by such as come after them , when truth comes to be more fully diservered . it is hardly possible for a man to speak plainer against a stand●ng infallible judg in controversies , than st. augustin doth in these words , wherein he neither limits his words to matters of fact , nor to manners ; but he speaks generally , as to the authority of the guides of the church compared with scripture . which are enter'd in the authentick body of the canon law , approved and corrected at rome , only that part which relates to the correcting of councils , is left out . but to make amends , g●atian in another place , hath with admirable ingenuity , put the popes decretal epistles among the can●nical scriptures , and quotes st. augustin for it too . but the roman correctors were ashamed of so gross a forgery , and confess st. augustin never thought of the decretal epistles , but of the canonical scriptures ; but yet they 〈◊〉 itle stand for good canon law. in the controversy about the church with the donatists , st. augustin's constant appeal is to the scrip●● ; and he sets aside , not only particular doctors , hut the prete●● to miracles , and the definitions of councils . he doth not therefore appeal to scripture , because ●hey 〈◊〉 about the church : but because he looked on the testimonies of scripture , as clear enough to decide the point , as he often declares . and he calls the plain testimonies of scripture , the support and strength of their cause . if he then thought that scripture alone could put an end to such a controversy as that , no doubt he thought so as to any other . but we need not mention his thoughts , for he declares as much : whether it be about christ or his church , or any matter of faith , he makes scripture so far the rule , that he denouncess anathema against those who deliver any other doctrine than what is contained in them . nor doth he direct to any church authority to manifest the sense of scripture , but leaves all mankind to judg of it , and even the donatists themselves whom he opposed . the same way he takes with maximinus the arian , he desires all other authorities may be laid aside , and only those of scripture and reason used . to what purpose , unless he thought the scripture sufficient to end the controversy ? against faustus the manichean , he saith , the excellency of the canonical scripture is such , as to be placed in a threne far above all other writings , to which every faithful and pious mind ought to submit . all other writings are to be tried by them ; but there is no doubt to be made of whatever we find in them . the same method he uses with the p●lagians , an advises them to yeild to the authority of scripture , which can neither deceive nor be deceived . this controversy , saith he , requires a judg ; les christ judg , let us hear him speak . let the apostle judg with him , for christ speaks in his apostle . and in another place , let st. john sit judg between us . and in general he saith , we ought to acquiesce in the authority of scripture ; and when any controversy arises , it ought to be quietly ended by proofs brought from thence . but st. augustin is the man , whom the defender produces against me ; because against the manicheans , he saith , he believed the scripture for the sake of the church ; and to bring any proof out of scripture against the church , does weaken that authority , upon which he believed the scripture , and so he could believe neither . the meaning wherof is this , st. augustin was reduced from being a manichean to the catholick church by many arguments ; and by the authority of the church delivering the books of scripture , he embraced the gospel , which before he did not . now , saith he , you would make use of this gospel to prove manichaeus an apostle , i can by no means yield to this way . why so ? do not you believe it to be gospel ? yes , saith he ; but the same reason which moved me to embrace this gospel , moved me to reject manichaeus , and therefore i have no reason to allow a testimony out of it for manichaeus . not that st. augustine seared any proof that could be brought from thence ; but he begins with general topicks , as tertullian did against the hereticks of his time , before he came to close with them . and such was this which he here produces . for in case manichaeus his name had been in the gospel as an apostle of christs appointing , this argument of st. augustine had not been sufficient . for there might be sufficient reason from the churches authority to embrace the gospel ; and yet if the scripture had been plain , he ought to have believed manichaeus his apostleship , though the church disowned it . as i will prove by an undeniable instance : suppose a jewish proselyte to have argued just after the same manner against jesus being the messias ; the apostles go about to prove that he was so , by the testimony of the prophets : no , saith he , i can allow no such argument : because the same authority of the jewish church which perswaded me to believe the prophets , doth likewise perswade me not to believe jesus to be the messias . if it be so far from holding in this case , neither can it in the other . for it proceeds upon a very feeble supposition , that no church can deliver a book for canonical , but it must judg aright concerning all things relating to it . which unavoidably makes the jewish church infallible at the same time it condemned . christ as a deceiver . but this was only a witty velitation in st. augustine , used by rhetoricians , before he entered into the merits of the cause . and it is very hard when such sayings shall at every turn be quoted , against his more mature and well weighed judgment . what noise is there made in the world with that one saying of his , i should not believe the gospel , unless the authority os the cathelick church moved me ? and the defender brings it to prove the church more visible than scripture . whereas , he means no more by it , but that the authority of the church was greater to him , than that of manichaeus . for he had been swayed by his authority to reject the gospel ; and now he rejects that authority , and believes the catholick church rather than him . and this doth not make the churches authority greater than scripture , but more visible than that of manichaeus . but if st. augustin's testimony here be allowed to extend farther , yet it implies no more than that the constant , universal tradition of the scripture by the catholick church , makes it appear credible to us . what can be deduced hence as to the churches infallibility in interpreting scripture , or the roman churches authority in delivering it ? the arrian controversie gave a great disturbance to the christian church ; and no less a man than the emperour constantine thought there was no such way to put an end to it , as to search the scriptures about it ; as he declared to the council of nice at their meeting , as theodoret saith . it is true , he spake to the guides of the church assembled in council , but his words are remarkable , viz. that the books of scripture do plainly instruct us what we are to believe concerning the deity , if we search them with peaceable minds . methinks bellarmine bestows no great complement on constantine for this saying , when he saith , he was a great emperour , but no grea● doctor . this had been indeed sawcy and scurrilous in others , but it was no doubt good manners in him . st. hilary commends his son constantius , because he would have this controversie ended by the scriptures ; and he desires to be heard by him about the sense of the scriptures concerning it ; which he was ready to shew , not from new writings , but from gods word . athanasius seems to question the usefulness of councils in this matter , because the scripture of it self was sufficient to put an end to it . and elsewhere saith , that it is plain enough to those who search for truth . and in general he asserts their sufficiency and clearness for the discovery of truth . when a controversie was raised in st. basil's time about the trinity , the best expedient that great man could think of for putting an end to it , was to refer it to the scriptures . in another place he commends it as the best way to find out truth , to be much in the study of the scriptures ; and saith that the spirit of god did thereby lead to all things useful . epiphanius was well acquainted with all the heresies of the church , and the best means to suppress them ; and certainly he would never have taken such pains to refute so many heresies out of scripture , if he had look'd on the church as the infallible judg of controversies . for he not only undertakes to give the sense of scripture for the ending of controversies , but he supposes all persons capable of understanding it , that will apply themselves to it . which he several times affirms in the consutation of his last heresie . i shall conclude with st. chrysostome , who speaks to this purpose , to a person so offended at the sects and heresies among christians , that he did not know whom or what to believe : ●he scriptures , saith he are pla● and true , and it is an easie matter to judg by them ; if a man agrees with the s●●iptures , he is a christian ; if not , he is out of that ●oll . but men di●fer about the sense of scripture . what , saith he , h●ve ye not a 〈◊〉 and judgment ? and after the answering several other cav●ls , l● concludes , let us submit to the divine law , and d●● what is pleasing t● that and that will bring us to heaven . and in another place , if ●e s●udy the scriptures , we shall understand both true doctrine and a good li●e . and again , the scriptures are the door which k●●p out hereticks , which establish our minds in the truth , and suffer us not to be sedu●ed . thus i have given somewhat a clearer view of the sense of the primitive church in this m●tter , than could be taken from two single passages of tertullian and st. augustin ; and i have been so far from swelling or enlarging this as far as i could , that i have made choice only of these , out of many others which i could have produced . but if these be not sufficient , a volume will not satisfie ; which it were not hard to make on this subject , out of the fathers . ( 3 ) it is time now to examine the inconveniencies alledged against persons judging of matters of faith according to the scriptures : ( 1 ) that god almighty would then leave us at uncertainties , if he gave us a rule , and ●eft every one to be his own iudg ; for that were to leave every phantastical m●n to c●use as he pleases . to this was answered , ( 1 ) that this objection doth not reach those of the church of englan● , which receives the three creeds , and embraces the four general councils , and professes to hold nothing contrary to any u●iversal tradition of the church from the apostles times . and that we have often offer'd to put the controversies between us and the church of rome upon that issue . to this answer the replier saith , that they do not charge our church with not prof●ssing these things , but for erring against her own prof●ssion , and deserting that church to which all these authorities bear testimony , and of which her progenitors and first reformers had been members , and from whose hands she received what soever she had , either of scripture , creeds , councils or tradition , and consequently whose judgment she was bound to follow . whether we act against our profession or not , it is plain the rule of our church doth not by this profession leave every one to follow his own fancy , and to believe as he pl●ses . but wherein is it that we thus act against our profession ? do we reject the ●reeds , councils , and universal tradition in our deeds ? wherein ? in deserting the communion of the church of rome ? and is the necessity of th●t contained in the creeds here receiv'd ? in the ●our councils ? ●y universal tradition ? for this i refer to the foregoing d●scourse about the unity of the catholick church . but we receiv'd these thi●gs from the church of rome . so we do the old t●stament from the jews , must we therefore hold communion still with them ? are we bound therefore to follow the judgment of the jewish chur●● ? but i do not understand how we receiv'd these things from the authority of the church of rome . we receiv'd the scriptures from universal tradition derived from all the apostolical ●hurches ; and so the creeds and councils ; and such an universal tradition is the thing we desire ; for the trent-creed , our forefathers never knew or receiv'd as part of that faith without which there is no salvation . but here the defender grows brisk , and saith , all hereticks since the first ●our general councils , may say the very same which i say for the church of england ; and all before them the equivalent . arius , macedonius , nestorius , and entyches , might have said as much of the cr●eds before them ; and all complain of the villainous fact●ns in the church against them . my plea for the church of england hath justified them all . [ the same thing is said in sewer words by the replier . ] that this plea justifies the arrians , and condemns the nicene fathers , vindicates the eutychians nestorians , and donatists , and confounds all general councils . lest therefore i should seem to betray the church of england , instead of defending it , i shall shew the reasonableness and equity of this plea , and its great difference from that of the ancient hereticks condemned by general councils , or the ancient church . ( 1 ) the ancient hereticks were condemned by that rule of faith which the church always receiv'd , v z. the scriptures ; but the council of t●ent set up a new rule of faith on purpose that they might condemn us for hereticks , viz. in making tradition equal with scripture , which is directly contrary to the doctrine of the primitive church ; as i have already shewed . the method of general councils was to have the books of scripture placed in the middle of them on a table , as the rule they were to judg by . and richerius , a doct●● of the scrbon , not only affirms the custom , but sai●h it was for 〈◊〉 reason , that the fathers of the councils might be admonished , that all things were to be examined by the standard of the gospel . bellarmin affirms the council of nice , to have drawn its conclusion out of scriptures ; and the same he affirms of the 6th general council ; and he might as well have done it of the rest ; their main design , being only to establish the doctrine of the divinity and incarnation of christ. but the case of councils came to be very different , when they took upon them to define other matters for which they had no colour in scripture ( as the 2d council of nice did , which was the first that went upon tradition ) and then the christian church did not shew such respect to them ; as was most apparent in the case of this council of nice , which was universally rejected in these western parts , ( rome excepted ) as appears by the council of fran●ford , and the unexceptionable testimonies of eghinardus , hincmarus , and others . would this have been a sufficient argument against charlemaign and the western bishops , that they joyned in the plea of the ancient hereticks , and none were ever condemned by the church , but they made such complaints against the proceedings of councils , as they did ? it is certain that leo armenus in the east , as well as charles , and the western church , rejected that council , as contrary to scripture ; which shews that neither in the east or west , did they think themselves so tied up by definitions of councils , proceeding in such a manner ; but that they were at full liberty to examin , and if they saw cause , to reject such definitions . while councils did declare , that they intended to make use of no other rule but scripture , and to deliver only the sense of the catholick church from the beginning , a great regard was to be shew'd to them : but when they set up another rule , the christian church had just reason not to submit to their decrees . and to say , this is the plea of all hereticks , is just as if an innocent person might not be allowed to plead not guilty , because the greatest malefactors do the same . there must be some certain rules whereby to proceed in this matter : and this is the first we fix upon , that they proceed as the ancient councils did according to scriptures . ( 2. ) the ancient hereticks were condemned by such councils , as did represent the universal church after another manner , than the council of trent did . i do not say , there was ever such a general council , as did fully represent the universal church , which could not be done without provincial councils summon'd b●●ore in all parts of christendom , and the de●●egation from them of such persons as were to deliver their sense ●n the matter of faith , to be debated in the general council ; and i have reason to question whether this were ever done . but however , there is a very great difference in the ancient councils from the modern , as to this point of representing , for in them there was the consent of all the patriarchs , and a general summons for the bishops from all parts to appear . but in the modern councils , four patriarchs , and the bishops under them , have been excluded ; and the 5th hath summon'd the bishops under him to meet together , and then hath called this a general council . which is just as if in the time of the heptarchy , the king of mercia should assemble the states under him , and call the convention of them , the parliament of england . thus in the council of trent , the pope summons the bishops that owned his supremacy , and had taken oaths to him , to meet together , and would have this pass for a general council . when the council met , and cardinal hosius was appointed president in it ; stanistaus orechovius , a warm and zealous romanist , writes to hosius , that it would very much conduce to their reputation and interest , if the patriarchs of constantinople and antioch , were summon'd to the council , because the greeks and armenians depended upon them : and he could not understand how the catholick church could be represented without them , nor how the council could be called oecumenical . to which hosivs replied , that the pope being oecumenical patriarch , a council called by him , was an oecumenical council . now this we say , is extreamly different from the notion of an oecumenical council in the ancient times , and overthrows the rights of other churches , as they were setled by the four general councils ; and therefore the case is very different as to being condemnd by general councils , and by the late conventions assembled by the popes authority . ( 3. ) themselves allow that some councils may be , and ought to be rejected ; and therefore all our business is to enquire whether we may not with as much reason reject some councils , as they do others . they reject the council of ariminum , which together with that of s●leucia ( which sat at the same time ) make up the most general council we read of in church-history . for bellarmin owns that there were 600. bishops in the western part of it . so that there were many more bishops assembled than were in the council of nice ; there was no exception against the summons , or the bishops present ; and yet the authority of this council is rejected , because it was too much influenced by constantius , and his agents . the 2d council of ephesus wanted no just summons , no presence of patriarchs , or number of bishops , yet this is rejected , because its proceedings were too violent . the councils of constantinople against images are rejected ; because , but one patriarch was present in either of them . now i desire to know , whether it be not as lawful to except against other councils , as against these , supposing the reasons to be the same ; and greater evidence to be given in these latter times , of the truth of the allegations . besides , we find they are divided in the church of rome , concerning their latter councils : some say , the councils of pisa , constance and basil , were true general councils , and that the council of lateran under leo x. was not so ; others say , that the former have not the authority of general councils , but the latter hath . some say , that there have been 18. general councils ; so the roman editors of the councils , and others ; but a great number of these are rejected by others , who allow but 8. of the number , viz. those wherein the eastern and western bishops met . and so the councils of lateran and trent , besides others , are cut off . what becomes then of the articles of faith , defined by those councils ? for they cannot be received on the account of their authority . however , we find this objection lies equally against them , as against us . for , do not both these differing parties side with the ancient hereticks , as much as we do ? for they except against the supreme judicature in the church , and decline the judgment of these councils , as much as those hereticks did the councils of their own times . these are therefore but ordinary t●picks , which may be reasonble or not , as they are applied . ( 2. ) it was answer'd , that the way proposed , doth not hinder mens believing as they please , i. e. without sufficient reason for their faith ; several instances were given : as , believing the roman church to be the catholick , without any colour of scripture , reason or antiquity ; ( as is now fully shew'd in the foregoing discourse ) believing against the most convincing evidence of their own senses . believing the lawfulness of the worship of images can be reconciled with gods forbidding it ; the communion in one kind with christs institution ; and praying in an unknow tongue , with the 14 chap●er of the first epistle to the corinthians . to this the replier saith only , that these are voluntary assumpti on s without proof : and his saying so , needs no answer . the defender shelters himself under the catholick church , and resolves not to put to sea with the answerer about these things . but he knows very well , we utterly deny any of these to have been the practice of the universal church according to vincentius lerinensis his rules ; by which we are content to be tried . and although he seems to wish for such a trial , yet i know a reason why they ought to decline it , because i am certain they can never make it good in any one of them . ( 2 ) the second inconvenience objected was , that this would make the wisdom of god fall beneath the discretion of prudent law-givers ; who do not make laws , and leave every man to be his own judg as to right or wrong . it was answered three ways : ( 1 ) that there are inconveniencies on both sides , and one ought to be provided against , as well as the other ; sor as the people are not to be their own judges , so it may happen that an usurper may pretend to the right of interpreting the laws , only to justifie his usurpation . ( 2 ) that the people are allowed in some sense to interpret the laws , or else they could never understand the duty they owe to their lawful king , and to justifie his rights against all the pretences of usurpers . to this the replier saith nothing , and the defender saith that which is next to nothing to the first , and takes no notice of the second answer ; and i think i therein tell him plainly enough , what i would be at . he saith , i mean receiving and holding the true faith by usurpation . nothing was farther from my thoughts . but i had thought it were easie enough to know whom i meant , viz. such a one as pretends to an infallible chair , which they cannot deny themselves to be the highest usurpation , if he cannot prove his title by scripture , as we are sure he cannot . ( 3 ) that in this case a rule is given to direct persons in the way to heaven , and therefore must be capable of being understood by those who are to make use of it for that end . which being the greatest concernment to mankind , they are therefore obliged to search into it for their own salvation ; but we exclude not the help of spiritual guides , and embrace the ancient creeds of the church . to this the replier answers two things : ( 1 ) that an infallible guide is necessary to secure persons from wilful errors , which he saith god hath provided . from wilful error ! this is new doctrine indeed , that god hath provided a remedy for wilful error . had not our saviour himself an infallible spirit , and yet we do not read that ever he secured men from wilful error ? or ever designed to do it . but suppose an infallible judg could do this , he doth not tell us where he is to be found , who he is , and in what manner he doth thus secure men , which are very necessary enquiries ; and without being satisfied in all these points , we are still left to be our own judges , so far as concerns the way to salvation ; since at the day of judgment we must answer for our selves , than which there can be no greater obligation to care and sincerity in judging . suppose a mans life depends upon the benefit of his clergy , and one comes to him and tells him , you are an ignorant man , and liable to great mistakes in reading , therefore i advise you by no means to trust to your own skill in reading , for it is a horrible dark letter , and many have been mistaken that were more book learned than you ; therefore take my counsel , there is mr. ordinary who understands book-learning a thousand times better than you or i , trust him for the reading , and no doubt you will escape . ay , sir , saith the man , all that is very true that you say , but my life lies at stake ; and how if mr. ordinary's reading will not be allow'd by the judg for mine , then i am a lost man past recovery ; therefore i am resolved to learn to read my self ; and to that end i will make the best use of his skill to instruct me before-hand that i may be able to answer for my self . this needs no application . but i do not see how an inf●●lible 〈◊〉 should be necessary to particular persons in order to 〈◊〉 salvation , upon the ●rinciples owned and receiv'd by the greatest divines in the roman church . for aquinas determines that every one that hath saving grace , hath likewise a gift of understanding whereby h● is ●ussiciently instructed in all things necessary to salvation , and that it is never withdrawn from them as to those things . if this doctrine hold good , i do not see any such necessity for persons to look after an infallible guide , as there is to look after saving grace . gulielmus parisiensis saith , that mens not looking after the way of salvation themselves , is that which will d●mn them . and in case of difference among guides , if a man sincerely makes application to god , to know the truth he doth not question but such is the mercy of god to keep such a one from dangerous error ; or if he doth suffer him to fall into error with a good mind , it shall not be imputed to him . it is a doctrine generally receiv'd in the schools , that where ever god doth bestow his grace , there goes along with it such a gift of understanding , as keeps them from being deceived in the matters they believe in order to salvation . henricus a gandavo thus expresses it , that as faith makes the mind to rest on the authority of the scripture , so this gift of understanding makes them perceive the truth of what they are to believe . and what need then such an infallible guide ? ( 2 ) he saith , that ancient creeds will not serve , unless there be a power in the church to make n●w decisions in matters of faith. this ought to have been a little proved . for in truth we are apt to think the faith once delivered to the saints as suffi●ient to carry us to heaven , as it was in the apostles times . a man is heir to a good estate , which by many generations is derived down from his ancestors , and he hath the original deeds in his hands ; one comes to him and tells him , ●t is a very fine estate you are heir to , and it is a thousand pities you should want a good title to it ; i will put you into a way to get it , if you will give up your musty old deeds , and put your self into the hands of such persons as i shall name to you , they shall make you a new settlement , and add several parcels to your estate which you had not before . i am content , saith the heir , with my ancestors estate , and i will never part with my old deeds for all your new settlements ; for i am sure my ancestors would never deceive me ; but i know not what designs you with your new settlements may have upon me , and therefore i pray let me alone with my old deeds . the defender here dances upon ropes , he makes swift and quick motions , but he stands on a slender bottom , and he knows not whereon to fix , but would seem ●o say something , but not enough to afford scope for an answer . that which he aims at , is , that unless a man by judging controversies by the infallible rule , be able to come to an infallible determination , then controversies will not be infallibly determined , if every man be left to be his own judg. and i am clearly of his mind . but the point is , whether such an infallible determination of controversies be the necessary way to heaven ? if a man can judg well enough to carry him thither , that is as much as i am concerned for at present . but he goes on . who can hope to he saved without pleasing god ? and every body knows that without faith it is impossible to please him . there wants only one little thing to be added , and without an infallible judg of controversies , there can be no faith. but this was forgotten . but after all he saith , i confess that scripture is not the rule of controversies . i pray why ? for i take it not only to be the rule , but to be the only rule . for , saith he , they are not ended till one side or other be certain . ●hat then ? is there no rule that doth not put an end to controversies ? nay their own writers say a rule , as a rule cannot put an end to them , and therefore a judg is necessary . but i must answer such things as they bring . in matters of good and evil , i said every mans conscience is his immediate judg , and why not in matters of truth and falshood ; unless we suppose mens involuntary mistakes to be more dangerous than their wilful sins . here the defender triumphs . how ? saith he , are we before we are aware come to conscience at last ? i heartily wish we were , t●●t would tend more to the ending of controversies than an infallible judg. but he wonders that in disputes of religion it should before we are aware come to conscienoe at last . good man ! he was not aware that there was any thing of conscience in the matter . doth he think it is only matter of interest we contend about ? so those who believe no religion themselves , think all controversies about religion , to have nothing of conscience in them . but after a long harangue , he saith , toat conscience can do no more than secure a man from being judged for sinning against his conscience : but if it lead him to do ill things , or embrace a ●r●ng faith , what can he answer for the sin of having that conscience ? i grant where it is a sin to have such a conscience , the conscience doth not excuse the faults a man commits by it . but the question we are upon is , whether it is not a sin for a man to have such a conscience ; and we are not upon the point of an erroneous conscience , but of an infallible judg of conscience in matters of good and evil . and it is strange the defender should not see this . there is no question , but there are as disputable points in morality , as in matters of faith ; and we think mens committing sin , is at least as dangerous to their souls , as embracing what they call heresy . now i desire to know , why it is not as necessary to have an infallible guide in manners , as in faith ? but , if they think that men may be let alone to judg as well as they can in such matters , as their salvation certainly depends upon , what monstrous inconvenience is it , if they use the same liberty in matters of speculation ? i would he had given some better answer , that i might have had an occasion to have inforced this matter . for in truth it seems to me , a very strange thing , when i read in the new testament , such terrible denunciations against the practice of sin , and that mens happiness or misery depends so much on their doing good or evil ; and so very little said as to mens errors or mistakes of judgment ( where there is a general sincerity , as to a good life , and a care to please god ) that so much weight should be laid on an infallible judg in matters of controversy , and no care taken for an infallible guide in matters of practice . but i am to consider , that it tends more to the interest of some people to swagger about an infallible faith , than to secure the practice of virtue , and a good life , which yet is certainly the great design and concernment of the christian religion , however it may seem to some , that an infallible faith and church are all in all . to shew we do not allow every man to believe as he pleases , i said , we not only allow the assistance of spiritual guides , and embrace the ancient creeds ; but think no man ought to follow his own fancy , against doctrines so universally received from the apostles times . but all this signifies nothing to him , unless our guides be infallible ; and he saith , they are plainly no guides of christs appointing , who teach any other doctrine than he taught . very well ! let this then be the rule , whereby we are to judg whether guides are infallible or not . but then have a care of telling us we must believe what . doctrine it was that christ taught , upon the word of these infallible guides , for by that doctrine we are to judg whether they be infallible or not . the different methods of his proceeding and mine in this matter , will be best understood by this comparison . a man that goes to enquire the way to a place ( he had a great desire to be at , but was afraid of mistaking the way ) of two men , and how he should avoid the dangerous passages in it ; the one like a plain ho●●st man , tells him there are diffi●ulties in it , but he will give him a book of the roads , which acqu●ints him with all the dangerous turnings he bids h●m look well to his steps , and observe the way he goes , and when he is to seek to ●e●rch his book , and ask such as understand the wav better th●n he does● alas ! ●aith the other man , this is a very sad direction to him , for his book may be misunderstood , and the guides may mistake themselves with all their care ; but i will put him into an infallible way , whereby he may avoid all the dangers . ay sir , saith the traveller , you speak indeed to the purpose , i pray acquaint me with it . there is , saith he to him , at such a hill , a person , who by the help of wings , not only flies over all that dangerous passage , but carries all those safe , who take hold of him : you have therefore no better way than to pinion your self to him , and you will be safe but saith the traveller , how if he and i should tumble down together , what would become of us both ? never fear that , saith he : but how should i help fearing of it ? have any that he carried thither , come back and assured others of the safety of the passage ? no. but how then ? why saith he , you are bound to believe what he saith , for he affirms that he can do it . but , saith the traveller , this is very hard i must venture body and soul upon his skill and strength , and i must take his word that he hath both . this seems very unreasonable to me , and therefore i am resolved to take the other course , which tho it do not make such big boasts of it self , is much more likely to be safe in the conclusion , having better reason on its side , and requiring a more constant care of my self , to which god hath promis'd more of his grace and assistance to secure me from all fatal mistakes of my way . where i mention doctrines so universally received in the christian church from the apostles times , as those in the creeds ; the defender makes a notable exception , as if , saith he , any part of the universal christian doctrine were lost , and all had not be●n always as universally retained as the creeds . then i hope all the points in controversy between us and them ▪ can be proved by as clear and evident a succession , as the articles of the creeds . if he can do this , he will be a ●ampion indeed . i desire him to take his choice , either supremacy , transubstantiation , infallibility of the roman catholick church , or which he pleases . i grant all true christian doctrine was universally retained , as far as the rule of it was so received ; but if he means any of those distinguishing points between us and them , when he comes to make it out , he will be of another mind . ( 3. ) a third inconvenience objected in the papers , against the want of an infallible judg , was , that scripture would be interpreted by fancy ; which is the same thing as to follow fancy . to this it was answer'd . ( 1. ) that our church owns the creeds , councils , fathers , and primitive church , more frankly than any other church , and therefore cannot be suspected to leave scripture to be so interpreted . the replier saith , we only pretend it , and do it not . that is to be proved , for bare saying it , will never convince us . but his proof is , because , if we had done it , we had never deserted the church of rome ; and our answer is , we therefore deserted the communion of that church , because she required owning things from us , for which she had no authority , either from scripture , creeds , councils or fathers . the defender would have me answer directly , whether it be not the same to follow fancy , as to interpret scripture by it ? as tho i were examined at the catechism , which requires all answers to be made by yea or nay . i said enough to shew the question doth not concern us ; for we do not allow persons to interpret scripture by fancy . and withal . ( 2. ) i asked some other questions to shew , that those who pretend to infallibity , may do things as unreasonable as leaving scripture to be interpreted by fancy . and i have our saviours example for answering one question with another . the instances i gave , were these ; the church of romes assuming to it self the power of interpreting the rule , which concerns its own power of interpreting ; which was to make it judg in its own cause , and to give it as great power , as if it made the rule ; and i further added , that interest is as mischievous an interpreter of scripture , as fancy ; and therefore , those who are so much concerned , are not to be relied on , either in councils , or out . the power of declaring tradition is as arbitrary a thing in the church of rome , as interpreting scripture by fancy . there being no other rule allowed by it , but the sense of the present church . the replier , like a fair adversary , gives his answer plainly ; which consists in two things . ( 1. ) that their church gives no sense of scripture , but what she received from tradition of the foregoing church , and so he calls it apostolical tradition . but suppose there happen a question , whether it be so or not , must not all be resolved into the authority of the present church , declaring what is apostolical tradition ? and so it comes all to one . ( 2. ) he saith , tradition is publick , and fancy is private . but i say , according to their rules , tradition is but publick fancy , and so fancy in particular persons is a private tradition ; but whether publick or private , if it be equally arbitrary , the case is alike . the defender saith , all this is besides the business , and therefore slides off as well as he can , with some slight touches , which deserve no answer . ( 4. ) if there be no infallible judg , the power of deciding matters of faith will be given to every particular man , for which no place can be shewed . the answer was , that if by deciding matters of faith , no more be meant , but every mans being satisfied of the reasons , why he believes one thing to be true , and not another ; that belongs to every man as he is bound to take care of his soul , and must give an account both to god and man , of the reason of his faith. this , the replier saith , is bringing every article of faith to the test of ones own reason ; whereas authority is the correlative of believing , and reason of knowledg . we do not pretend that every one that believes , should be able to judg from meer principles of reason of the credibility of the doctrine propos'd ; it is sufficient , if he finds it to be of divine revelation , by being contained in gods word . and it is not the authority of the church , but of divine revelation , which faith bottoms upon ; the former is no more than an inducement to believe those books we call scripture , to contain the word of god in them . but when we find any doctrine therein , we account that sufficient reason for believing it . the defender finds no fault with our saying , we ought to be satisfied of the reason why we believe ; but the question he puts , is , whether there be indeed any reasons why they should believe besides the authority of the church ? he doth not deny that particular men ought to judg ; but the meaning of the papers , he saith , is , that they ought not to judg unreasonably . then we have no difference , for i assure him i never pleaded for mens judging unreasonably . the question then between us , is , whether those who do not believe upon the infallible authority of the roman catholick church , do judg unreasonably ? i. e. whether there be equal grounds to believe the roman catholick church infallible , as there are to believe the scriptures to be the word of god ? we utterly deny the roman churches infallibility to be necessary to our believing the scripture ; for we receive that by an universal tradition from all the apostolical churches ; which is as clear for this , as it is wanting for the other . and there●●re we must judg more reasonably . what follows about the infallibility promised to the church , hath been answered already . as to the canonical book , i shewed it was no authoritative decision by a power in the church to make books canonical which were not so , but a meer giving testimony in a matter of fact , in which all parts of the church are concerned ; and it depends as other matters of fact do , on the skill and fidelity of the reporters : and so far i own the truly catholick church to have authority in any testimony , delivering down the books of scripture ; but this proves no more infallibility in the christian church as to the books of the new testament , than it doth in the jewish church as to the books of the old testament . and thus much of the authority of the catholick church in matters of faith. iii. of the reformation of the church of england . there are so many passages in the papers relating to the church of england , on the account of her reformation , that i thought it the best method of proceeding to handle this subject by itself . and there are these things charged upon it , either in terms or by consequence , in the papers , which as i am a member of this church , i think my self bound to clear ; for i could nor justifie continuing in her communion , if she were justly liable to these imputations . 1. that she hath made a causless breach in the communion of the catholick church . 2. that she hath been the occasion of a world of heresies crept into this nation . 3. that she hath not sufficient authority within her self , and yet denies an appeal to a higher judicature . 4. that she contradicts her own rule , viz. the holy scriptures . 5. that she subsists only on the pleasure of the civil magistrate . all these i shall examine with care , and consider what hath been said in defence of the papers upon these heads . as to the charge of causless breach in the communion of the catholick church , it lies in these words , and by what authority men separate themselves from that church ? which being spoken with respect to the members of the church of england , do imply that they have made a separation from the communion of the catholick church , and that they had no sufficient authority for so doing , and therefore are guily of schism in it . to the question two answers were given , 1. by distinguishing the truly catholick church from the roman catholick : and a distinction between these being made out , ( which is done in the first part of this defence ) it doth not follow that we have made a breach in the communion of the catholick church , because we do not join in communion with the roman catholick : this was illustrated by the example of a prosperous usurper in a kingdom , who challenges a title to the whole , by gaining a considerable part of it , and requires from all the kings subjects within his power , to own him to be rightful king ; whereupon the question was put , whether refusing to do it , were an act of rebellion or of loyalty ? so in the church , the popes authority over it , so as to restrain catholick communion only to those who own it , is not only looked on as an usurpation by us , but by all the eastern churches ; and is in truth altering the terms of christian communion from what they were in the truly catholick and apostolick church : therefore since the conditions required are unreasonable , because different from them , what breach hath followed , is not to be imputed to those who refuse these terms , but to those who impose them ; and so the guilt of it lies upon the church of rome , and not upon the church of england . this is the substance of the answer . to which the replier saith , that the eastern churches cannot be parts of the catholick church , because they hold not the apostolick doctrine contained in the creeds and councils owned by the church of england . this hath been fully answered already . but he goes on , there were no other churches then in being , but those which were in communion with the church of rome ; consequently the church of england going out from them , separated her self from the catholick apostolick church . and the defender saith , he expects i should shew that truely catholick and apostolick church we held communion with , when we separated from the roman . he desires to know where the men live , that people may go to them , and learn of them , what their faith is , &c. in answer to this , i say , that there is no necessity for us to shew any church distinct from others , which in all things we agreed with ; because we hold all particular churches liable to errors and corruptions ; and that the notion of the catholick church may take in such particulars from which we may see reason to dissent : but we do not thereby exclude them from being parts of the catholick church ; but we say they are no infallible rule to us , and therefore we ought to proceed by what the church hath receiv'd as an infallible rule , and not by the communion of other churches . and supposing there were no particular church we did in all things joyn with , the church of england might reform it self without separating from the catholick apostolick church . for it was then in the case , particular churches were in after the councils of ariminum and seleucia ; for then the standard of catholick communion , set up by the council of nice ▪ was taken down ; and the setting of it up again , was to oppose the consent of the christian church in the most general council that ever assembled . i do not say , this council obliged men to profess arrianism ; but that it took away the authority of the nicene creed in as valid a manner as the council by its acts could do it ; i ask then , by what authority any particular church could set up the nicene faith ; and if not , how it was possible to be restored ? and i desire to know in what country the people lived , who then owned the nicene faith against such a general council ? and where were the churches in being , which at that time adhered to it ? but if in this case the british church , tho alone , was bound notwithstanding such a general consent , to reform it self , and to restore the authority of the nicene creed ; the same case it is , when the western church was oppressed and hindered from reforming errors and abuses by the usurpation and tyranny of the papal faction ; the church of england was then obliged to exercise its own inherent right , in bringing things to the state they were in , in the time of the first general councils . in matters of reformation , the main enquiries are , whether there be just occasion , and due authority for it , and a certain rule to proceed by ; the last and least important question is , what company we have to joyn with us in it ? for there is a natural right i● every church to preserve its own just liberties , and consequently to throw off such an usurpation as that of the popes was . and the main point in order to a reformation , was casting off the popes power , as an encroachment upon the ancient and canonical priviledges of the western churches , which was done here by a general consent even of those bishops , who held in communion with the roman church , as far as those could do who rejected the head of it . and this is the fundamental point as to the matter of schism : if the pope , as head of the church , doth influ●●ce catholick communion so far , that it is necessary to salvation to live in subjection to him , it will be very hard to justify separation from that body whereof he is the visible head. but if there be no scripture , no councils , no universal tradition for this , as the roman catholick bishops here declared in the time of h. 8. then there can be no schism in acting without authority from him , or against his authority . and whether any other church joyned with ours or not , is no more material to the justification of the reformation , than the lawfulness of any one counties acting for the royal family in the late times of usurpation , did depend upon the concurrence of others with it . what more commonly talked of , and magnified in the church of rome , than the reformation of the m●nastick orders ? and some of the person● have been canonized who have done it ; but in this case , the governour of a monastick order , proceeding according to the rules of his order , doth a very justifiable thing , tho never another monastry joyn with him in it ; because he only doth his duty , and proceeds by the rules which are receiv'd by the whole order . this , i say , was the case of the church of england in reforming according to scripture , and the sense of the primitive church ; and if others joyned , so much the better ; if not , the act justifies it self , and needs not the concurrence of others to make it good . ( 2. ) the 2d answer was , that there is a difference between voluntary separation , and that which is unavoidable , in case unreasonable conditions of communion be required . the defender pretends he can by no means understand this unavoidable separation ; because tho men be separated from the communion of a church , yet they may continue of the same faith if they please : but if they have another faith , they separate themselves , even supposing usurpation , or whatever i would have . now this seems very strange to me from a person who knows the terms of communion with the roman church . can any man be a true member thereof , who doth not own and profess to believe the popes supremacy , transubstantiation , &c. is he not by the constitution of that church required to believe all that the roman church believes ? but suppose men do not , and cannot for their hearts believe as that church believes ; can they notwithstanding be members of it ? no , he confesses a different faith unavoidably casts them out . but then to believe otherwise than the roman church believes , casts them out unavoidably . the question now is , who is the cause of this casting out , those who cannot believe those doctrines , or those who require the belief of them in order to communion ? if these doctrines be evident in scripture , or were defined by the four general councils , or are contained in the ancient creeds , or can be clearly proved by universal tradition , then we confess the blame falls on those who refuse ; but if none of those can be made appear to the satisfaction of a mans mind who desires to search out truth , then their separation is unavoidable , and there is no reason to make it their voluntary act . but , saith the defender , a mans faith is his own voluntary act . i grant that ; but not a voluntary cause of separation : which two ought to be distinguished in this case . as in the case of usurpation , the owning the lawful king is a voluntary act ; but if an usurper threatens to banish him if he doth not abj●re him ; upon whom must the blame be laid , upon the mans voluntary act , or the usurpers voluntary imposing such a penalty on those who do nothing but what is just ? the defender did not consider that the making such terms of communion was a voluntary act too , and being a thing unreasonable and unjust , it leaves the blame upon the imposers . but he denies any such thing as usurpation in the p●pe , because he hath shewed by his reiterated approbation of the bishop of meaux's book , that he is content with that submission and obedience , which the holy councils and fathers have always ta●ght the faithful . these are very fine words to deceive the unwary . but i pray tell us , who is to declare what the councils and fathers have always taught the faithful ? who is to be judg ? is not the pope himself ? for no council will be allowed without his approbation and confirmation . and is not this then a very pretty artifice to draw weak persons into a snare ? for my part , i do not wonder at the popes approbation of the bishop of meaux's book , no more than i would at a gentlemans approbation of a fine spun net when he goes a fishing , which is not so easily discerned , and yet doth as effectually catch the game : some there are still who love to be deceived , and some have more arts of deceiving than others ; and those who gain most by it , will be sure to give them the greatest approbation . the defender proceeds : suppose there were usurpation , must people therefore believe otherwise than they did before ; as that there is no change of substance , no purgatory , no more than two sacraments , and the rest ? the question about faith is one thing , and about separation is another . we are now upon the latter of these ; and in this case we are most concerned about the popes authority , since he is look'd on by you as the head of the catholick church , and the center of communion . if there were no such usurpation , yet we should never decline giving an account of the reasons of our faith , as to sacraments , purgatory , or what you please of the points in difference between us . which i neither desire to make greater or lesser , than really they are . for there may be deceit both ways . as to his renewing the question , by what authority we separate ? i answer , by the same authority which makes it unlawful for us to profess what we do not believe ; and to practise what we believe god hath forbidden : this is just as if one should ask by what authority men are bound to be honest and sincere ; and to prefer gods laws before mens ? for the church of rome requires from the members of her communion , besides matters of faith , such acts of worship , which , whatever they be , to those who believe as they do , must be idolatrous to those that believe as we do . for example , suppose in china where they believe god to be the same with the world , that honour of the chineses ( who on that account think they may lawfully give divine worship to any part of the world ) to be converted by the missionaries , who tell them the parts of the world cannot be god , for he is infinite and immutable , and wise , and powerful , which the parts of the world are not , and cannot be , and therefore they cannot without idolatry give divine worship to them ; the mandarins require their giving the same adorations that others do ; they refuse and say , whatever you may do , who believe god and the world to be the same , certainly it would be gross idolatry in us , who believe the thing you worship , to be nothing but dull insensible parts of the world. and if now it should be asked , by what authority they separate ? is there not a plain answer , by the authority of god himself , who requires adoration to be given to himself alone ? but who shall be judg , saith the defender ? god himself will be judg a● the great day , whether we will or not . and i think that is more to be regarded , than putting an end to controversies . if we be not sincere and faithful to him and his service , if we do not act and judg with a regard to the judgment of that day , all the pretences in the world of a judg in controversies , then will stand in no stead . if we do use our careful endeavours to know the will of god , and to do it , we have great reason to hope god will shew mercy to us ; and then the question will not appear of such wonderful importance , who shall be judg here ? but we do not decline a reasonable judgment in this world ; we only desire our judges may be fair and equal , and such as god hath appointed . and if those who would judg for us , pretend that they have a divine commission , we desire to know who shall be judg of this pretence ? we have no reason to trust them ; and they will not trust us . so that here we are stopt at first , unless the commission be produced , which impowers those persons to judg , who challenge such authority over our judgments . a general indefinite obscure commission , which may extend to all other guides in the church as well as to them , will by no means be sufficient . let us see whom christ hath appointed in his own words , and we will submit ; for we look on him as supreme judg and legislator to his church ; and if he hath thought fit to appoint an infallible judg , we have done . but we desire to know where he hath done it ? hath he granted any new commission from heaven ? no. is it to be found in scripture ? yes . but then i pray observe , you tell us scripture cannot be judg in any controversie , being ambiguous , uncertain , general , mute , flexible , and what not ? and because it cannot hear parties , nor give a decisive voice , it can by no means be a judg of controversies . how then can the scripture put an end to this controversie , when it can put an end to none ? are the expressions in this matter so particular , so clear , so peremptory , that we cannot mistake about the sense of them ? if so , then i perceive , notwithstanding all the hard words given it , scripture may be judg as well as a rule , because it is fitted to put an end to such a controversie , which is as doubtful as any ; and why not as well to all the rest ? we are not then afraid of this question , who shall be judg ? but we desire to be satisfied about it ; and to know not only who hath appointed him , but who he is , whether the pope in cathedr● , or a general council ? for this is very material for us to know , since even at this day you are far from being agreed about it . the assembly of the clergy of france have solemnly declared within few years , that they do not believe the popes judgment to be infallible . the clergy of hungary have rejected and censured this declaration as absurd and detestable , and have forbidden any to read , hold or teach the doctrine , and own the pope to be the only infallible judg of controversies . a sorbon doctor in his notes on the hungarian censure , calls this , the new heresie of the jesuits ; on the other side , large volumes have been printed to prove , that the right of judging infallibly , belongs only to the pope . and now very lately comes out a learned book by another doctor of the sorbon , to prove not only that the popes judgment is not infallible , but that it is a dangerous thing to believe it ; and that no man ought to do it , unless infallible proof be brought of it . but he proves at large , that not so much as probable evidence can be brought for it , either from scripture or tradition . i pray now the defender to tell me , who is the judg ? is the pope infallible or not ? it is easily answer'd i , or no. and it is necessary to be answer'd , if we must know , who is the judg ? the common evasion is , that you are agreed , that popes and councils together are ; but this is but an evasion . for the infallibility is by virtue of divine promises , ●●d those must either relate to the church as the subject of them or to the successors of st. peter in their capacity as such . if to the former , the popes have nothing to do in it , but as included in the church ; if the latter , the councils have no infallibility , but the pope . to say the council is infallible , when confirmed by the pope , is nonsense . for , either it was infallible in its decree , or not . if not , it can borrow no infallibility from the popes subsequent confirmation ; but the popes judgment may be said to be infallible , but by no means the councils . and du pin hath proved , that there cannot be two seats of infallibility ; for whereever there is infallibility , it can receive no addition or force from another infallibility ; and whatever is infallible , must be believed for it self , and not depend on anothers judgment . and therefore i again desire the defender to make no harangues about this matter , but to answer directly , who is the judg ? for we would sain be acquainted with this some body , as he speaks ; but i am afraid his some body of infallibility , will prove a more pleasing dream than what he charges me with in what follows . i had given a fair account of the proceedings in england upon the reformation , how the search began , the popes authority to be discarded , and the articles of religion to be drawn up , which ought not to be looked on as particular fancies , but the sense of our church . all this he calls a pleasing dream ; i am sure the pretence of infallibility is so ; but i related matter of fact , which he hath no mind to meddle with , but he runs again to his , who shall be judg ? and concludes , that i think between churches there 's none at all . i do think the church of england in this divided state of the catholick church , is under no superior judicature , but that it hath sufficient power and authority to reform abuses , and to declare articles of religion so as to oblige its members to conformity ; especially since it proceeds by such excellent rules , as the holy scriptures , the ancient councils and universal tradition . and i hope this may pass for a direct answer . the replier takes another course besides this , for he makes use of these two topicks against the church of england : 1. that the church of rome was in poss●ssion of all those truths we rejected 2. that we ought to bring positive texts for our negative articles . 1. as to the plea of possession of all those truths now question'd by us . this were a pleasant thing for us to question them , if we owned they were truths ; but he means only that he thinks them so . well then , how is it their church was in possession of those truths ? do they become truths by their possession , or only that they were truths they were then possessed of ? if so , he must first prove them to be truths , or the possession signifies nothing and that is the point i went upon , that no possession gives a right to truth ; but the church of england had just reason to examine whether these were truths or not ; and upon examination finding them to be otherwise , it had reason to reject them . but to inforce this , he saith afterwards , that their church had a thousand years prescription here , and that their religion came into this nation with christianity . although according to st. cyprian's rule , all this pr●ves no more than the antiquity of error , unless the proof be made from scripture , yet because this goes a great way with some people , i do not only deny the truth of it , but shall give evident proof to the contrary . for i suppose it will not be questioned , that the religion brought in here by augustin and his companions , was the religion of gregory the great ; i shall therefore compare the doctrine of the council of trent with that of gregory , in some remarkable paticulars , and shew the great difference between them as to these things . 1. scripture and tradition . council of trent , gregory the great , declares , that it receives traditions with an equal veneration with holy scriptures , sess. 4. affirms , that all things which edifie and instruct , are contained in the volume of scriptures , in ezek. hom. l. 1. cap. 8.   that gods mind is to be found in his words , regist. epist. l. 4. ep. 40.   that the scripture is the glass of the elect , in reg. l. 4. c. 10. in job l. 2. c. 1.   that to be born of god , is to love his will revealed in scripture , in 1 reg. c. 14   that preachers are to instruct their people in what they learn , out of the holy scriptures , greg sacram . in consecr . episcopi .   that the staves being in the rings on the sides of the ark , do shew that teachers should have the holy scriptures in their hearts , that from thence they may presently teach whatever is needful , de cura pastor , l. 2. c. 11. 2. apochryphal books . the council of trent , gregory the great , reckons the maccabees among the canonical books , sess. 4. plainly rejects them from being canonical ; for he excuses taking an example out of them , not being canonical , moral . in job , l. 19. c. 13. 3. merit of good works . the council of trent , gregory the great , anathematizes those who deny good works to be truly meritorious of grace and eternal life , sess. 6. can. 32. denies the most sanctified persons to procure divine wisdom by their graces , in job l. 18. c. 26.   affirms , that the best men will find no merit in their best actions , moral . l. 9. c. 2.   that all human righteousness will be found unrighteousness , if strictly judged , ib. l. 9. c. 11.   that if he should attain to the highest virture , he should obtain eternal life , not by merits , but by pardon , ib. 4. auricular confession . the council of trent , gregory the great , declares secret conf●ssion of all sins to be necessary in order to remission and absolution by the priest , sess. 14. c. 6 , 7 , 8. speaks of no other confession than what was required in order to the reconciliation of those who had undergone publick penance , the custom whereof at rome , is set down in golasius his sacramentary , p. 63. and gregory refers to the custom then used , in his sacramentary , p. 225. and there is no form of absolution in either of them , but by way of prayer to god , which is different from a sacramental , judicial absolution , required by the council of trent .   he makes no absolution true , but that which follows the judgment of god , which he parallels with the loosing of lazarus after christ had raised him from the grave , hom. 26. in evangel . 5. solitary masses . the council of trent , gregory the great , anathematizes those who say such masses wherein the priest only communicates , are unlawful , and to be abrogated , sess. 22. can. 8. forbids the priest to ce ebrate alone , and saith expresly it ought not to he celebrated by one , because the people are to bear their share , greg lib. capital . c. 7. apud cassandr . liturg. c. 33. transubstantiation . the council of trent , gregory the great , declares the body of christ to be in the eucharist under the species of bread , sess. 13. cap 1. asserts the body of christ after ●is resurrection to be palpable , i. e. that it may be seen and felt where it is , and that he proved this against eutychius of constantinople , moral . l. 14. c. 31. that asserts only the species to remain after consecration , ib. c. 4. he frequently declares , that our bodies as well as our souls , are nourished by the eucharist , which cannot be done by more species ; for no accidents can produce a substance , greg. sacram. 16. kal. mart. in sexages . hebd . 3. in quadrag . fr. 4. 7. communion in one kind . council of trent , gregory the great , declares against the necessity of communion in both kinds , sess. 13. cap 13. affirms it to be the constant practise for the people to receive in both .   sacram. in quadrag . fr. 3. 6 kal. julii ad comple●d . hebd . 3. in quadr. sabbato . miss temp. belli . sexages . ad complend . domin . in ramis palm . vi. non. julii ad complend . viii . kal. aug. ad compl. kalend. aug. ad compl.   the like may be observed in gelasius his sacramentary , who declared it sacriledg to do otherwise ; as appears by the known canon , comperimus . de consecr . dist. 2. who was one of gregory's predecessors , and not long before him . 8. purgatory . council of trent , gregory the great , declares that there is a purgatory after this life , out of which souls may be helped by the prayers of the faithful , sess. 25. affirms , that at the time of death , either the good or evil spirit seizeth upon the soul , and keeps it with it for ever without any change . moral in job , l. 8. c. 8. ed. basil. c. 9. ed novae . that , in the day of death , the just goes to joy , and the wicked with the apostate angel is reprobated . moral . in job , l. 12. c. 4.   the passages in his dialogues , which seem to contradict these , do not come up to the council of trents purgatory ; for they only speak of a purgation for light and venial sins , and not for the temporal pain of mortal sins , * whose guilt is remitted : but in the former places he plainly denies any change of state after this life ; so that the purgation he speaks of , must be consistent with a state of joy ; and in that very place , he saith , persons shall be at the day of judgment , as they were when they went out of the world. 9. masses for the dead . the council of trent , gregory the great , declares , that they are intended for those who are dead in christ , not yet fully purged from their sins . sess. 22. c. 2. supposes those to be in a state of bliss , for whom the oblation was made at the altar , as appears by the sacramentary iv. kalend. julii , where the oblation is first mention'd ; and after follows , deus qui animoe famuli tui leonis eternae beatitudinis praemià contulisti . 10. worship of images . the council of trent , gregory the great , declares , not only that images are to be placed in temples , but to be worshipped there . sess. 25. allows their being in temples , but denies any worship to be given to them . for he not only often denies any adoration to be given them ; but he saith , they are only for instruction ; which excludes relative worship . registr . epist. l. 9. ep. 9. l. 7. ep. 110.   the epistle to secundinus gussanvillaeus in his late edition of s. gregory , saith , was not to be found in the most ancient m s s. 11. extreme unction . the council of trent , gregory the great , anathematizes those who do affirm it not to be a true and proper sacrament , appointed by christ for remission of sins , and conferring grace . sess. 14. can. 1 , 2. mentions the unction then used in order to the recovery of sick persons ; and in the prayer applies s. james his words that way ; and then adds , sana quoque quaesumus , omnium medicator ejus febrium , & cunctorum languorum cruciatus aegritudinemque , &c. sacram. p. 253. and immediately before , in the unction , these words are said , per hanc sacrati olei unctionemprisinam & emmelioratem recipice mersaris sanitatem . ibid.   and that it was not looked on as the last sacrament , appears by things in that sacramentary :   1. the eucharist was to be given after it :   2. it was to be continued for seven days if there were occasion ; & suscitabit eum deus ; which shews that it was designed for bodily health . 12. pope's supremacy . council of trent , gregory the great , owned it from beginning to end ; and refer'd the confirmation of its decrees to the pope , as supreme head of the church . declares the headship of the church to be peculiar to christ. registr . ep. l. 4. ep. 36 , 38. where he speaks not of an essential head , but of the fountain of jurisdiction .   he urges it as an inconvenience , if there were a head of the church , the church must err with him . epist. 32. 36.   which bellarmin owns to be a true consequence . de r. po●t . l. 4. c. 5.   he makes it the pride of lucifer , and the forerunning of antichrist , for one bishop to set himself above the rest . ep. 36.   not to be the sole bishop ; but to have all the rest in subjection to him . these things may be sufficient at present , to shew how little ground there is to say , that the religion now owned in the church of rome , was brought in hither with christianity in the time of gregory the great . ( 2. ) the replier saith , we ought to bring positive texts for our negative articles ; as no praying to saints , no purgatory , no worship of images , no transubstantiation , and the like ; with which , he saith , the 39 articles are stuft . but why must we be obliged to bring texts for the negative ? because he saith , we make these articles of faith. to answer this , let us suppose the common council of the city should agree to make men swear that the monument near london bridge , is a living creature , and should exclude all those from the city priviledges who do not ; and that others having examin'd the monument , and found nothing but stones and iron , were resolved to follow their senses , and declare their minds , that upon due consideration , they did judg the monument to be no living creature ; would any say , these men ma●e it an article of their faith , when they only rejected a false proposition imposed upon the faith of others ? why may not a church declare what it doth not believe , as well as what it doth ? and when it declares what it doth not believe , doth it make such declarations articles of faith ? the plain case is , those of the church of rome impose things we think as hard and unreasonable as the former example : our church not only denies its belief of them ; but signifies it to its members by a body of articles which they are to sign , to testifie their consent : how doth this come to make every one of these declarations an article of faith ? they are only articles of agreement , and not of faith. and the difference between these may be easily understood . an article of faith supposes a divine revelation , as the replier yields ; but if men offer that for a divine revelation , which is not , the rejecting of that cannot be called an article of faith ; because there is no need of revelation to declare the other to be none , supposing there be a rule to judg what is of divine revelation , and what not . that rule we say is the holy scripture , not interpreted by fancy , but by the primitive church ; by this rule so interpreted , we reject invocation of saints , purgatory , worship of images , transubstantiation , &c. and why then should our rejecting them , be called so many articles of faith ? we own the scripture for our rule , and for our compleat and adequate rule of faith ; and therefore it serves us both for what we are to believe , and what we are not to believe . in positive articles , we resolve our faith into divine revelation contained in scripture ; in negative , the article of faith is , that scripture is our rule ; but from thence it is a necessary consequence of reason . that we are not to believe any thing but what is contained in scripture , or may be deduced from thence . which deductions being within the force of the rule , are not to be looked on as different from it ; and what can neither be proved by scripture , nor by deductions from it , if our principle be allowed , we can never be blamed if we reject it . for otherwise we should not act reasonably , nor agreeable to our own principles . but as to the particulars mentioned , we do not meerly reject them as not contained in scripture , but as repugnant to such principles concerning divine worship . remission of sins , the nature of christs body , &c. which are evidently contained therein : but i go no further t●an the replier leads me . at the conclusion of the first paper , there was a suggestion , as tho the schism were raised by particular men , for their own advantage . it was answered , that the advantage of the clergy lay plainly on the other side ; which is yielded by the replier ; and yet he would have the clergy byast : what , byast against their interest ? for that is the point , whether they got ot lost by the reformation ? and besides other considerations , if there were so much sacriledg committed by it , as is said in one of the papers , it is hard to suppose that they should raise the schism for their own advantage . i am of the defenders mind . that matter of interest ought not to be regarded in these things ; but when that was said to lie at the bottom of the reformation , we had reason to consider on which side lay the greater advantage . the 2d charge is , that the reformation hath been ●he occasion of a world of heresies creeping into this nation . with this the 2d paper begins . in answer it was said , that either this respects the several sects of dissenters from the religion established by law , and then it seems hard , considering a● circumstances , to charge the church of england with them ; or it takes in all that dissent from the church of rome , and so it is a charge on the whole church since the reformation , as guilty of heresie ; which was a charge i said could never be made good . the defender avoids the charge as to the church of england ; but the replier in plain terms owns it ; saying , that establishment of a religion by law , cannot protect it from being a heresie ; which i readily grant . and then he adds . let him defend his own , and his work is done . the best way to do that , is to consider first what heresie is , and that i said was an obstinate opposing some necessary article of faith ; and then , how it comes to be in the power of the church of rome to define heretical doctrines , so as that any doctrine comes to be heresie , by being contrary to its definitions ? he answers , by the same way the church had power in her general councils , to make creeds , and to anathematize hereti●ks . so that whatever power the catholick church exercised in declaring matters of faith , he challenges as of right belonging to the church of rome , which wholly depends on the first point already discussed ; viz. that the roman and catholick church are the same but i shall now wave that , and consider , whether if that were allow'd , the church could now have the same reason to declare the points in difference to be heresies , as the primitive church had the doctrines of the trinity , and incarnation of christ. i am of opinion it cannot ; and yet if it could , that alone is not sufficient to charge heresie upon us . and in making out of both these , i shall argue from the nature of heresie , as it is stated among their best writers , who agree that there are three things necessary to make up the charge of heresie . 1. the nature of the proposition . 2. the authority of the proponent . 3. the obstinacy of the party . 1. the nature of the proposition ; for it is allowed among them , that there is a difference between a proposition erroneous in faith , and heretical . but for our better understanding this matter , i shall set down something very pertinently observed by aquinas and others . 1. aquinas saith , that faith in us depends upon divine revelation , not such as is made to any person , but that which was made to the prophets and apostles , which is preserved in the canonical books ; and therefore he saith , the proofs from scripture are necessary and convincing ; those from other authorities are but probable : which is a testimony of great consequence in this matter ; for from hence it appears , that whatsover article of faith is made necessary to be believed , must be proved from scripture ; and heresie being an obstinate opposing a necessary article of faith , there can be no heresie , where the doctrine is not founded on scripture : and elsewhere he makes the principles of faith to be the authorities of the scripture . 2. that all matters of faith are not equally revealed in scripture ; for some , he saith , are principally designed , as the trinity and incarnation ; and these are directly against faith ; and to hold the contrary to them , especially with obstinacy , is heresie ; but there are others which are indirectly against faith ; from whence something follows which overthrows faith ; as , for any one to deny that samuel was the son of helcanah , the consequence would be , that the scripture was false . 3. he makes a distinction between those who discern the repugnancy , and continue obstinate , and those who do not ; not intending to maintain any thing contrary to faith ; and in this case there may be an erroneous opinion in faith , without heresie . so that an erroneous opinion lies in not attending to the consequence of that opinion , as against faith , and not maintaining it obstinately . but he asserts it to be in the churches power to declare such an opinion to be against faith , and then he makes it heretical to deny it : his instance is about the five notions of the trinity ; and his conclusion is , that it cannot be heretical in it self to have different opinions about them , but it is very hard to understand how the church by its declaration can make the holding one or the other opinion to be more or less repugnant to faith. but then the reason of heresie must be resolved into the authority of the church ; of which afterwards ; yet still scripture is the rule by which the church is to judg . ( 4 ) that there are some things revealed in scripture which immediately tend to make mankind happy ; and those are the articles of faith which all men are bound to believe explicitely ; other things are revealed by accident , or secondarily , as that abraham had two sons , that david was the son of jesse . now as to these latter points he saith , that it is enough to have an inward preparation of mind to believe all that is contained in scripture ; and those things in particular as soon as they are known to be there . but we believe all persons bound to search the scriptures , that they may know what is contained therein . however we gain this point hereby , that by their own doctrine , besides the articles of faith receiv'd on both sides , no other points can become necessary , till they be made appear to us to be contained in scripture , otherwise it is sufficient for us to be ready to believe whatever is contained therein . and consequently , we cannot be charged with heresie for rejecting them . alphonsus a castro makes this distinction between heresie and a proposition erroneous in faith ; that the former is against such a point of faith , as all men are bound to believe ; but there are some propositions , he saith , relating to faith , wherein a man is under no obligation to believe either part of the contradiction . but if he asserts either of them to be an article of faith , and pronounces the other heretical , he then errs in faith , and is become a heretick . from whence i observe , that supposing any points in controversie , not to be so determined as to bring on men an obligation to believe them , those who make them to be articles of faith , and condemn the others for hereticks , are in so doing hereticks themselves . melchior canus saith , that although a proposition be thought by wise men to be a matter of faith , yet if it be not plainly defined by the church , nor demonstrated by reason , then the opposing of it is no heresie , but erroneous doctrine . nay he saith further , that if an opinion do contradict a point of catholick faith in the most probable and almost necessary opinion of all wise men , yet if it do not manifestly contradict , it is barely erroneous , and not heretical . suarez saith , that melchior canus his doctrine in this matter is generally receiv'd . but he adds one thing more , viz. that in heresie there must be the highest opposition to immediate revelation ; but if it implies only a repugnancy to a bare catholick truth , or theological conclusion , it is erroneous in faith , but no heresie . the highest opposition lies in three things : 1. the revelation must be immediate , and not deduced by consequence . 2. that it must be most certainly and undoubtedly of faith. 3. that the erroneous proposition do most certainly and undoubtedly contradict it . for , saith he , if there be a defect in any one of these , it is not an heretical proposition . these are the principles laid down by their own writers of greatest esteem . and therefore if the replier think fit to make good his charge of heresie against the church of england , he may from hence see what he hath to do . ( 1 ) he must prove the points in controversie to be of immediate divine revelation ; and not drawn from thence by consequences and suppositions . 2. that the doctrine of our church doth in the highest , plainest , and most certain manner contradict such propositions of faith. and supposing it were possible for him to do the former ; yet if their own expositor of the articles of our church may be believed , he can never do the latter . for he endeavours to prove them capable of a catholick sense . the five first he allows for catholick as they stand . the sixth about canonical scripture , with st : jerome's explication , is catholick enough . the 7th , 8th , first part of the 9th , and the whole 10th , are very catholick . the four next he examines . the 15th needs only a gloss of st. augustins . the 16th very good . the 17th catholick , and so the 18th . the 19th only wants a gloss , and so the 20th and 21. the 22th he examines . 23d is allow'd . the 24th being only against a custom of the church , he proves from canus , can imply no heresie ; and yet he thinks it capable of a good gloss. the 25th he allows in the genuine sense of it . the 26th and 27th are confessed to be the doctrines of the church , and all the fathers . even the 28th against transubstantiation he thinks may be glossed into a good sense . the 29th is explained from s. augustin . the 30th from canus , not to contain any heresie . the 31th he saith only opposes the common opinion . the 32th capable of a 〈◊〉 sense . 33 , 34th agreeable to scripture and antiquity . 35th 〈◊〉 h●milies , passable . 36th about ordination valid . 37th agreeable to the french opinion and practise . the popes jurisdiction may be understood of temporal . the two last he allows to be catholick . so that of 39 articles , but five are reserved for examination , and of these , the 11th he saith , is about words ; the 12 and 13 capable of a good sense ; the 14th goes upon a mistake of their sense ; the 22th determines nothing against the true faith. i do not go about to justifie his exposition ; but i say , that upon your own grounds , it sheweth that our church cannot be justly charged with heresie . for if it be required that such propositions as are heretical must in the highest and clearest manner contradict the doctrines of faith ; and your own expositor grants they do not ; then however you may think them erroneous , yet you cannot condemn them for heretical . ( 2 ) as to heresie , a sufficient proposition of the matters of faith is required . for they grant that the matters of faith must be proposed in such a manner as to induce an obligation to believe them , before any can be guilty of heresie in rejecting them . therefore it is necessary for us to know what they mean by a sufficient proposal . s●arez yields this to be a necessary condition ; and elsewhere discourses about the nature of it . and there he shews , 1. that a sufficient proposition of a matter of faith is not barely to deliver it as a divine trath , but it must be done with such circumstances , that it may appear to be prudently credible , i. e. so as to see such reason for it , as to put him beyond doubt or fear of the contrary . 2. that it must appear evidently credible to be revealed by god , and therefore certain and infallible . 3. that it must appear not only so , but evidently more credible , than the doctrine repugnant to it . 4. that according to natural reason , the assent to it is to be prefer'd before the contrary opinion . now to make good the charge of heresie against our church , he must not bring the motives of credibility for the christian faith in general , which are owned on both sides ; but as to those points which are asserted by them as matters of faith , and rejected by us . as for instance , transubstantiation is declared by them to be a matter of faith ; and it is denied by us ; and they charge us with heresie for it . we say , it hath never been proposed to us in such a manner , as to make it appear to be a prudent judgment in us to believe it , or that it was ever revealed by god or more credible than the contrary opinion , in the judgment of reason . not any one of these things doth appear to us , but the contrary ; for we can see nothing of the credibility , but a great deal for the evident incredibility of it . how then can this matter of faith be said to be sufficiently proposed to us ? it may be said , all this is done by the authority of the church proposing it ; and if it be made evidently credible that you ought to believe the church , then we are hereticks for rejecting her authority . i answer , that if by the churches authority , be meant that of the roman catholick churches infallible proposing matters of faith to us , we are as far to seek as ever and for our hearts we cannot find this made out with any degree of credibility . we have searched all your grounds , examined your motives , weighed your reasons , your miracles we have not seen ) but we can meet with nothing that should make it a prudent judgment for us to take all matters of faith upon trust from her . and if there be no evidence of credibility , there is no sufficient proposal ; and if there be not , there can be no obligation to believe ; and where that is not , there can be no heresie in not believing , according to the judgment of your greatest divines . ( 3 ) as to the charge of heresie , there must be obstinacy in the party ; which they all make necessary to formal heresie . aquinas quotes the noted passage of st. aug●stin to this purpose , that although men hold a false opinion , without pertinacious animosity , especially if they derive it from their parents ; and do with diligence and caution seek after the truth ; and are ready to lay it down when they have found it , they are not to be recko●'d for hereticks . and we do not think a better plea can be made for us as to this charge , than what is contained in these words of st. august●n . but here we must observe the artifice of aquinas . he saw this would never do their business against the enemies of the church of rome , and therefore he pretends to give the reason for this , because they do not contradict the judgment of the church ; and so draws the power of declaring heresie to the pope , as having the chief authority in the church . of whom st. augustin saith not a word . but however aquinas himself requires obstinacy even in this case to make a heretick . and the obstinacy is not placed by him in the meer resisting the authority of the church , but in the manner of doing it . cajetan there affirms , that if there be no pertinacy in the will , there is no heresie . so that if a man holds an opinion contrary to faith in it self , and he thinks he holds right , and doth not intend to dissent from the church , he is not guilty of heresie . and so cajetan defines pertinacy to be a consent to an error in faith , knowing it so to be . melchior canus saith , it is the general opinion of divines and canonists , that there can be no heresie without obstinacy . and no man is a heretick , he saith , who doth not , seeing and knowing , chuse a doctrine contrary to fa●●h . suarez saith , that all the doctors are agreed , that obstinacy is required to heresie ; and that it is expressed in the canon law. so that i need to produce no more to that purpose . but the difficulty is , to know what they mean by obstinacy . it is not hard to understand what is meant by the word ; for pertinax is one that is over-tenacious , i. e. that holds an opinion , when he sees no ground for it , or will yield to no reasonable conviction ; or that hath not a desire to find out truth , and submit to it . and so it is plain st. augustin understood it , in the place before mention'd . and in another place , he makes it to lye in a mans resisting the catholick doctrine made known to him , without which he did not judg him a heretick , though he held heretical doctrine . and again he declares those to be hereticks that contumaciously resist those that correct and instruct them , and will not amend their wicked doctrines , but go on to defend them these passages of st. augustin are enter'd in the body of the canon law ; and the gloss there saith , if one bolds doctrines against faith , and be ready to be better instructed , he is no heretick . the same authorities ockam insists upon , and from them he declares obstinacy to be so necessary , that without it no man can be a heretick . and he concludes from st. augustin , that if a man be ready to yield to truth when he finds it , he is not guil●y of obstinacy and he proves that such are no hereticks from these reasons : ( 1 ) because hereticks are to be excommunicated ; but such by the canon law are not to be ●xcommunicated . ( 2 ) because they are ready to be better instructed ( 3 ) because many have erred and were not accounted hereticks on this account . o●kam distinguishes a twofold obstinacy : 1. internal . 2. external . internal may be known , he saith , by the●e rules : 1. if a man be not convinced by miracles . 2. if he will rather question the truth of the christian faith , than be convinced . 3. when he doth not use means for his own conviction , but resolves to persist in his errors , such a neglect argues an obstinate mind . external , of which he gives many instances , of which i shall mention some , as ( 1. ) if a man willingly saith , or doth something whereby he discovers his disbelief of the whole christian faith ( 2 ) if he demes any part of the old or new testament ( 3. ) if he holds the whole christian church to have erred ; which he by no means understands of any part of it assuming the titles of catholick and infallible to it self ; for he saith , some say , that whatsoever christ hath promised to his church , may be made good , if but one person in it holds the true faith ; but he declares that the 〈◊〉 faith may be preserved in a very few . ( 4. ) if the contrary doctr●● known to be universally received among christians , as if one sh●uld deny that christ was crucified ; and on this account , he charges 〈◊〉 22. with heresy , for denying that the souls of the wicked are in hell , and of the saints in heaven before the day of judgment ( 5. ) if he refuses to be informed , being reproved by the learned . ( 6. ) if he protests he will never alter his opinion . ( 7. ) if he forbids reading the scriptures , or preaching catholick doctrine ( 8. ) if a pope commands an erroneous opinion to be believed as matter of faith. ( 9. ) if a man consents to such a definition of the pope , and imposes it on others . joh. gerson treats at large about the obstinacy which makes one a heretick , in several discourses before the council of constance ; and he follows st. augustins doctrine in saying , that it consists in not seeking after truth , and not obeying it when he hath found it . melchior canus , finds fault with the uncertain marks of obstinacy given by others , and he resolves it at last into this , that a man holds an opinion , which he knows to be contrary to the catholick faith ; but then he requires , ( 1. ) that he be certain that it belongs to it , and it is not enough that learned men say so . ( 2. ) that he must know it by an infallible authority . for otherwise a mans persisting in his opinion , may be great rashness and presumption , but it is not heresy . but in case a persons ignorance be such as makes his errors involuntary , it doth excuse him from heresy , because that is not a voluntary error . suarez , and others after him , in plain terms make the obstinacy to lie in not submiting to the judgment of the church ; because , while a man doth yield to the churches authority , they account him no heretick ●his is indeed an argument according to their way of declaring hereticks ; but we are now enquiring what that obstinacy is , which doth really make a man such . st. augustins opinion is reported by aquinus , as the reason of his judgment , that is adopted into the body of the canon-law : and therefore , that ought to be the standard , according to which they are to pronounce a person obstinate . if men do not wi●h diligence and caution seek after truth , and are not willing to embrace it , when they find it , then they are to be accounted hereticks for being obstinate . but st. augustin goes no further ; however suarez would seem to agree with him : but it is worth the while to consider his doctrine about it . ( 1. ) he affirms , that it is not enough for one to be ready to submit to gods word , either written or unwritten ; but the submission must be with respect to the church , as proposing both to us . ( 2. ) that those who believe any doctrine , because their judgment tells them , it is the sense of scripture ; if they therein follow their own judgment , and not the sense of the church , they are guilty of such an o●stinacy , as makes hereticks . ( 3 ) that it doth not excuse , ●f he be willing to believe the church , if he ●●es reasons and arguments to move him ; for this , he saith , is not to believe the churches authority as divine , but after a human manner , which may consist with obstinacy against the church , as a rule of faith. ( 4 ) that it is not yet necessary in order to this obstinacy , to believe the church to have infallible authority , for then those must be excused from heretical obstinacy who denied it : but it is sufficient that the church is proposed as a true church , whose authority he is bound to submit to . the short of all this matter is , if a man resolve to believe as the church believes , a very small thing will excuse him from heresy : but if not , nothing according to suarez will do it : unless it be ignorance as to the churches proposing . and this is the modern notion of heresy , which appears to me , to be very unreasonable on these accounts . ( 1. ) suppose a person have a general disposition of mind to believe whatever is sufficiently proposed to him , as revealed by god , and believes sincerely whatever he knows to be contained in scripture . i would sain know whether this disposition of mind do not really excuse him from heretical obstinacy ? and yet this is very consistent with doubting whether the church be accounted as the proponent of matters of faith. ( 2. ) is it necessary in order to heretical obstinacy , that the person believes the proponent to be infallible or not ? if it be , then none can be convinced of heretical obstinacy , but such as reject the churches authority , when they believe it infallible ; and then none of us can be charged with it ; for we do not believe the churches infallibility . if it be not necessary , then the churches infallibility is not necessary to faith ; for i● order to heretical obstinacy , he must be convinced of resisting that which was necessary in order to fa●●h ; from whence it will follow , that the churches infallibility is no● equired as the ground of faith. ( 3 ) suppose a person thinks himself bound in conscience to believe those guides which god by his providence hath set over him ; and he believes to be sincere and honest : and these tell him , there is no ground to believe on the churches authority , as being sounded neither in scripture , nor antiquity , nor reason , is not he excused hereby from heretical obstinacy ? ( 4. ) suppose he declares himself ready to believe the churches authority , if it be sufficiently proposed to him ; i. e. with such reasons and arguments as are proper to convince him ; but after all , he declares , that he cannot see any such . and yet aquinas affirms , no man can believe , unless he sees reason why he should 〈◊〉 . how then can a man be liable to heretical obstinacy , because he only refuses to believe , when he sees no reason to believe ? ( 5. ) suppose he doth believe that which the church proposes , not meerly upon its authority , but upon the reasons which the church offers ; why must this man be liable to heretical obstinacy , for believing upon the churches reasons ? what a wonderful nice thing is heresie made ? it seems by this rare doctrine , it doth not excuse from heresie to believe even truth it self , if it be upon grounds of reason which the church it self gives . but it must be taken meerly from the churches authority ; and yet that very authority must be believed on the grounds of reason , or the motives of gredibility . ( 6. ) suppose a person hath used the best means he could to find out his obligation to believe on the churches authority , and after all , he cannot find any such thing , what obligation is he under to enquire farther ; and from whence doth it arise ? and if he be not under any , how can he be guilty of herecial obstinacy , who is under no obligation to search any farther ? for obstinacy must suppose resisting some obligation . ( 7. ) suppose he be willing to believe on the churches authority , if that church be made appear to him to be the one catholick church of christ , but when he comes to examine this , he finds that he must exclude very great and considerable parts of the catholick church , to reduce the authority of the catholick church to that of the roman communion ; how can it then be heretical obstinacy not to suppose a part to be the whole ? ( 8. ) suppose he hath overcome this , yet if he should mistake about the seat of infallibility , is he not still as liable to the charge of heretical obstinacy , because the true reason of it is , that such a person rejects that which god hath chosen as the proper means to propound matters of faith to us : but if he should be mistaken in the true proponent , he is in as much danger of heretical obstinacy still . as suppose a man takes a general council , as representing the catholick church , to be the only true proponent of faith ; and therefore rejects the authority of the pope in this matter , i desire to know , whether this be heretical obstinacy , or not ? if not , then rejecting the true proponent , doth not make any liable to it : if it doth , then there is heretical obstinacy in the church of rome , as well as out of it . and so much in answer to the repliers charge of heresie on the church of england . ( 3. ) the next charge relates to the insufficient authority of the church of england , and that on these accounts : ( 1. ) in that it leaves every man to judge for himself . ( 2. ) because she dares not use the true arguments against sects , for fear of their being turned upon her self . ( 3. ) because she denies an appeal to an higher judicature . ( 1. ) it is urged in the papers , that among us every man thinks himself as competent a judg of scripture , as the very apostles . it was answer'd , that every man among us doth not pretend to an infallible spirit , but all yield the apostles had it . and by being a judg of scripture , if no more be meant , than that every man must use his understanding about it , that was no more than was necessary in order to the believing the matters contained in it : but if by being a judg of scripture , was meant , giving such a judgment as obliges others to submit to it , then it was denied , that every man among us is allow'd to judg of it . but yet we own the authority of the guides of the church , and a due submission to them ; but we do not allow them to be as competent judges of scriptures as the very apostles . this seems to me to be a full and clear answer . but the replier offers some things against it . ( 1. ) that i suppose men cannot be deceived in understanding the scriptures ; and consequently their spirit is infallible . i never said , or thought , that they could not be deceived ; but i 〈◊〉 , they must use their understandings , to prevent being deceived , and must judg of the sense of what they are to believe in the scriptures , in order to their own salvation . but he saith , whosoever uses his understanding in opposition to the churches tradition , makes himself a judg indeed , but not to his own salvation . to make this matter clear , we must consider , that matters of faith necessary to salvation , are of another nature from matters of controversie concerning the sense of scripture in doubtful places . as to the matters necessary to salvation to particular persons , we assert the scriptures to be so plain , and the tradition of the church as to the creeds , so well known and attested , that no man without gross and culpable neglect , can mistake about them ; but in case of invincible or unaffected ignorance , their errors shall not be laid to their charge , and so their mistakes shall not hinder their salvation : and herein we assert no more than we can justifie , not only from scripture , reason , and antiquity , but from the best of their own writers , who assert , 1. that there are some points of faith necessary to be explicitely believed by all in order to salvation ; for altho they say there may be such invincible ignorance of them , as may excuse from sin in not believing them ; yet without believing them , they are not capable of salvation . as to the prima credibilia , as aquinas calls them , he determines , that every man is bound to believe them explicitely , as much as he is bound to have faith ; but as to other things , a preparation of mind is sufficient to believe all contained in scripture , and so much explicitely , as is made plain to him to he contained therein . from whence it follows , that by the doctrine of the schools , every man is to judg what he is to believe ; for his words are , quando hoc ei constiterit , when it is made clear to him ; and how can any thing be made clear to a man unless he be the judg of it ? 2. that particular persons may certainly know what is sufficient to their salvation by the inward assistance of divine grace , without depending on the churches infallibility . this follows from what is mention'd before concerning the divine gifts which accompany grace . and so much is owned by melchior canus , as to what is necessary for every man as to his own state and condition . so that the greatest divines of the roman church do yield all we contend for , as to the matters necessary to salvation . the only question is about matters of controversie raised in the church concerning the sense of scripture ; and as to these they yield these material points : ( 1 ) that an implicit faith as to what is contained in scripture , is sufficient ; and that particular persons are bound to no more , till the doctrine be made clear to them , which appears from the words of aquinas lately mentioned . 2. that particular persons may disbelieve many things determined by the church , without sin . this sancta clara proves from vega and others : and he saith himself , their ignorance in such cases , is either invincible , or at least such as excuses from sin . and he farther saith , 3. that it is the common opinion of the schools , and of their divines , that laymen erring with their teachers , are excused from any fault , and as long as it is out of obedience to their teachers , it is rather a meritorious act. let us now lay these things to the present case , and all the difficulty will soon disappear . as to the matters of salvation , they grant that god will not suffer those to be deceived about them , who do sincerely seek after the knowledg of them . as to matters of controversie , they are in no danger , if they trust their spiritual guides . and i asserted that we owned the authority of guides in the church , and a due submission to them . but the replier is not satisfied with this , for he saith , 2. that no other submission is sufficient , but such as men lose i haven without it . this is somewhat hard to understand : doth he in earnest think men cannot go to heaven without a blind obedience to the church ? is there no allowance to be made for ignorance , education , reasonable doubts ? is all other submission to authority in the church merely ad pompam ? but this gentleman did not take time to consider the doctrine of their own schools about these matters , for i cannot imagine he could be ignorant of it . but the defender seems to be wholly unacquainted with it , otherwise he could not talk so crudely and unskilfully as he doth , about mens judgment in matters that concern their salvation . and he may now see how far their own divines allow particular persons to be competent judges about matters that relate to their own salvation : and therefore i need give him no other answer , till he hath better informed himself about these things : but we have been upon such a point as may in some measure excuse him , but not those who ought to understand their own doctrine better . ( 2. ) the next argument to prove the insufficient authority of the church of england , was , that she dares not bring the true arguments against the other sects , for fear they should be turned against themselves , and confuted by their own arguments . to this it was answered , that the church of england did wisely disown the pretence of infallibility , and made use of the best arguments against sectaries from a just authority , and the sinfulness and folly of the sectaries refusing to submit to it . to take off the force of this answer , two different ways are taken . ( 1. ) the replier saith , the argument is as forcible without infallibility as with it . ( 2. ) the defender saith , authority signifies nothing in this case without infallibility . i shall consider them both , tho both cannot stand together . ( 1. ) the replier goes upon this ground ; that the church of england can never justly charge sectaries with disobedience to her , because they may as well cast it in her teeth , that she disobeyed her mother church , whether she were infallible or not . but the force of this depends upon a double mistake . ( 1. ) that the church of rome hath as much authority over our church , as the rulers of it have over the members . which ought not to have been supposed , but substantially proved , since the weight of the cause depends upon it . but i see nothing like a proof produced . ( 2. ) that the sectaries have as much reason to reject the terms of communion required by our church , as our church had to reject those of the church of rome . but this is as far from being proved as the other . ( 2. ) the defender desires to be instructed , how such an authority can be in a church without infallibility ? i hope he believes there may be authority without infallibility ; or else how shall fathers govern their children ? but not in the church . why so ? have not bishops , out of councils , authority to rule their diocesses ? have they not a provincial synods authority to make canons , tho they be not infallible ? what then is the meaning of this ? he tells us soon after ; to say a church is fallible , is to say she may be deceived . there is no doubt of that . and if she may be deceived her self , they may be deceived who follow her . and if a church pretends to be infallible , which is not , she certainly deceives those that follow her , and that without remedy . but all this sort of reasoning , proceeds upon a false suggestion , viz. that our faith must be grounded on the chuach's authority as the formal reason of it . which he knows , is utterly denied by us , and ought to have been proved . we declare , the ground of our faith is the word of god ; not interpreted by fancy , but by the consent of the whole christian church from the apostles times . this is our bottom , or if you will , the rock , on which our church is built . this is far more firm and durable , than a pretence to infallibility ; which is like a desperate remedy , which men never run to , but when they see nothing else will help them . had the church of rome been able to defend her innovations by reason or antiquity , she had never thought of infallibility . it is a much better expedient to keep men in error , than to keep them from it ; and tends more to save the authority of a sinking . church , than the souls of men. but he will not let the church's infallibility go thus ; for he pretends to prove , that if we take that away , we make christianity the most unreasonable thing in nature ; nay , absolutely impossible . what! whether god hath promised to make the church infallible or not ! we understand those who offer to prove the church infallible by scripture ; but these scientifical men despise such beaten roads , and when they offer to demonstrate , fall short of the others probabilities . as will appear by examining his argument : faith requires an assent to a thing as absolutely true ; but a fallible authority cannot oblige me to a thing as absolutely true ; and therefore this would be an effect without a cause ; a down-right impossibility ; a flat contradiction . i will match his argument with another ; faith is not an assent to a thing as absolutely true , upon less than a divine testimony ; but the church's testimony is not divine ; and therefore to believe upon the church's testimony , is an effect without a cause ; a down-right impossibility ; a flat contradiction . let him set one of these against the other , and see who makes faith unreasonable or impossible . but i will clear this matter in few words . i grant that faith is an assent to a thing as absolutely true ; and that what is absolutely true , is impossible to be false : i grant , that a meer fallible authority is not sufficient to produce an act of faith. but here i distinguish the infallible authority of god revealing ( into which my faith is resolved , as into the formal reason of it ) from the authority of the church conveying that revelation , which is only the means by which this revelation comes to be known to us : as when a man swears by the bible , there is a difference between the contents of that book by which he swears , and the officers putting the book into his hands . ( 3. ) the church of england is blamed , for allowing no liberty of appeals to a higher judicature . the question is , whether this makes her no true church ; or not to have any just authority over her own members ? the replier saith , she makes her self the last tribunal of spiritual doctrine . i know not where she hath done so , since we own the authority of free and truly general councils , as the supreme tribunal of the church upon earth . and accordingly receive the four first ; which even s. gregory the great distinguished from those that followed , as to their authority and veneration . the defender had a good mind to cut off the church of england from being a church , because she hath renounced communion with the church of rome ; but his heart failed him : and i hope he will think better of it , when he sees cause to prove a little more effectually , that the church of rome in its largest extent is the catholick church . he argues , that there must be such an authority in a church , which may give a final sentence conclusive to the parties , as the judges do temporal differences . but is it necessary for all churches to have such a power ? then there must be as many supreme courts as there are churches . if not , we desire to know where the supreme court is , and who appointed it ? and where christ hath ever promised to his church a power to end controversies when they arise , as effectually as judges do temporal differences ? for the freest and most general councils yet assembled , have not been so happy ; and those we look on as the most venerable authority to decide differences in the church . but still our church wants sufficient authority , in his opinion . doth it want authority to govern its own members ? to reform abuses in a divided state of the catholick church ? to cast off an usurped power , as it was judged by the clergy in convocation , who yet concurred in other things with the church of rome ? i pray what authority had the gallican church so lately to declare against the pope's infallibility , and to reduce him in that respect to the case of an ordinary bishop ? if absolute obedience be due to him as head of the church , what authority have the temporal princes in other countries , sometimes to forbid , sometimes to restrain and limit the pope's bulls . this at least shews , that there may be just authority to examine and restrain the pope's power . and i see no reason , why the several churches of christendom may not act as well against the pretence of the pope's authority , as the gallican church hath done against his infallibility ; especially , since this gentleman hath told us , that authority without infallibility , signifies nothing . and those who think they may examine and reject his dictates , may do the same by his authority , the one being as liable as the other . it was said in the papers , that no country can subsist in quiet , where there is not a supreme judg , from whom there can be no appeal . the answer was , that the natural consequence was then , that every national church ought to have the supreme power within it self . but how comes appeals to a foreign jurisdiction to tend to the peace and quiet of a church ? the defender saith ; that a national to the whole church , is but as a shire to a kingdom ; and a very natural and consistent consequence it is , that every shire should have a king. one would think by such an answer , this defender is a mighty stranger to the ancient polity of the church . did he never hear of the power of metropolitans being setled by the council of nice for governing the churches , and calling provincial synods ? did he never hear of many other canons relating to the power and frequency of provincial synods ? did he never hear of the decrees of the council of ephesus , forbidding all incroachments on the ancient rights of churches ? did he never hear that provincial councils have declared matters of faith , without so much as advising with the bishop of rome ? as the african councils did in the pelagian controversy ; and the councils of tolcdo , in the case of arianism ; which reformed the spanish churches , and made canons by their own authority ; which were confirmed by their kings , reccaredus and sisenandus ? did he never hear that it was good doctrine among cathol●ck divines , that particular churches might take upon them to declare the true catholick faith ? and if so , they must judg what is so . did he never hear , that in a divided state of the church , errors and abuses may be reformed by particular churches ? and that this was owned and defended by great men in the church of rome ? if he did not , he was very much unprovided for the handling such a controversy ; if he did know these things , he ought not to have spoken with so much contempt of the power of particular or national churches . and to assert their authority , is very far from being like setting up a king in every shire ; for this were the highest dilloyalty to the king , who hath a just and unquestionable authority over all the shires . let him prove that the pope hath such a monarchy over all particular churches , before he make such a parallel again . but the way he takes is rather like making the imperial crown of this realm to be in subjection to a foreign power , because the roman emperors once had dominion here , and therefore this kingdom could never recover its own rights . but he saith , a foreign jurisdiction is hardly sense with respect to the church , for ●oris is out , and unless the ultimate jurisdiction be out of the church , it cannot be said to be foreign . this is a shameful begging of the question , that what they call the roman catholick church , is the catholick church ; for if it be not ( which i hope i have sufficiently shewn ) then the pretended and usurped jurisdiction of the roman church over the church of england , is a foreign jurisdiction . he adds , that it is impossible to re-settle the church among us , without that which we call foreign jurisdiction ; because dissentions in matters of religion cannot otherwise be removed . but suppose this foreign jurisdiction be the occasion of these dissentions ? some maintaining 〈◊〉 others asserting the rights of our church against it ; is not 〈◊〉 ●oreign jurisdiction like to put an end to it ? yes certainly . for , if all parties submit , there will be no longer disputing . but our question , as yet , is , whether this be reasonable or not ? i complained of the inconvenience of appeals to a foreign jurisdiction . he gives us a smart answer , and saith , that holds no comparison with the inconvenience of heresy . as tho it were so plain a thing that we are guilty of heresy , that it needed no manner of proof . alas ! what need a man prove that it is day when the sun shines ? we are just as much guilty of heresy , as the good bishop was , who , for denying the antipodes , was condemned by pope zach●●y . but it is a comfortable thing in a charge of heresy , to find it no better proved . he saith , i mistook the matter of appeals , and that it was not understood with respect to causes , but to matters of doctrine and worship . an appeal must re●ate to a superiour authority ; and a constant appeal to a standing authority ; and whatever the pretence be , the court of rome will challenge supreme jurisdiction , where-ever the pope is owned as head of the church : and then all those consequences will follow i mentioned before . if other kind of appeals were meant in the papers , yet they must relate to an authority superiour to our church ; which we could wish had been more fully expressed , that we might have known to whom the appeal was to be made ; whether to a free general council , which we never disowned ; or to the popes authority , which we yet see no cause to make our appeals to , especially as to what concerns his own jurisdiction . he pleads , that supream power must be judg in its own cause ; for no authority ought to be set up against the king , supposing a question be started about his prerogative . i answer ; this is a case extreamly different : for in matters of prerogative , the king 's supream power is not the question ; for his right to the imperial crown is , and ought to be out of dispute ; but all the question that can be started , must relate only to the exercise of his power , in some particular cases , where former laws made by the king's consent , are supposed to limit it ; which the courts of judicature take cognizance of , and so are a kind of legal arbitrators between the king and his people . but in the case before us , the jurisdiction it self , and the right to exercise any such authority , is the very thing in question . and i desire this gentleman to resolve me , whether in the late times of usurpation this had 〈◊〉 been good doctrine , that those who enjoy , or pretend to supream power , are to be judges in their own case ? if so , then it had been impossible for men to have justified their loyalty to the royal family , then very unjustly put out of possession . if not , then there may be a pretence to supream authority , where it is by no means allowable for the pretender to judg in his own cause . as to his appeal to the catholick church ; we by no means reject it , provided he mean the church truly catholick , as it comprehends the apostolical church in the first place ; and then all other christian churches , which from the apostles times have delivered down the catholick doctrine and worship , which they received from them . but if he means that which is called a catholick church , but is neither catholick nor apostolical ; we beg his pardon , if we allow no appeal to it , since its errors and corruptions are the great and just cause of our complaints . he runs into a long discourse about church-security , and his design is to shew there can be none without infallibility . infallibility is no doubt a very good thing , but where is it to be had ? is it not possible for men both to be deceived and to deceive , with a pretence of infallibility ? all that we desire is to see some infallible prooss of it ; without which all the talk about it doth not end one controversy , but beget many . and this kind of talk is , as if a man were to advise with two lawyers about making a purchase , but would fain be secure of a good title ; the one desires to see all the evidences that belong to the estate , and after the perusal of all , he tells him , that as far as he can possibly discern , the title is very good , and he would venture all he had upon it . he goes to another , and tells him what the former had said to him . and was this all , saith he ? would he not say , it was impossible for you to be cheated ? no. and will you venture your money without such security ? why , saith the client , what would you have me to do ? i will tell you , saith he , there is but one way in the world for you to be safe . what is that , sir. i should be glad to know it with all my heart ? i will discover it to you , provided you follow my counsel ; and that is , to deal with a man who hath such a gift from heaven bestowed upon him , that he never did , nor ever can deceive you , and then it is impossible you should be cheated : for , all these deeds and writings , and lawyers , may deceive you ; but if you deal with such a man , you are safe enough . i thank you , sir , saith the client , for your good advice ; but i pray , where is there such a man to be found ? for , if i cannot find him out , i am just where i was before , and i must use the best means i can , and rather trust to good deeds and real honesty , than wait for a chimerical infallibliity . it is alledged still , that without infallibility , we have not judgment but fancy . and the replier saith , that in competition with the churches authority all is but fancy . the difference of these must depend upon the reason we produce ; and by that we are still content the world should judg , so we understand those , who are unprejudiced in it . it was said in the papers , that if the fancies of those who are now for the church of england vary , they are ready , or ( as the desender saith it ought to be read ) really to embrace or joyn with the next congregation of people , whose discipline or worship agrees with their opinion at that time . i will take his own reading , which in my opinion alters the matter very little ; for still it implies , that those of the church of england have nothing to hold them to it , but a present fancy , and when that varies , they may as well be of another perswasion ; for fancy , we all know , is a very mutable thing . but , to shew that those of the church of england are not so apt to vary their fancies or opinions in these matters , i alledged their adhering to the crown in the times of rebellion . he answers , that my zeal for the church of england is wonderous unlucky . i am sorry if it prove so , since i unfeignedly design to serve her , and therefore should be much more concerned , if i should do her injury under a pretence of service . but wherein is it ? he confesses , the doctrine of our church is in this point very orthodox , and her practice in the times of rebellion conformable to it . and what was the practice of the church then , but the firmness of the members of it ? but many , he saith , deserted her and her doctrine in this point at that time , so many that the rebellion was peradventure indebted for its success to those deserters . but they were deserters still ; and the practice of the church of england was agreeable to her doctrine , by his own confession . how then comes this to shew , that it is only a variable fancy which keeps men to it ? he saith , if those who deserted her , had ever adhered to her with a perswasion , that they were obliged to believe what sbe taught , they could not have deserted her in this point , who always taught loyalty ; and till they do so , there is no security of adhering to her . this seems to me to be a wonderous unlucky answer . for doth infallibility secure a church against deserters ? have no men , no provinces , no whole nations deserted a church which pretends to infallibility ? and since there may be such multitudes of deserters , where ●●fallibility is challenged , what greater security can that give a●●inst them , more than our church doth ? nay , i think so much the less , because the very pretence to infallibility is suspicious and hard to be made out , and every error overthrows it . and i do not think the church of rome did her self greater mi●●hief , or ●ade more total deserters by any one thing , than by pretending to be infallible . for , when such gross errors and corruption ; were complained of , that one of the popes at that time confessed them , and owned the necessity of a reformation , when the princes of the roman communion called for it , and pressed it very hard by their ambassadors in the council of trent ( as appears by the french collection of memoires relating to it ) when 〈◊〉 all , no one thing , as to doctrine or worship , could be redressed , it ●onvinced the world , that let things be as they would , they would reform nothing ; this made the breach irreconcileable . for , till the council of trent was ended and confirmed , there was still hopes of reconciliation , upon a due explication of some points , reforming abuses , and leaving school-doctrines at liberty ; but when they saw every thing defended , and the errors complained of , made articles of faith , and put into a new creed , there was no hopes of any accommodation left . and all this was the blessed effect of pretending to infallibility ; for if one error had been owned , there had been no farther pretending to that . it is some comfort however , that our church is confessed to teach the orthodox doctrine of loyalty , and her practice to be conformable in the worst of times ; and so i hope it will always be . but it hath been said by some body , that we had our government and ceremonies from his church , our doctrine from luther and calvin ; and that we had nothing peculiar to our church , but our doctrine of non-resistance ; and much good may it do us . and we hope we shall never fare the worse for it . this might give occasion to enquire , whether the church which pretends to be infallible , doth teach it so orthodoxly or not ? or whether those who do think themselves obliged to believe what she teaches , are thereby obliged to the strictest principles of loyalty ? but i forbear . it is sufficient to my purpose to shew , that our church doth not only teach them , as her own doctrine ; but which is far more effectual , as the doctrine of christ and his apostles , and of the primitive church ; which i think ought to have more force on the consciences of men , than the pretence to infallibility in any church in the world. but all this while it is said , there is no firm motive produced for adhering to the doctrine of our church . and this is repeated over and over : as though there could be any greater motive in the world , than that our doctrine is no other than that of christ and his apostles . and unless you prove this as to the doctrine of the church of rome , all your other motives signify nothing to the real satisfaction of any man's conscience . for it is agreed on all hands , that our religion is a revealed religion ; and that this revelation was made by christ and his apostles : and that this revelation , as to matters necessary to salvation , is contained in the books of the new testament . what satisfaction then can it be to any man's conscience , to be told , such a church tells me this and that , and the other point were the doctrine of christ and his apostles ? as will appear by this short representation . you pretend to no new revelations of matter of doctrine ? no. you have the books of this revelation ? yes . are they not legible ? yes . but you cannot understand them . let me try ; it is for god's sake i must believe , and therefore i cannot be satisfied till i see his word . what! will you not believe the church which delivers you the word ? i pray excuse me . a man brings me a letter from my father , about matter of great consequence to me ; he tells me , i need not look into the letter it self , for he was authorized by my father to tell me his meaning : altho i believe he dealt faithfully in bringing me the true letter ; do you think i will trust him for the meaning of it ? no ; i will open it , if it be only to see , whether he had such authority from him or not . and i know , if my father was pleased to write to me about matters of such importance , he would write in such a manner that i might understand him ; and if any difficulties arise in point of law , i will take the advice of th●se who are most fit and able to direct me . but after all , i must know what my father would have me to do from his own words , and not from the mouth of the messenger . or if he tells me he hath authority to deliver other things by word of mouth , not contained in the letter , which i am equally bound to believe with what i can find in i● ; can any one think i will believe him , unless it appears by the letter it self that my father gave him such authority ? let him tell me never so much , how long he hath been my father's servant , and how faithful he hath been to him , and how much he hath done and suffered for him , and what a number of certificates he can produce , from time to time , of his good behaviour ; yet all this can give me no satisfaction , as long as the letter he brings is confessed to be my father 's own hand-writing ; and that it was purposely sent to direct me what i was to do in a matter that he knew to be of the greatest concernment in the world to me . can i imagine one so wise and careful , should omit setting down in his own letter such important things , and leave them to the dis●retion of one that may either mistake his meaning , or have some interest to carry on different from mine ? and therefore all the fair pretences or motives in the world , shall never make me believe any thing to be his mind for me to do , in a matter which relates to my welfare , but what i find under his own hand . it is to very little purpose to quote s. augustin's motives about the church ▪ unless it be made appear that they belong only to the church of rome ; and that they prove the church infallible in all she teaches . our faith depends on the word of god , as it is contained in scripture : thi● scripture is conveyed down by the church ; but the church still is but the messenger which bring● the letter , by which we are directed what to believe and practise in order to salvation . we do by no means think the word of god is made by writing , as he suggests ; but we are sure it is the word of god which is written , which we can never be of any tradition . we do not look out for a fallible judg , to be sure to have an end of our differences : but we hate to be imposed on , by a pretence to an infallible judg , who instead of ending differences , makes more . we do not think it judgment to affirm , that giving honour to god , is not giving honour to god : but we have not such deep understandings to comprehend how god should be honoured by the breaking his commandments . it is not judgment in our opinion to think , that because only one could redeem us , no body besides can pray for us : but it is no great wisdom and judgment , if god hath appointed but one advocate in heaven , for us to appoint him more ; or to make our addresses to our fellow-creatures in heaven , when he hath commanded us to do it to his son. we do not believe that the body and blood of christ can now be separated , or he die again : but when christ instituted a sacrament to set forth the shedding of his blood , that it is meer fancy to think his blood being in his body , doth answer the ends of it . the apostles no doubt understood christ's meaning in what he said , and have so well instructed his church therein , that we have no reason to believe he meant the substantial change of his body , in the institution of a sacrament . now on which side judgment and reason lies , these very instances discover . and we desire no greater liberty in these matters , than to have our judgments sway'd by the strongest reason ; and that i hope is not building on sand. the replier saith ; the infallible church is as visible as the sun. we are then wondrous unlucky indeed that cannot see it : i have often rubbed my eyes , and looked over and over , where they tell me it is to be seen , and i can yet see nothing like it ; although i should be as glad to see it as another . i have heard of a blind man , who pretended to have such a sagacity with his fingers , that he could feel colours ; and he proceeded so far in it , that some vertuoso's believed him , and were ready to form a theory of colours from the subtilty of the blind man's fingers ; but before they had accomplished it , the trick was discovered . an infallible judg of all controversies looks to me just like it ; he is to determine controversies , not by seeing , but by a kind of feeling . if he produces reason , we may judg as well as he ; if he doth not , he must feel them out ; which is so different a way from the proceeding of the rest of mankind , that for my part , i must be content rather to grope in the darkness of common reason , than be directed by the light of this invisible sun-shine . the defender here comes in with his dish and his stand ; which are metaphors somewhat too mean for such a subject , and are apt to turn one's stomach more than repetition . the question is , whether those who allow the use of our judgments in the choice of a church , have reason to find fault with it in other thing● ; because the difficulties about an infallible church , are as great as about any other point in religion ? the replier again saith ; the church is a noon-day light. then , what cimmerians are we ? tully questioned . whether some god , or nature , or the situation of the place , hindred a whole nation that they could never see the sun ? but our modern geographers put an end to this dispute , telling us , there are no people in the world who cannot see the sun at some time or other . and we are apt to think , if there were such a sun-shine of the churches infallibility , we should be able to discern it , unless the light of it may be thought to dazle o●● eyes ; for , we are as willing to find it as they ; but the dis●● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it are such as we cannot conquer . and there need no telescopes to find out the sun. but the defender will not yield that there are any su●● difficulties about the church's infallibility ; for he hath but o●● thing to mind , and that no difficulty neither , where , or which the church is . i hope when he hath considered the former discourses , he will not think it so easy a matter to find out the church he talketh of , viz. one infallible catholick church . but the difficulties about scripture are greater ; as about the canon , translation , and sense of it . the question proceeds upon a person who in earnest desires to satisfy himself in this matter ; whether in order to his salvation , he must follow the directions of scripture , or the church ? and i doubt not to make it appear , that the difficulties are greater about the church than the scripture . that which deceives persons is , that they rather consider the difficulties after the choice , than before . it is very true , those who trust the church , have no more to do afterward , but to believe and do as she directs ; for they are to examine no farther , whether it be true or false , right or wrong , vertue or vice , which is commanded ; the church is to be obey'd . but those who follow the scripture , must not only read , and weigh , and consider it well ; but when doubts arise , must make fresh applications to their rule , and use the best means for understanding it , by prayer , meditation , and the assistance of spiritual guides . and this is far more agreeable to the design of the christian religion , as it was taught by christ and his apostles . but the difficulties of the choice are now to be consider'd ; and let us consider what those are about the church , and then compare them with those about the scripture . if i choose a church for my infallible guide in the way to heaven , to which the promises of christ do belong , then there are these difficulties , both which i think impossible for my mind to get over . ( 1. ) i must exclude all other churches in the christian world from any share in these promises . and either i must condemn them without hearing them , or examining the grounds of their exclusion , or i must be satisfied with the reason of it ; which i cannot be , till i am certain that church hath justly shut out all other churches , and challenged the promises to her self alone . ( 2. ) i must be satisfied that christ did intend one standing visible church to be my director in the way to heaven . and for this purpose , i must examine all the places of scripture produced to that end , and be judg of the clearness and evidence of them , i. e. i must conquer the difficulties about the scripture , as to canon , translation , and sense , before i can be satisfied that i am to make choice of a church . ( 3. ) there is yet a harder point to get over ; suppose a church must be chosen : why the church of rome rather than any other ? what is there in the promises of christ , which direct me to chuse that church and no other ? suppose i were born in greece , and there i was told , i must ●huse a church for my guide to heav●n . if it must be so , i will chuse our own greek church ; no , it must be the church of rome . what reason or colour is there for it ? is it said so in scripture ? no , not expresly . but what consequence from scripture will make me do it ? there are promises made to the church . what then ? were not our churches planted by the apostles ? have not we had a constant succession of bishop ; in them ? have we not four patriarchs in our communion , and you but one ? for what imaginable reason then should you exclude our chur●●es from any share in the promises of christ ? but now as to the scripture , we are to consider ; 1. that no more is necessary as to particular persons than knowing the things necessary to their salvation ; which are easy to be known , and are clearly revealed in scripture , if s. chrysostom and s. augustine may be b●lieved . 2. that what difficulties are objected about the scripture , must be all of them resolved by him that believes the church , ( as is already observed ) but the difficulties about the church's infallibility , do not concern him that relies on scripture . 3. that the general consent of the christian church , is of far greater advantage for the satisfaction of a man's mind , than the authority of any one church , as about the integrity of the copies , and the canon of scripture . 4. as to translations , the unlearned in all churches must trust to those that are learned for the particular examination of them ; but in general , a private person may be satisfied by these con●●derations . ( 1. ) that men will not go about to deceive others in a matter wherein so many are concerned ; and in which it is so easy to discover any wilful fraud . ( 2. ) that since the divisions of christendom , there are parties still at watch to discover the faults committed by each other in a work of so publick a nature . ( 3. ) that where a translation hath been review'd with great care , after several attempts , there is still greater security as to the goodness of it . and this is the case of the present translation of our church , which was with wonderful care review'd and compared with the original languages , by the particular direction of k. james i. and therefore deserves to be esteemed above such a translation , which was never made out of the original ( as to the old testament ) nor ever review'd and corrected by it . which is the case of the vulgar latin , and of such translations which are made from it . i had said , that the scrip●ure may be a rule without the church , but the church cannot without the scriptures . the replier , like a fair adversary , mentions that which looks like an objection , viz. that there was a church before the scriptures were written ; and some ages were passed before the canon of scripture was made and owned by the church . to which i answer ; that when i said the church cannot be a rule without the scripture , it was upon the supposition , that the canon of scripture had been long since owned by the church , and that the church derives its infallibility from the promises contai●ed in the scripture . but the defender goes another way to work ; for , saith he , the scriptures , i say , may be a rule without the church ; that is , without faithful ; for a congregation of them is a church . what! in the sense now before us , as it is taken for a guide ! is every congregation of the faithful a church in this sense ? then , well-fare the independents . and this , me-thinks , makes infallibility sink very low . i do not say , there could be no church before scripture ; nor that they had then no rule of faith ; nor that the church depends on writing ; these are but mean objections ; but i ●ill say , that where a church challenges her authority by the scripture , it can signify nothing without it . which is so plain , that i need not multiply words about it . as to his church-security , we have considered it enough already ; but it would make one mistrust a security which is so often offered . i said , that suppose infallibility be found in scripture , there is yet a harder point to get over , viz. how the promises relating to the church in general , came to be appropriated to the church of rome . from hence he insers , that i have at last found the promises of infallibility to the church there . is not this a rare consequence ? suppose i should say , i know a book of controversy in the world , that hath very little of true reasoning in it ; but if it were to be found there , it doth not reach to the point in hand . doth this imply that i affirmed in the latter part , what i denied before ? is this finding out true reasoning in the latter period , which was not to be found in the former ? there may be true reasoning , when it is not to the purpose . so there might be infallibility , and yet the church of rome not concerned in it . suppose the church of jerusalem , as the mother church , might be infallible by the promises of scripture ; what would this be to the church of rome ? but i never said , or thought , that there were any promises of infallibility made to any church in scripture : pro●ises of divine assistance and indefectibility , i grant , are made to the church in general : but these are quite of another nature from promises of infallibility , in delivering matters of faith in all ages . yet if this were granted , the church of rome , as it takes in all of her communion , hath no more reason to challenge it to her self , than europe hath to be called the face of the whole earth . as to his sandy foundation , i tell him in short , he that builds his faith on the word of god , builds on a rock ; and all other things will be found but sandy foundations . ( 4. ) the next thing laid to our charge is , that we draw our arguments from implications , and far-fetch'd interpretations , at the same time that we deny plain and positive words . in answer to this ; ( 1. ) it was shew'd , that in many of the points in difference , we have express words of scripture for us . as , against the worship of images , and giving divine worship to any but god : and for giving the eucharist in both kinds , and praying in a language we understand . the defender would have me produce the very words , to shew that the scripture saith no , to what their church saith i , or contrariwise . he talked much before , that we give the same answer the old hereticks did ; and now i think he hath matched them . shew us , say they , in terms , the direct contrary to our propositions ; where the son was said to be consubstantial to the father ; or the holy ghost was a divine person ; or the blessed virgin the mother of god ; or that there are two natures in christ after the union . will reason and consequences signify nothing , when founded on the word of god ? but i need not this answer , for i assirm that the words of the first and second commandment , of the institution of the sacrament , drink ye all of this ; of s. paul 14. of the first epistle to the corinthians , against publick service in an unknown tongue , are so plain and evident , that there is no command of scripture but may be avoided and turned another way as well as these . and herein we go not upon our own fancies , but we have the concurrent sense of the christian church in the best and most primitive ages , in every one of the points here mentioned . and whether we are right as to the sense of the second commandment ; and as to divine worship in general , as to christ's institution amounting to a command , as to st. paul 's discourse : which the replier insists upon , next to the scripture it self , and the force contained therein ; we appeal to the primitive church , as the most indifferent arbitrator between us . ( 2. ) i answered ; that where words seem plain and positive , they may have a metaphorical or figurative sense ; as when god hath eyes and ears , &c. given him ; and the rock was christ. and so in the words , this is my body ; it was a sacramental expression , as the other was ; and the other words are figurative , when the cup is said to be the new testament in his blood : and st. paul , notwithstanding those words , called it bread after consecration . here the defender will not bite , the light being too clear for him ; but descants upon denying plain words , and so runs clear off from the point , which seemed to be chiefly meant by the paper . but the replier is a generous adversary , and attacks what stands before him . he endeavours to shew a difference between god's having eyes and ea●s , &c. and those words , this is my body , as to the receding from the literal sense ; because , saith he , there is an implication of impossibility in the one , but not in the other . but withal he grants , that if by this be meant the bread , it would have implied an equal impossibility . i am very glad to see this point brought to so fair an issue : for , if i do not prove by the general consent of the fathers , both of the greek and latin churches , that by this the bread is meant , i dare promise to become hi● proscly●● . ( 5. ) the last thing objected is , that our church s●bsists only on the pleasure of the civil magistrate , who may turn the church which way he pleases . to this it was answered ; ( 1. ) that the rule of our religion is unalterable , being the word of god ; tho the exercise of it be under the regulation of the laws of the land. ( 2. ) that altho we attribute the supreme jurisdiction to the king , yet we do not question but there are inviolable rights of the church which ought to be preserved against the fancies of some , and the usurpations of others . the replier answers , that our religion is built on private interpretations of scripture established by law ; and therefore if the law be mutable , the religion is mutable . the defender desires i would make it appear , that the holy scripture is such a foundation , as makes the protestant church unalterable ; for the letter of scripture is common to all who bear the name of christians . and all alterations of religion are made upon pretence of scripture . to give a clear and distinct answer , i shall lay down these propositions . ( 1. ) that altho humane laws be alterable , yet the divine law is unchangeable , and continues its force on the consciences of men ; so that no humane law can make that lawful which god hath sorbidden , nor that unlawful which he hath commanded . whatever change therefore may happen as to the laws of men , the law of god is still the same , and its obli●ation cannot be taken off by any laws of men. as suppose god hath forbidden the worship of images , or of saints , or of any creature , upon supposition that it is not a creature ; no law in the world can make this lawful ; because god's authority is superior and antecedent to man's , and therefore cannot be superseded by an act of men. and this is one of the fund mentals of the christian religion , without which it could never have been practised , when the laws of the empire were again●● it . so , neither can humane laws make that true which is agains● the word of god , nor that false which is agreeable to it . they can never make transubstantiation a true doctrine ▪ if it were nor so before ; nor a purgatory necessary to be believed , unless it be proved from scripture to be so . so that the foundation of our religion , being the word of god , and the obligation of that on the consciences of men , it must remain the same , tho humane laws be mutable . howbeit , i do not deny the magistrates power in making laws for regulating the publick exercise of religion . but as we have cause to thank god for the establishment of the best church in the christian world by them among us ; so we are unwilling to put such cases as the defender doth , when we enjoy our religion as established by law : and it would be interpreted to be a mistrust of his majesty's gracious promise to protect it . ( 2. ) although the letter of scripture be liable to misinterpretations and abuses , yet the true and genuine sense of it may be understood ; and then there is a great disterence between false and mistaken notions , and the proper sense of scripture . this is very strange reasoning , if men will infer that there can be no certainty as to the sense of scripture , because so many have misinterpreted it . is it any argument that the constitution of our government is not sirm ; or that loyal subjects cannot be certain of their duty , because men of ill principles have run away with false notions of a fundamental contract , and coordinate power ? is there no certainty in law , because judges have been of different opinions , and determined the same cause several ways ? is there no principle of certainty in the world , because men have been imposed upon , both by their senses and reason ? if notwithstanding this , we must allow that we may judg truly of some things , ( or else we must all turn scepticks ) then we desire no more than to observe the same rules and caution in judging the sense of scripture , which we do as to our judgment of other matters . in them we take notice of the causes of errors , the circumstances of things , the difference of objects , the nature of the medium , and accordingly pass our judgment . and in things too small for our view , or too remote , we make use of glasses to help us ; but all this while men do not reason so weakly in these matters . do they say that some have been deceived by their glasses and telescopes ; therefore there is no certainty in any of them , and they must all be laid aside ; and whatever they talk of spots in the sun , and the unequal surface of the moon , they are all fancies and chimera's of giddy brains , and no men of sense can believe them ? if mankind do not argue at this rate in other things , how come they to be so fatally unreasonable about the scripture ? the letter of scripture , say they , is used for this fancy , and the other mistake , and a third pleads it for down-right heresy : i very one thinks he hath the letter of scripture for him ; and upon that he grounds his faith. and what then ? the natural consequence is , that every one would sain have scripture of his side . doth it really follow from hence that no body hath it ? or that there can be no certainty who hath it , and who hath it not ? but every one thinks he hath it . and what follows ? some or others must be deceived . i grant it ; but who shall tell who is deceived , and who not ? i pray let me ask one question ; are you willing to be deceived , or not ? who is willing to be deceived ? every one that will not take the pains to be undeceived , or to prevent being deceived . what pains do you mean ? such honest industry and diligence which every one ought to take , who pretends he searches for truth in order to his salvation . and i dare affirm , such shall never want means to attain certainty as to the sense of scripture in what concerns their salvation . but suppose the question be about churches , how can the church of england assure men that is the true sense of scripture which is delivered by it ? i answer ; ( 3. ) the church of england hath ofsered all reasonable satisfaction to mankind , that it doth follow the true sense of scripture . and that by these ways ; 1. by not locking up the scripture from the view of the people , but leaving it free and open for all persons to judg concerning the doctrines here taught . which argues a great assurance , that our church is not afraid of any opposition to be found to the word of god in the articles of our religion . and the contrary is vehemently to be suspected , where reading the scripture is forbidden the people , as it is in the church of rome , if the popes authority signify any thing ; for clement the 8th , did revoke the power of granting licenses , which was allowed by pius the 4th . and i do not see how any confessor can justify his acting against the pope's authority . 2. by not pretending to deliver the sense of scripture on her own authority . if she did require her members to depend wholly upon her sense , without examining themselves , that very thing would render her authority suspicious with all inquisitive men ; who always mistrust where there is too much caution . 3. by her constant appealing to the primitive church ever since the reformation , as the best voucher for her keeping to the true sense of scripture . and in truth , one of the greatest controversies between our church and the church of rome , is not about the bare letter of scripture , but the best interpreter of it . our church still contending , that the sirst and purest ages of the church , next to the apostles times , did certainly best understand the sense aad meaning of scripture ; and the church of rome pretending , that the giving the true sense of scripture , belongs to the present catholick church , which they would be thought to be , against the plainest evidence of scripture and reason . as appears by the foregoing discourses . the defender's cavil against the prayer at the end of the answer , would have held as well against amen , if it had been added to it . but he was to answer all , and therefore the very prayer could not escape his confutation , or at least his putting an ill construction upon it ; which was far from the intention of him that made it . who thinks it a part of a good christian , to be always a loyal subject . as to the summing up the evidence in his conclusion , i shall not follow him in it , since i think the cause so clear in the opening of it , that i shall leave it as it is , to the reader 's judgment . an answer to the defence of the third paper . i have now done as to matter of reason and argument ; the third paper chiefly relates to matter of fact : which , if i were mistaken in , even the brisk defender of it , doth me that right , to say , the bishop of winchester did mislead me . for the whole body of my answer , he saith , is in effect a transcript from the bishop's preface ; that i purloin his arguments , without altering sometime so much as the property of his words . that i have quoted him five times only in the margin , and ought to have quoted him in almost every leaf of my pamphet . in short , if the master had not eaten , the man ( saving reverence ) could not have vomited . this is a tast of the decency and cleanliness of his stile ; especially in writing for princes and great ladies , who are not accustomed to such a sort of courtship to others , in their presence . but as course as the complement is , it clears me from being the author of any mistakes , and lays the blame on the bishop , who is not able to answer for himself . yet , as if i had been the sole contriver and inventer of all , he bestows those civil and obliging epithets upon me , of disingenuous , foul-mouth'd , and shuffling ; one of a virulent genius , of spiteful diligence and irreverence to the royal family ; of subtil calumny , and sly aspersion ; and he adds to these ornaments of speech , that i have a cloven foot , and my name is legion ; and that my answer is an infamous libel , a scurrilous saucy pamphlet . is this indeed the spirit of a new convert ? is this the meekness and temper you intend to gain proselites by , and to convert the nation ? he tells us in the beginning , that truth has a language peculiar to it self ; i desire to be informed whether these be any of the characters of it ? and how the language of reproach and evil-speaking may be distinguished from it ? but zeal in a new convert is a terrible thing ; for it not only burns but rages , like the eruptions of mount aetna , it fills the air with noise and smoak ; and throws out such a torrent of liquid fire , that there is no standing before it . the answerer alone was too mean a sacrifice for such a hector in controversy . all that standeth in his way must fall at his feet . he calls me legion , that he may be sure to have number enough to overcome . but he is a great prosicient indeed , if he be such an exorcist , to cast out a whole legion already . but he hopes it may be done without fasting and prayer . if the people continue stedfast to their religion , they are the rabble ; and the only friends i can perceive he allows us . my good friends the rabble in one place , and in another , our author knows he has all the common people of his side ; what nothing of honour , or dignity , or wit , or sense , or learning left of our side ? not so much as a poet , unless it be robbin wisdom . i pray , sir , when was it that all our friends degenerated into the rabble ? do you think that heresy , as you call it , doth ipso facto degrade all mankind , and turns all orders of men , even the house of 〈◊〉 lordsit self , to a meer rabble ? if all the common people be of our side , we have no reason to be troubled at it ; but there is another thing of our side , which you like worse , and that is common sense ; which is more useful to the world than school-divinity . but methinks he should not be angry with the common people , when he takes such pains to prove , that the kingdom of heaven is not only for the wise and learned ; and that our saviour's disciples were but poor fishermen ; and we read but of one of his apostles who was bred up at the feet of gamaliel ; and that poor people have souls to save as precious in the sight of god as the grim logicians . would not any one take this for an apology for the common people , rather than for the dutchess of york ? whose wit and understanding put her far beyond the need of such a mean defence ? could she be vindicated in no other manner than by putting her into the rank of the persons of the meanest capacities ? but this is another part of the decency of this defence . he had several pretty sayings , as he thought , upon this subject , and therefore out they come , without regarding the reflection implied in them on a person of her capacity as well as dignity . and so h● goes on in his plea for the ignorant , i. e. for the common people , as i am resolved to understand it . must they be damned unless they can make a regular approach to heaven in mood and figure ? is there no entring there without a syllogisin ? or ergotcering it with a nego , concedo , & distinguo ? this may pass for wit and eloquence among those i think he pleads for . and so i am content to let it go for the sake of my friends , the common people . but this is somewhat an unusual way of defending , to plead for those he professes to despise , and in such a manner , as to reproach the person he undertakes to defend . from the common people , we come to church-m●n , to see how he uses them . and he hath soon found out a faction among them , whom he charges with juggling designs : but romantick ●eroes must be allowed to make armies of a field of thistles , and to encounter wind-mills for giants . he would fain be the instrume●t to divide our clergy , and to fill them with suspicions of one another . and to this end , he talks of men of a latitudinarian stamp : for it goes a great way towards the making divisions , to be able to fasten a name of distinction among brethren : this being to create jealousies of each other . but there is nothing should make them more careful to avoid such names of distinction , than to ob●●rve how ready their common enemies are to make use of them , to create animosities by them : which hath made this worthy gentleman to start this different character of church-men among us ; as tho there were any who were not true to the principles of the church of england as by law established : if he knows them , he is better acquainted with them than the answerer is ; for he professes to know none such . but who then are these men of the latitudinarian stamp ? to speak in his own language , they are a sort of ergoteerers , who are for a concedo rather than a nego . and now i hope they are well explained . or , in other words of his , they are , saith he , for drawing the non-conformists to their party : i. e. they are for having no non-conformists . and is this their crime ? but they would take the headship of the church out of the king's hands . how is that possible ? they would ( by his own description ) be glad to see differences lessened , and all that agree in the same doctrine , to be one entire body . but this is that which their enemies fear ; and this politician hath too much discovered : for then such a party would be wanting , which might be plaid upon the church of england , or be brought to joyn with others against it . but how this should touch the king's supremacy i cannot imagine . as for his desiring loyal subjects to consider this matter ; i hope they will , and the more sor his desiring it ; and assure themselves , that they have no cause to apprehend any juggling designs of their brethren ; who , i hope , will always shew themselves to be loyal subjects , and dutiful sons of the church of england . the next he falls upon , is , the worthy answerer of the bishop of condom 's exposition , and him he charges with picking up stories against him , and wraping them up with little circumstances . how many fields doth he range for game , to sind matter to sill up an answer , and make it look big enough to be considered ? but that author hath so well acquitted hims●lf in his defence , as to all the little objections made against him , that i can do the reader no greater kindness , than to refer him to it . i must not say , the poor bishop of winchester is used unmercifully by him ; for he calls him that prelate of rich memory . as though , like some popes , he had been considerable for nothing , but for leaving a rich nephew . but , as he was a person of known loyalty , piety , and learning ; so he was of great charity , and a publick spirit , which he shewed both in his life-time , and at his death . could nothing be said of him then but that pr●late of rich memory ? or , had he a mind to tell us he was no poet ? or , that he was out of the temptation of changing his religion for bread ? the bishop of worcester is charged with down-right prevarication , i. e. being in his heart for the church of rome , but for mean reasons continuing in the communion of the church of england . therefore , saith he , take him topham . and now what can i do more for the poor bishop ? the most he will allow him is , that he was a peaceable old gentleman , who only desired to possess his conscience and his bishoprick in peace without offence to any man , either of the catholick church , or that of england . yet he hath so much kindness left for the poor bishop , that for his sake he goes about to defend , that a man may be a true member of the church of england , who asserts both churches to be so far parts of the catholick church , that there is no necessity of going from one church to another to be saved . this is a very surprising argument from a new convert . why might he not then have continued still in the communion of this church , tho he might look on the church of rome as part of the catholick church ? the reason i gave against it was , that every true member of this church must own the doctrine of it contained in the articles and homilies ; which charge the church of rome with such errors and unlawful practices , as no man who believes them to be such , can continue in the communion of that church ; and therefore he must believe a necessity of the forsaking of one communion for the other ; and that no true member of this ch●rch can , with a good cons●ience , leave this church and embrace the other . let us now see what a talent he hath at ergoteering . if this be true , saith he , then to be a member of the church of england , one must assert that either both churches are not parts of the catholick , or that they are so parts , that there is a necessity of going from one to another . he would be a strange member of the church of england , who should hold that both churches are not parts of the catholick ; for then he must deny that parts are parts ; for ev●ry true church is so far a part of the catholick church . therefore , i say , he must hold , tho it be in some respects a part of the catholick church ; yet it may have so many errors and corruptions mixed with it , as may make it necessary for salvation to leave it . the second , he saith , is nonsense . how nonsense ? he doth well to hope that men may be saved that do not understand controversy ; nor approach heaven in mood and figure . a necessity of a change , saith he , consists not with their being parts ; for parts constitute one whole , and leave not one and another to go to or from . we are not speaking of the parts leaving one another ; but of a person leaving one part to go to another . suppose a pestilential disease rage in one part of the city , and not in another ; may it not be necessary to leave one part and go to the other , tho they are both parts of the same city , and do not remove from one to the other ? but he saith , with great assurance , that necessity of change makes it absolutely impossible for both churches to be parts of the catholick . which plainly shews , he never understood the terms of communion with both churches . for , no church in the world can lay on obligation upon a man to be dishonest , i. e. to profess one thing , and to do another ; which is dissimulation and hypocrisy . and no church can oblige a man to believe what is false , or to do what is unlawful ; and rather than do either , he must forsake the communion of that church . thus i have given a sufficient taste of the spirit and reasoning of this gentleman . as to the main design of the third paper , i declared that i considered it , as it was supposed to contain the reasons and motives of the conversion of so great a lady to the church of rome . but this gentleman hath now eased me of the necessity of further considering it on that account . for he declares , that none of those motives or reasons are to be found in the paper of her highness . which he repeats several times . she writ this paper , not as to the reasons she had her self for changing , &c. as for the reasons of it , they were only betwixt god and her own soul , and the priest with whom she spoke at la●t . and so my work is at an end as to her paper . for i never intended to ransack the private papers , or secret narratives of great persons . and i do not in the least question the relation now given , from so great authority as that he mentions of the passages concerning her ; and therefore i have nothing more to say as to what relates to the person of the dutchess . but i shall take notice of what this defender saith , which reflects on the honour of the church of england . ( 1. ) the pillars of the church established by law , saith he , are to be found but broken staffs by their own concessions . what! is the church of e●gland felo de se ? but how , i pray ? for after all their undertaking to heal a wounded conscience , they leave their proselytes finally to the scripture ; as our physicians , when they have emptied the pockets of their patients , without curing them , send them at last to tunbridg waters , or the air of montpellier . as tho the scripture were looked on by us as a meer help at a dead lift , when we have nothing to say . one would think he had never read the articles of the church of england ; for there he might have seen , that th● scripture is made the rule and ground of our faith. and , i pray , whither should any persons be directed under trouble of mind , but to the word of god ? can any thing else give real satisfaction ? must they go to an infallible church ? but whence should they know it to be infallible , but from the scriptures ? so that on all hands , persons must go to the scriptures if they will have satisfaction . but this gentleman talks like a meer novice as to matters of faith , as tho believing were a new thing to him ; and he did not yet know , that true faith must be grounded on divine revelation , which the pillars of our church have always asserted to be contained only in the scripture ; and therefore whither can they send persons but to the scripture ? but it seem● he is got no farther than the collier's faith ; he believes as the church believes , and the church believes as he believes ; and by this he hopes to be too hard for a legion of devils . ( 2. ) he saith , we are reformed from the vertues of good living , i. e. from the devotions , mortifications , austerities , humility and charity , which are practised in catholick countries , by the example and precept of that lean mortified apostle st. martin luther . he knows we pretend not to canonize saints ; and he may know , that a very great man in the church of rome , once said , that the new saints they canonized , would make one question the old ones . we neither make a saint nor an apostle of martin luther ; and we know of no authority he ever had in this church . our church was reformed by it self , and neither by luther nor calvin , whom he had mentioned as well as the other , but for his lean and mortified aspect . but after all , luther was as lean and mortified an apostle as bishop bonner ; but a man of far greater worth , and sit for the work he undertook , being of an undaunted spirit . what a strange sort of calumny is this , to upbraid our church , as if it followed the example and precept of martin luther ? he knows , how very easy it is for us to retort such things with mighty advantage ; when for more than an age together , that church was governed by such dissolute and profane heads of the church , that it is a shame to mention them ; and all this by the confession of their own writers . but as to luther's person , if his crimes were his corpulency , what became of all the fat abbots and monks ? but they were no apostles , or reformers . i easily grant it . but must god chuse instruments , as some do horses , by their fatness to run races . as to luther's conversation , it is justified by those who best knew him , and are persons of undoubted reputation , i mean , frasmus , melancthon , and camerarius . and as to matters in dispute , if he acted according to his principles , his fault lay in his opinions , and not in acting according to them . but whether our church follow luther , or not , it is objected , that we have reformed away the vertues of good living . god forbid . but i dare not think there is any church in the world , where the necessity of good living is more earnestly pressed . but i confess we of the church of england , do think the examples and precepts of christ and his apostles , are to be our rules for the vertues of good living . and according to them , i doubt not , but there are as great examples of devotion , mortification , humility and charity , as in any place whatsoever . but i am afraid this gentleman's acquaintance did not lie much that way ; nor doth he seem to be a very competent judg of the ways of good living , is he did not know how to distinguish between outward appearances and true christian vertues . and according to his way of judging , the disciples of the pharisees did very much outdoe those of our blessed saviour ; as appears by a book we esteem very much , called the new testament : but if i mention it to him , i am afraid he should think i am like the physicians , who send their patients to tu●bridg-wells , or the air of montpellier . ( 3. ) that two of our bishops , whereof one was primate of all england , renounced and condemned two of the established articles of our church . but what two articles were these ? it seems they wished we had kept confession , which no doubt was commanded of god ; and praying for the dead , which was one of the ancient things of christianity . but which of our 39 articles did they renounce hereby ? i think i have read and consider'd them , as much as this gentleman , and i can find no such articles against confession , and praying for the dead . our church , as appears by the office of the visitation of the sick , doth not disallow of confession in particular cases , but the necessity of it in order to forgiveness in all cases . and if any bishop asserted this , then he exceeded the doctrine of our church , but he renounced no article of it . as to the other point , we have an article against the romish doctrine of purgatory , art. 22. but not a word concerning praying for the dead , without respect to it . but he , out of his great skill in controversy , believes , that prayer for the dead , and the romish doctrine of purgatory , are the same . whereas this relates to the deliverance of souls out of purgatory , by the suffrages of the living ; which makes all the gainful trade of masses for the dead , &c. but the other related to the day of judgment , as is known to all who are versed in the writings of the ancient church . but this our church wisely passes over ; neither condemning it because so ancient , nor approving it because not grounded on scripture , and therefore not necessary to be observed . ( 4. ) but his great spite is at the reformation of this church ; which , he saith , was erected on the foundation of lust , sacrilege , and usurpation . and that no paint is capable of making lovely the hideous face of the pretended reformation . these are severe sayings , and might be requited with sharper , if such hard words , and blustering expressions , had any good effect on mankind . but instead thereof , i shall gently wipe off the dirt he hath thrown in the face of our church , that it may appear in its proper colours . and now this gentleman sets himself to ergoteering ; and looks and talks like any grim logician , of the causes which produced it , and the effects which it produced . the schism led the way to the reformation , for breaking the unity of christ's church , which was the foundation of it ; but the immediate cause of this , which produced the separation of hen. 8. from the church of rome , was the refusal of the pope to grant him a divorce from his first wife , and to gratify his desires in a dispensation for a second marriage . ergo , the first cause of the reformation , was the satisfying an inordina●e and brutal passion . but is he sure of this ? if he be not , it is a horrible calumny upon our church , upon king henry the 8th , and the whole nation , as i shall presently shew . no ; he confesses he cannot be sure of it : for , saith he , no man can carry it so high as the original cause with any certainty . and at the same time he undertakes to demonstrate the immediate cause to be henry the 8s . inordinate and brutal passion . and afterwards assirms as confidently as if he had demonstrated it , that our reformation was erected on the foundations of lust , sacrilege , and usurpation . yet , saith he , the king only knew whether it was conscience or love , or love alone , which moved him to sue for a divorce . then by his favour , the king only could know what was the immediate cause of that which he calls the schism . well! but he offers at some probabilities that lust was the true cause . is ergoteering come to this already ? but this we may say if conscience had any part in it , she had taken a long nap of almost twenty years together before she awakened . doth he think that conscience doth not take a longer nap than this , in some men , and yet they pretend to have it truly awaken'd at last ? what thinks he of late converts ? cannot they be true , because conscience hath slept so long in them ? must we conclude in such cases , that some inordinate passion gives conscience a jog at last ? so that it cannot be denied , he saith , that an inordinate and brutal passion , bad a great share at least in the production of the schism . how ! cannot be denied ! i say , from his own words it ought to be denied , for he confesses none could know but the king himself ; he never pretends that the king confessed it ; how then cannot it be denied ? yea , how dare any one affirm it ? especially when the king himself declared in a solemn assembly , in these words , saith hall , ( as near , saith he , as i could carry them away ) speaking of the dissatisfaction of his conscience , — for this only cause , i protest before god , and in the word of a prince , i have asked counsel of the greatest clerks in christendom ; and for this cause i have sent for this legat , as a man indifferent , only to know the truth , and to settle my conscience , and for none other cause , as god can judg . and both then , and afterwards , he declared , that his scruples began upon the french ambassador's making a question about the legitimacy of the marriage , when the match was pr●posed between the duke of orleance and his daughter ; and he affirms , that he moved it himself in confession to the bishop of lincoln , and appeals to him concerning the truth of it in open court. sanders himself doth not deny that the french ambassador ( whom he calls the bishop of tarbe , afterwards card. grammont ; others say it was anthony vesey , one of the presidents of the parliament of paris ) did start this difficulty in the debate about this marriage of the king's daughter ; and he makes a set speech for him , wherein he saith , that the king's marriage had an ill report abroad . but then he adds , that this was done by the king's appointment , and that card. wolsey put him upon it ; but he produces no manner of proofs concerning it , but only , that it was so believed by the people at that time , who cursed the french ambassador . as tho the suspicious of the people were of greater authority than the solemn protestation of the king himself . but i think it may be demonstrated , as far as such things are capable of it , from sanders his own story , that the king 's first scruples , or the jogging of his conscience , as our author stiles it , could not come from an inordinate passion to ann bolleyn . for he makes card. wolsey the chief instrument in the intrigue . let us then see what accounts he gives of his motives to undertake it . he not only takes notice of the great discontent he took at the emperor charles v. the queen's nephew ; but how studious he was upon the first intimation of the king's scruples , to recommend to him the dutchess of alençon the king of france's sister ; and that when there were none present but the king , wolsey , and the confessor . afterwards wolsey was sent on a very splendid ambassy into france , and had secret instructions to carry on the match with the king of france's sister . but when he was at calais , he received orders from the king to manage other matters as he was appointed , but not to say a word of that match . at which , saith sanders , he was in a mighty rage , because he carried on the divorce for nothing more , than to oblige the most christian king wholly to himself by this marriage . how could this be , if from the beginning of his scruples he knew the king designed to marry ann bolleyn ? but sanders thinks to come off with saying , that wolsey knew of the king's love , but he thought he designed her only for his concubine . but this is plainly to contradict himself ; for before he said , that wolsey knew from the beginning whom he intended to marry . besides , what reason could there be , if the king had only a design to corrupt her , that he should put himself and the world to so much trouble to sue out a divorce ? for the divorce was the main thing aimed at in all the negotiations at rome ; other applications had been more proper , if his design was only upon having her for a concubine . but she would not be corrupted . if this were the reason , he must again contradict himself , for he makes her a lewd vicious woman . and it doth not ●eem so probable , if she had been such a person as he des●ribes her , that she would have put the king to so much trouble , and such a tedious method of proceeding , by so many forms of law. but again , sanders saith , when she returned from france , and was at court , she found out what wolsey designed . which makes it evident , by sanders his own words , that the design of the divorce was before the thoughts of ann bolleyn . and it seems very probable , that card wolsey might carry on a publick design by it , to draw the king off from the emperor , and to unite him with france . and the pope at that time being highly displeased with the emperor , he might think it no dissicult thing to procure a dispensation , the king of france's interest being join'd with our king 's . some have written , that the pope himself was in this intrigue at first ; but seeing no proof of i● , i dare not affirm it : it is sussicient for my purpose , that the first design was laid quite another way . i confess afterwards , when wolsey upon his return from france , saw how things were like to go , he struck in with the king's humour , as appears by the letters of ann bolleyn to him : but yet carried himself so coldly afterwards in the matter of the divorce , that it proved one occasion of his fall. thuanus , being an historian of great judgment , saw the inconsistencies of sanders his relations ; and therefore concludes that wolsey was surprized with the business of ann bolleyn , after he went into france , having notice sent him by his friends ; and that wolsey wholly aimed at the french match . mezeray saith , the cardinal could not foresee the love of ann bolleyn , but his design was to be reveaged on the emperor ; and he questions whether the king were smitten with her , till wolsey was sent into france ; when the king so unexpectedly forbad him to proceed in that match , cum summo eras dosore , as sanders confesses . from all this we see plainly , that since sanders makes card. wolsey the great contriver and manager of this business , the immediate cause of the schism could not be the love of ann bolleyn . but we have other kind of proofs concerning this matter , besides sanders his inconsistencies , and those shall be from some of the greatest and most a●live men of that time , and some remarkable circumstances . the sirst is a person of unquestionable integrity , a●d accounted a martyr for his conscience at that time ; i mean sir thomas more then lord chancellor ; who after he had delivered to the house of commons the original papers of the universities in favour of the divorce , he then sa●d , that all men should clearly perceive that the king hath not attempted this matter of will and pleasure , as strangers say , but only for the discharge of his conscience , and the security of the succession to the crown . which was a reason alleadged by the king himself ; and seems to have been built on the grounds which charles the 5th assigned for breaking his oath which he made to marry the lady mary , by the first article of the treaty at windsor . lord herbert owns that the emperor , to avoid the force of this treaty , had alledged something against the marriage between the king and his aunt : but another author , who lived much nearer the time , doth affirm , that when the match was debated in the spanish council , it was then said , that altho the match between the king and his brother's relict were not yet disputed , yet if the king should die without issue male , rather than the kingdom should pass to foreigners , the english nation would dispute the validity of the marriage . and to confirm this , in sir henry spelman's manuscript-register of the proceedings of the legatine court about the divorce , subscribed by the three notaries there present , the witnesses deposed , that at the time of the marriage , the people said commonly , that it was unfit one brother should marry the other brother's wife . and arch-bishop warham then upon oath declared , that he told k. henry the 7th , that the marriage seem'd to him neither honourable , nor well-pleasing to god. and he confesses , the people then murmur'd at it , but that the murmuring was quieted by the pope's dispensation . so that all the satisfaction that was given about it , arose from the pope's extraordinary dispensing power with the laws of god. which was a thing vehemently opposed by many in the church of rome ; and the university of bononia it self afterwards declared , that the match was abominable , and that the pope himself could not dispense with it ; and this they say was , after they had read card. cajetan 's defence of the marriage . the like was done by the university of padua ; besid●s many others which i shall not mention , and are easily to be seen . so that the succession to the crown by this match , must depend upon an extravagant power in the pope , which the roman church it self never owned ; and the wisest statesmen thought by no means sit to depend upon . the notice of this debate in the spanish council being sent over to card. wolsey , seems to have been the first occasion taken of starting the question about the lawfulness of the king's marriage ; which wolsey , out of a private grudg to the emperor , as well as for other reasons , was not wanting to carry on , till he saw which way it was like to end . and the pope himself was willing enough to grant the bull for the divorce , till he made a secret peace with the emperor : and it is easy to see that the pope went forwards and backwards in the whole affair , merely as politick considerations moved him . which being fully known to so discerning a prince as henry the 8th , it gave him just occasion to question , whether that authority were so divine as was pretended , which in so great a matter did not govern it self by any rule of conscience , but by political measures . one remarkable circumstance in this matter ought not to be omitted , viz. that the king's agent at rome sent him word , that the pope's advice was , that if the king's conscience were satisfied , he should presently marry another wife , and then prosecute the suit ; and that this was the only way for the king to attain his desires . but the king refused to do it . and when card wolsey sent a message to the king to the same purpose : the king replied , if the bull be naught , let it be so declared ; and if it be good , it shall never be broken by any by-ways for me . and when he objected the tediousness of the suit , he answered , since he had patience eighteen years , he would stay yet four or five more , since the opinion of all the clerks of his kingdom ( besides two ) were lately declared for him : adding , that he had studied the matter himself , and writers of it ; and that he found it was unlawful , de jure divino , and undispensible . thus we have found the king himself declaring in publick and private , his real dissatisfaction in point of conscience ; and that it was no inordinate affection to ann bolleyn which put him upon it : and the same attested by sir tho. more , and the circumstances of affairs . i now proceed to another witness . the next is bishop bonner himself , in his preface to gardiner's book of true obedience : for thus he begins ; forasmuch as there be some , doubtless , now at this present , which think the controversy between the king 's royal majesty , and the bishop of rome , consisteth in this point , for that his majesty hath taken the most excellent and most noble lady ann to his wife ; whereas in very deed , notwithstanding , the matter is far otherwise , and nothing so . so that if bishop bonner may be believed , there was no such immediate cause of the schism , as the love to ann bolleyn . and withal he adds , that this book was published , that the world might understand what was the whole voice and resolute determination of the best and greatest learned bishops , with all the nobles and commons of england ; not only in the cause of matrimony , but also in defending the gospel's doctrine , i. e. against the pope's usurped authority over the church . again , he saith , that the king's marriage was made , by the ripe judgment , authority , and privilege of the most and principal universities of the world ; and then with the consent of the whole church of england . and that the false pretended supremacy of the bishop of rome was most justly abrogated ; and that if there were no other cause but this marriage , the bishop of rome would content himself , i. e. if he might enjoy his power and revenues still ; which , he saith , were so insupportable , that there lay the true cause of the breach : for his revenues here were near as great as the king 's ; and his tyranny was 〈◊〉 and bitter , which he had exercised here under the title of the catholick church , and the authority of the apostles , peter and paul ; when notwithstanding he was a very ravening wolf , dressed in sheeps clothing , calling himself the servant of servants . these are bonner's words , as i have transcribed them , out of two several translations , whereof one was published while he was bishop of london . stephen gardiner bishop of winchester , in his book , not only affirms the king's former marriage to be unlawful , and the second to be just and lawful ; but that he had the consent of the nation , and the judgment of his church , as well as foreign learned men for it . and afterwards he strenuously argues against the pope's authority here , as a meer usurpation . and the whole clergy not only then owned the king's supremacy , ( fisher excepted ) but in the book published by authority , called , a necessary doctrine and erudition of a christian man , &c. the pope's authority was rejected as an usurpation , and confuted by scripture and antiquity . k. james i. declares , that there was a general and catholick conclusion of the whole church of england in this case . and when some persons suspected , that it all came from the king's marriage , bishop bonner we see undertakes to assure the world it was no such thing . the separation was made then by a general consent of the nation , the king , and church , and people , all concurring : and the reasons inducing them to cast off the popes usurpation , were published to the world at that time . and those reasons have no relation at all to the king's marriage ; and if they are good , as they thought they were , and this gentleman saith not a word to disprove them , then the foundation of the disunion between the church of rome and us , was not laid in the king 's inordinate passion , but on just and sufficient reasons . thus it appears , that this gentleman hath by no means proved two parts of his assertion , viz. that our reformation was erected on the foundations of last and usurpation . but our grim logician proceeds from immediate and original , to concomitant causes ; which ; he saith , were revenge , ambition , and covetousness . but the skill of logicians used to lie in proving ; but this is not our author's talent , for not a word is produced to that purpose . if bold sayings , and confident declarations will do the busines , he is never unprovided ; but if you expect any reason from him , he begs your pardon ; he finds how ill the character of a grim logician suits with his inclination . however , he takes a leap from causes to effects ; and here he tells us , the immediate effects of this schism , were sacrilege , and a bloody persecution , of such as denied the king's supremacy in matters wholly spiritual , which no layman , no king of israel ever exercised . what the supremacy was , is best understood by the book published by the king's order , and drawn up by the bishops of that time. by which it appears , that the main thing insisted on was , rejecting the pope's authority ; and as to the positive part , it lies in these things . 1. in defending and protecting the church . 2. in overseeing the bishops and priests in the execution of their office . 3. in reforming the church to the old limits and pristine estate of that power which was given to them by christ , and used in the primitive church . for it is out of doubt , saith that book , that christ's faith was then most pure and firm , and the scriptures of god were then best understood , and vertue did then most abound and excel : and therefore it must needs follow , that the customs and ordinances then used and made , be more conform and agreeable unto the true doctrine of christ , and more conducing unto the edifying and benefit of the church of christ , than any custom or laws used or made by the bishop of rome , or any other addicted to that see and usurped power since that time . this book was published with the king's declaration before it . and therefore we have reason to look on the supremacy to be taken as it is there explained . and what is there now so wholly spiritual , that no layman , or king of israel , ever exercised in this supremacy ? but this writer never took the pains to search into these things , and therefore talks so at random about them . as to the persecutions that followed , it is well known that both sides blame k. hen. 8. for his severity ; and therefore this cannot be laid to the charge of his separation . for the other effect of sacrilege , i do not see how this follows from the reformation : for although some uses might cease by the doctrines of it , as monks to pray the dead out of purgatory ; yet there were others to have employed the church lands about , as some of them were in founding new bishopricks , &c. and i have nothing to say in justification of any abuses committed that way ; only that the king and parliament could not discern the difference between greater and lesser as to the point of sacrilege ; and since the pope had shewed them the way , by granting bulls for the dissolution of the lesser monasteries , they thought , since the pope's power was taken away , they might , with as little sacrilege , dissolve the rest . i will shut up this with the words of arch-bishop laud ; but if there have been any wilful and gross errors , not so much in opinion as fact , ( sacrilege too often pretending to reform superstition ) that 's the crime of the reformers , not of the reformation , and they are long since gone to god to answer it , to whom i leave them . the method i proposed for satisfaction of conscience about the reformation , was to consider , whether there were not sufficient cause for it ? whether there were not sufficient authority ? and whether the proceedings of our reformation were not justifiable by the rules of scripture , and the ancient church ? he tells me , he may safely join issue with me upon all three points , and conclude in the negative . but upon second thoughts , he finds he may much more safely let it alone : and very fairly would have me take it for granted , that the church of rome cannot err in matters of faith ; ( for that he must mean by the church there ) and that our church hath no authority ef reforming her self ; and that our proceedings were not justifiable according to the right interpretation of scriptures by the fathers and councils . but if i will not allow his affirmations for proofs , for his part he will act the grim logician no longer ; and in truth , it becomes him so ill , that he doth well to give it over . when he will undertake to prove , that the church of rome is the one catholick and infallible church of christ , and answer what i have produced in the former discourses , i will ease him of any farther trouble ; for then i will grant that our reformation cannot be justified . but till then , i shall think it no want of humility to conclude the victory to be on our side . and i would desire him not to end with such a bare-faced assertion of a thing so well known to be false , viz. that there is not one original treatise written by a protestant , which hath handled distinctly , and by it seif , that christian vertue of humility . since within a few years ( besides what hath been printed formerly ) such a book hath been published in london . but he doth well to bring it off with , at least that i have seen or heard of ; for such books have not lain much in the way of his enquiries . suppose we had not such particular books , we think the holy scripture gives the best rules and examples of humility of any book in the world ; but i am afraid he should look on his case as desperate if i send him to the scripture , since he saith , our divines do that , as physicians do with their patients whom they think uncurable , send them at last to tunbridg-waters , or to the air of montpellier . finis . errata . the folio's , through mistake , are twice repeated , from pag. 81 , pag. 92 , inclusive . page 7. line 26 , for authority , read antiquity . pag. 22. l. 39. f. perso●a , r. parsopa . pag. 23. l. 25. f. when , r. whom . l. 26. f. his , r. as . l. 32. f. western , r. southern . pag. 26. l. 5. f. s. cyprian , r. san lyran. pag. 68. l. 32. r. some of the chineses . pag. 78. l. 3. a whole line faulty , r. pristinam & melioratam recipere 〈◊〉 sanitate : pag. 86. ( 2d . ) l. 23. blot out not . pag. 93. l. 23. blot out both . pag. 103. l. 14. f. house of the lord , r. house of lords . pag. 108. l. 20. f. satness , r. fitness . l. 28 f. dare not , r. do not . page 112. l. 37. f. eras , r. ejus . pag. 116. l. 17. f. declarations , r. declamations . books lately printed for richard chiswell . the history of the reformation of the church of england . by gilbert burnet , d. d. in two volumes . folio . the moderation of the church of england , in her reformation , in avoiding all undue compliances with popery , and other sorts of pha●aticism , &c. by timothy puller , d. d. octavo . a dissertation concerning the government of the ancient church : more particularly of the encroachments of the bishops of rome upon other sees . by william cave , d. d. octavo . an answer to mr. serjeant's [ sure footing in christianity ] concerning the rule of faith : with some other discourses . by william falkner , d. d. 40. a vindication of the ordinations of the church of england ; in answer to a paper written by one of the church of rome , to prove the nullity of our orders . by gilbert burnet , d. d. octavo . an abridgment of the history of the reformation of the church of england . by gilb . burnet , d. d. octavo . the apology of the church of england ; and an epistle to one signior scipio , a venetian gentleman , concerning the council of trent . written both in latin , by the right reverend father in god , john jewel lord bishop of salisbury : made english by a person of quality . to which is added , the life of the said bishop : collected and written by the same hand . octavo . a letter writ by the last assembly general of the clergy of franc● to the protestants , inviting them to return to their communion . together with the methods proposed by them for their conviction . translated into english , and examined , by gilb . burnet , d. d. octavo . the life of william bedel , d. d. bishop of kilmore in ireland . together with certain letters which passed betwixt him and james waddesworth ( a late pensioner of the holy inquisition of sevil ) in matter of religion , concerning the general motives to the roman obedience . octavo . the d●cree made at rome the second of march , 1679. condemning some opinions of the jesuits , and other cas●ists . quarto . a discourse concerning the necessity of reformation , with respect to the errors and corruptions of the church of rome . quarto . first and second parts . a discourse concerning the celebration of divine service in an unknown tongne . quarto . a papist not misrepresented by protestants . being a reply to the reflections upon the answer to [ a papist misrepresented and represented ] . quarto . an exposition of the doctrine of the church of england , in the several articles proposed by the late bishop of condom , [ in his exposition of the doctrine of the catholick church ] . quarto . an answer to three papers lately printed , concerning the authority of the catholick church in matters of faith , and the reformation of the church of england . quarto . a catechism explaining the doctrine and practices of the church of rome . with an answer thereunto . by a protestant of the church of england . 80. a papist represented and not misrepresented , being an answer to the first , second , fifth and sixth sheets of the second part of the [ papist misrepresented and represented ] ; and for a further vindication of the catechism , truly representing the doctrine and practices of the church of rome . quarto . the lay-christian's obligations to read the holy scriptures . quarto . the plain man's reply to the catholick missionaries . 240. a vindication of the answer to some late papers concerning the unity and authority of the catholick church , and the reformation of the church of england . quarto . a treatise written by an author of the communion of the church of rome , touching transubstantiation . wherein is made appear , that according to the principles of that church , this doctrine cannot be an article of faith. quarto . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61635-e130 def. p. 1. pag. 2. pag. ● . des. p. 2 , 3. des. p. 2. rep. p. 2. des. p. 3. rep. p. 3. rep. p. ● . def. p. 3 , 4. pag. ● . pag 5. de eccl●s l. 3. c. 2. ibid. c. 5. catech. rom. part. 1. c , 10. ● . 10. tertul. c. pra●●am c. 1. no●a collect. concil . bal●● . p. 10. v. epist. cypri . ep . 74 , 75. epist. 4. 8. fa●● . l. 4. c. 3. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . po●● co●● . ba●il x. nova collect. concil . p. 1551. ratra●● . c. graec. ap●d 〈◊〉 . spicil . to. 2. p. 3 , 24 , 27 , 29 , 53 , 54 , 60 , 61 , 62. monument a graec. to. 2. p. 138. n. 6. p. 164. n. 3 , 4 , 5. ca●is . a●tiq . lect. to. 6. p. 197. pag. 196. innocent . iii. ep. l. 1. 353. lib. 2. 208. ep. 209. 〈◊〉 . c● 〈◊〉 . p. ● . 〈◊〉 . l. 4. c. 14. l. 7. c. 24. st●● . l. 7. p. 764 , 〈◊〉 , 7●●5 . 〈◊〉 . e●● . 1. fulg●●t . op. p. 6● . lactant. in it . l. 4. c. ●lt . sola 〈◊〉 catholi● 〈◊〉 qu●●erum cult●● 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . concii . p. 286. supplem . concil . gall. p. 14. can. 6. epist. ad smyrn . eus●b . l. 4. c. 14. l. 7. c. ●4 . cyril● . catech. 18. p. 220. 〈◊〉 . ●o . 2. p. ●●2 . 〈◊〉 . in 1 cor. 12. 27. opt. c. par. l. 2. c●m inde dicta sit catholica , quod sit rationabilis & abique dissusa . bal●z . coll. concil . p. 287 , 288. nos universo orbi christiano communione cohaeremus . n. 100. et appellantur & merito sunt catholici ipsa sua communione no●●en testantes . catholon enim secundùn tot●●m dicitur . qui autem à toto s●paratus est , partem ●ue defendit ab uniniverso praecisam , non sibi u●●rpet hoc nomen , sed nobiscum teneat veritatem . n. 101. concil . florent . sess. 9. concil constant . sess. 11. concil . gen. to. 12. p. 87. de rom. pont. l. 4. c. 14. des. p. 23. pag. 6. not. in mo●● . gra● . to. ● . p. 601. reply p. 8. defence p. 7. pag. 8. pag. 9. catech. rom. part 1. c. 10. n. 20. se●● . 7. can. 7 , 8 , 9. de bapt. can. 13. pag. 10. pag. ● . reply p. 8. pag. 9. pag. 9 , 10. concil ephes. part 2. act. 6. chalcedon . act. 5. des. p. 14. pag. 15. 〈…〉 . a●●● thom. à ●esa . l. 7. c. 14. philipp . à ss . trinit . itiner . orient . l. 5. c. 5. 〈◊〉 . hist. s●●iet . jesu . l. 6. 12. 123. voyage du mont. li●an 〈◊〉 da●dini remarques s●r chap. 2● . p. 383. diss●rt . de origine , nomine & religion ? ma●o●itar●m . pag. 15. thom. à jesu . de concil ●mn . gent. l. 7. c. 6. pag. 16. pag. ii. a●g . ● . donat. p. 6. collat. c. 20. pag. 12 , 13. prejugbs legit . contre le jan●●●● . p. 135. pag. 14. c. parmen . l. 1. c. ult . l. 2. c. 1 , 11. c. cresom . l. 4. c. 10 , 11. pag. 14. concil . nic. c. 19. arel . c. 8. pag. 11. pag. 12. pag 1. deut. 17. 8 , 9 , 10 , 11. rom. 15. 17. 1 thess. 5. 21. 1 s john. 4. 1. 1 tim 3. 15. gr●g . nyssen de ●ita . mos. p. 226 basil. epist. 62. chrysost. hom. 148. to. 5. theod. de prov. orat. 10. p. 441. greg. nazian . ep. 38. orat. 19. epist. 29. heins . in loc . pag. 17. dis. p. 33. pag. 33. 〈◊〉 legit . c. le jansenists , c. 10. p ag . 87. pag. 34. rep. p. 22. aug. de bapt. c. donatis● l. 3. c. 17 , 18. l. 4. c. 18 , 20. l. 5. c. 21. l. 6. c. 1 , 3 , 4 , 14 , 24 , 2 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 40. l. 7. c. 12 , 32 , 43 , 44. l. 2. c. 1. l. 7. c. 51. ●●line●● . rep. p. 23. john 7. 17. def. p. 34 , 35. greg. 7. epist. reg. l. 4. ep. 2. pag. 18. 1 john 4. 3. a● 〈◊〉 . p. 3. pag. 4. pag. 6. i. 〈◊〉 . l. ● . c. 17 , 18. * l. 1. 1. 4. 69. † l. 3. c. 1. * l. ● . ● . 47. 4. 66. de carut christi , &c. marcion . &c. valentin . def. p. 18. d● praescript . c. 17. aufer denique haereticis quae cum ethnicis sapiunt , ut de scripturis solis quaestiones suas sistant , & stare non poterunt . de resur . ca●nis , c. 3. haereses autem sine aliquibus occasionibus scripturarum audere non poterant ; idcirco pristina instrumenta quasdam materias illis videntur subministrasse , & ipsas quidem iisdem literis revincibiles , c. 63. lucifugae isti scripturarum , c. 47. clem. alex. strom. l. 7. p. 755. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ib. & 757. orig. dial. c. marcionist . §. 4. p. 108. p. 101. y●od . ad he●●t . fab. pr●ef . & l. 2. p. 218. haeret. fab. l. 3. p. 226 , 231. st. cyprian , epist. 74 , 75. reply , p. 13. aug. de bapt. c. donatill . l. 2. c. 3. de●r . dist 9. c 8. dist. 19. c. 6. de unit . ecel . c. 3. 416. c. petil. donar . l. 3. c. 6 c. maxim. arian . l. 3. c. 14. c. faust. l. 11. c. 5. de peccator . merit & remiss . l. 1. 22. de nuptiis & concupisc . l. 2. c. 33. de grat. & lib. arbitrio . c. 18. in psalm 67. def. p. 18. de● p. 2. theod. l. 1. c. 6. bellar. de ver. dei , l 4. c. 11. hilar. l. 2. ad constant. athanas. de synodis tom. 1. p. 873. tom. 2. p. 197. tom. 1. c. grat. basil. epist. 80. tom. 3. epist. 1 , & 284 haer. 75. p. 923 943 , 989. chrysost. in acta apost . hom. 33. in joh. hom : 53 ib hom. 58 reply , p. 18 def : p : 21 : reply , p. 19 act synodi eph. p. 175. hist. concil . to. 1. p. 498. bell. de concil . l. 2. c. 12. niceph. cum leone armeno disput. ed. combefis , p. 162. hos. oper. p. 373. quandoquidem solus ille verè dicitur & est oecumenicus patriarcha , quod concilium ipsius est auctoritate congregatum , id verè dicitur oecumenicum . de concil . l. 1. ● . 6. repl. p. 8 def. p. 23 def. p 24. circa ea quae sunt de necessitate salutis , sufficienter instruuntur ● spiritu sancto , 2 , 2 qu. 8 ar . 4 ad : 1 : donum intellectus nunquam se subtrahit sanctis circa ea quae sunt ●e●●●saria ad salutem ; ib ; ad 3 gul. parisiens . de legibus c : 21 p : 57 , 58 : pag : 59 d. col. 1. henr. a gand. sum. art. 13. q. 4. n. 3. def. p. 26 p. 27. p. 28. def. p. 29. reply , p. 21. def. p. 30. reply . p. 21. def. p. 31. reply , p. 22. def. p 32. reply , p. 25. def. p. 39. def. p. 39. def : p : 40 : pag. 41. def. p. 42. pag. 43. cler. gallica . declaratio prop. 4. 1682. censura hungarica . 24 oct. 1682. tractat. de libertat . eccles . gallican . leodii , 1684. regale sacerdotium romano pontifici assertum . auctore eugenio lombardo , 1684. de antiqua ecclesiae dis●iplina dissert . 5. auct . lud. ellies du pin , 1686. dissert . 5 c. ● ss . 2. pag. 44. pag 45. reply , p. 25 pag. 27. reply , p. 40. * dial. 4. c. 39. reply . p. 27. reply , p. 28. def. p. 46. reply , p. 29. inititur enim fides nostra revelationi apostolis & prophetis factae qui canonicos libros scripserunt , non autem revelation si qua fuit aliis doctoribus facta . 1. q. 1. ar● 8 ad 2. 2. 2. q. 1 art. 5. ad 2. 1. q. 32. art . 4 2. 2. q. 2. art . 5 de haeret : pu●it . l. 1. c. 3 : loc. theolog. l. 12. c. 11. suarez de fide disp. 19. sect. 2 n. 13. suarez de fide disp. 19. sect. 2. n. 8. ●●p . 4. sect. 2. n. 3. 2. 2. q. 11. art. 2. ad 3. aug epist. 162 non est ergo haereticus nisi qui videns prudens doctrinam eligit fidei contrariam . loc. 12. c. 9. suarez de fide disc. 19. sect. 3. n. 9. de bapt. c. donat l 4 c. 16 de civit. dei , l. 18. c. 51. c. 24. q 3. c. 29 , 31. ockam dialog l. 3. c. 3. &c. c. 6. ad fin . cap. 8 c. 24. q 1. schismae . ● . 4. c. 2. c. 5 , &c. c. 9. c. 10. c. 27. c. 28. c. 29. c. 30. gerson . to. 1. p. 408. can. loc. th. l. 12. c. 9. disp. 14. de fide sect. 3. n. 10. n. 11. ibid. n. 13. 2. ● q l. art . 3. repl. p. 31. 2. 2. q. 5. loc. 2. c. 8. concedimus enim liberaliter doctrinam cuique in sua vita & stat●● necessariam illi fore perspectam & cognitam , qui fecerit voluntatem dei. deu● natura gratia probl. 15. p. 96 p. 97. def. p. 49. repl. p. 32. des. p. 51. page 52. repl. p. 33. def. p. 54. page 55. page 56. page 57. pag. 55. pag 58. pag. 59. pag. 59. pag. 52. pag. 63. pag. 64 , 65. pag. 65. repl. p. 34. pag. 66. p. 67 , 68. pag. 67. pag. 6● . pag. 70. repl. p. 36. pag. 71. pag. 75. repl. p. 37. dis. p. 72. pag. 73. pag. 74. pag. 75. pag. 38 , 30. des. p. 76. rep●● . p. 35. repl. p. 41. dis. p. 78. pag. 80. des. p. 111. pag. 85. 87. 88. ib. 125. lvix pag. 85. page 92. 125. 126. pag. 95. 93. pag. 〈◊〉 . pag. 87. pag. 88. pag. 97. p. 104 , 105 , &c. 108 , 109. pag. 109. pag. 90. ibid. ibid. page 11● . page 94. pag. 98. ●ag . 101. pag. 1●2 . pa● . 117. pag. 117. pag. 117. sand. de schism . angl. l. 1. p. 11. pag. 9. pag. 10. pag. 15. pag. 10. pag. 18. acworth . c. sander . l. 2. ● . 14 , 17. pag. 22. history of h. 8 p. 216. servi fidelis responsio , &c. 〈◊〉 herb. 〈◊〉 . 219. pag. 217. apol. for the oath of all●giance . pag. 118. ●id . conference , 〈◊〉 p. 156. pag. 1. 2. fanaticism fanatically imputed to the catholick church by doctour stillingfleet and the imputation refuted and retorted / by s.c. a catholick ... cressy, serenus, 1605-1674. 1672 approx. 262 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 108 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2003-11 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a34970 wing c6898 estc r1090 11781001 ocm 11781001 49053 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a34970) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 49053) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 812:4) fanaticism fanatically imputed to the catholick church by doctour stillingfleet and the imputation refuted and retorted / by s.c. a catholick ... cressy, serenus, 1605-1674. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [22], 188 p. s.n.], [douay? : 1672. reproduction of original in huntington library. attributed to serenus cressy. cf. nuc pre-1956. issued also in a collection of several treatises in answer to dr. stillingfleet, 1672. letter to sir marc-albert d'ognate signed: s.c. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng catholic church -controversial literature. 2003-07 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-07 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2003-09 rina kor sampled and proofread 2003-09 rina kor text and markup reviewed and edited 2003-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion fanaticism fanatically imputed to the catholick church by doctour stillingfleet : and the imputation refuted and retorted by s. c. a catholick o. s. b. psalm . lxxi . 4. iudicabit pauperes populi ▪ & humiliabit calumniatorem . proverb . xxvi . 18 19. as a madman vvho casteth fire-brands , arrovvs , and death : so is the man that vvrongeth his neighbour , and saith , am not i in sport ? m.dc.lxxii . permissu superiorum . to the right honourable sir marc-albert d'ognate knight , counsellour to his catholick majesty , commissary for renevving of magistrats in the province of flanders , president of the chamber of commerce and navigation , and envoyé from the king of spain to his majesty of great brittain . sir , it had been to be vvished that vve might have concealed from strangers the stains of our nation , and that they might remain ignorant that neither fidelity to our prince , nor charity to our fellovv-subjects can secure catholicks from the vvorst effects of vvar in the midst of peace : such is the virulence of one malignant party : vvho though they enioy their lives by an unmerited pardon of their rebellion , vvill never pardon us for our loyalty . in most countreyes of europe there are agitated dayly disputes and controversies about religion , and in books on each side ordinarily some sharpness is mingled . but in england our lott must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vve are forced to contend vvith adversaries vvhose minds by our late tumults are rendred savage and implacable . they to spite us , resume a nevv vvar against heaven it self , deriding and blaspheming the saints in glory . and against gods church on earth they frame accusations never heard of before , making her greatest vertues passe for the directly opposite greatest crimes . the most saintly exercises of persons among us consecrated to god and entirely subiect to authority are disgracefully stiled fanaticism : because vve vvill not be chusers each one of his ovvn faith , vve are accused to have an enthusiastick vvay of religion : vvee exercise charity to our freinds deceased , and that is called an impediment of deuotion : vve teach ( as our saviour did ) that the vvay to heaven is strait , and consequently that to enter into it vve must practise confession of sins , pennances , mortifications , praying , fasting , alms-giving &c. and for this vve are charged to be hinderers of piety and a good life : our acknovvledging an authority in gods church to end controversies is called an effectuall mean to multiply them : if out of compassion to persons guilty of schism , and out of a tender love to vnity any one among us strains his vvitts to persvvade our adversaries that the distance betvveen us is not so vast as some of them seem vvilling to conceive , his recompense must be contemptuous revilings : no pagans or cannibals must be esteemed so blindly , so horribly i dolatrous , no quakers so ridiculously frantick , no fifth-monarchists so dangerous both to church and state. these enormous excesses vvich have been lately exposed to the vvorld in a stile partly burlesque and partly tragicall vvere never heard of in any other nation but england , and only of late in england , and i hope , for the credit of our nation , are not taken notice of by many strangers living here , and thereby less in danger to be published abroad . but from you , sir , they could not be concealed , since your zeal to catholick religion makes you inquisitive into all things that concern it , and your perfect knovvledge in our language renders all our books as intelligible to you , as if vvritten in your ovvn . my hope novv is that you being vvell acquainted vvith the present temper of our nation , vvill judge aright , that a book vvritten in such a stile , and vvholly composed of malignant passions and nevv-invented calumnies against gods church vvas only the private design of a malicious brain on purpose to feed the exulcerated minds of a , malevolent party among us , and consequently not to be imputed to any other besides . the affection you bear to our nation , from vvhich you are not quite , even in blood , a stranger , encourages mee to expect thus much iustice from you . as for my self , i being , i hope , not the only person , engaged in the defence of truth and innocence against malice and calumny , am desirous to address to you this my ansvver , as a testimony of my gratefull resentment of the favour and honour you have been pleased to conferr generously on mee , in allovving mee a share in your freindship : the comfortable effects vvhereof have likevvise been extended to an afflicted community abroad , recommended by mee to your protection . but besides this , a far greater obligation both my self and all loyall english subjects have to honour you for your constant respect , duty , and assistance vvhich you have allvvayes vvith great zeale shevved to his sacred majesty and his cause , vvhen he vvas inhumanly treated by the same party , vvhich novv so inhumanly treats his faithfull catholick subjects . in vvhich fatall conjuncture also , his banished freinds and servants found in your house hospitality and kindness vvhich vvith them had been banished out of england . i beseech you , sir , accept this address as a gage of gratitude , honour and respect from , sir , your devoted servant in our lord. s. c. to the reader . the report is very current that doctour stillingfleet wonders , and even complains that , having made a generall formall challenge to catholicks to come openly into the field against him being ready with weapons in his hand , he cannot yet have the contentment to give further proof of his skill and courage against them . but surely it is not for the doctors credit to make such a complaint , when the world knows how all passages into the field are stoppd and even walled up , i will not say , by himself , yet at least by his partizans ; how stationers apprehend greater danger in publishing answers to his book , then any books of sedition or treason ; and how during the space of a few months since his last book saw the light , searches into presses have been more sollicitously exact , and more frequent dayly and hourly , then they have been all the years taken together since his majesties restauration , inquisitors searching into every hole , turning over every small paper , and rigorously examining both maisters and servants whether any thing has been written against doctour stillingfleet . how securely now may the doctor triumph , and as oft as he pleases , multiply his challenges of defiance against catholick adversaries so bound hand and foot : and at how cheap a rate has he gotten ( from tradesmen and gossips ) immortall honour by a book , then which england never to this day saw any one , pretending to controversy , more harmless to the church he professes to oppose , nor more destructive to the church he professes to defend . now whether this be not a true character of it , i do willingly and confidently stand to the judgment of any learned and considering protestant reader who shall think fit to peruse the following treatise . notwithstanding it cannot be denyed but that the doctor has used a wonderfull dexterity in mannaging this controversy : for though his book proves in effect exceeding harmless to the common cause of catholicks , and though all the weapons made use of by him against the catholick faith really want both edges and points of sufficient sharpnes and strength to make an entrance into the rock on which our saviour has built his church , yet they pierce into the very bowells of the persons , fortunes and condition of english catholicks , whose destruction he seems to design . and on the other side , though the same weapons do draw out the very heart-blood of the english church , yet he pretends all the way , and seems to be acknowledged by them a champion of its cause , and not to intend the least harm to the prelats and subiects of it . cicero was wont to say , that he thought any one roman augur could not without smiling look upon another augur , considering what large preferments and honours they enioyed by befooling the whole roman common-weale with their ridiculous fopperies . the like smile of secret intelligence passes between the doctor and his ancient brethren . for a great pleasure it must needs be to them to see him in his new dress , in his surplice and scarlet-hood , so canonically defending out of the pulpitt the church of england , or brandishing his sword against her adversaries in printed volumes ; but so defending it , as not to do the least harm to the old cause : not one word falls from his tongue or pen to give his now prelats warning of their danger from presbyterians , independents , latitudinarians and other sects , though all these conspiring against them had held their necks so many years of late under their feet . but nothing can be more ridiculous to those sectaries ( nor truly more deserving detestation from all loyall subiects ) then to see the same sectaries quondam friend doctour stillingfleet zealously pretending a care of the safety of his majesty and the state against the seditious writings and practises of ill-principled subiects , and at the same time , as if he thought the world by vertue of the act of oblivion had quite forgott the last twenty years troubles , naming none but catholicks as such ill-principled subiects , who yet alone among all dissenters from the english church had all of them unanimously adhered to his majesty , and for his majesties sake had defended also the said church against the doctor and his brethren in evill , the sectaries . the plain truth is , the doctors collusion and prevarication in his book seems to me so visible and so insupportable , that it is a shame that hitherto not one true prelaticall protestant has appeared as a defender of the english church and state against him : but on the contrary even some english prelats themselves have congratulated and boasted of his supposed succesfull endeavours against the catholick church , though ruinous only to themselves . indeed it was the doctors master-piece by his drollery to putt protestants into a fitt of laughing , that being in so good an humour they might drink down the poyson he presented them . this poyson , it seems , does not yet sensibly work with them , and therefore they neglect to provide antidots . well : all j can say is , viderint ipsi . but they may also do well to consider that to this hour they have not from this defender of the church of england seen one line which was not more to the advantage of their enemies , the sectaries , then of their own church . so that abating severall hundred pounds of yearly preferments , he still is what he was before his majesties return . he was pleased to stile some late catholick writers by the name of ratts , for not answering line by line his great volume : he must give me leave to make use of his metaphor another way , applying it to himself . it is a common observation among mariners that when they see a ship suddenly freed from ratts formerly abounding there , they conclude that there are some leaks in it , unobserved by any but the ratts themselves , which threaten its sudden sinking . now let any one judge wherther the doctour by publishing his principles has not stolln out of the church of england : ( yet with a latitudinarian conscience holding fast his preferments : ) and does not this argue that the ratt foresees , or shrewdly suspects some danger to the ship , and therefore provides for his own safety , by returning to the same sects which uncessantly plott against it , and , it is to be feared , against the civill state too ? it is a sad thing therefore that not one protestant will open his eyes , and give warning of the dangerous proceedings of their champion . now whether that task and duty deserted by them , has not been efficaciously enough undertaken and performed by the authour of the following treatise . j leave to all indifferent iudges to determine . they are also hereby entreated to impute the delay of this answer to the true cause above mentioned , or indeed to any thing rather then to the least guilty apprehension which catholicks may have of encountring such an adversary as the doctour is supposed to be by persons who are perswaded that an insolent confidence must needs be accompanied with reason and truth . and for such persons , so qualified , no doubt , it was that the doctor wrote his book , not to instruct them , but to imprint his own enormous passions in their minds . whereas readers of but ordinary capacity and prudence will easily perceive that it was a consciousness of his own inability to cast any prejudice on the received doctrins and discipline of the catholick church her-self that forced him to indulge to his fancy and invention to expose to contempt and hatred of unwary readers the opinions and practises of a few particular persons among catholicks , not alwayes faithfully related by him , and most of them already censured by superiours . but that which has gained to him the most of his applauding readers is his acting the theologicall zani , after a fashion altogether new and unexpected , whilst he most ridiculously imputes fanaticism to the catholick church , of which never any heretick before him suspected her capable . my last request to the reader is that seeing this treatise written in a stile so unpractised hitherto by mee , and indeed so contrary to mine own inclination , he will interpret it aright , and believe that j judged my self obliged to neglect complements of civility to such an adversary . if he had written like one that sought out truth , j should have condemned my self if any phrases of bitterness had escaped my pen. but in answering such a mass of buffonry mixed with rancour and malice , the wise man has taught me my duty . proverb . xxv . 5. of fanaticism §. 1. the authours motive of writing this treatise . doctour stillingfleets three heads of accusation against the catholick church , &c. 1. the authour of this following treatise may with confidence profess , that it was not from a resentment of severall contemptuous aspersions cast on him by doctour stillingfleet in his lately published book , that he was induced to write this answer . for who would not glory in suffring any scorns or calumnies , when merited only for recommending to devout christians instructions for the practise of christian vertues and piety in the greatest perfection that this life is capable of ? his motiues therefore of writing and publishing this discourse were first his obedience to certain freinds whose commands he ought in no wise to resist : and then a just indignation in seeing the most sacred things and persons in the catholick church selected on purpose by him , to be contaminated with his inck full of gall and poyson , thereby imprudently ministring new aims to atheists ( against whom as a considerable and growing sect among them , he and others begin to preach and write ) by shewing , to his utmost ability , that all the religion professed in the world , and that thing that bare the name of a catholick church for so many ages ▪ before the times of luther and calvin , was nothing , for their worship , but idolatry ; for their devotions , but fanaticism : and for their doctrine and disciplin ; nothing but faction , ambition and avarice . 2. the task therefore here imposed being to answer in the doctours last book , not the points of controversy between the catholick church and protestants ( reserved for a more learned pen of his worthy antagonist ) but those discourses in his book ( and principally touching fanaticism ) in which the doctour seems not to have intended to employ his talent of reasoning , but to discharge his excess of spleen and choler and to give free scope to all vnchristian and even in human passions , the authour hopes he shall not deserve justly a censure from the reader , if he endeavour here to defend the truth with as much zeal and confidence as his adversary hath assaulted it : so long as nothing passeth from him that any way woundeth christian charity , nor any sharpness is used , but such as may , through gods grace prove beneficiall to him , and his applauding readers . 3. now in the doctours book there are three heads of accusation selected by him with intention to disgrace , and fright his readers from the communion of the catholick church , by imputing to her . 1. that she is guilty of severall opinions and practises which hinder devotion and a good life . 2. that fanaticism is not only countenanced by her , but made a ground of believing some doctrins , of making some ecclesiasticall ordonnanes , of erecting religious orders , and ●kewise of resisting lawfull authority . 3. that there are among her subiects divisions about doctrins of great moment and no possibility of reducing dissenting parties to vnity or obedience . 4. these accusations my purpose is to refute , and for his proofs of them , to shew the invalidity of those which are pretended by him to regard the church her self . but as for such as regard the opinions or actions of particular persons , and which fill up the far greatest number of his leaves , some thing shall be said to those among them which seem of any considerable moment , and the rest shall be neglected , as needing no answer , though never so truly alledged by him . and having done this , i will , as i am perswaded , with much greater confidence , retort the same heads of his accusations upon himself , demonstrating that his protestant churches , as principled by him . 1. doe evidently undermine the foundations of piety and a good life . 2. that the essence of his religion is meer fanaticism , in his own sence of the word : and that it iustifies rebellion against the civill magistrate . 3. that by the grounds of his religion all manner of divisions and schims are not only excusable but lawfull , and withall incurable . 5. he will perhaps , when he sees his large book pretended to be sufficiently answered in a few sheets of paper , renew the scornfull complaint made by him in his preface , that those who in , some small measure have attempted to answer him , have performed it in a way that ratts answer books , by gnawing some of the leaves of them , the body and design of them remaining wholly untouched by them . now who those persons are whom he is pleased to resemble to ratts , i can only iudge by guess : and if i guess aright , particularly of one authour , i could make it appear to the doctour , that the very bowells and most vitall parts of his great volume have been eaten through and consumed by that his adversary . 6. however , i conceive he wil not have iust reason to apply this metaphor to the authour of this present treatise , since it was his own fault , by heaping together a great masse of rubbage and stuff altogether impertinent , to make a short answer sufficient . does he think his adversaries , in case they were allowed the liberty and commodity of publishing large volumes , so much at leasure as to follow him step by step in examining quotations , and answering obiections which are of no moment whether they be true or false ? he may by such a way of writing beget in the minds of the vulgar sort of readers a high opinion of the vastnes of his unnecessary reading , and his well-furnished library : but his adversaries will be much to blame if they trouble themsselves with defending every old story , or personall imputations : or indeed , if hereafter they engage themselves in any controversy with him , except in points pretended by him of such consequence as to iustify a necessity in protestants of separating from the catholick church ▪ and few such points are to be found in his books . 7. but moreover , as short an answer as this is , he wil have less reason to say , that the body and design of his book will remain wholly untouched in it . he may indeed perhaps have some ill design in publishing ( as it were by conspiracy with others ) a book so voyd of christian charity and moderation : which design may remain untouched by mee , because i am unwilling to declare the grounds of my coniectures moving me to look upon it as an ominous ill-boading book , fore-running some expected mischeif . but for the body of his book , that is , whatsoever appears to me in it of consequence , it is truly a very slender dwarfish body , being almost entirely contained in a few sheets at the beginning , and in the last single sheet which enwraps his protestant principles . the publishing of which principles was truly an act of commendable ingenuity and confidence also : for i think he is the first protestant-controvertist who upou such a tender subiect has appeared bare-faced out of the clouds . and moreover i may take leave to tell him that from a heedfull consideration of those his principles i do collect that he and myself are of the same iudgment in one matter of great importance , viz. that no shew of reason or conscience can be pretended to escape from the authority of the catholick church but by renouncing entirely ( as he has done in his principles ) all ecclesiasticall ( or even civill ) authority : and by consequence that no churches proceed logically in asserting the grounds of their religion , but only catholicks or single-independents . the reason hereof is , because for any ecclesiasticall superiours to acknowledge any obligation lying on thers subiects to submitt to their authority , and at the same time to preferr the authority of a particular church before that of the vniversall , which is the fountain of all authority , is to putt out their subiects eyes , and to hale them after them with chains . and above all other congregations the tyranny of presbyterians is most brutish , who after a denyall of all visible authority extant before them , endeavour violently to subdue mens consciences to the jurisdiction of their classes , erected upon controverted texts of scripture , as interpreted by themselves alone . 8. the doctours principles therefore being by far the most materiall part of his book , it is not notwithstanding my business in this treatise to examine them apart one by one , or to trouble my self with making a setled iudgment whether of the two fore-named parties , catholicks or independents has the most solid reasons on their side . for being engaged to make reflexions on that part of his book which is of least importance , writen in an immodest , uncivill , petulant stile , it was not fitt in my answer to mingle considerations on a subiect so serious , and soberly expressed as his principles are , which indeed deserve to be examined separately with all possible calmness and impassionateness , as being an argument on which all other controversies do depend , and which one way or other makes an end of them all . 9. yet for all this , it was not possible for me to avoyd all mention of his principles in this answer to a different subiect : since ( as hath been already intimated , and will be seen by the sequele ) whatsoever charge he brings against the catholick church , and which i pretend here to refute , does scarce at all touch her , but lyes most heavily and unmoveably upon his principles , and on any church acknowledging or adopting them . he must therefore dispose himself , with the greatest patience he can , to be put in mind more then once or twice of his principles and the fatall consequences of them . from which consequences till he can effectually clear them , he will have little cause to call , as he hath done , for an answer to his former large volume . for if it shall appear , by the ruine of his , that the principles of catholick religion only are solide and inexpugnable ; that is , that the catholick church is indeed , and to be acknowledged the pillar and ground of truth , from whose authority no appeal is to be admitted , then both his former and latter books are thereby sufficiently refuted , as far as they condemn or but question any doctrins whatsoever determined by her . this being once established , he will find his books , not having a few leaves gnawed by ratts , but unà liturâ entirely abolished . §. 2. a vindication of the honour and sanctity of s. benedict &c from the doctours contumelious imputations . 10. having given this account of the motiue and design of this treatise , it is time to take into consideration the forementioned heads of accusation layd by the doctour against the catholick church , which he thinks of sufficient weight to deterre any one from ioyning in her communion . i will begin with that touching fanaticism , which though the second in his order , yet principally concerned me to disprove , and particularly that part of it which contains an invective against the life and prayer of contemplation commended and practised only in the catholick church , it being a state which from the infancy of the church hath been esteemed the nearest approching to that of glorified saints ; from whence notwithstanding he has taken occasion to vilify in particular the authour of this ensuing treatise : who is very well content to receive his proportion of scorn with such companions , as thaulerus , suso , rusbrochius , blosius &c. 11. now the doctour , to the end he might make an entrance into his in vective with better grace , has prepared a way thereto , then which a more proper could not be found for such a purpose , by producing on his stage , antickly disgvised , the famous teachers and erectours of schools for contemplation , s. benedict , s. romuald , s. bruno , s. francis , s. dominick and s. ignatius : so exposing them like blind samson to the derision of profane readers : for from such only can he expect an applause for his impiously employed wit : and he will find in the end , except repentance prevent it , that selius his argument in the epigrammatist wil prove a dangerous fallacy . 12. and to the end he may not too much boast of the novelty of his invention , and his profanely employed witt , i doe assure him that i my self , being then a young student in oxford , was witness of a far greater , and if fancy alone be considered , far better deserved applause given to a preather , who in a repetition-sermon to the vniversity , descanting on the whole life of our saviour , rendred him and his attendants , men and women , obiects of the utmost scorn and a version , as if they all of them had been only a pack of dissolute vagabonds and cheats . this the preacher performed , taking on him the person of a iewish pharisee and persecutour of christ. and he performed it so to the life , that he would have shamed lucian , and raised envy in the doctour himself . but presently upon it , changing his stile as became a disciple of christ , he with such admirable dexterity and force of reason answered all the cavillations and invectives before made , that the loudly repeated applauses of his hearers hindred him a good space from proceeding . notwithstanding this , the grave doctours and governours of the vniversity , though much satisfied with his intellectuall abilities , yet wisely considering that a petulant , histrionicall stile even in obiections , did not befitt so sacred a subiect , and that it was not lawfull to personate too naturally a deriding iew , obliged the preacher to a publick recantation-sermon in the same pulpit the sunday following . and this deservedly , for vitium simulari non potest , virtus potest . 13. if the doctour would now make a second essay of his witt and invention on severall stories as we find them recorded in holy scripture , he would perhaps find his fancy as inventive , and if nature had denyed him , the devill would , no doubt , once more furnish him with expressions as apt to move the spleen and laughter of his present applauding readers , as any are now found in his book : by which means he perhaps may arrive at the glory to be acknowledged the head of a new sect of the ecclesiae malignantium . and unless report deceives us , there are already severall books of the holy bible descanted upon in a stile like to his , and it may be the unhappy authours conceive that the same press may ( without an imprimatur ) be allowed them also . 14. it is not now my purpose to make a particular vindication of each saint traduced by him . but considering the publick interest obliging the whole western patriarchat , and most especially england to be tender of the honour of s. benedict , by whose disciples , if they were fanaticks , christianity has been established among us , and in veneration to whom such a world of religious houses and churches have been erected and enriched with vast possessions , i can not , without renouncing my duty as a christian , religious man , and an english man , by silence conspire to his dishonour : the rather , because to my best remembrance i never knew that any of the english church since the reformation did ever cast any scornfull aspersions on his memory : and i believe the doctour will scarce find any one hereafter willing to imitate his malignant ingratitude . 15. now what is it that the doctour layes to the charge of s. benedict ? the whole charge consists in repeating after a ridiculons manner certain passages of s. benedicts life written by s. gregory : as 1. how being a child he by his prayers obtained a miracle for the consolation of his nurse , a monument of which miracle remained publickly visible many years after . 2. how he lived three years with wonderfull austerity in a cave , unknown to any but s. romanus , who to the devills despight furnished him with necessary food . 3. how he rolled himself in thorns to conquer his amorous passions . 4. how he was enabled by supernaturall revelations and lights to spy out devills , to discover things absent and foretell things to come , to be a spectatour of the soule of his sister s. scholastica in the shape of a dove going up to heaven , and to see all the world in uno radio solis , &c. 16. by this brief account of the life and actions of s. benedict , all which the doctour expects that his readers should esteem to be meer fanaticall lyes and forgeries , his intention seems to be to convict both s. benedict and s. gregory of lying against the holy ghost , and ascribing to a divine power pretended miracles , visions &c. which either were not at all , or were sleights of leger-de-main . but what arguments does the doctour give to disparage s. gregories relation ? will he deny that any miracles were wrought by gods servants in that age ? if so , he will find it a hard task to defend himself against so many saints , learned and prudent men , who have testified that they have been eye-witnesses of many . he will not surely affirm ( though he is bold enough to affirm anything ) that such miracles , if reall , were proofs that the workers of them were fanaticks and deceivers . these things considered where will he hope to find readers who can be inwardly perswaded that what s. gregory relates is sufficiently confuted by his scornfull manner of repeating it in the new stile of a theological scarron ? or to iudge this a concluding argument ; s benedict wrought miracles , was favoured with supernaturall visions and revelations , therefore he is manifestly convicted of fanaticism ? and upon that fanaticism he instituted his religious order , for which he framed a fanaticall rule ? 17. now by fanaticism the doctour ays he intends an enthusiastick way of religion , that is , a religion built upon falsly pretended inspirations , illuminations &c. which definition being approved , with what shew of reason can the doctour accuse s. benedict of fanaticism ? for did s. benedict frame to himself a new religion ? did he make any the least alteration in the religion conveyed to him by tradition , and professed by the whole church ? had any of his visions or revelations any influence on his religion to make him introduce any innovations ? how was he then an enthusiast ? 18. but s. gregory affirms that he had revelations , inspirations and the guift of discerning spirits : and these things the doctor will needs call enthusiasms . surely he will not deny but that god may ; yea often has conferred on his servants , revelations of his will , in some speciall circumstances , which are not in the doctors sence , enthusiasms : neither , will i on the other side deny but many persons , even in the catholick church have bin seduced by the devill , and their own pride , to pretend to lights received from god , which were either effects of a distempered fancy , or suggestions of the devill . the question therefore is , whether s. benedicts visions , and revelations came the former , or the latter way . but it is no question touching the doctours iudgement in this case : for certainly he durst not decide them , if he thought or but suspected that they came from god. 19. i beseech him now that he would examine his own conscience , whether , i will not say , convincing proofs , but rational grounds may not be affoorded , that s. benedicts visions and revelations were truely divine , considering . 1. the innocence , purity and vninterrupted fervour of devotion conspicuous in s. benedict , from his infancie , to his death . 2. the admiration in which the age wherein he lived held him , both for his piety , and the stup●nduous favours , conferred on him by almighty god. will the doctor now say , that all that age , and all ages following , have been deluded by an hypocrit , and counterfeit enthusiast , and that himself was the only person clear-sighted enoug to discover the cheat ? not only all christians living in his time , but even the pagan goths had him in veneration : by what light now after above a thousand years , has he seen that the whole world besides himself have been deluded ? hee will easily giue me leave to say assuredly it was not by a supernaturall light , least he himself should be suspected an enthusiast : and for a naturall light to justifie him , he has shewed us none , having concealed the reasons moving him to make a saint soe glorious in the esteem of the christian world , the obiect of his derision . 20. i verily believe the doctor would have been easily induced to have spared the person of s. benedict ( and so of the other saints ) had not a saying of cardinal bellarmin afflicted his mind , and stirred up his choler , viz. that religious orders were at first instituted by s. benedict , s. romualdus , s. bruno , s. dominick , and s. francis by the inspiration of the holy ghost : this was a sayeing insupportable to a mind by education , and wordly interest prevēted with a strong preiudice , and therefore all books and legends must be searched , and everie crifling passage , and circumstance , perhaps indiscreetly inserted any where by , authors , must be made use of to disgrace the saints , and to prove them enthusiasts : though all the world besides haue them in veneration . 21. now to enter into dispute concerning their personall qualities with such an adversary , wil bee to offend against charity by giving him occasion , of reviling yet more gods most beloued perfect servants . the most commodious way then to make a true judgement of them will be , to examine their fruits . for by their fruits , saith our saviour , they will be known . 22. therefore to determine , whether it was by gods inspiration that they instituted their respective orders , lett those who doubt , yea those who scarce think it lawfull to doubt . 1. examine their severall rules , according to which their disciples oblige themselves to conform their lives and actions . and. 2. consider whether god has acknowledged them for his servants , by making use of them to the great benefitt of his church , and dilatation of his honour . now if it shall appear that their rules advance perfection in all christian vertues : and that such among them as have squared their actions by their rules have in a signal manner benefitted gods church , and encreased his honour , it is most certain that bellarmin had just grounds , how angrie soever the doctour be , to say , that such orders were instituted by the inspiration of the holy ghost . 23. i doe heartily wish for the doctours good , that he would without prejudice examine these two points , or at least patiently read what is here written concerning them : now to descant upon all their rules , and to enumerate the services done by the severall orders to gods church would be too tedious . i will therefore as my duty more particularly engages me , confine my self to s. benedicts rule and his disciples actions : and in so doeing the reader will be sufficiently informed in all the rest : since they all agree in the sanctity of their rules and glory of their actions , though in some circumstantiall rites , and observances there be some variety . 24. as touching therefore the rule of s. benedict , whether it was written with a fanatick spirit or not , the doctours own judgement may be appealed to , if he would vouchsafe to read and examine it . for what is it but a collection skilfully made of all evangelicall precepts , and counsells of perfection ? there the ecclesiasticall office is so wisely ordered , that the whole church judged it fitt to be her pattern . there s. benedict teaches his disciples to begin all their actions with an eye to god , begging his assistance , and referring them entirely to his glory . there a holy family is so ordered , with such a decent assignation of dutyes proper to all offices both of superiors , and subjects , in their severall rancks , that a great and wise king made choice of it for his rule in managing his kingdome . there a contempt and hatred of the world is taught with great energy : religious men are enioined to hide themselves from it , that they may in their sequestred cells enioye a freer conversation with god. and because they cannot exclude themselves out of their solitude , they are instructed to mortifie there all sensuall passions , by prayer and temperance . if by gods providence they enioyed plenty of temporall goods , the poore and strangers only reaped the fruits of it . yea their lawgiuer taught them not only by his rule , but example also , to preferre even in the times of the greatest scarcity the satisfieing the wants of others before their own : hospitality was a vertue soe peculiar to them , and so constantly practised by them , that till the rapine and furie of a tyrant here in england destroyed them , there was no need of any law among us for sustaining the poor , who after soe many modern lawes can scarce be preserved from perishing . and there ( which the doctour may doe well to consider ) the vertues of humilitie and peacefull obedience most contrarie to and inconsistent with fanaticism are of all others most copiously and vehemently inforced , as if in them the spirit of his rule did principally consist . by these two vertues his disciples were securely guarded from all dangers which an externall exercise of other vertues might expose them to : by the former ( humilitie ) they were exempted from pride and self complacencie , in case god should bestow any supernaturall favours on them : and by the latter ( obedience ) which obliged them to discover even their most secret thoughts to their superiours and spirituall directors , they were secured a demonio meridiano , from false illuminations , and illusions of the enemy . and lastly to prevent all innovations in opinions touching religion , and disturbing of the churches peace by spreading abroad new invented fancies ; a most strict silence was inioynd them at home , and none permitted to goe abroad , either for busines , or preaching , but such as the superiour esteemed fitt , with the benediction and prayers of whom , and of their other brethren they were sent forth , and at their return received again . 25. now can the doctour believe that it was a fault in cardinal bellarmin to say that it was by the inspiration of the holy ghost that such a rule as this was instituted , and families erected for the observing of it ? and yet if he will peruse it he will find that i have omitted many other perfections which shine forth in it . 26. and whereas from some mistaken expressions of s. gregory he charges s. benedict with the great crime of being a hater of human learning : wee doe not find that he forbids his disciples the study of it in his rule , at such times as the office of the quire and manuall labour for the benefit of the monastery afforded them a vacancy . and it is unquestionable that wee owe to his followers the preservation of almost all the literature which remains in the world : for by their care in conserving and transcribing of books , all our libraries are now soe richly furnished and the doctour enabled to write against them and their master . this they did notwithstanding such a deluge of barbarous nations , which for religions sake hated and sought to destroy all manner of learning : and s. benedicts disciples doeing so , they thought such their care to be no transgression of their rule . 27. but as for s. benedict himself almighty god did not call him to be a critick , but a teacher of sanctity . and to enable himself thereto , wee find in the last chapter of his rule , that he was no stranger in the books of holy scripture , in the writings of the ancient doctours of the church , in the conferences , and lives of the holy fathers , all which he recommends to his disciples . but as for the subtilties of pagan philosophers , the elegancies of their poets and the like ( considering his vocation ) it would have been in him the vice of curiosity to have spent his time in them : which s. augustin judges to have been the concupiscence of the eyes , reckoned by s. iohn , as one of the three great temptations of the world . 28. s. benedict therefore was not a hater of human learning ( as the doctour vnjustly and without warrant stiles him ) but for his own vse and office he preferred before it that learning which the wiseman stiles scientiam sanctorum , that learning which does not puff up the mind , but renders it docibilem dei , and makes the possessors of it saints : and i am confident that in the day of iudgment god will never ( as the doctour does ) impute this choice to him as a fault . i would to god the doctour , instead of deriding , would imitate him . in this regard therefore it was that s. gregory stiled s. benedict [ scienter nescium & sapienter indoctum ] skilfully ignorant , and wisely vnlearned : by which character he had no intention certainly to disparage him , but rather to paralell him with the kingly prophet who writing of himself , saith : that he was wiser and had more understanding then his enemies , then his teachers , then the ancients , only by meditating on gods law , and keeping his precepts . 29. thus far concerning the severall heads of accusations of s. benedict , in a scornefull manner represented by the doctour to make his readers merry at the expences of a glorious saint . but withall his readers are desired to consider , that all these heads are borrowed from s. gregory who wrote the saints life , from the testimonie of certain holy men who had been s. benedicts disciples . so that the very same things which s. gregory wrote to prove the sanctity of s. benedict , the doctour makes use of to shew him , as it were on a stage to have been a fanatick , a false pretender to miracles , visions and inspirations , and an ignorant fool : and all this without any reason or proof given to iustifie such imputations . 30. but the readers are desired to consider , that whatever opinion they have of s. benedict ( to the zeal and charity of whose disciples notwithstanding they owe their christianity ) yet surely s. gregory was not a person fitt to make sport for the doctour and his readers : s. gregory , perhaps the most exalted and most humble saint , the most illuminated doctour , the most zealous and most charitable prelat , that since the apostles times almighty god ever provided to govern his church . thus he has alwayes been esteemed not only through the western , but eastern churches also . and can the doctour think he can find any reader who has not in his heart renounced christianity , that wil applaud him for trampling with scorn on s. gregory ? for it is from s. gregory indeed that the doctour is informed that s. benedict was a fanatick , if he were such an one : it is s. gregory who commended and confirmed his rule , and if the doctour may be believed , it seems very ignorantly and foolishly stiled it [ discretione praecipuam ] eminent for the discretion of it ; which is a vertue ill suiting with a fanatick . it is s. gregory who has conveyed to posterity an account of the graces and supernaturall favours by god conferred on s. benedict : the truth of which i believe scarce any one hitherto has disbelieved , beside the doctour : certain it is that a generall firm belief of them , both during s. benedicts times and afterward , made a change in christendom scarce ever to be paralleld before or since , whilst incredible multitudes of well meaning christians wakened from a lethargy of sin , either flocked together to take on them the yoke of that rule , or if they wanted such courage , powred forth their treasures to entertain such as consecrated themselves to gods service . and all this the doctour without any proof , pronounces fanaticism , and is desirous that men of this reformed age should believe these divine favours communicated to s. benedict to have been illusions of satan ( which satan himself never durst own ) and that men had done more wisely if they had continued to serve the world , and the flesh , rather then to quitt both in following an hipocriticall fanatick . 31. surely the doctour was much to blame , and i hope he will sadly reflect on the danger of raising mirth from such an argument as this . or if he doe not , it will be very fitt that when hereafter he mentions those two persons so venerated by all but himself , he would abstain from calling them saints . for in the same breath to call s. benedict a saint and a fanatick , savours something of blasphemy . yet it will be a hard task for him to conquer so inveterated a custome : mens tongues are so enured never to mention them without that title of saint , that the only expedient to correct that fault in himself and others , will be to let his readers know that he intends the same ill thing by the terms of saint and fanatick . thus farr touching s. benedict and his rule : by examining whereof i conceived men might judge whether , notwithstanding the doctours raillery , god did not esteem him his faithfull servant . 32. the next thing proposed in order to make the like judgement , was to consider whether after s. benedicts death , god did not declare the same thing , by making choice of the disciples of s. benedict to procure an encrease of his honour , and considerable blessings to his church : for if he did , surely the doctour himself , how bold so ever , will scarce dare to disgrace them hereafter by the title of fanaticks . 33. to clear this , it is to be observed that in s. benedicts age christians generally were falln into such a decadence from piety , charity among them was become so cold and frozen , and all manner of vices raigned so impudently and uncontrollably , that almighty god was even forced to open a free passage among them for innumerable armies of barbarous pagan nations from the north , getes ( or goths ) vandalls , francks , hunns , saxons , danes , lombards , and many others , which like locusts spread themselves , devouring all things through all countreyes , especially of the western church , all which did not expresse their fury so much against their christian enemies forces , as against their religion . now what could be expected from such conquerours , but that the christian faith should be vtterly extinguished . 34. yet such was the infinite wisedom and goodnes of god that that which was a most terrible plague to impious and dissolute christians then alive , proved in generall to gods church and christian religion a most unvaluable blessing . for in a short time , god of those stones raised up children to abraham : children , not like the former , who sluggishly contented themselves with the name of christians , and in their lives denyed christ : but heroically zealous servants of our lord : witness innumerable churches magnificently built , and richly endowed , to his honour : witness innumerable monasteries and schooles of piety frequently inhabited by emperours , kings , queens , princes , and princesses , who preferred a voluntary life of solitude , poverty , and mortification ( to the end they might more freely attend to heavenly meditations ) before magnificent courts , scepters , and crowns . lastly witness a numerous army of martyrs , not a few of them soueraign kings , and princesses & tender virgins witness likewise aposticall bishops who willingly offered their blood for the salvation of their barbarous murderers . 35. now who were the persons who , by gods most blessed direction , instilled into the hearts of all these such an heroicall faith and divine loue ? were they not principally the disciples of s. benedict ? let the records and annals of so many nations in europe be consulted : they will justifie the same , and to gods glory will testify how his apostolick preachers to convert their ancestours have been dignified with stupendious miracles . yet all these are derided by the doctour as fanaticks , the children of a famous hypocrit and fanatick : by the doctour , i say , who cannot shew one village converted to christianity by any one of his own sect , nor one miracle pretended to . 36. now if any thing here delivered touching s benedict and his disciples be true ( and if all be not true , wee have been deceived by the common tradition of whole nations , besides bookes never hitherto contradicted ) nay if any one miracle has been truly reported of him or them , in what a condition has the doctour by his unseasonable mirth concluded himselfe ? the wiseman tells us there is a time to weep , and a time to laugh god has placed them in this order , that weeping should goe before laughing ; but the doctour has perverted the order : he must expect therfore after his and his profane readers mirth , a time of weeping will succeed : god almighty grant that his weeping time may come in this life , and that weeping and wayling and gnashing of teeth come not together . 37. i doe not know how any adversary of the catholick church could with all his study have shewd himself more impotent in his passions , and less succesfull in reasoning , then the doctour has done in his book . certainly it must be a hatred horribly poysonous against the catholick church militant , which will not spare the church triumphant . i defy the doctour , how bold a champion soever for schism to say publickly or by writing to signify only his opinion , that s. benedict , s. gregory , s. francis and the rest are now reprobate , damned souls in hell : yet such they must needs be ; if they were hipocriticall visionaires , and false pretenders of miracles , on purpose to gather disciples , and withal dyed vnrepentant of these things , as most certainly they did . now if such be not his opinion , nay if he be not assured that they are in an accursed condition , was not his tongue ( or penn ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ] sett on fire of hell , whilst it uttered such blasphemies against them , as a perpetuall monument of his rage till the day of iudgment , when he must be answerable for all that shall be corrupted by them . 38. but suppose that all these accusations could really be verified , must the whole church be esteemed antichristian , in which salvation is scarce possible to be had ( for to prove that is the doctours design ) because five or six hipocrits have lived undiscovered in it ? because a young man notwithstanding all his austerities , and prayers , having been inflamed by the spirit of uncleannes , chose rather to torment his flesh by rowling himself naked among bryars and nettles , then to suffer its impure delectations ? or because another young man having been commanded to restore to his father all the goods committed to his care , meerly to hinder his charitie to the poor , in a fitt of fervour gave up not only his goods , but cloaths also , to his very shirt ? or because another man out of some severe ( or the doctour may call it , capricious ) humour , or to procure contempt to himself , would refuse to give a civill respect to his betters ? 39. what then would the doctour say of a church , in which visions , and dreams and revelations far more exotick in outward appearance , are proposed to mens belief ? in which one who calls himself a prophet professeth that another sort of mortification was enioynd him then that which s. benedict practised , namely to mixe his bread with mans dung , and so to eat it ? in which a prophet by gods command for three years together walked naked and with his feet bare before all the people ? in which another commands his disciple not to salute , or shew any respect to any person whosoever should come in his way ? yet not any of these persons or actions the doctour dares deride , or refuse to yield his assent and approbation of them , though he has encouraged his profane readers by his example to deride them . §. 3. of the life and prayer of contemplation , derided by the doctour . 40. the doctour , not being contented with recreating himself and others by vnsainting , and as he hopes , plucking downe from heaven many glorious saints , so esteemed by gods church ( whose company notwithstanding , where ever they are , i wish both he and my self may forever enjoy ) proceeds to represent as ridiculously the way of devotion in greatest request among those of the severall orders instituted by them . this is the prayer of contemplation taught by rusbrochius , suso , harphius , blosius ( and f. baker reduced into a method by m. cressy . ) he might , if he had pleased , have cited far more ancient authours had he consulted cassian , the disciple of s. chrisostom , in his conferences of hermits of his time , and a primitive writer , denis the ar●opagite , who , whatever his true name was , was questionles an authour of the second , or at least the third age of the church , and who describes the most sublime and most purely divine prayer exercised by hierotheus , a disciple of the apostles . it had been a mastery worthy of such a champion as the doctour to have trampled on such contemplatives as these , or on s. paul the hermit , and s. anthony , or rather on s. mary magdalen , s. mary the egyptian , and other inhabitants of desarts , who it seems , wanted such a directour for contemplation as the doctour is . 41. if he doe acknowledge a reall difference between an active and a contemplative life , ( in the opinion of the ancient fathers exemplified by the employments of the two holy sisters , s. martha , and s. mary magdalen ) he might doe well to teach this age what is meant by a contemplative life , and what way and manner of devotion peculiarly suits to it : and whether among all the sects which he call by the common name of protestants , he can tell us any news of any who have pretended to a contemplative life , or given any rules for such as would performe the exercises of it : such are , and have always been esteemed such , solitude , abstraction from worldly cares , rigorous abstinences , cilices , indispensable obedience to superiours , continuall prayer practised according to the degrees of it , still more and more pure and spirituall , a performance of all dutyes and even ordinarie actions in vertue of prayer and vnion in spirit with god &c. i doe not now require of him an account of raptures , extasies , passive vnions with god , in which a pure soule only receives divine influences : for these things he derides as phantasticall enthusiasms , and yet all ages have mentioned them , and afforded innumerable examples of them , and they are recorded by persons eminent for piety and learning . 42. but the doctour has one argument unanswerable , which iustifies him to call that language unintelligible canting , by which certain mystick divines endeavour , as well as they can , to express the most pure operations of the soule herself , and likewise of god upon the soule in contemplative prayer : and this argument is drawn from a treasvre of most deep humility . his argument is this ; i , even i the most learned , and all comprehending doctour stillingfleet doe not understand the language of such mysticks , therefore it is unintelligible canting . 43. yet notwithstanding this more then herculean argument , i believe i can oppose against him an antagonist who will have the boldnes to maintain that he will answer this argument , and demonstrate it not to be concluding . and this is a certain holy man that professes of himself that in a wonderfull extasy he found himself present in paradise , and there saw and heard ( as he thought ) god only knows what . now what soever it was that he saw and heard , he was , no doubt , willing to have communicated it to his brethren , but he had not the power to doe it . no human language could afford words to express matters so elevated and divine . for if it could , i am assured he , who was the greatest master of language that perhaps ever was , had not failed to do it . nay more , which still encreases the wonder , though he professes that he really saw and heard these inexplicable glorious things , yet he could not determin whether all the while his corporall sences , externall or internall , were employed in this divine visitation . 44. this was surely , according to the doctours grounds , the greatest fanatick that ever was , yea the father of all fanaticks . yet the doctour dares not call him so , after he is told that this was s. paul : and that he it was who describes the revelations communicated to him by gods divine spirit : describes them , i say , by not describing them , but by professing that no human language could describe them , nor humane fancy comprehend them . this certainly the doctour will not deny to have been a passive vnion ( so derided by him ) of s. pauls soule with god , for he contributed nothing actively either to the procuring or enioying of it . 45. if therefore mystick writers , many of them persons both of great sanctity and learning , in endeavouring to describe what passed in their soules during vnions far inferiour to those of s. paul , are forced to make expressions , out of the common road , and not agreeing with school philosophy ; if observing that in pure contemplative prayer their own operations , and the infusions of gods spirit are so in time in the soule , that it seems to them that there is as it were a region of it beyond the discovery of philosophy , which they think fit to call the apex mentis , and fundus animae , the doctour might without any further guilt have abstained from imputing fanaticism to ludo vicus blosius , or m. cressy , for transcribing such expressions . but this is a sycophancy inexcusable in the doctour , who mentions such mystical phrases on purpose to deride them as unintelligible non-sence , and at the same time omitts the setting down expressions which interpret them . 46. but there is one speciall phrase which above the rest cited by m. cressy , exposes him to the doctours utmost contempt . this is where it is sayd that , in the supreme degree of contemplative prayer the soule is so united to god as if nothing were existent but god and the soule : yea so far is the soule from reflecting on her own existence , that it seems to her god and she are not distinct , but one only thing . this is called by some mysticks an vnion of nothing with nothing in which the soule comes to a feeling of her not being , and by consequence of the not being of creatures : the which is indeed a reall truth . true , says the doctour , this is indeed either a reall truth or else intollerable non-sense . 47. now i suppose it is not for the doctours interest to seem to have received any satisfaction from persons iniured by him : therefore addressing myself to any indifferent reader , i doe affirm , that the most supreme affirmative notion that we can have of god is that which is implyed in his most adorable incommunicable name of iehova , or as himself interprets it [ sum qui sum ] i am what i am , which imports an infinite vniversall plenitude of being . therefore , as the schoole doctours say , if we hold to the notion of being , between the being of god and the limited , participated being of creatures , there is an infinite distance , and by consequence creatures compared with god have more of not-being , then they have of being ; in which regard their denomination , so considered , ought rather to be taken from not-being , then from being . thus the sthooles : which if they speak nonsense ( for my part i think they doe not ) yet surely the nonsense is not intolerable . 48. but moreover mystick divines though they acknowledge the infinitenes , totality , and vniversality of gods being ; yet they rather chuse [ to which choice the nature of contemplative prayer even forces them ] to reiect all distinct , affirmative notions of god and his perfections , as coming infinitely short of his divine nature , and which indeed are falsely applied to him , if considered as they are comprehended by us : and they frame to themselves a negative notion of him , by separating from him all attributes whatsoever comprehended by us , because as such they are indeed imperfections . and to instill into our minds such a notion of god , of all others least imperfect , he is pleased to describe himself in scriptures to be inaccessible light , that is , light though infinitely glorious , yet to us invisible , and invisible because of the excess of its visibility . hence he is sayd to dwell in darknes , and to make darknes his secret place , and his pavilion round about him to be dark waters and thick clouds of the skyes . in this darknes it is that god is contemplated in pure spirituall prayer , in which , all images and positive notions of the divinity being reiected , an incomprehensible nothing remains , to which the soule is united , and in whose presence all created beings are annihilated . in this darkness therefore contemplative soules have , as it were , an experimentall perception of what schoolmen deduce from reasoning . 49. it seems now to mee that a weaker capacity then the doctours may perceive in this no intolerable nonsense . yea i must add , that here the doctour gives a manifest proof of his dishonesty , in wilfully leaving out that which evidētly explains m. cressy's meaning : which if it had not been concealed from the readers would have rendred his assertion touching the not-being of creatures to be most rationall . for thus m. cressy ( in sancta sophia treat . 3. p. 304. ) treating of the state of perfection , writes : in this state the soule comes to a feeling indeed of her not being , and by consequence of the not being of creatures : the which indeed is reall truth : not as if the soule or other creatures either did cease according to their naturall being ; or as if a natural being were indeed no reall being ( as f. benedict canfield doth seem to determin ) but because all sinfull adhesion by affection to creatures being annihilated , then they remain ( as to the soule ) only in that true being which they have in god , by dependance on him , and relation to him , so that he ( alone ) is all in all . whereas while we sinfully adhere unto them , by staying in them with love , we carry our selves towards them as if we thought them to have a being or subsistance of and in themselves , and not of god only , and that they might be loved for themselves , without reference to god : which is the fundamentall errour and root of all sin. 50. thus the doctour deales with his catholick adversaries . he can at pleasure make them write non-sense by concealing their sense . and thus also he treats m. cressy again in repeating severall passages of sancta sophia touching contemplative prayer : for selecting from severall places certain abstruse words and phrases made use of by mysticks to express , as well as they can , their conceptions , he presents them all together in a heap before his readers eyes , and then miscalls them vnintelligible canting , whilst in the mean time he leaves out the interpretation which m. cressy gives of those words and phrases , to make them intelligible . truly it is not without some scruple now that i take notice of any thing that such an adversary as the doctour shewes himself , doth or can write on an argument so unfitt for controversy as contemplative prayer is , which cannot but he disgustfull to such a sensuall palat as he shews his to be , being willing to corrupt the palats also of his readers . it may be e're long they will see a treatise on this argument , demonstrating the substance of what so ever the doctour finds fault withall in m. cressy's sancta sophia , to be suitable to what the fathers of gods church have both from tradition , and from their own experience also , delivered on that most divine subject . and the doctour shall have free leave ( without any future reply ) once more to call what those holy fathers write unintelligible canting , and intolerable non-sence , though their expressions be parallelled and confirmed by numerous texts of holy scripture . in the mean time , for the readers sake , i will here add some reflexions upon what the doctour has written . 51. he proceeds further , saying that the utmost effect of contemplative prayer if intelligible and practicable , is gross enthusiasm . and why ? because , forsooth m. cressy says that by a diligent practise of such internall spirituall prayer the soule receives from god a heavenly light and inspiration for her direction in all her actions , according to the psalmists words . accedite ad deum & illuminamini , and according to the prayer in his own churches liturgy , borrowed from the roman : [ fifth sunday after easter ] lord from whom all good things doe come , grant us thy humble servants that by thy holy inspiration , we may think those things that be good , and by thy mercyfull guiding we may perform the same . the word inspiration therefore needs not trouble the doctour : neither by it is any other thing meant , but divine grace , which , sayes he , none denyes . 52. yet he must know that this divine grace obtaind by spirituall prayer constantly exercised , though it be in its nature and kind the same which every good christian enioyes , yet the lights and motions of it extend much farther , even to the directing a person not only in necessary dutyes , but to the sanctifiing of all his actions , otherwise in their own nature indifferent , and improving them for the perfectionating the soule in divine love , in soe much as those actions which are performed by ordinary good christians meerly out of an impulse of nature , or for some sensuall satisfaction , are by these done in obedience to the divine will , discovered to them . 53. and whereas to distinguish these inspirations from those pretended to by fanaticks , it was sayd , that in contemplative persons these direct rather to not doing , then doing , when both these seem otherwise equally indifferent , i wonder why the doctour should be displeased with this . he may remember that in the time of the late vsurper , when himself was a great leading preacher , all the actions almost of his brethren were pretended to come from a divine light and inspiration all warranted by the bible , which light ( more , it seems , to the doctours mind ) directed them to nothing but doing , viz : to reform religion , to rebell against their king , to pluck down hierarchy , to multiply sects , to usurp the office of preaching without any vocation , to imprison , pillage , kill their fellow subiects and the like : but no such effects proceed from the lights and inspirations of internall livers among catholicks : they ( having the same vocation that s. mary magdalen had ) leave the many businesses to martha , vnles god by their lawfull superiours , calls them to externall emploiments , which when he does , he enables them to perform them with greater perfection , as we see by the conversion of many nations performed by such as had spent a great part of their lives in solitude and contemplation . 54. it is most certain that if luther , calvin , tindall and such reformers had by prayer disposed themselves for such lights as these , and also followed the direction of them , they would never have procured warre and bloodshed , destruction of kingdoms , rebellions of subjects , tearing asunder gods church and sacrilegiously invading its revenues neither would they to satisfie their lusts have incesttuously polluted themselves with consecrated virgins : in a word they would have done all things contrary to what they have done . and if the doctour himself had followed the guidance of such a light , he would never have published such a book , in which pretending to demonstrate that salvation can scarce possibly be attayned in the catholick church , whatsoever is alledged by him which truly concerns the church it self , may be contained in twenty or thirty pages , whereas the book it self consists of five or six hundred , all the rest being scurrilous buffonries , petulant revilings of gods saints , imputing to the church the doctrins and practises of madmen or sectaries condemned by the church herself , and any thing that he could take out of dunghills which might be serviceable for his unchristian purpose to eradicate out of his readers hearts charity and all sense of humanity : and all this without any provocation , as if , enraged to see that the same mercifull indulgence is not denyed to catholicks alone , which is allowed to himself , and all sects among us which vnanimously conspired to his majesties destruction , and of which not any one to this day has renounced the principles which led them thereto : as if , i say , in that rage his design was to expose innocent , and peaceable subiects to all manner of contempts , affronts , hatred , and mischievous attempts of their fellow subiects , to the disturbance of the kingdoms peace and the renewing of our publick calamities and tragedies , to which he knows that thirty years since , such books and sermons were made use of as a prologue . 55. he must give me leave to add hereto , that in the principles at the end of his book , giving an account of the faith of protestants , he has layd a foundation to support and iustify not only all manner of sects , but the worst effects of them , i mean , the late rebellion , and any other that may follow hereafter : i will not say this was his intention , but the consequence may easily be demonstrated . 56. for in the said principles this being layd down by him as a ground of protestancy , that every sober enquirer into scriptures may be infaillibly certain of all necessary truths contained in them without any obligation to consult or however to obey , ecclesiasticall superiours and teachers : does it not necessarily follow , that all sectaries are equally iustifiable , since it is impossible , without looking into their thoughts , to evince against them that they have not enquired soberly ? what monstrous opinions now may not hereby be justified ? and what possibility of confuting them ? now if among such opinions this be one , that it is the necessary duty of a christian subiect to contribute all that is in his power , even goods and life it self , to sett up the true religion , that is , his own sect , and this against all power whatsoever civill or ecclesiasticall , which shall seek to oppress it , what will the doctour , standing to his own principles , say hereto , if he had a mind to oppose it ? now that such an opinion may possibly spring up , and the assertours of it may pretend that it is grounded on evident scripture , the doctour himself will not deny , since i am sure he remembers , and has reason to do so , that this was the architectonicall principle , common to all sects in the like rebellion : this was thundred out in pulpits , of this all pamphlets were full : the bible and nothing but the bible was all their warrant , the bible was the ensign carried up aloft before their troops , as if the king , bishops , and all their party had been professed enemies to the bible , or had grounded their religion upon the alcoran , whereas indeed all these sects had turned christs doctrine into that bloody law of mahomet . yet notwithstanding all this the doctour zealously and furiously against the papists still contends for putting the bible into all mens hands , and assures them that they are the only legall iudges of the sense of it in necessaries , upon condition they will only say that they are sober enquirers into it . 57. this seems to me to be an evident consequence of the doctours principle ; a principle never acknowledged in gods church for above fourteen hundren years by any one orthodox christian , or by any unless by some whom the doctour himself will call hereticks . if the doctour think i doe not speak truth , lett him search , and lett him employ his freinds to search into libraries : let them consult all the ancient fathers of the church , and all councills : and when they have done , and seen themselves deserted by all antiquity , and vertually condemnd and anathematized by all councills ( which pretend to have right to teach , and to oblige christians to yeeld their assent ) will it not follow that his religion hath a most pittifully unstable and sandy foundation ? but to return from this digression to an argument more gratefull to the doctour , the fanaticism by him imputed to the catholick church , with regard to the prayer of contemplation . 58. whereas m. cressy in his sancta sophia among severall things by which liberty of spirit may be hindered , reckons this for one : the doing actions meerly for edification : the doctour in scorn adjoyns hereto these words , a most excellent and apostolicall doctrine ! these words shew that the doctour likes not that saying : but i cannot imagin what reason he had for it . our saviour indeed requires that our light should shine before men , that they seeing our good works might ( being edified ) glorifie our heavenly father . but this concerns only such good works as our duty obliges vs to doe in publick . but as for other duties , such as is prayer and fasting , he bids us retire into our closets to practise them there , without an eye to the edifiing others , and condemns the pharisees for doing them that they may be seen of men . in like manner those who are called to an internall life and solitude , for them to quitt their proper exercises to goe abroad on purpose to do actions good in themselves , for no other end , but meerly to give a good example for the edification of others was there iustly esteemed a prejudice to the liberty of spirit necessary for their state . 59. but moreover i would ask the doctour , whether being at church in a publick duty , and not having any devotion himself at present , he would esteem it a commendable action to pretend to much fervour , by lifting vp his eyes or beating his breast , and this meerly and only to the end that others seeing him might be edifyed , himself being nothing the better for such grimaces ? or would he give an alms before people meerly for their edification , and not out of a motive of charity inherent in himself ? truly if he should doe all this in such a manner , i should be none of his admirers . and much lesse do i , or i think , any good christian admire him for his book so full af all manner of vnchristian affections , which surely he cannot pretend to be written meerly for edification , and for which i hope his judgement is not soe perverted as to expect a reward from god , who litle esteems witt without charity , or rather witt shewed for the destruction of charity , and truth also . 60. after this the doctour out of the same book mentioning the supernaturall favours which innumerable catholick writers both ancient and modern , do testify to have been communicated by almighty god to his servants after a constant exercise of internall prayer , and mortification , the doctour , i say , would have his reader think that his deriding of these is a sufficient confutation . and i may more justly think that a sober reader will judge that the only mentioning of a proceeding so contrary to all rules of reasoning is a sufficient reply . 61. what hath been hitherto sayd is even too much touching the defence of a book of prayer published by m. cressy , in which the church of england is so litle concerned , and which was compiled for the use of good devout humble soules , and not at all for persons of the doctours temper . those eminently learned and pious fathers , and particularly r. f. leander a s. martino who with great care perused the severall spirituall treatises written by r. f. baker , and gave their approbations of them , were persons in all regards for their profound universall learning far exalted above the censures of malignant pedants : and the devout soules to whose practise they recomended those pious instructions , have reaped such fruits from them , such effectuall helps far their advancement in the divine love and spirituall perfection , that the bouffoneries of such a doctour will only produce this effect upon them , to give god daily thanks that they have escaped from a church in which blasphemous invectives against gods saints and the science of saints are not only permitted , but applauded and rewarded . 62. none can justly wonder that a soule so manifestly voyd of divine love should want both light and tast in such things . daamantem & sentit quod dicimus , saith s. augustin . but does the doctour hope that because he understands not and therefore proudly contemns misticall theology and the exercises of an internall life , the catholick church and governours of it will abate their esteem of that blessing , which manifestly proves that gods holy spirit does not communicate his most sublime and precious gifts to sects divided from the church , of which scarce any pretend to them , and those that doe so , do evidently shew by their contempt of all authority , renunciation of all christian charity , furious and restles attempts of new reformations and seditious combinations to the ruine of all peace , that it is a black spirit , which was a murderer from the beginning , by which they are agitated ? whereas those humble , devout , and retired soules among catholicks , stiled by the doctour , fanaticks , are so far from any intention of disturbing peace , and so entirely submitted to lawfull authority ( the spirit of prophets being so indispensably subiect to the prophets ) that they are in a continuall readines to renounce all reuelations , apparitions , impulses and whatsoever extraordinary visitations , if they seem any wayes to occasion in them doubts of the churches faith , or to prejudice obedience to her ordonnances . 63. the doctour i am sure , considering his supposed universall reading , cannot be ignorant , that such fanaticks as these , though invisible to the busy world , were yet esteemd chariots of israël and the horsemen thereof . that pious , wise , and potent christian emperours have consulted them in their greatest affairs , and have acknowledged themselves obliged to them for miraculous victories over tyrants , resolving upon warre by their encouragement , beginning them with their benediction , and conquering by the assistance of their prayers : by their prayers , and not their disputations , the church has triumphed over heresies , and the world been freed from plagues and mortalities . at their names devills have trembled , and by their command , though absent , those proud spirits have with a mixture of feare and rage quitted their habitation in the bodies of unhappy men . yet these the doctour dares deride , and because they are patient , will not perhaps repent , till it be too lare , but will justify still his impious boldnes and petulancy . 64. it is truly a sad thing to consider with what disposition of mind persons qualifyed , as ( it seems ) the doctour is , do apply themselves to the reading of books of piety written by catholicks . it is as daggers piercing their hearts when they find no advantage to expresse their malignity : if in a great volume full of most heavenly instructions for the exercise of all vertues and dutyes to god and man , they can find but a line or two into which they think they can make their venenious teeth to enter , by that line or two they become edified , that is comfortable nourrishment to their minds , the whole book besides being nauseous to them ; would not damned soules in hell , if spirituall books were sent them , thus read and thus descant upon them ? 65. now whether the doctour ( and some other of his freinds ) has not shewed himself such a reader of catholick books truly innocent , devout , and in which the breathing of gods spirit may , as it were , be perceived , let any indifferent reader of his book be judge . how many of such books , from s. gregory to s. ignatius his time , does the doctour shew that he has read , how many lives of saints , how many treatises of devotion , and among them he will give me leave to name sancta sophia , and poor mother iuliana ? and what account does he give to his readers of the spirituall benefit reaped by him from his laborious reading ? he it seems is not able out of them all to suggest any point of instruction in christian doctrin , not one good affection to god , not the least encouragement to a vertuous holy life . all these things are vanished out of his memory , and evaporated out of his brain , having never affected his heart . what then does he yeild for his readers edification ? he teaches him in reading such books to pronounce mimically and scornfully what he finds there concerning miracles , how wel soever attested , and concerning divine favours communicated by god to his speciall servants : and this being done , to call them fanaticks , and so doeing to esteem such relations sufficiently confuted , and such spirituall books sufficiently disparaged . he teaches him to snatch out of a great book three or four passages lamely and imperfectly cited , to give what construction to them he pleases , and whether he does not understand , or over-understand them , to pronounce them still fanaticall , and there is an end of those books : by the doctours good will no protestant hereafter must receiue the least good from them , vnless pride , malice , and contempt of godlines be good things . 66. now having named in the last place poor mother iuliana , a devout anchoret about three hundred years since living in norwich , i must needs signify my wonder , what could move his spleen and choler against her litle book . it is true , her language to the ears of this age , seems exotick : but it is such as was spoken in her time : therefore she may be excused : her expressions touching gods favours to her are homely , but that surely is no sin . for affections to god are set down with great simplicity indeed , but they are withall cordiall and fervent , and apt to imprint themselves , in the heart of an unpreiudiced reader . the sense and tast she shews to have had of gods speciall love to his servants , of the omnipotent efficacy of his grace , and his impregnable defence and watchfullnes over his elect , to secure them finally from all dangers of tentations , is indeed admirable . yet the doctour has no eyes to see any of these things . but through what glasses he looked when he spied out blasphemy in her writing , i am not able to say : blasphemy , which never hitherto could be observed by so many learned and religious persons as have perused them . but it is no wonder that spiders should suck and digest into poyson the most wholesom nourishment . 67. what hath been hitherto said of contemplative prayer is but even too much to such an adversary , it being a subiect too sacred and divine to be treated of in a polemicall discourse against an opponent of the doctours temper : who , i think , is the first protestant writer that ever made that an argument of controversy against the catholick church . the only excuse that i can devise for so unreasonable a quarrel begun by him , is his indulgence to a froward passion conceived by him , without any provocation , against m. cressy , who severall years since published a book on that subiect , called sancta sophia : in which book notwithstanding he challenges nothing to himself , but the labour of making collections and the method of it . in that regard therefore it may be permitted him to commend the directions for the exercise of internall spirituall prayer , and the practise of all christian vertues in perfection contained in it . and this , in despight of the doctours unmerited malice , he does with such confidence , that he dares promise to himself that if any sober ; well affected reader , though a protestant , and though at present one of the doctours admirers , shall seriously and with an humble heart peruse it , he will either apply himself to the practise of the excellent instructions contained in it , or bewayle his want of spirituall courage in not daring effectually to aspire to so glorious an attempt . 68. wee must not here forget two notable saints , which as the doctour confidently pretends have given him sufficient advantage so to denigrate their persons , as by them to cast an aspersion on the church . these are a holy widow and a virgin , s. brigit , and s. catharine of siena . both these had supernaturall revelations : therefore says the doctour , they were fanaticks . but moreover , their revelations touching the conception of our blessed lady do contradict one the other , and the revelations of both are allowed , and of one confirmed by the church in a councill : and by consequence the doctour with assurance pronounces the church to be a favourer not only of fanaticism , but errour also . to this purpose the doctour . 69. hereto i answer , 1. that all catholicks acknowledge both these to have been saints . 2. and that each of them hath been favoured with supernaturall revelations the publick office of the church testifyes . thus much is confessed : but it is utterly denyed that the church does so approve them , as to forbid any one to make iust exceptions against them : as wee see many writers on both sides have done : she judges they may in generall be usefull to stirr up devotion in readers minds , but she does not confirme them as infallible . for how could it be known to the pope or councill that any speciall revelation made , or pretended to be made to another , was from god , unles the person also testify them by miracles ? and it is observable that when examination is made of miracles in order to the canonization of any saint , the testimony of women will not be received . naturally imagination is stronger in them then judgement , and whatsoever is esteemed by them to be pious , is easily concluded by them to be true . this i say upon supposition that such revelations , were not pretended by persons interessed on both sides of the controversy about the immaculate conception . and particularly touching s. catharine of siena , suares affirms that not any who have written her life have made mention of this revelation . it will suffise therefore to set down here what two illustrious catholick writers have declared touching this point . the former is s. antoninus mentioned by the doctour . if you say , saith he , that some saints , have had a revelation of these things , as s. brigit : it is to be observed that other saints who have wrought miracles , as s. catharin of siena , have had a revelation of the contrary . and since true prophets doe sometimes think that a thing proceeds from divine revelation which they utter of themselves , there is not inconvenience to say , that such revelations were not from god , but human dreames . an example hereof may be found in the prophet nathan speaking to david proposing to him his dessign to build a temple to god. for david though he answered him by a spirit of prophecy , the contrary hereof after wards appeared . the other is cardinal baronius , who treating of certain revelations of s. brigit and s. mathildis , hath these words : i doe indeed honour and venerate ( as is due ) those two saints : but touching the revelations had by them , or rather ascribed to them , i receive only those which the church receives , which we know cannot approve things so repugnant . 70. i am sorry i cannot impute it to so harmles a principle as ignorance , that the doctour speaking of two writers who both of them rejected these pretended revelations of both these saints as illusions and fancies , adds , what becoms then of the popes and councills infallibility , who have approved both ? by which words an unwary reader will not doubt but that an oecumenical councill had made a canon with an anathema against all those who should not acknowledge all the revelations of s. brigit to have been divine , and the belief of them necessary to salvation . whenas all that was done by the councill was , upon occasion of invectives made against those revelations by many catholicks , to require ioannes a turrecremata to peruse and give his judgment of them , which being favourable , the councill , saith he , approved them , that is , freely permitted them to be read , as contayning nothing contrary to faith and good manners . notwithstanding which kind of approbation , we see liberty taken , and with leave enough from the church , by many writers to decry both the one and the other , and there is scarce a catholick alive that thinks he has an obligation to believe either of them . §. 4. visions &c. no grounds of believing doctrines among catholicks . 71. the doctour thinks it advantageous to his cause against the catholick church , that it should be believed that visions , revelations , &c. are made by catholicks grounds of believing severall points of doctrin , as purgatory , transsubstanciation and auricular confession . indeed if he could prove that any such points of doctrine have been , or the point of the conception of our b. lady should hereafter be declared articles of faith upon no surer grounds than modern miracles or revelations , it would have been the maister-piece of all that he has , or ever shall write . but this he durst not say explicitely , though perhaps he is willing his readers should understand that to have been his meaning : for then almost all the councils of gods church would have confuted him , since they professe that the only ground of their faith is divine revelation made to the church by christ and his apostles , and conveyed to posterity in scripture and tradition . 72. now this the doctour being i am sure not able to contradict , is it to be esteemed a preiudice to catholick faith that almighty god to confound hereticks and establish the belief of catholicks , should in severall succeeding ages afford particular revelations , or enable his servants to work miracles : and that he has done so , we have such a cloud of witnesses , that credit must be denyed to history in generall , if none of such witnesses must be admitted . as for the doctour , the only expedient made use of by him to invalidate their testimony , is to produce it in a stile of raillery . 73. as for the instituting festivalls , for example of the conception of our blessed lady &c. it cannot be denyed but it is a lawfull church-institution : and might at any time on any occasion be appointed : and if on some revelation , supposed divine , an occasion was given to the pope to ordain it , this can be no prejudice to it , being a glorifying of god for the blessed virgin , the mother of our lord , her being either preserved , ( as some catholicks say ) or at least cleansed ( as others ) from the common pollution of originall sin at her conception , without any determining which of these two hapned to her , and so the festivall is equally observed by catholicks of either opinion . the like may be said of the feast of corpus christi , of s. michael the archangëll &c. by none of which the least alteration was made in the common faith. 74. but truly we have great obligation to the doctour , though i believe he does not expect wee should thank him , for imputing to the church the frantick preachings and practises of mad-men , and at the same time telling us , that they were excommunicated and other wayes punished by popes , princes and bishops . indeed it is a terrible argument to prove it dangerous to live in a church , because there heresies , false revelations and impure actions are condemned by it . if holy institutours of religious orders could with their rules give also power and will to their subjects not to transgress them , the world would be even too happy . but this exceeding a created power to doe , it is even necessary that scandalls should follow , such as were given by a sect of mendicants , the authours of the horrible evangelium aeternum , the followers of petrus ioannis de oliva , the beguini , fraticelli , beguardi , the illuminati , or alumbrados of spain , and such other monsters , raised up by the devill , in a cursed imitation of the graces and gifts communicated by god to his devout and faithfull servants . but the doctour who can ( no doubt ) commend luther for opposing and dividing god● church , though luther himself tells him that he did it by the devills instigation , scornfully derides and reviles any one who shall pretend to defend the church by gods inspiration or miracles . but 〈◊〉 calvin had not failed in his designed miracles , by raising a man from the dead the quite contrary way , the doctour perhaps would have been reconciled to miracles and inspirations . 75 thus we see that nothing that god has done , or perhaps can do , for the benefit of his church will please the doctour . if catholicks live abstracted lives in the exercise of pure spirituall prayer , or if god confers on any of them supernaturall gifts , all this must passe for meer enthusiasme , though the persons with perfect humility submit all to lawfull authority , and though the doctour alledges nothing to disprove any of these things . 76. but least we may in the end hope that he will permitt and encourage us to keep to the externall devotions and publick liturgy . by no meanes : there must nothing be thought or done by the children of the catholick church , but must be found fault with : the liturgy , saith he , is a tedious and ceremonious way of externall devotion as dull and as cold as the earth it self . hereto ( quia de gustibus non est disputandum ) all that i conceive needfull to say , is that the doctour seems to me not yet cordially reconciled to the ceremonies and common prayer book of his own lately adopted church , which he knows to have been borrowed from the catholick liturgy , and for that reason hated by his freinds the presbyterians and independents , and by them esteemed a tedious and ceremonious way of externall dev●tion , as dull and as cold as the earth it self . §. 5. resisting authority falsely imputed to catholick religion . 77. we have hitherto seen the doctors charge of fanaticism on the catholick church , and his proofs also , such as they are : but he concludes this his accusation with an epiphonema truly of great importance , if rightly applied , which is the fanaticism of catholicks , in resisting authority under a pretence of religion . 78. to make this good , he very ingenuously absolves the catholick church her self , and layes this fault only on the principles and practises of the iesuiticall party , a party , saith he most countenanced and encouraged by the court of rome . and for proof of this he produces severall books written and actions done by them in the last age . 79. hereto our answer must be : that scandalls in gods church are unavoydable , as our saviour tells vs. but where will he find any catholick who will be answerable for all the actions of the court of rome , or all the writings of a single party ? the popes are absolute princes as well as prelats , and if some of them have been tainted with ambiti●n and a desire to invade the rights of other princes ( for what courts have ever been entirely free ? ) such can never want ministers zealous , diligent and inventive to justify all their pretentions and designs , whatever they are . vice will never want instruments and supporters , till the devill himself be converted and become a good christian , and it will be long before this happen . 80. but it is well known that in this point , princes , and states are generally become more clear sighted and more wise then formerly they have been , and by consequence the court of rome also . 81. but to be more particular . if the doctour will think good to consult the iesuits , i believe they will tell him , that if they find speciall favour in the court of rome , it is not with regard to any such books or actions imputed by him to their fore fathers and which they are far from defending : that they have other merits and endowments to recommend them to the popes favour . and particularly that this is not reckoned among their merits , their equally free access and more then ordinary interest of favour in the court of france ( where , the doctour knows , such doctrins are far from being admitted ) will more then sufficiently testify . they will further tell him that for as much as concerns the unsafe antimonarchicall doctrins contained in the foresaid books cited by him , it is almost a whole age since that they have been by their generall forbidden under paine of excommunication and other most greivous censures to iustify them , either in writing , preaching or disputing : and more over ( which is very considerable ) this prohibition was not only made before the condemnation of these books in france , but also was known to the pope and permitted by him . i am moreover confident that he cannot with any tolerable proofs make good his accusation of their being wanting in their fidelity to his majesty , or his glorious father , during the late rebellious warr , which was raised and prosecuted by the doctours best quondam freinds : and more over i may assure the doctour , that if an oath were framed free from ambiguity , and without odious phrases inserted in it ( wholly unnecessary to the substance of it ) they would not make any scruple of ioyning with all their catholick brethren in taking it . but then what thinks the doctour of these two propositions to be sett in the scale against his ? 1. that it is absolutely unlawfull to subiects by arms to propagate or defend religion against their lawfull prince . 2. that ( i say not by the pope ; to this he and his brethren are as forward as any , but ) by no assembly civill or ecclesiasticall , subiects can be authorized by arms to oppose their prince , upon any pretence what soever . are he and his quondam party ready to declare these ? will he or they damne the execrable covenant ? surely the kings safety and the publick peace are far more concernd in these then in the former . this therefore would be a task in which his learning and eloquence would be worthily employed : and more over in case himself either by preaching or writing has declared the contrary to either of these , or engaged his soule in the covenant , so great , so horrible a scandall as that , certainly ought not only to be repented of , but a publick revocation of it to be made . and moreover my lords the bishops his superiours deale but too mercifully in not requiring also a recantation from him of what he has written destructive to the ecclesiasticall government of that church , in whose revenues they have now given him so great a share . but i despair of being able to extort from the doctour a free expression of his mind touching these two points , which involue a secret never to be discovered . at least then he may with civilitie be entreated to satisfy the world touching the sense of the two oaths of supremacy and allegiance which he has taken already , as appears by the preferments he enioys : unles perhaps for the tendernes of his conscience he has been dispensed with taking them . i doubt not but that in the oath of alleagiance he cheer-fully renounced all authority in the pope or any forrain potentate to absolue subiects from their allegiance : but will he doe the same with regard to any domestick power , assembly , or state at home ? this were worth the knowing . 82. and next touching the oath of supremacy , the doctour during the late execrable vsurpers time publishing in his irenicum the iudgement touching church government of the prime patriarch of the english reformation , stiled by him that most worthy prelat and glorious martyr archbishop cranmer ( a martyr indeed , if an impenitent traytor may be called a martyr : ) and his judgment , declared in an answer to a petition of the clergy in the convocation , was in brief , that princes and governours may make ( bishops and ) priests as well as bishops may : and that a bishop or a priest made by them needeth no consecration by the scripture . moreover the doctour signifies that he had in his possession an authentick copy of the same cranmers answer in resolution of certain doubts propounded by the same clergy touching doctrinall points , as about the masses institution , nature , receiving &c. but this secret the doctour envyed his readers : notwithstanding we may collect the sense of cranmers answer from the subscription to both the resolutions , the form whereof is this , t. cantuariens . this is mine opinion and sentence at this present , which i do not temerariously define , but do remit the judgment thereof wholly to your majesty . so that it seems a finall judgment both touching government and doctrin is by the prime bishop referred to a child of about nine years old : a great glory surely to the english clergy , for the knowledge of which they are beholding to the doctour , as the doctour was to cranmer for confirming the substance of his book touching church government , very advantageous to my lords the bishops . 83. now this being premised , and notice being taken that this book , attributing all this power to the supreme civill governour , was printed in cromwells time : he cannot surely refuse to declare whether he intended in taking lately the oath of supremacy to acknowledg as much in the king , whose title by law is , supreme head and governour of the church of england : and whether by the church of england is to be understood only the prelaticall church , so as that all the doctours other protestant churches are to be supposed exempt from his iurisdiction . for if they be not , it is expected that the doctour should declare that the king as head of the church may ordain bishops and priests for his own church : and presbyters for the presbyterians , ministers for the independents , holders-forth for anabaptists ; declarers for quakers and tub-preachers for that sort of fanaticks . but this is not all : for the doctour , if holding to his book , seems obliged to assert a power in the king to appoint also articles of belief , a hundred ways varying and contradicting one another , to fitt the fancies of each respective congregation . but how would the doctour advise him about fifth monarchists ? thus much at present upon this subiect , by occasion of the doctours requiring an account from catholicks touching their fidelity , which account none were less fitt to require then the doctour . causa patet . 84. but after all , did it become a doctour of such reputation ( though having a design to doe all the mischeif he could to catholicks , who never provoked him ) to call into his ayd two such authours as the answerer to the apology for catholicks , and the answerer to philanax ? for touching the former , he cannot but know that his barbarous answer has mett wich a reply already from an honourable pen. and for the other , where was the doctours modesty when he stiled himr a worthy authour for belying most horribly a party among catholicks , as if they had had an influence ( and had joyned with the doctours friends ) in the most barbarous effects of fanaticism here in the murther of a most excellent prince ? does he not know how oft , and particularly how upon the complaint of the late queen-mother of most precious memory , he has been summoned to make good that his forged calumny ; but all in vain ? js that wretched serpent to be stiled a worthy-authour , who if he had not been warmed and thawed by english preferments , had never been able to hiss in his own countrey , and much less to disgorge his poyson to the disturbance of our island ? js any credit to be given to him who would haue that to be believed in england which all france knows to be false , viz. that his father was a loyall subiect to his king , that is , that he was an apostar from huguenotterie , where confession of faith obliges them to be traytours and rebels whensoever the honour of god ( that is , the defence of their execrable religion ) is concerned ? 85. if the doctour had had the patience to delay a while the publishing his book , he might both haue cowntenanced and strengthned his cause very considerably by imploring the succours of another of the same french huguenot brood of the loyall family of the du moulins . one by profession of late ( god help us ) à physician , but heretofore ( as is said ) for his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presented to cromwell , in which he celebrated his victories , created by him a publick reader of history in the vniversity , then he became a controvertist , and teacher of diuinity : the diuinity doubtles then in fashion , and pernicious to lawfull soverains . jt seems the poor snake , not th●iving by his drugs ( for he finds very few of the english holy tribes weary of living long ) betakes himself to his former trade of railing at papists , a trade at all times , but now especially , which brings in as certain a revenue , as if he had sett up an alehouse . this doughty controvertist to putt the world in mind of his first trade of surgery , has giuen catholick religion as he alone thinks , a deadly wound in cutting the very iugulum causae . jf his book had come abroad time enough the doctour could not haue refused to make use of it , being one of the seauenty patrons to whom he has written most pittifully begging epistles , addressed to all degrees , sects and professions , except bishops . and in requitall he cannot but warrant him now a sufficient minister , in case he can get ordination from a iustice of peace , or some other qualified ciuil magistrate . poor england ! art thou so unprovided of factious spirits , that french calvinists must be calld in , and hired to plant among us the poysonnous roots of malicious huguenotterie ? 86 but to return to the doctour himself . j am far from being of his opinion , that the most dangerous sect among us is of those who under pretence of setting up the kingdom of christ , think it lawfull to overturn the kingdoms of the world . such were venner and his company , who ( saith he ) acted to the height of fanaticism among our sectaries . thus far indeed j agree with him , that these frantick fifth monarchists do more professedly teach rebellion then any other sect : but i should renounce common reason , if i should affirm that such à handfull of mad-men , as venner and riscrew , are a sect more dangerous to the kingdom then those numerous armies of sober fanaticks ( presbyterians , independents , anabaptists , &c. ) who all conspired to the raising and prosecuting the late rebellion . yet all these will say as much for themselves as the doctour has here done , viz. we condemn any opposition to government under any pretence whatsoeuer : for it was in obedience to a government such as it was , that the rebellion was upheld ; a government divided from the kings , and usurped on purpose to destroy him . to conclude this point , as zeale for the kings safety and the publick peace is commendable in all english subjects and in such strangers salso whom english preferments have made his subiects , yet certainly in the doctour and his worthy huguenot authour it seems a preposterous and suspicious zeale , which has been shewn only against a party , of which not one can be accused of want of fidelity to his maiesty , whilst they speak not a word , nor so much as intimate any apprehension of danger from those who unanimously conspired to his destruction , and who , for any thing to the contrary appears , cannot yet find one word in the scripture ( or the lawes of the kingdom ) which condemns their former rebellion . but enough , if not too much , of this argument , which the doctour would needs discourse upon . §. 6. fanaticism returneed upon the doctour and his vvhole religion . 87. the doctour now for the recreation of his readers hauing represented catholicks , not only such as now liue , but many in glory with god in heaven , travestis in a disguise of ffanaticks acting a ffarce or enterlude composed by him , the glory of which invention he may lawfully challenge to himself alone ; for i do not find that any pattern has been giuen him by any other adversaries of gods church : he cannot iustly take it ill , if in some degree of requitall we endeavour to shew not only himself , but the whole church , i mean all the churches of protestants , as they are principled by him in his book , to be really , without any vizard or disguise very fanaticks . 88. jn pursuing this subiect , we cannot hinder the doctour from challenging some , by him esteemed great , advantages , in which he much glories , and for which he giues god humble thanks . for 1. we can find no religious orders among them , upon the institutours and subjects of which we might fasten this title , and whom we might stigmatize with this brand . an attempt indeed has once been made of beginning such an order of young men and women liuing promiscuously together ; but by reason of two defects it presently expired ; for neither would they be persuaded to vow continency ( in such circumstances truly vnreasonable : ) neither could a superiour , he or she be found to whom they could be obliged in conscience to profess obedience ; and no wonder , since , it seems , their own church cannot exact it from them . 2 ▪ we cannot heare of so much as one single person whom we might call a fanatick for leauing the flesh and the world to the end he , or she might entirely consecrate themselues to god in solitude and exercises of spirituall prayer and mortification . 3. jn case god should call any one to such a state of life , there is an vtter want among them of instructours and instructions proper for it , vnles the crumms of comfort , , the practise of piety , truly for the substance good innocent books , with store of pious affections : or else one , a more late one , yet better then those called , the whole duty of man could serue their turns . but these hauing neuer been intended for such an vse , it cannot reasonably be expected from them . 4. they all of them ( except the quakers and fifth monarchists , with few besides ) disclaiming all gratuite graces , visions , illuminations , inspirations , passiue vnions , &c. jf vpon this account we should call any of them besides these , fanaticks , they would , and very iustly , call us impudent slanderers . 5. not one miracle hauing been pretended to since the first reformation not so much as the curing a tertian ague to testify that reformation was pleasing to god , we cannot reasonably accuse them of forging any miracles . 6. the doctour might haue done well , even in revenge against his enemy m. cressy and his church history , or as he scornfully stiles it great legend , to have given to the world at least a pretty little legend of his reformed saints . but alas , his records will not furnish him with matter of that argument to fill a nutshell . so that he has deprived us of the means of requiting him with finding fanaticks among his rubricated saints . yet if he will consult more ancient and some even primitive records , as s. ireneus , tertullian , and after them s. epiphanius , s. augustin , and philastrius , together with other modern writers , as alphonsus a castro , prateolus , &c. who have compiled books expressly touching the lives and doctrins of many of his predecessours , it will goe hard if he be not able to discover some among them whom he may call saints ( as well as cranmer ) and we in requitall , fanaticks . but he is too wise to loose his advantage . 89. and all these manifold advantages wee yield up to him , to our shame , and to the doctours great contentment , and to the glory of his protestant churches . yet all this will not discourage vs from endeavouring at least , to iustify that the doctour and his churches are meer fanaticks . this we confidently pronounce , and to make this good we will not , as he has done , exemplify in the writings or actions of a few persons culld out , with an intention to baffle , affront and reuile them , but we will demonstrates vpon his own grounds and principles , that the very nature and essence of his churches and religion , is pure putid fanaticism . 90. now a demonstrable proof of this the doctour himself affords vs in the 13. and 15. principles at the end of his book . his words are these : such a particular way of reuelation being made choice of by god ( for the means of making known his will in order to the happines of mankind ) as writing , we may iustly say , that it is repugnant to the nature of the design , and the wisdom and goodnes of god to giue infallible assurance to persons in writing his will for the benefit of mankind , if those writings may not be vnderstood by all persons who sincerely endeauour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary for their saluation . and consequently , there can be no necessity supposed of any infallible society of men , either to attest or explain those writings among christians . 91. what is this now but fanaticism in the heighth of the notion signified by the word , to make euery christian soberly enquiring into scripture to be his own teacher in all necessary points of faith ( and it is no matter what becoms of vnnecessary points ) and to be a competent iudge of the true sence of scripture in them : all this without any regard to all externall authority infallible , or fallible either ; for an infallible one being vnnecessary , what necessity can there be of a fallible authority , which none is or can be bound to belieue ? if it be fanaticism to attend to and belieue certain pretended illuminations , inspirations and reuelations concerning particular matters , perhaps of no great importance , with a refusall to submitt them to any externall authority : what is it to ground his whole religion vpon his own fancy , enquiring into the true sense of diuine reuelation ? 92. but perhaps the doctour thinks himself and his churches secure notwithstanding any thing here said , & because neither himself , nor they , pretend to any new reuelations , illuminations , or inspirations in this matter . notwithstanding he will not find an euasion by this . for besides that , j am sure , presbyterians at least , if not the other sects , and likewise the huguenots of france in their confession of faith , haue always professed that they haue not only the true sense of scripture by inspiration of the holy ghost , but that thereby they are enabled to distinguish true scripture from apocriphall writings : i will take the boldnes to tell him , that he himself does the same , and if he denyes it , it is because he is ignorant of what passes in his own mind . 93. to shew this , i will here propose a few questions to him , and he not being present to doe it himself , i will suppose he gives me leaue to make answers to them , such as j conceiue he will not disavow . the. 1. question : does he after a sober enquiry vnderstand and assent to the true sense of scripture in all necessary points ? answer . yes . 2. question . is his assent ▪ to such points an act of meer naturall reason or is it a diuine faith ? answer . a diuine faith surely as he hopes , and is fully perswaded : for he would be sorry if he belieued not better then devills . 3. question . is a diuine faith a supernaturall gift of gods holy spirit . answ. yes : the scripture saying so expresly . 4. quest. is this gift of god communicated to his servants any other way , then by illumination , inspiration , or the like diuine operation equivalent ? answ. j must answer in the doctours place , till he better informs me , that no other way is known . jn the last place . 5 q. does he think himself fobliged to acknowledge that he receies this faith from , or to submitt this his perswasion of a diuine operation in him to the teaching of any church ? answ. he will not ( though j thank god j doe ) acknowledge any church , fallible or infallible , which can iustly require thus much from him . now therefore a primo ad vltimum , does the doctour want any necessary qualification to make him passe for a perfect fanatick and enthusiast , a fanatick by duty imposed on him from the essence of his religion , and moreouer a teacher of fanaticism ? jf i could absolue him from this ; i would very willingly : but sincerely i cannot , since he himself has giuen me a distinct notion of fanaticism , by which he , and his party , vnderstands an enthusiastick way of religion , or resisting authority ( civill or ecclesiasticall ) vnder a pretence of religion : by which notion , in it self true and proper , he is to be iudged without appeale . 94. now though the doctour takes vpon him , and is generally conceiued by others to be a champion of the church of england , yet perhaps it would be rashnes in me from his warrant alone to affirme that the church of england ( that church , j mean which is established by publick authority ) does now at last ground her faith on such a fanatick principle , as the doctour in her name has layd : for then it might indeed be truly sayd , that the new faith of the church of england , is the very faith of new england . the doctour , how learned soeuer otherwise , he is but a neophit in this church : and therefore all he says not to be swallowed presently without examining : if he wrong the church of england , j am vnwilling to wrong her with him . 95. and one particular thing which i have observed from his book , makes me suspect that my lords the bishops will not avow this principle imposed by him on them , which is , that his book wants an imprimatur . now if an approbation was either not demanded by him , or being demanded was refused him : it seems strange that against order and publick command it should be permitted to be so dispersed without any controll . but the truth is , there is a great mistery of late in that formality of approbations : for some books want an imprimatur for the reader , which was not wanting to the printer . perhaps the doctours virulence against poore catholicks was so highly approved by the grave censor librorum , that rather then it should be hindred from doing mischief to them , he was content the principles also should passe : which utterly destroy the foundations of his own church . this may seeme more probable , because in like manner a licence is given to the printer for a book of sermons , in one of which , composed entirely of lying invectives against catholicks , and by a most horrible calumny imputing the pouder treason to the preaching of catholick religion , there is this passage becoming a preacher of the gospell ; i wish that the lawes against these foxes ( the papists ) might be put in execution , as they were anciently against wolues . nothing but an vtter extermination of catholicks , it seems , will content the charitable preacher , who seems to intimate also , that in his judgment it is fitt a price should be sett on every catholicks head as formerly on wolues , to be payed to his murderer . such a sermon as this the printer is licenced to print ; but he who gave it , being ashamed that his approbation of so barbarous a piece should appeare to the world , has given order that his licence should be concealed . 96. what judgment therefore in this regard , to make of the doctours book , truly i cannot determine . only this i may say , that if prelaticall protestants do allow him for their champion , and approve the grounds of his religion , it is one of the most signall victories that in any age has been gained by a single doctour over a whole church , the governours whereof will be forced to acknowledge that they have no authority to teach truth , or condemn errours ; that all the people ( formerly under them ) are becom prophets , and that all their articles , constitutions , and ordonances have been comp●se● and enioyned by an usurped authority , of which they are not willing to be despoyled , and perhaps , after the example of a late scottish bishop , to do pennance for their fault of being bishops . but certainly my lords the bishops will hardly , with all the doctours eloquence , be perswaded to this compliance with him : regard both to the kings and kingdoms safety , and their own character will not permit them to yeeld to an anarchy first in the church , and presently after in the kingdom . 97. notwithstanding it cannot be denyed but the doctour may expect more then ordinary indulgence from them , since during their late calamities , he did not joyn in the clamour for destroying them . he was no root and branch enemy , but on the contrary generously undertook their defence , and with great boldness told his then maisters , that though episcopall goverment and ordinations , as likewise deans and chapters ( which anciently were the bishops counsell ) were not necessary , nor perhaps convenient , as matters then stood , yet neither was their utter destruction : they might , if the state pleased , be retained without sin , upon condition that for their maintenance the ravenous beasts then in power would be content to vomit up three or four hundred thousand pounds of yearly ●ents . but my best course is to leave the doctour to plead his own cause , much better then i can doe ; and i assure him i would not have touched this string , nor calld to mind these things passed , were it not that hitherto he has made no retractation of any thing written by him , and also if his principles newly published should prevayle in mens minds , they would be more destructive to both kingly and church goverment then all the writings of presbyters and independents &c. 98. but perhaps after all , the said principles , though pernicious to superiours , may at least produce vnity and peace among the people . for a man would think if every sober enquirer ( and who thinks not himself such anone ) may be allowed to chuse a sence of scripture for himself , what can he desire more ? every one then surely will be quiett and contented . but i must tell him , quid verbo audio , cum facta videam . if indeed men could be content to enioy their faith to themselves , and not think themselves obliged to propagate it ; if they could with patience see their doctrins confuted , their actions derided , and their designs opposed , peace perhaps might be hoped for ad graecas , calendas . 99. yet i confess that ( according to the welsh proverb , the gospell and a stone will drive away a dogg ) the doctours principles and a severe civill government ioynd together , that is , a charitable indulgence to tender consciences , with a watchfull care to prevent quarrells and eager disputes about religion , may produce that peace , which has hitherto never been seen in england since the reformation , and mens minds , being enured to tast the pleasure of such a peace , may probably in a short time becom as zealous against quarrelling , as they are now for it . 100. but there is another sort of peace and vnity more fitt to be the argument of writings composed by ecclesiasticall persons , that is , vnity of faith and doctrin . and this vnity was intended certainly by christ , when he left his church established under spirituall governours , to continue in an orderly succession till the worlds end : and was signifyed by s. paul , saying , there is one body and one spirit : one lord , one faith , and one baptism &c. who also declares that this one body and one faith is preserved by apostles and other governours instituted by christ in his church , to the end that gods people may not be tossed to and fro , and carried about with every wind of doctrin &c. this unity also is proposed and professed by us in the creed , i believe one holy catholick and apostolick church . now this vnity the doctour , seeing utterly chaced out of his churches principled by him , earnestly endeavours to prove it a stranger to the catholick church also : and would seem to intimate that if it be possible to be attained , it must be by his principles . and the truth is , if men might enioy their consciences , and would be induced to abstain from quarrelling , persecuting and hating one another ; truth in the end would probably prevaile , were there not one hindrance more , i feare , insuperable , which is , that truth , or true religion has no other passions and carnall affections to combat withall , besides quarrelsomnes . it requires a bending , and even breaking of the will to the obedience of lawfull superiours : it requires yet further a captivating even of the vnderstanding to the obedience of faith taught them by the same superiours : it requires also a free discovery of the most secret and most difficult to be acknowledged crimes , in order to painfull satisfactions to be undertaken for their expiation , and for obtaining absolution and pardon of them : it requires from many a totall renouncing of all carnall lusts , and all externall remedies of quenching them . these and many other severe exactions are required by true religion , and only by it● and therefore no wonder if sects dispensing in these things , prevaile so much against it : yet gods grace is omnipotent , and can work greater and more difficult effects in the hearts of his servants , when he is pleased to exert it . 101. it is truly an attempt worthy so heroicall a champion to pretend to bring proofs , from which , saith he , it appears that the church of rome can have no advantage in point of vnity above his protestant churches , which is in effect to demonstrate that one article of our faith ceases to be true . 102. let this be examined : and first let us enquire what helps for unity ( i mean unity of faith and doctrin ) protestants have , and then compare them with those of catholicks . first , for the doctour himself , who as yet , must pass for the common advocate of protestants , till he be disavowed , surely he will not pretend to contribute the least advantage to such unity , unles he hopes to perswade any one , that a licence given to every christian to chuse his own faith out of scripture be a probable way to make all agree in the same faith : which licence he gives ▪ and justifying it ▪ is the principall design of all his principles . is not this all one as to say , let every man in england think and doe what he pleases , and by this means all will agree to be good obedient subiects to the king ? yet the scripture argues the contrary , saying , that because there was no king in israel , everyone went severall ways , doing what was good in his own eyes . so that by the doctours way of proceeding , one would almost believe that his meaning was , that our saviour had no intention that his church should be one , and consequently that generall councills , which took great paines to procure vnity , transgressed therein our saviours order . 103. but all protestants are not of the doctours mind : for though they generally make scripture , not only the rule , but judge also of faith when controverted : yet they do not so neglect vnity , but that they profess a willingnes to submit their judgments for the sence of scripture to a lawfull generall councill . this the doctour cannot doe , now that he has sett forth his principles , unless he will confess the foundation of his protestant religion to be unsound . he might well enough have done it before , whilst he was a defender of archbishop lawd : but now it appears that the archbishops principles and his are not the same , nor probably ever were , and i doe assure my self that if the archbishop were alive , none could be more ready to condemn them . 104. other protestants therefore refuse not submission to councells : as may appear by their confident demanding them . for gesner speaking in their name thus writes . we with the loudest voice we can , cry out again and again , and with all our power we humbly and earnestly beg of christian kings and emperours that a free , christian and lawfull councill may be conv●ked , in which the scripture may be permitted to be the iudge of controversies . and our countreyman sutcliff confidently cryes out that catholicks are afraid of councills . yet all the world sees that if a lawfull generall councill were called , according to the order of all past lawfull councills , even those received by protestants , they must necessarily be condemned . 105. this some others more wise then these loud sollicitours for councills saw ; and therefore when a councill was ready to be called , they , providing for themselves , would not permit any point to be decided by catholick bishops alone , but euery minister , yea lay-men , must have votes in them : and a plurality of suffrages was not to prevayle , but an equall number on both sides must dispute , and lay judges decide : that is , declared hereticks must enioy greater priviledges then catholicks , and instead of a councill there must be an assembly of wild beasts consulting to establish unity in gods church , which , it seems , was only to be procured by confusion , and not by order . therefore a certain lutheran said well of calvinists calling for a lawfull councill , that they did imitate a well known buffon calld marcolphus , who was wont to say , that after all his search he could never find a fitt tree upon which he could willingly be content to be hanged : such a tree would a legitimate councill prove to the doctours principled protestants . 106. yet there is one expedient for producing unity , which the doctour may doe well to advise upon : for if it take , it will certainly have that effect : even the quakers themselves and fifth monarchists will not refuse to be of the doctours church , if they be not already . nay , which is more , the catholicks will come in too . this is no invention of mine , but was many years since suggested by one of the doctours protestants , robert robertson an english anabaptist of amsterdam . this surely well meaning man perceiving how litle success scripture alone had to vnite sects , agreeing only in opposing popery , in the year sixteen hundred and two printed a book in holland , in which he proposed to them all this means of vnity viz. that they should all ioyn in a common petition to the states to give them leave to assemble themselves in some town or field , and there each sect severally to pray to god , one after another , that he would shew some evident miracle for decision of their controversies , and declaring which among them had the truth , ( which he supposed vndoubtedly was not among catholicks ) and to the end the devill might not enter in , and deceive them with a false miracle , the man told them he had thought of one allowed by scripture , and which he was sure the devill could not work , namely , to make the sun stand still for a certain considerable time : not doubting but that god of his great goodnes would not refuse to condescend to the petition of such devout servants of his in a matter so iust and necessary . 107. i suppose the doctour will not deny this design ( if succesfull ) to be a most powerfull and unfaileable mean of producing vnity , which his principles have utterly destroyed , and rendred impossible , if not unlawfull . and let him with all his wit and invention devise any other more probable , since the catholick churches authority is reiected by him and them . 108. notwithstanding all this , the doctour , according to his custom and nature , is confident , that he has demonstrated , that the church of rome can have no advantage in point of vnity above his medley church . now to the end any impartiall reader may be a competent judge between us , i will briefly set down the instruments and means of vnity left by our lord to his church , to 〈◊〉 end the truth of this article of our faith , i believe one catholick church , may remain to the worlds end unalterable . 1. catholicks do ground their faith on gods revealed will in scripture interpreted by tradition . 2. they believe that god according to his promise , will lead and preserve his church in all necessary truth , or in the true sense of scripture . 3. that for this purpose , he foreseeing that heresies and schisms grounded on a false sense of scripture , would in after times come , has established in his church an unfaileable succession of teachers of his truth , with whom he will continue till the worlds end . 4. it is his will and command that all christians should obey these teachers , who are to give an account of their soules . 5. these teachers constitute the churches hierarchy . 6. the vniversall church is represented by these teachers assembled in a lawfull generall councill . 7. such a councill therefore is the supreme tribunall of the church , from whose decisions there must be no appeale . 8. but because the difficulties of making such assemblies are extreamly great , therefore it is necessary there should be a standing authority with power to prevent heresies and schisms in the intervalls of councills , arising and disturbing the church . 9. this ordinary authority is established in the supreme pastour , the bishop of rome . 10. his iurisdiction therefore as to such an end , extends it self to the whole church , and is exercised in taking care that the ordinances of generall councills be not by any transgressed : and also in case any heresies arise , or that any controversies in causis majoribus can not be otherwise ended , either to determine the points of catholick truth opposed , or at least to impose silence upon disputants and litigants , till he can assemble a councill to declare un-appealably the truth , and to do iustice upon the guilty parties . thus the catholick church is furnished against schisms , and none of these defensive arms will the doctour allow to any of his protestant churches , and yet he confidently avows that catholicks have no advantage . 109. but let us consider what argumēts an over-weening witt can alledge to prove so strange an affection ; for he might as well have said , that goverment , and such government as obliges the conscience , has not so much force to preserve men in vnity , as anarchy has . 110. as touching his proofs , which take up above an hundred pages , our answer to them must be , that we may yield him in a manner all the premises of his faulty sillogisms , and must deny the consequence of the conclusions he would draw from them . he tells us many tragicall stories of miscarriages of popes , how they revolted from the empire , and upon such revolting layd the foundation of greatnes to their see : how afterward challenging to themselves a supreme temporall dominion over the whole world , they quarrelled with emperours and other christian princes , from whence followed rebellions , massacres , and a whole iliad of all sorts of mischiefs . well : this being granted , what follows ? therefore says he , papall authority in gods church is no , good mean to produce peace and order ( nor consequently kingly authority in the common wealth , since notwithstanding it many kings have exercised tyranny , and could not always prevent rebellions . ) but s. peter and s. paul never thought of such an argument , when the most abominable monster that ever lived governed the roman world . it was to nero that they commanded christians to be subiect , to pay taxes , to yeeld honour &c. and this not only out of feare of his power , but also for conscience sake . it was such an argument as this ( as the doctour has reason to remember ) that was made use of to the destruction of the best king that ever governed this island . be it therefore granted , that after a thousand years of excellent order produced in the christian world by the government of popes , some of their successours for about an age or two caused intolerable disorders in the church and empire : what follows ? therefore a supreme authority in gods church is of no good use at all : nay more , all manner of authority is useles ; for if any authority , then subordination : and if subordination , then of necessity a supreme . 111. from hence the doctour descends to a way of arguing yet less reasonable then this : for he tells his reader of i know not how many schisms , yet all of them after the church was above twelve hundred years old ( for before there were scarce any : ) and of yet later disorders since s. bernards time , by reason of quarrels between bishops and monastick orders about exemptions and priviledges : likewise between regulars and seculars the other day in england , and much more such stuff which popes either would not , or rather could not compose , for feare of greater disorders by endangering schisms yet more pernicious to the church then the former . and what would he conclude from hence ? the very same as before : for his argument in brief is this : subiects are oft times rebellious to their superiours : therefore it were better there were no superiours at all . but might he not as rationally argue , that god is governour of the world : yet notwithstanding this the far greatest part of the world , not in one or two , but in all ages , from the beginning hath been rebellious to him , therefore his government is of small benefitt ? 112. as touching certain ( truly scandalous ) quarrells between bishops and some regulars concerning episcopacy and the churches government , the doctour ought to have taken notice that never any regular pretended episcopacy to be antichristian , as the doctours freinds , the presbyterians , independents , and other later sects have done ; neither have they declared a government by bishops to be in it self indifferent , or that ordination and consecration of bishops and priests is a meere ceremony , and conferred as well and legally by lay magistrates as by ecclesiasticks , as the doctour himself has done : the whole controversy consisting among catholicks about restraining some part of episcopall iurisdiction , and maintaining priviledges granted by some popes to certain regulars . a vast difference therefore there is between catholicks and protestants in disputes touching church government : and utterly irremediable on the protestants side , whereas wee see it ended , or at least silenced , among catholicks . 113. but differences of this nature are not considerable compared to those obiected by the doctour in the last place , which are touching matters of doctrin , and as he pretends of faith : in which regard he says that the church of rome can have no advantage in point of vnity above others : and further , he , not content with this , adds , that the popes authority being acknowledged by catholicks the fountain of vnity , and all catholicks not agreeing in the popes infallibility , whereas both catholicks and protestants agree in the infallibility of scripture , which is to protestants a more certain way of ending controversy , therefore he concludes that protestants have a more certain and safe way of vnity , then catholicks . for that the pope has not a sufficient power to reduce to vnity parties dissenting in doctrinall points of weight , such as are the controversies between the iesuits and dominicans about grace and free will ; between the dominicans and franciscans about the immaculate conception &c. is , he saith , evident , since those quarrels have to this day continued many ages , and are prosecuted with great eagernes . 114. in this manner argues the doctour , whereto the answer is obvious . for. 1. he trifles with and abuses an unskilfull reader , in telling him that the scripture being acknowledged on both sides to be infallible , is a more certain way of ending controversies then the popes determination , who is not by many catholick believed to be infallible . for how can a writing , the sense whereof is controverted , end a controversy ? and to say that a writing is of it self a surer mean to end debates , then when interpreted by a iudge , to say this , and to think to be believed , is to call his readers brutish , irrationall creatures , and to make all tribunalls ridiculous . 2. it is not the popes infallibility , but his . authority which ends the controversies , either by determining the point in controversy , so as his determination is accepted by the church : or at least by imposing silence among disputants , till himself in a councill unappealeably decide it : by which way of imposing silence severall eager disputes have been ended by popes , as this age can witness . 3. though all catholicks do in thesi acknowledge that they are obliged , at least , to silence when imposed by the pope : yet it cannot be denyed but that some have not complied with this obligation . but this is not to be imputed to want of authority in the pope , but to the unrulines of mens passions and pride . and the same fault we see in secular tribunalls , which yet does not hinder but that iudges are reputed fitt and proper to end law suits . 4. that neither the pope nor the councill of trent , have decided the fore mentioned controversies , we are to ascribe either to the inconsiderablenes of them ; or to the want of sufficient clearness of scripture or tradition for either party ; or to a just and prudent care of preventing schisms in the church by such determinations , wherein so considerable parties in the church are divided in opinion . 5. whereas the doctour says that the points in controversy among catholicks , being many of them the same agitated among protestants , are points of faith , he is manifestly mistaken : for there are among catholicks no points controverted , but such doctrins where the sense of scriptures being variously expounded by the two parties , the church as yet hath determined nothing which sense of them is de fide ( though the parties themselves would each of them have their own to be so , ) not determined , i say , so clearly , as that both sides are agreed that such is the churches decision . as for protestants , what doctrins are esteemed points of faith , and what school disputes , i think no oedipus can resolue . doctour stillingfleet elsewhere saith down right , that the church of england holds no points to be articles of her faith , but those wherein the church of rome also agrees with her , and holds the same to be such . his words are , there is a great deale of difference between the owning of some propositions in order to peace , and the believing of them as necessary articles of faith. the church of england makes no articles of faith , but such as have testimony and approbation of the whole christian world of all ages , and are acknowledged to be such by rome it self ; and in other things she requires subscription to them , not as articles of faith , but as inferiour truths , which she expects submission to , in order to her peace and tranquillity . thus the doctour . but here i cannot well understand , why he saith her subiects subscribe them as inferiour truths , and yet maintains the church of england to require no subscription to her articles as truths , for that surely is a requiring of assent to them , but a subscription of non-contradiction , or non-opposition of them , which consists with the parties holding them errours . now methinks , this the church of england believing nothing as of faith , but what the popes and the roman churches faith also secures to them to be so , should sound somewhat harsh in the ears of many of his disciples . again , it necessarily follows , that the church of rome , notwithstanding its idolatry , fanaticism &c. yet failes in no necessary point of faith. 6. lastly , that which makes disputes among christians about dostrinall points pernicious , is not the heynousnes of the errours themselves on either party , but the refusall to submitt to the churches authority when condemning them , from whence schisms are inevitable , and such refusers then truly stiled hereticks . no man will deny but that the errour of the photinians [ or socinians ] called anciently homuncionists , for affirming christ to be meer man , is a most grievous errour , incomparably exceeding any among catholicks : yet if one living in the commu●ion of gods church , should hold this most pernicious errour , not knowing that the church had condemned it , and being ready to renounce it assoon as he knew this , s. augustin professes he durst not call such a man an heretick . how the doctour would call such an one , i know not . but this i will iustify , that according to the doctours principles he ought to pass for as good and as well grounded a protestant as himself : and therefore especially orthodox , for not submitting his judgment to the church . §. 7. the doctrin of pennance vindicated from the doctours mistakes . 115. now notwithstanding what hath hitherto been said i do nothing doubt but those popular readers , for whom only i conceive , the doctour wrote his book , will still resolutely judge every line of it unanswerable . the like they will say concerning the other points of accusation charged by him on the roman church , as 1. many obstructions of a holy life . 2. endless divisions . how happy are we , will they think , who have escaped out of such a babel , were frantick subiects are governed by more frantick superiours ? where mens ears are deafned with endless quarrels ? and where lawes are made against piety ? in the former regards papists may deserve our pitty or contempt : but in the last our hatred . for what cruelty is not too mercyfull against the professours of a religion which teaches so many doctrins hindring a good life necessary to salvation , that it is scarce possible any of them should be an honest man ? the doctour has told them that these wicked men make the sacrament of pennance ioynd with contrition ( that is , as he interprets , a remo●se of mind for sin ) sufficient for salvation : but his adversary , in effect , bids him , with contrition to ioyne confession and absolution . he is contented : but he will needs have one condition more added , which is forsaking of sin . which they of the church of the rome not requiring , notwithstanding all their confessions and absolutions a thousand times repeated , they destroy the necessity of a good life . 116. here if the doctour were asked , does the catholick church held the doctrin here by him reproved ? he could not say she did , because then the express decision of the councill of trent , disproves him : where three parts of the sacrament of pennance are declared , contrition , confession , and satisfaction : now in two of these the forsaking of sin are contained . for contrition implies a sorrow for sin proceeding from a love of god victorious over sin , and consequently a detestation of sin . and satisfaction signifies yet more , viz : a holy revenge taken by the penitent upon himself for offending god , by denying to himself even lawfull pleasures because unlawfull ones have tempted him to sin : which is a great deale more then protestants require . 117. a disposition , one may say , inferiour to this required by the councill , served davids turne , who says , i said i will confess my sins unto the lord , and thou forgivest the iniquity of my sin . i cannot now believe the doctour will acknowledge that a sinner repentant of his sins out of a love of god victorious over the devill , the world and the flesh , and weho tstifies that sorrow and that love by submitting to severe pennances and mortifications , willing also to declare to his own confusion , his most secret sins , with a serious purpose of amendment , will thereby be put in a state of pard●n and salvation : especially having received from gods authorised ministers , absolution from his sins : absolution i say pronounced by commission and iurisdiction from christ himself , and not such an aery phantosme of an absolution as the doctour interprets to be the applying the promises of pardon in scripture to the particular case of dying persons , for this , saith he , is that we mean by absolution : and which say i , the silliest woman in the doctours parish can conferr as well and validly as himself . but who are these wee , who mean no more then this by priestly absolution ? i am sure not the prelats of his church , ( but i must not say his church when i mean the church of england ) who all hitherto have justified this as one essentiall character of the order of priesthood and episcopat ; unles since the new reformation ( not yet ten years old ) they have been content that this character should be wiped out by the doctour , and that instead of the fathers of gods church , maister calvin should be the universall authentick teacher of their clergy . but i believe the doctour will in vain expect this compliance from them : and i am sure the now highest and worthiest of his prelats , will not be of the number of the doctours wee , who has solidly asserted this primitive doctrin , and to confute whom perhaps the doctour has published so pittifull a sense of absolution ; to their preiudice ingratiating himself with all other sects , enemies to all ecclesiasticall orders and ordinations , and making every one of them ( as before iudges of the scriptures sense , so ) now vsurpers of their offices , and , as they hope , ere long of their revenues . 118. the church then is manifestly free from the charge here imputed to catholicks by the doctour , and by him made use of to deterr any one from ioyning themselves to her , because in her ( not , by her ) doctrins are by some taught destroying the necessity of a good life . all the doctour can say is : some reach some such doctrins , which some also refute , and the whole church disavows . this being so , with what conscience can the doctour pretend danger upon this account in being members of the catholick church , whenas in his own protestant churches , for which he has layd grounds and principles , every christian is allowed by himself in these principles to chuse not only what opinions , but what articles of faith ( after using a sober enquiry into the scriptures ) they like best . and what most horrid doctrins he has thereby excused and defended , all christendom at this time sees with amazement and detestation . 119. surely when the doctour wrote this passage he conceived himself quarrelling not with catholicks , who constantly assert against protestants , the necessity of good works to salvation , and their efficacy in it , upon supposition of our lords gracious promise to reward them , but with some of his own protestants ( perhaps with himself ) who exclude all merit of good works from a christians salvation : or with his patriarch luther , who said that good works did more harme then good ; therefore he may doe well to ask them pardon after contrition , and confession of his fault . 120. certainly if he could bring himself to a willingnes of informing himself in true catholick doctrins , he would find that the way to salvation there taught is much strayter then that which is chosen by protestants , and holines of life far more strictly required . for proof of which it were sufficient only to repeat what was even now cited out of the councill of trent touching the doctrin of pennance : but a proof visible of late to all our eys are so many apostats from the catholick church , apostats first from obedience and chastity , and next from faith ; for doe not they declare to all the world that carnall liberty and carnall lusts drove them first out of their monasteries , and next out of the church : as soon as they come into the aire of protestancy , a woman becoms necessary to them , and fasting insupportable , and if they can ravish from christ a spouse consecrated to him , they promise to themselves a more gainfull and honorable reception . but if they will needs have women , because the woman is handsom and attractive , is therefore the pope presently turned antichrist ? does our lord cease to be present in the sacrament ? is purgatory presently extinguished ? doe angells and saints no longer deserve to be acknowledged our protectours ? in a word , have they forgotten what they formerly beleived and are they in a moment inspired to answer to a new catechism , full of new articles of faith , gravely proposed to them by a patriarch and pandar for impure apostats , out of the pulpitt ? what influence has the woman upon them to make all this change ? truly the very same the woman had from the creation . she presents an apple to them , which wonderfully delights them to look upon ( especially if growing in england , where they heare the fairest are to be had . ) but if besides seeing it , they get a tast of the apple , their eys are presently opened , and as it were in uno radio solis they see ( all ) good and evill , and nothing appears good but what the woman approves , and without which they can not enjoy and maintain the woman , nor make a companion and mistress to our noblest young ladyes . 121. but leaving these putrid carcinomata of the catholick church , and infamous stains to the protestant , is it not apparent that the doctrin of pennance and mortification hath been rejected by protestants , not because they are hindrances of good life ( as the doctour says , and i dare say not one understanding person in his own parish beleives him ) but for the severity of them , and contradiction to flesh and blood ? besides this , where doe we hear of restitution of goods got by usury and deceit among protestants , there being among them no obligation of confessing such sins , and by consequence of making satisfaction , without which absolution cannot be granted ? the doctour will not allow me here to name those schooles of holiness , and devotion , monasteries , though from the primitive times esteemed a principall ornament of gods church , because he will esteem them nothing but schooles of fanaticism . 122. but in generall most certain it is , that among catholicks the study of ways promoting holiness and piety is incomparably greater , but withall more painfull , then among protestants . 123. but this satisfies not the doctour , who brings in bishop taylour , using the same argument with him in his disswasive from popery , viz : the no-necessity of forsaking sins in the catholick church , since if a man commits them again and again , he knows a present remedy , toties quoties ? it is but confessing with sorrow or attrition , and upon absolution he is as whole , as if he had not sinned . yea if after sixty or eighty years together of a wicked life , he shall doe this in the article of his death , this instantly passes him into a state of salvation . yea moreover the doctour afterwards taxes the indulgence of the roman church , because in her rituall she ordains that extreme-vnction should be conferred on persons unable to confess as being under a delirium , or wholly insensible , if before it be but probable that they desired it , or gave any signs of contrition . and hereby , saith he , if any sins have remained upon them , they are taken of by vertue of this sacred vnction . 124. as touching the too great facility allowed by some catholick writers in giving absolution toties quoties to sinners returning to their vomit , and giving but small signs of their will to relinquish sins , the doctour does very well to taxe it , as a great hindrance indeed to a holy life . but because some few have practised , or perhaps taught this , he does very ill to make this a disswasive from ioyning to the church herself , expressly condemning in the councill of trent such a facility in confessours : saying , the priest of our lord ought as far as his spirit and prudence shall suggest to enioyn wholesom and convenient satisfactions , according to the quality of crimes and ability of penitents : least if they should happen to connive at sins , and be indulgent to their penitents by enioyning sleight pennances for grieveous crimes , they themselves become partakers of the crimes of others . 125. besides this , the doctour , i believe , is not ignorant , though it was not for his purpose to take notice of it , that not very long since , among severall dangerous positions collected out of some modern casuists , such scandalous relaxations in administring the sacrament of pennance had a principall place , all which were not only condemnd by the bishops of france , almost in every diocese : but also a book , the author of which undertook to defend them , was solemnly prohibited , and condemned by the pope : since which time such doctrins have been wholly restrained and silenced . §. 8. of conferring absolution and extreme vnction in articulo mortis . 126. in the next place for as much as concerns the conferring absolution and administring the sacrament of extreme vnction to persons in articulo mortis , who do , or have given any sign of sorrow or desire of them : the church in her rituall does no more then hath been the practise ever since the first councill of nicea . and s. augustin treating of this subiect in a sermon , tells his auditors that out of charity and care to dying persons , gods ministers upon the least testification of sorrow in such patients administer the sacrament to them , though despairing that they shall live to doe works worthy of pennance , so leaving them to gods mercy : ( this they did by warrant from the first councill of arles , and the declaration of pope innocent ) but withall he seriously exhorts them to doe such works in time of health , and not to to an absolution conferr'd in such circumstances ; for though they may be confident of enioying the full effect of that sacrament , yet , saith he , i am not confident of i● . yet notwithstanding such want of confidence he would not be wanting to them , to afford them all his assistance in such a perillous hour . and if the doctour were seriously examined by any one of his freinds , or by any but a catholick , whether in such circumstances he would refuse an absolution , i mean an absolution according to his mode , by applying the promises of the gospell to his patient ; sure he would not say that his custom among his parishioners is to bid the poor agonizant to goe to the devill , for there was no hopes for him . he would no doubt tell him of promises , and bid him rely upon them , though he will not permit catholicks to do so . 127. but the doctour in prosecuting this subiect alters his method of proceeding . for whereas generally in his book he endeavoured to make catholick religion odious , by telling stories of the actions and doctrins of particular persons , disowned by the church : here he absolves some catholick doctours , among the rest , monsieur arnaud , and charges the church itself for teaching a doctrin ( as he pretends ) manifestly hindring devotion and a good life , viz. in that her canon : whosoever shall say , that the sacraments do not conferr grace , exopere operato , let him be anathema . now says he , if grace be effectually conferred by the force of the bare externall action ( acknowledged by all catholicks ) what need can there be of a true preparation of the mind by the exercise of faith , prayer , repentance &c. in order to the receiving the benefitt of them ? he further adds , that thoug● cassander interprets this to have respect to the worth of the priest , as if his unworthines could hinder the validity and efficacy of sacraments , though the receivers be never so well prepared : yet ( saith he ) this cannot consist with the councills meaning , because in the twelfth canon following it was condemned expressly , and it is not to be supposed that the councill would frame two canons to condemn the same errour . 128. thus argues the doctour , but under favour deales not fairely in not citing the councills canon entirely , which had he done , would have spoyled his inferences from it . the words are , whosoever shall say that by the sacraments themselves of the new law grace is not conferr'd ex opere operato , but that a belief alone of the divine promise is sufficient for the obtaining grace , let him be anathema . which canon was made specially against luthers errour , who attributed all good to faith alone , making the sacraments entirely useless . in which errour i doe not know that he is followed by any sober protestants , except the doctour , who by his discourse seems to renounce all benefitt from the sacraments themselves : he will owe grace to nothing but his own faith , prayer &c. in his opinion the sacraments of the new law as well as the old , are [ infirma & egena elementa ] weak and beggarly elements . but scripture and tradition have taught the church , and the church us , otherwise , viz. that by baptism the grace of regeneration is conferr'd ; that the holy eucharist is semen immortalitatis ; that by extreme vnction and the priests prayers sins are forgiven &c. 129. neither from hence can the doctour rationally inferr , that there will be no need of a true preparation of mind by the excuse of faith &c. since the church herself requires such preparation as the doctour speaks of : and the very term of preparation implies that some benefitt is expected to be received from the work it self , besides , and beyond what is obtained by preparations . 130. but this being a doctrinall controversy and brought in only by the way in this his present discourse , the prosecution of it ought to be reserved for his worthy adversary , if he think good : yet this right i will doe the doctour , that he has with monsieur arnaud justly censured one particular writer who required as necessary , for example , to a worthy receiving of the most holy eucharist no other preparation of mind but only an absence of mortall sins , to be had by confession of them . but will any rationall man judge that because there are found in a church a few teachers of security , and sowers of pillows under mens ellbows , that therefore it is dangerous to be a member of a church most free from warranting that doctrin which is scarce received by one bishop in it . 131. yea moreover , if he would search among school-men who make the largest allowances in this business , he will find that generally all require faith and repentance in the receivers of baptism , and these two joyned with confession for the sacrament of pennance ; they require also the state of grace ( that is the habit of faith , hope and charity , and so of devotion ) for the eucharist &c. and whosoever wants any such predispositions is reckoned by them among such as do ponere obicem . §. 9. of prayer for the dead . 132. another scandalous thing for which the doctour accuseth the church of rome is her charity , charity to the dead , who are not able to help themselves , and which evidently has been practised by all churches from the beginning , till protestantism arose . 133. but wherein lyes the fault of this charity ? the doctour tells us , that the care of a good life is taken off among catholicks by supposing an exp●ation of sin ( by the prayers of the living ) after death . whereas wee protestants , says he , in our plain doctrin teaching that every impenitent sinner must expect no less then eternall vengeance in another world , if this will not prevail upon men to leave their sins , and lead a good life , we cannot imagine a groundles fiction of purgatory should ever doe it . 134. who would not think now that the doctour in such a way of discoursing is willing that his readers should believe that catholicks very seldom , if ever , endeavoured to terrify impenitent sinners with the threatning of eternall torments in hell fire ? and no doubt if he had plainly said so he would not have wanted some believing readers , it being in this age so gainfull a trade to traduce catholicks by odious , false imputations both in pulpits , presses , and any where else . 135. therefore though i must not expect to be believed by all , that i understand the doctrin of the catholick church so well as the doctour , yet i will not forbear plainly to declare it . catholicks are taught . 1. that finally impenitent sinners , if guilty of mortall sins , shall irremediably suffer everlasting torments of hell. 2. that catholicks guilty of mortall or venial sins , and repenting of them before death , unless they also undergoe such pennances and satisfactions as the church imposes , or such as in any faulty indulgence of their spirituall superiours herein , the quality of their sins and the imperfection of their contrition in gods iustice requires , and by that means dye in perfect charity , and their souls entirely purged from the stains of them , shall suffer most greivous yet temporall , punishments after death , since no unclean thing , remaining so , can enter into the kingdom of god. 3. we are taught that many conditions are required of us to the end our lords all , sufficient merits and satisfactions may be applied to us , by the charity , alms , and prayers of devout catholicks . 136. now such being the catholick doctrin touching this point , with what shew of reason can any one affirm , that this doctrin takes away the care of a good life ? it teaches all that protestants teach touching the pains of hell attending a wicked life : and withall it teaches the terrible consequences of a tepid , negligent , imperfect , though otherwise not bad life , which protestants do not teach : protestants require to repentance only a change of life : but the catholick church , besides this , requires satisfaction for past sins , herein following primitive antiquity , whose doctrine in this point is thus declared by s. augustin : it is not sufficient for a penitent sinner to change his manners to the better , and to recede from evill actions , except for sins past satisfaction be made to god by the dolour of pennance , by humble sighs and groans , by the sacrifice of a contrite heart , and by almsgiving &c. thus it is that the catholick church hinders a good life , and thus do protestants promote it . 137. yea but , says the doctour , a fear of such temporall torments is in a manner taken away by an expectation of the charity and devotion of living freinds , especially if the dead person had been rich , and had left means of procuring masses &c. for his soule . be it so : yet how ever , some terrour there is to catholicks , restraining them from security in an imperfect life , which protestants laugh at , whilst they promise imperfect soules with all their stains , a present possession of heaven after death , to be obtained not by laborious good works , but by faith , that is , a strong fancy that their sins are certainly forgiven , and that they are of the number of gods elect , in whom god sees no sins , though themselves & their neighbours see too too many . 138. but the doctour pleases himself in one great advantage which he has found against this doctrine : which is thus expressed by him , how easy is it ( according to this doctrin ) for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of god ? but with his leave , such easines of being saved is not thereby promised to rich men . yet thus much we will allow to the doctour , that in some small regard rich men may enioy an advantage , as to salvation , which poor men want ; and this surely he will not deny , when he considers that speech of our saviour , who though he had formerly said , how hardly shall a rich man enter into the kingdom of heaven ? yet speaking to rich men , he counsells them , saying , make to your selves freinds of the mammon of iniquity , that when ye faile they may receiue you into euerlasting tabernacles . which speech of his seems exactly pertinent to the present subiect . here it is euident that rich men by the ir riches may procure that which poor men for want of the mammon of iniquity cannot . 139. yet in many other regards it is certain that poor men haue a very great advantage aboue the rich , being free from many temptations and snares to wich wealth , ease and plenty exposes men . so that at least for escaping hell and purgatory the poorer are in a much fairer and easier way . the poor also are these freinds here spoken of by our lord , beloued of god , who not only with ease enter into his kingdom , but by their credit can help to bring their rich benefactors thither also . 140. but after all this , the application of the churches and particular persons prayers and suffrages for the deceased , that are procured by the alms of the rich , whether it be not vniuersall or whether , to recompence this , the poor do not share more the common prayers of the church , not made with respect to particular persons , the church hath determined nothing . and of these common prayers of the church more applied to the poor and freindles , s. augustin speaks thus [ j quote him because being a father of great reputation , he may perhaps more safely escape the doctours contempt and drollery ] a question being putt to the said father by s. paulinus bishop of nola , whether it were any benefit or advantage to the soule after death to be buried in the memoriall , or near the shrine or tombe of a martyr ? he answered ; it was : that so this might mind the kindred or freinds of the deceased to recommend such a soule to the martyr , whose relicks lay there , so to be helped with our lord by his intercession ( where it may be observed , that s. augustin both allows praying to the martyr in the behalf of such deceased , and supposes the martyrs hearing such prayers ) but withall the father tells them , that should some deceased not have the happines to be buried in such a holyplace , others are not therefore to neglect their supplications for such , because not so minded of them , as of others , when they goe to the memoriall of the martyr ; and then comes to our very case , that howeuer such soules may want kindred or freinds to remember them , as the other hath : yet the common prayers of the church pro defunctis are without naming any particular persons , offred vp for them . his words are , adsupplicationes faciendas pro omnibus in christianâ & catholica societate defunctis , etiam tacitis nominibus quorumcumque sub generali commemoratione suscepit ecclesia : vt quibus ad ista desunt parentes aut filij , aut quicunque cognati velamici , ab vna eis exhibeantur pia matre communi . §. 10. of indulgences . 141. but toward the latter end of his book treating of indulgences the doctour alledges a practise in the church which these catholicks who pretend to iustify it , will , j belieue , find very great difficulty in answering the doctours proofs , that it is really a hindrance of the care of a good life . if any therefore do find harm by relying vpon such a practise , they may thank themselues , they voluntarily and without any obligation procure such harm to themselues . the councill of trent in its decision of this point of indulgences , expressly condemns a too frequent vse of them , as enervating ecclesiasticall discipline , and desirous to correct all scandalous abuses crept in them , ordains an vtter abolishment of all vnlawfull gain for the obtaining of them , enioyning likewise all bishops in their provinciall synods to take care that the benefit of indulgences may be dispensed piously , holily and without corruption to the people . 142. now if after such solicitude shewed by the councill , all abuses doe not yet cease , this must be imputed to humane frailty and corruption , and to the erroneous doctrin of some schoolmen : or rather some passages of them singled out from the context , and stript from the necessary circumstances , and so misapplied , whereby the power of the donour of them is extended without its certain limitts , and a vertue attributed to them far exceeding that which the present church acknowledges in them . 143. this seems plainly to appeare by the words of the councill declaring , that since a power of conferring indulgences hath been giuen by christ to his church , which from the most ancient times hath exercised this power , diuinely granted to her ; therefore the holy synod doth teach and command the vse of indulgences to be retained in the church , as very healthfull to christian people , and approved by the authority of holy councills . 144. from this declaration of the councill the doctour truly says , that some catholick writers do make this deduction , that indulgences are only a relaxation of the ancient severity of church disciplin according to the old penitentiall canons . which deduction seems the lesse irrationall , since the indulgences inserted by the councill are the same , which from the most ancient times have been exercised by the church . and such an vse of indulgences if the doctour refuse to the catholick church , he dares not to his own , since he cannot deny but that in the spirituall courts the iudges assume a power either to qualify corporall punishments imposed by the laws and canons on speciall sins , or commuting them into pecuniary . but i must add one thing , that euen these indulgences may be said to extend their vertue till after death : since it is certain that being duly administred , and taking away the obligation to the seuerity of the penitential canons , they doe consequently abate the suffrings after death , which otherwise the penitent was to vndergoe having neglected to make satisfaction in this life . in a word , catholicks are taught that indulgences are beneficiall to none but those that are already in the state of grace : and that remission of penalty only , and not sin , is conceded by them : likewise that they relate to purgatory only , not to hell : and lastly by the form of them it appears that the vertue of them after death is only per modum suffragij . 145. as touching the doctours questions concerning indulgences if he expect an answer to them , he must goe into some of our catholick schooles , where he will not faile to receiue solutions to them all , if they were twice as many ; but i dare not assure him that these solutions will give him satisfaction . for my part i have nothing to say about them , nor , i am sure , any other catholicks , as a catholick : neither doe i belieue that euer any protestant controvertist wrote a volume against the catholick church , of which not near a tenth part did in any sort concern her : and such a book the doctour , certainly , knows his to be : and by consequence every ingenious prudent reader will easily discouer from how poysonous a heart it issued , and to how vnchristian an end it was directed . §. 11. of the churches liturgy in a tongue not generally understood . 146. another practise in the catholick church there is which the doctour esteems a notable hindrance to piety , which is , the publick ecclesiasticall office being in a tongue vnder stood by few . this he will not allow to be a matter of discipline only , and consequently in the churches power to alter : because the churches power is only to edification , for a power beyond that the apostles themselues never challenged : now it is manifest , saith he , that s. paul judges praying or preaching in an vnknown tongue not to be of edification . 147. notwithstanding , with the doctours favour , his allegations doe not proue the mater not to be of discipline meerly . for the case stands thus : it was far from being the churches primary intention that the publick office should be in a tongue not vnderstood by the people ; for it was at first composed in the language generally spoken and vnderstood through europe . but that language being changed by a mixture of the dialects of seuerall barbarous nations , she thought it not prudent that the publick service of god composed with great care and exactnes , should be exposed in euery nation to vnsskillfull translatours , and every age to be varied , as dialects did alter , it not being in her power to examine all translations after every new edition . and the same judgmēt the most ancient & most extended churches in the east had , all which in a manner do to this day retain their ancient liturgies , now not vnderstood by the common ignorant people . 148. notwithstanding to repair , as much as may be , this incommodity , the roman church ( at least ) has taken great care in her councills that the people in all nations should be furnished with devotions in their natiue tongues , which are for the most part taken out of the publick liturgy , and moreouer has commanded all pastours to interpret to the people in the administring of sacraments , especially the most holy eucharist , whatsoever they are capable of vnderstanding : by which means there is scarce a rustick so ignorant but well vnderstands what the priest does through the whole course of the masse . 149. matters standing thus , the church esteems it more prudent and more conducing also to edification in generall , that all catholick churches should serve god vniformly in a language which cannot be corrupted , especially such provisions being made for the peoples good , then to haue the service of god exposed to corruptions and continuall changes . but if the doctour think himself wiser then the whole western and most eastern churches , much ioy may he take in his great humility . 150. but after all , how can the people say , amen , will the doctour say from s. paul ? i answer . s. paul in that place speaks not of the common divine service , which was celebrated then in a language well vnderstood : and at corinth doubtles in the greek tongue : but of these spirituall hymns and praises of god extraordinary , that were delivered by some in a tongue vnknown . and all that can be deduced from it , and applied to the publick divine servcie , is this , that either this be performed in a known tongue : or when the church hath reasonable motives ( which she , not we , must judge of ) not to change the formerly vsed language of it , so much as is necessary for the common people to vnderstand , and say amen to , be interpreted , as the apostle saith there ouer and over again . ) now such prayers , collects , psalms , hymns , litanies &c. as are thought necessary for the common people , are interpreted by the churches order , and they have them ready in their primers , manuels &c. euen all the parts also of the service of the masse necessary to be known by them . 151. jt is certain that it is not out of a desire that the people should be ignorāt that the church thinks not meet to change the language of her liturgy . and i would to god , that were the only hindrance of reuniting england to her once beloued mother , for then the breach would not last long . §. 12. of the churches denying the reading of the bible indifferently to all . 152. but the last and greatest hindrance of piety , and ( which is wonderfull ) of vnity likewise , in the doctours opinion , is the roman church her denying the reading of scripture to all persons promiscuously , without exception . this fault the doctour will neuer forgiue her. and the truth is , if euer there should be a restraint of such liberty in england , all the principles of his religion would vtterly goe to wrack . for how then should euery sober enquirer into scripture frame a religion to himself ? how much would the number of sects be diminished , ( which is great pitty ? ) then pastours and teachers would perswade the people that it is their duty to believe and obey them , and not to be their own directours : which is intolerable . therefore in so great a concern , the doctours zeale in this point aboue others may well be forgiuen him . 153. how much would the doctour be beholden to that freindly man who could furnish him with but one line out of any ancient ecclesiasticall writer , father or councill to iustify the fundamentall principle of his , and ; as he pretends of all protestants religion , viz. that euery sober enquirer may be a iudge infallible of the sense of scripture in all points necessary to saluation ? but i can assure him , such a freind is not to be found . nay i believe he would thank that man who could shew any ancient heretick an authour of that enormous doctrin : for as he cannot but know that he embraces seuerall points condemned by the ancient church in hereticks , he would , no doubt , with ioy adopt this point so beneficiall and necessary to the fabrick of his protestant churches . 154. to descend to our modern times : though luther , calvin , zuinglius , &c. those disturbers of the world , to gain the affections of the common rabble , were very earnest to put the bible into their hands , yet does the doctour think that they would patiently haue suffred any of their followers to chuse any other religion out of it , but what they , as prophets sent from god , had taught them ? nay would the doctour take it well of his own parishioners if they should doe so ? yet he is angry with catholicks because we rather trust the churches iudgment , then our own : a strange quarrell certainly . but it is a folly to think that any of the common sort of people seek into the bible to find their religion there ▪ not one in ten thousand among us but for his whole faith relyes vpon the credit and supposed honesty of some zealous lecturer , or reputed learned doctour . now j would fain know of doctour stillingfleet with what conscience he can suffer a whole congregation of well meaning men , who can rely vpon nothing but authority , to prefer his authority before that of the whole church : for nothing can be more contrary to the rules of common reason in them ; and for their sinning against reason he must be answerable to god. how does one of the doctours parishioners find his whole religion in scripture ? thus : the doctour will bid him read the last verse of the 6. chap. to the romans : ( or he will read the words to him ) the gift of god is eternall life : here , says he , the papists are plainly confuted , who say that god rewards our good works with heaven . he will tell him again that the papists hold that our lords body is in the sacrament . how shall they be confuted ? christ indeed says , this is my body : what then ? this must be vnderstood as if he had sayd , this is the figure of my body . then plain scripture interpreted by the doctour is against them . again , look out the first chapter to titus , you will find that those who are called elders , or presbiters in the fifth verse , are called bishops in the seaventh : here our antichristian prelats are plainly confuted , who exalt themselues aboue elders , &c. 155. but one point there is of main importance to these who will find all things in scripture , which is , a proof that these books which they are taught to call scripture , are the same which were anciently written by men inspired by god : that they have not been corrupted , and that they are rightly interpreted . none of all these things they can find in scripture : what remedy therfore for this ? none in the world , but the doctours own authority . he will tell them perhaps that the vniversall tradition of all ages , which is of it self credible , testifies this , and therefore they ought to belieue it . but if they should reply , and tell the doctour , that for all necessary points of belief they were , according to his principles , to be iudges for themselues , but of that which they call tradition , they know not how to iudge . if any of the doctours parishioners should be thus troublesom : then must he be angry , and with a frown tell them , will ye be papists ? is it not fitter ye should believe me , then like blind papists , pin your soules vpon the authority of the present vniversall church ? this stops their mouths : now they are fully satisfied , and ask pardon for presuming to doubt , hauing such an oracle to teach them : that they ought to be their own teachers . ) thus it is that ordinary people , even boyes and girles , are to be fooled , and made to believe that they see all their religion in scripture : whenas in very truth they may as well be told , that they smell it out with their noses , as i once heard sir francis wenman say in a discourse on a subiect like this . 156. howeuer the whole stress of the doctours religion lying vpon it , that euery christian is to be a judge of the sence of scripture : hence it was necessary for his ends to contend manibus pedibusque that none should be discouraged from reading scripture : ( yet i hope he will excuse those who are not able to read . 157. to make this good , he employes the vtmost of his invention , subtilty and reading . he who cannot find out one single short sentence in antiquity to help to support the main pillar of his religion : yea moreouer he who has not alledged one probable argument of reason for strengthning that tottering pillar , except only a negatiue one , which is this , that christians haue no obligation to belieue any church or teacher expounding the sence of scripture , therefore they must if they will be believers , believe themselues alone : in this miserable exigence this same doctour notwithstanding to proue that christians in all times were indulged and exhorted to read the scriptures , flourishes in a luxuriant stile with demonstrations a priori , a posteriori , per reductionem ad absurdum & impossible , which demonstrations also he backs with an army of ancient fathers teaching as he himself does , viz. s. clement , s. ignatius , s. policarpus , clemens alexandrinus , tertullian , origen , s. basill , s. hierome , s. chrisostome , s. augustin , &c. and moreouer that this was their doctrin is ( saith he ) acknowledged by late catholick diuines , espenceus and alphonsus a castro , and ( one more i will add , ) by the vnworthy writer of this treatise also . 158. but this being granted , no catholick , and , j think , no man in his right witts will grant , that euery porter , cobler or landresse is capable to instruct themselues by reading the scripture alone , or if they cannot read them , by hearing them read , in this point of main importance , that scriptures are gods scriptures , or to clear the doctrine of the mystery of the holy trinity , the incarnation of our saviour , the procession of the holy ghost , or the point of iustification , as determined by s. paul and s. iames , &c. i have so much confidence now in the doctours ingenuity that he will also acknowledge thus much , yea by his experience in teaching ignorant people , j am assured he has found no small difficulty in making such and other like necessary doctrins of christianity sink into the minds of the rude people , though sett down in the simplest , plainest catechisms for infants , though also those catechisms were with all his skill explained by himself . 159. now taking this for granted ( till he contradict it ) j would ask him , does he in his conscience think that the forecited fathers , when they exhorted the christians of their times to the reading of scriptures did not suppose that for the sence of them in things any way difficult or controverted they would submitt their judgements to the church : which had they not supposed , they would haue been less liberal in putting the scriptures into their hands ? for hence it is that the bible is called by s. ambrose , liber sacerdotalis , because to be dispensed to the people according us bishops and priests iudged it might proue beneficiall to them , and in all ambiguities to be interpreted by the same pastours , besides this , the art of printing being then vnknown , it was not every ordinary mechanick who could purchase so costly a manuscript , as the bible was : every groom or chamber-maid could not carry it vnder their arms to church , vnles they could spare at least two years wages to buy it , and hire also a litle asse to carry it , so great was the bulk , considering the largenes of letters writen in these ancient times . the persons invited therefore by these holy fathers to the frequent reading of scriptures , were for the most part those of the higher rank , of more ingenuous education , and so prudence and discretion : and especially such as they knew to be firm to the teaching of the church . now to such persons the roman church freely allows the reading of scriptures : and on the other side , for such as the doctour qualifies with the name of protestants according to his new mode , that is independents on any authority , the fathers most certainly would more strictly , then they are now , have pro-prohibited the reading of them . 160. neither is it much to his purpose , his alledging that though in the time of the first four generall councills the fathers had tryall enough of the mischief of heresies , yet notwithstanding they did not on that account forbid the people to read the scriptures . for who knows not the vast difference between the ancient and our modern heresies ? anciently the in ventours of heresies , were great learned prelats , and subtile philosophers , and the obiect of their heresies were sublime mysteries of faith , examined and framed by them according to the grounds of plato's or aristole's philosophy , far above the reach of vulgar capacities ; from whence it is that tertullian calls the ancient philosophers , the patriarchs of hereticks . and moreover their applications of texts of scriptures for confirming such heresies , were so speculatively nice and acroamaticall , that both great sharpnes of witt and learning too were necessary to the discovering and unridling the fallacy . hence it came to pass that in those dayes the scriptures might freely enough be read by ordinary christians without danger , especially considering their intention in reading them was not to find out a new religion , but to instruct themselves in piety , and inflame their hearts in the divine love. 161. thus stood matters in the church during the times of the first four generall councills . but our modern heresies are of a quite different complexion . they are conversant about matters obvious to the weakest capacities , as the external administration of sacraments , the iurisdiction of superiours , civill and ecclesiasticall , the manner of mens devotions , the institution of religious orders , the obligation of vows ; the ordonnances of the church teaching fasting , matrimony , celibacy , paying of tithes , &c. or if about sublime mysteries , men are taught to examine such mysteries by naturall reason and the verdict of their outward senses . hence it is come to pass that our late heresiarcks have not been profound subtle philosophers , but at the best a few sensuall incestuous fryars abroad , and popular preachers at home : yea , as we have lately seen , even mechanicks , souldiers or any other ignorant persons actuated by the spirit of pride and licentiousness to begin a sect fitt for the palats and complexions of seekers after novelties . 162. matters therefore standing thus in these later times , can any rationall man be perswaded that if any of those holy fathers , cited by the doctour , had lived among us , or if such heresies had been spred among their disciples , and pretended to have been evidently deduced from gods word , they would have been so zealous in their exhortations to a promiscuous reading of scriptures ? but how much think we , would such their zeale have been cooled , in case such an architect of principles , as the doctour is , had been in vogue in their times ? for principles they are which evidently contain the most pernicious , soule-destroying heresy that ever assaulted gods church : principles which banish peace , charity , humility and obedience vtterly from the church and state : principles which if through gods judgment they should generally prevaile , what think you would become of our saviours promise , for there would not be left in the world one church at all , true or false : since where every one is acknowledged the only inventer and iudge of his own faith , there may meet a multitude , but it is no church , none having right over another ; errour and truth , vertue and vice being equally iustifiable . lastly these are principles , the admirable vanity of which i think was never paralleld by any heresiarch , but a certain rhetorius mentioned by philastrius , who taught , that all heresies were in their precepts of life , innocent ; and in their doctrins true : [ omnes hereses rectê ambulare , & vera docere . ] 163. non sum ambitiosus in malis , i may with a good conscience protest that it is only truth and a charitable compassion to soules miserably seduced by so comprehensive a heresy as is contained in the dostours principles , which hath moved mee to fix such a brand upon them : not that i suspect that he would approve such consequences : but i am confident with all his skill he cannot avoyd them . 164. now i must acquaint the doctour that my iust indignation against these principles is heightned from my own unhappines , if not guilt in being the first who gave occasion that they should be known and received into the church of england . this i am sure neither he , nor perhaps any one now alive , does know , and therefore i will acquaint him with the true story concerning them . 165. as i remember it was in the year 1638. that i had occasion to accompany a noble freind in a iourney from dublin to london . when we were ready to return , i went to a booksellers shop to search out some b●oks to be carried back into ireland , and among others i bought daillé du vray usage des peres , a book at that time not at all taken notice of . that book the same night i shewd to my noble dear lord lucius lord falkland , who perusing and liking the contents of it , desired me to give it him , which i willingly did . about a month after my return into ireland , he sent me a most civill letter , full of thanks both in his own , but especially in m. chillingworths name for that small present , telling me that that litle book had saved him a most tedious labour of reading almost twenty great volumes . 166. this mysterious speech i easily understood . for m. chillingworth a litle before was returned out of flanders ; where he had professed himself a catholick : and being sent for by archbishop laud , was strictly examined by him touching his religion , and whether he went to masse , or common prayer ; to whom he gaue this account , that he had entertained such scruples touching catholick religion , and withall was as yet so vnsatisfyed with the grounds of the english protestant religion , that at the present his conscience would not permitt him to goe either to masse or to common prayer . and therefore with his graces leaue he was resolued to spend a year or two in a solitude , and the study of greek and latin fathers , fully purposing to embrace that religion which appeared to him most consonant to what the fathers generally taught . the archbishop much commended his design , and dismissed him with his blessing , and a promise also that he should enioy entire liberty to prosecute so laudable a study . very busy in this study i found , and left him , in england . but it was presently after interrupted by that vnlucky book of daillé , which perswaded him to a light esteem of the holy fathers , vpon whose authority he would no longer rely . but yet this did not bring him into the church of england , so as to think himself obliged to belieue her doctrins , and whose authority he saw was much inferiour to the other : and from all subordinate , but diuided english sects , he had a horrible aversion and contempt . therefore without any long demurr he fixed his mind vpon socinian grounds , which he afterwards shewed in a litle book of one of them which was an answer to certaine theses posnanienses , which theses , as j remember , asserted the authority of the catholick church : in opposition whereto the socinian , reiecting all externall authority , layd these very grounds of his religion : that in all necessary doctrins the scripture was clear : therefore euery sober enquirer might with ease find them in it , without any help of a teacher or at least any obligation to believe him . vpon these grounds m. chillingworth dilated his discourses with much art and gracefullness of stile in his book against a learned catholick writer : and the same grounds so discoursed on , doctour stillingfleet has contracted methodically into his principles : and both these books though manifestly destroying all authority in the english , or any other church , haue been patiently and quietly suffred , yea commended by superiours here , to their infinit dammage , as is seene at this day : which dammage is j belieue more sensible to them since they see no considerable prejudice to catholicks by them , for j doe not remember to haue heard of any one established catholick shaken in his faith by such grounds : though i confess they obctructed a good while my entrance into the catholick church . 167. now it being certain that these princi ples came originally into england from the socinians ( a sect maintaining a fundamentall heresy ) it is of small edification and less glory to the english church ( in case , as the doctour pretends , his faith and hers are built on the same principles ) that she should consequently acknowledge herself forced to desert the grounds vpon which she proceeded since the reformation , as being grounds by m. chillingworths discovery found to be sandy and ruinous , and consequently acknowledge all her articles of belief , all her laws , constitutions , canons , &c. misgrounded . the consideration of this , besides disreputation , cannot but raise great scruples , in the minds of her disciples and subiects , till she not only disavow this her champion , but likewise assert her authority by answering all the discourses of m. chillingworth , my lord falkland , m. digges , m. whitby , doctour stillingfleet and severall other doctours and professours in the vniversities , who all exalt their single judgments above her authority . 168. and as for doctour stillingfleet there is another task to be undertaken by him , which i believe will give him excercise enough . for he knowing that the socinians , as well as himself , do make the plain evidence of scripture in all necessaries to all sober enquirers , a principle of their religion , and upon this principle building their heresy , his study must be to beat them from this principle , which can be done no other way , but either by confessing that the doctrin of christs divinity is not necessary to be believed , or by demonstrating to them that they do not understand the plainest texts of scripture , not having been sober enquirers into it . this will be a task becoming such an hectorean controvertist as the doctour is esteemed to be , considering how even among his freinds the socin●ans , among all protestant sects , are acknowledged to have been very laborious and far most exact in interpreting the most difficult books of scripture , and this not without good success , except where their iudgment has been perverted by a resolution to defend their peculiar hereticall doctrins . now by this time i believe the doctour sees what a world of work his principles have cut out for him , which he is obliged to justify not only against catholicks , who abhorr them , but socinians also who invented them as necessary for maintaining their heresy , & lastly against my lords the bishops his superiours , as i verily believe . his principles therefore being of so very main importance & being the only considerable subiect treated of in his book , my readers must not wonder that in so short a treatise i have so oft put him in mind of them , since a horrour of the consequences of them forced me to look on them as mihi saepe vocandum ad partes monstrum nullâ virtute redemptum a vitijs . §. 13. the conclusion : vvith advices to the doctour . 169. thus much i judged sufficient to make up an answer to those parts of the doctours book , which do not purposely treat of a doctrinall controversy : for no more was required from mee , indeed not quite so much : it being only the section of fanaticism in which j was particularly concerned . but the others intruded themselves , j know not well how : and by that means forced me also to neglect observing the order in which they lye in his book . which being no very great fault , j hope a pardon from the doctour will without much difficulty be obtained . 170. j shall also stand in need of another pardon for a fault , such as it is , willingly committed , and not yet repented of , because j beleive , except himself , none will esteem it a fault . it is this . observing in the doctours book a world of quotations out of authours which j never saw , nor intend to see , containing many dismall stories , and many ridiculous passages of things done or said by severall catholicks in former , and some latter , times : if j had had a mind to examine , and say something as in answer to them , an impossibility of finding out those authours must have been my excuse . but j have a better excuse then that . for if the doctour would have lent mee those books out of his library , i should have thanked him for his civility , but withall i should have refused to make use of his offer . for to what purpose would it have been to turn over a heap of books to find out quotations in which neither the church , nor myself were any way concerned ? not concerned , j say , though they had been opinions or actions even of popes themselves , being assured that at least , never any pope , how wicked soever , ha's brought any heresy into the church . it is to me all one whether all his allegations be true or false , as to any advantage he can make of them against the catholick church : unless the doctour will undertake to demonstrate , that it is unlawfull , or but considerably dangerous to be a member of a church where any persons doe , or have lived , who have been obnoxious to errours , or guilty of ill actions : 171. yet j must acknowledge that in one regard a book written in such a stile as the doctour's is , may have an influence on the whole church , and , against his intention , produce a good effect in it . for it may be hoped that catholicks of the present age will seriously consider the horrible consequences of seditious , licentious and otherwayes unwarrantable doctrins and practises of a few catholicks in former times , which have not only been pernicious to the authours themselves , but by the scandalousness of them have exposed the church her self , how innocent soever , to the detestation of such who are without : for sins , when scandalous are an vniversall and never ceasing plague : which moved our saviour to say , [ vae mundo a scandalis : ] woe to the whole world because of scandalls . 172. hoping therefore that by occasion of the doctours book such a benefit may accrew to his catholick readers , as to render them more watchfull over themselves to prevent hereafter the like scandals , j think my self obliged in requitall , seriously to advise him touching the dangerous state he is now in , as to his soule , in regard likewise of scandall . he would laugh at me if i should tell him that this danger proceeded from his not being a member of the catholick church . it is not that therefore that i now mean : though woe unto him , if in the day of iudgment he be found separated from our lords mysticall body . 173. not to hold him in suspence : j take leave to admonish him , that since the world sees that he manifestly professes himself a member of the english-protestant church established by law , his mind must either answer to his profession , or he must be a shamefull hyppocrit . now in case he be not an hypocrit , he is desired as a genuine english-protestant to cast his eyes on , and to examine severall of the first constitutions of his church : there he will find an excommunication denounced ipso facto against all such as shall ( in the manner there expressed ) openly oppose any thing contained in the nine and-thirty articles , in the books of common prayer and of ordinations of bishops and priests &c. which excommunication is there declared to remain in force , till the offender repent ( not of his boldness and disrespect , but ) of his wicked errour , which he ought to revoke . 174. after he has considered this , he may please to reflect on his book called irenicum ( not to mention his sermons during the late rebellion : ) and so comparing together the said constitutions ratifyed with an excommunication , and his own book , let him ask his conscience whether he has not incurred this excommunication , of the legality and validity whereof , he , being now supposed a declared protestant cannot , nor ought to doubt ( though j humbly conceive , j may . ) now his fault , in case he be guilty having been publick and notorious , and no repentance , no retractation appearing ( unless perhaps he thinks that the accepting a thousand pounds yearly in preferments is vertually a retractation ) and much less any solemn absolution having been given him ( unless perhaps also he thinks that the act of oblivion reaches to heaven , discharging the conscience , and dispensing in foro interno from an obligation of demanding absolution either from bishops , or from the civill magistrat , who , according to his teaching has received the power of the keyes , and can excommunicate and absolve as well as any bishop : ) matters , j say , standing thus , j must needs tell him that all prelaticall protestants can no otherwise look upon him , but as one ( j doe not say , traditum satanae , but ) excommunicated and separated from christs mysticall body . and therefore j coniure him that he would take care of his soule , which must needs be in great danger , even though in his heart he believes such excommunications to be bruta fulmina ; for in that case also he will conclude himself at least guilty of most damnable hypocrisy . 175. it will now be seasonable , with this act of charity , to him , to take my leave of him , and putt a period to this my answer , which truly i think sufficient , though perhaps he will impute my telling him so , to an ungrounded confidence or presumption . 176. i have onely one thing more to say to him , which is this , that i with reason enough may accuse him that in writing his book he has prevaricated with his superiours . for whereas in his preface he tells his readers that he was by command publickly engaged in the defence of so excellent a cause as that of the church of england against the church of rome , even of that church of england , which , vpon the greatest enquiry he could make , he esteems the best church of the christian world ; i desire no other iudges but the prelats of his own church whether by examining his principles j have not demonstrated how that contrary to command and his publick engagement , he has been so far from defending her , that he has betrayed the cause of his church to all the fanatick sects which have separated from her , and with most horrible cruelty sought her destruction , and with her the ruine of monarchy : whereby he has left her in a most forlorn condition , tottring upon foundations and principles , which to my certain knowledge were not extant at least not known in england thirty years since : in so much as if those who commanded him to defend her , will still avow him her champion , there will not be , nor ever was , a prelaticall church so miserably devested of all authority . and therefore let any indifferent reader judge between us two , whether with better success he has defended the cause of the church of england against the church of rome , or i , the cause of his own church against himself . 177. to conclude , nothing can be more irrationall then for the doctour , holding to his principles , to profess himself a controvertist , till he can demonstrate that he has the gift of seeing into mens hearts . for since he allowes all sober enq●irers to be for themselues iudges of the sence of scripture in necessaries , and iudges likewise what points are necessary , till he can disprove the allegations of any adversary , catholick , protestant or fanatick , by demonstrating that they have either not enquired at all , or enquired unsoberly , and that none besides himself enquires soberly , it will be most unreasonable in him to condemn , or but trouble any dissenters from him . 178. but alas , the misery is , none are more eager in usurping a magisteriall and tyrannicall power over other mens consciences , then such as renounce all authority internally obliging in the church : because having no tye upon mens consciences , or security in their subiects obedience , they find externall violence the only mean to support them . which surely argues a horrible depr●vation in the minds , especially of ecclesiasticks : which depravation can now only be cured by the wisedom and power of the civil magistrate . da pacem , domine , in diebus nostris . amen . finis . the contents . § . i. the authours motive of writing this treatise . d. stillingfleets three heads of accusation against the catholick church , &c. pag. i. § . ii. a vindication of the honour and sanctity of s. benedict , &c. from the doctours contumelious imputations . ii § . iii. of the life and prayer of contemplation derided by the doctour . 28 § . iv. visions &c. no grounds of believing doctrines among catholicks . 71 § . v. resisting authority falsely imputed to catholick religion . 76 § . vi. fanaticism returned upon the doctour and his whole religion . 88 § . vii . the doctrine of penance vindicated from the doctours mistakes . 121 § . viii . of conferring absolution and extreme vnction in articulo mortis . 132 § . ix . of prayer for the dead . 137 § . x. of indulgences . 144 § . xi . of the churches liturgy in a tongue not generally understood . 148 § . xii . of the churches denying the reading of the bible indifferently to all . 152 § . xiii . the conclusion : with advic●s to the doctour . 171 errata . page 3. line 6. read inhuman . p. 4. l. 2. read about . ib. l. 4. read or obedience . p. 5. l. 16. read to the. p. 7. l. 15. r. upon . p. 8. l. 4. read their . p. 13. l. 3. r. preacher . p. 17. l. 25. r. sayes . p. 47. l. 25. & 26. r. severall . p. 48. l. 14. r. but be . p. 52. l. 22. r. rake out . p. 59. l. 20. r. helps for . p. 60. l. 7. read therefore . p. 67. l. penult . r. them . ib. l. ult . r. both . p. 75. l. 12. r. permit . p. 76. l. 19. r. herself . p. 85. l. 5. r. apostat . p. 87. l. penult . r. also . p. 88. l. 17. r. returned . ib. l. ult . r. fanaticks ib. r. farce . p. 90. l. 8. r. flesh . p. 91. l. 17. r. nutshell . p. 92. l. 18. r. demonstrate . p. 93. in the margent . r. 15. principle . p. 95. l. 6. r. points . ib. l. 16. in some of the copies , dele not . ib. l. 24. r. receives . p. 97. l. 4. r. soever p. 100. l. 9. r. government p. 101. l. 2. r. government . ib. l. 10. r. such an one . p. 104. l. 10. r. p. 105. l. 11. r. because . p. 110. l. 1. at the lines ●nd read the. p. 117. l. 4. r. catholicks . p. 123. l. ult . read vvho testifies p. 136. l. 4. read . by the exercise . p. 142. l. 5. r. their . p. 145. l. 5. r. eneruating . p. 148. l. 8. r. understood . p. 151. l. 10. r. service . ib. l. penult . r. desire that . p. 152. in the margent ●ead p. 215. a post-script to the doctor . if this short treatise shall after more then half a years strugling haue the fortune to break through all hazards , and arriue safe to the doctors hands , the authour of it will presume , in concluding it , to offer to him a few requests . the first is , that , unless he do indeed think himself obliged in conscience , by breaking all rules of piety and humanity , to do all manner of despight to his catholick fellow-subiects , he would , hereafter at least , please to abstain from reviling and blaspheming gods saints , or traducing the most divine exercises of contemplative soules , more perfectly practised only in heauen . jt argued certainly a heart brimm full of the gall of bitternes , that to oppose only one single line of his adversary ( pag. 31. ) in which all that he sayes is , the mentioning new sects and fanaticisms , he could allow one hundred and twenty pages in a senceless and execrable recrimination : not considering , or rather perhaps too much considering and intending that such a recrimination should reflect with great disparagement on the english protestant church , in whose calendar severall of those saints to this day possess a place . truly in all reason his attempt by his socinian principles of depriving the governours of that church of all anthority , granted by her princes and parliaments , ought to haue suffised him , without traducing her as a canonizer of fanaticks . what excuse he can make for this i cannot imagine , unless perhaps his tenderly scrupulous conscience dictates to him that the scottish covenant requires all this and more from the obligation whereof the bishops cannot it seems and his brethren presbiters will not absolue him . if so , his zeale methinks should incite him yet further , and particularly to make use of the power and high esteem he has by his late book gotten in his vniversity of cambridge , to become a godfather in rebaptizing and giving a new name to an ancient and famous colledge there , which at present has two names both of them extremely inconvenient and prejudiciall to the design of his beloued book being called not only s. benets , but likewise corpus christi-colledge : for as long as these names continue , neither will s. benedict pass there for a fanatick , nor the reall presence be esteemed aground of a worse then pagan idolatry . but i believe he will scarce be able , with all his rhetorick , to obtain from them such a compliance , or even perswade his own parishioners to renounce heaven , except s. gregory s. benedict , s. francis , &c. be excluded thence . a second request is , that since , to his great credit , order has been taken by his friends , more solicitous for him then their own church , to render his book unanswerable , he would hasten his zealous huguenot brethren of the savoy ( iust such defenders of the church of england as himself ) to enlarge his conquests through france also by sending abroad their french translation of his formidable book , the rationall account . there will be no need to fear any officious searchers , nor the least obstruction to their dispersing their ware in france , for there catholicks are so confidently secure of the invincible truth of their religion , that the king himself not only permits , but invites , yea and expressly commands the subtillest of the huguenot ministers to write and publish freely whatsoever they are able to say in defence of themselves , or against catholick doctrines . now it is manifest that the doctours friends , the zealous searchers and murderers of all answers to his book do not believe that he has any confidence at all either in the truth or honesty of his cause . and iust reason they have : since it is a cause evidently destructive both to the english church and state , as hath been demonstrated . and if themselves had any regard at all either to their church or the civill state and peace of the kingdom ( all betrayed by him ) they would see and acknowledge that their vigilance would have been much better employed in preventing the birth of so deformed and pernicious a monster . my third request is indeed , j fear , too reasonable to expect it should be granted by an adversary of the doctors temper . it is this . his design beeing to deterr all english-men from communion with the catholick church from a consideration of dangerous doctrines and practises in it , he is requested , that hereafter he would not abuse the world by fathering on the church exotick opinions of particular schoolmen , and by representing the churches doctrines lamely , falsely and dishonestly . his enormous faultiness in this regard ( in mitation of doctor taylor ) committed in his last book through every one of the points mentioned by him , may be visible to all heedfull readers , and irrefragable proofes here●fare in a readiness to be produced , if his busy friends the searchers could be perswaded to rest in their beds in the night time . he cannot complain of any difficulty to find out all necessary doctrines in which catholicks universally agree ( as we may for proteflant doctrines . ) the councill of trent alone will sufficiently furnish him . or if he think fitt to have recourse to the interpretations of its decisions , in all reason and conscience he ought to content himself with such as seem to him most moderate and rationall ; christian charity and love of peace requiring this from him . but i fear his unconformity hereto must be pardoned . for his principall vocation now being to be a controvertist , to which , it seems , he is by superiours engaged , and to which employment preaching , sacraments , and all must yield : it will be impossible for him to write volumes of controversy his way , if he be confined to matters only which are pertinent , or to arguments which are logically concluding . for how could he then delight profanc readers with ridiculous stories , or give scope to his own more profane fancy in descanting irreligiously on the actions of saints , or fill up many sheets with nasty occurrents raked out of dunghills , and charging them on the church , which abhorrs them more then himself . how could he , i say , thus play the controvertist , if he were to assault the church only in her necessary doctrines and discipline , exhibited in her councills ? i must therefore , i fear , prepare my self with patience to receive a refusall to requests , though in my opinion very reasonable , and which i here sett down , because j believe they will be esteemed such by ingenuous and judicious readers , who surely will not judge the cause of catholicks prejudiced by the doctors confutation of a church no where extant in rerum naturâ , except in his own disordered fancy . lastly , he is desired to consider that almighty god commands us to loue peace and truth ( zach. 8. 19. ) both these : for peace alone , without truth , is a conspiracy in errour : and an imprudent zeale for truth may be more pernicious then errour . both these therefore ought to be loved together . and to hate both peace and truth seems a depravation scarce consistent with human nature , or any rationall agent besides the devill himself . since therefore the doctor by demolishing all tribunalls in gods church which might peaceably end controversies , has endeavoured , as much as in him lyes , to banish peace eternally from among christians : it is iustly to be expected from him , that , being now become by profession a controvertist , he should give some better testimony to the world , that he is at least a seeker and promoter of truth , and that his design in writing , preaching , and disputing is to conquer the iudgments of dissenters to a belief of that which himself pretends to be truth . but can any reasonable man imagine that he had so much as a desire to convert catholicks ( who alone seem to be esteemed by him dissenters ) by such a book as his last is , which they cannot read without trembling at the blasphemies of it , and without a horrible aversion from one who would make their church and faith odious for doctrines and practises which the said church is so far from owning that she condemns them ; and would moreover persuade them to forsake an established communion , without being informed whither to betake themselves ? these proceedings are so unreasonnable , that it seems manifest he had not so much as a thought of convincing their iudgments : so that he will have small reason to wonder that not one single person can be found , whom he looks on as an enemy , who has given him occasion to erect a trophey : yea moreover , though perhaps he will not believe it , that a considerable number have , against his will , had their eyes opened by him , to see the desperate state of that cause , which seems to seek its last refuge in the protection of such an advocat . a strange fate certainly this is of a book so boasted of , and to which such conquests have been promised . therefore any sober reader who shall heedfully reflect on the doctor 's abilities , will hardly be perswaded to believe that he intended his last should be a book of controversy , but rather an engin raised by him , to work , during the space of a few months , some considerable mischief against the persons of innocent catholicks , at a season , as he thought , proper for his purpose , when he conceived thereby the whole kingdom might happily be incensed against them : which holy design if he could effect , it would afterward be indifferent to him whether his book were confuted , or not . however , our hope is , that dominus iudicabit pauperes populi , & bumiliabit calumniatorem . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a34970-e1350 nullos esse deos , in ane coelum affirmat selius , probatque , quod se factum , dū negat haec , videt beatū . martial l. 4. epigr . 21. pag. 262. psal. 118. mem. 2. cor. 12. v. 2. 3. 4. p. 334. p. 336 p. 336. p. 337. p. 244. suar. in 3. s th q 27. an●on . summ. p. 1. tit . 8. c. baron ▪ ad a. d. 604. p. 248. p. 235. irenic . p. 392. p. 346. p. 349. p. 350. 13. principle , 15 principle . i. que. ansvv. ii. qu. ansvv. iii qu. ansvv. iv. qu. ansvv. v. qu. ansvv. irenic . eph. iv 4. 5. vers . 5. gesner in re bellar. def. schlussc●b . p. 443. ration accou . p 54. aug. de bapt. cont . donat. l. 4. c. 16. p. 180. conc. triden . sess. xiv cap. 3. p. 183. p. 181. p. z12 conc. t●id . ses. xiv c. 8. august lib. 50 hom . hom. 41. conc. t●id . se● . vii de sacram . can. 8. p. 206. gal. 4. p. 183. aug. hom. 50. capvlt . p. 681. luk xvi . 9. lib. de curâ p●● mo●tuis cap. 4. p. 183. conc. t●id . ses. xxv dec●et de indulg . ibid. p. 516. p. 188. p. 174. cor. 14 1. cor. 14. vers. 5. 9. 13. 27 28. p. ●15 . p. 174. philast preface pag. 6. ibid. p. 22. ecclesiastical cases relating to the duties and rights of the parochial clergy stated and resolved according to the principles of conscience and law / by the right reverend father in god, edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1698 approx. 418 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 214 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-05 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61555 wing s5593 estc r33861 13585131 ocm 13585131 100520 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61555) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100520) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 1049:29) ecclesiastical cases relating to the duties and rights of the parochial clergy stated and resolved according to the principles of conscience and law / by the right reverend father in god, edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. xxvii, [3], 393 p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock.., london : 1698. reproduction of original in the union theological seminary library, new york. includes bibliographical references. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng ecclesiastical law -england. law reports, digests, etc. -england. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-03 rina kor sampled and proofread 2004-03 rina kor text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion ecclesiastical cases relating to the duties and rights of the parochial clergy , stated and resolved according to the principles of conscience and law : by the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester . london , printed by i. h. for henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard , 1698. to the reverend clergy of the diocese of worcester . my brethren , the following discourses do of right belong to you ; the substance of them being contained in what i delivered to you in several times and places , in the course of my visitations : in which i endeavoured to lay open the nature and dignity of your function , the rules you are to observe in the discharge of it , and to state and resolve the most important cases which relate to your duties and rights , according to the principles both of law and conscience . for i observed that some had spoken very well of the general nature of the ecclesiastical function , without a particular regard to the limitations of the exercise of it by our laws . others had endeavoured to give advice and counsel in point of law , who meddle not with the obligation of conscience . and therefore i thought it necessary to joyn both these together , that you might have a clear and distinct view of your duties in both respects . for in a matter of positive institution , where only the general duties are prescribed in scripture , and the bounds of the exercise of them depend upon the laws of the land , i could not see how any person could satisfie himself in the discharge of his duty , without a regard to both . for the care of souls in general , is a matter of wonderful weight and importance , and can never be sufficiently considered by those who are concerned in it . but no man among us takes upon him an indefinite care of souls , without regard to persons or places ; for that would produce confusion and endless scruples , and perplexities of conscience about the nature and obligation to particular duties , which cannot be prevented or removed without a right understanding the different respect all that have taken our holy function upon them , do stand in both to the church in general , and to that particular cure of souls which they are admitted to . the best way i know to represent them , is to consider the case of dominion and property ; and how far the vniversal obligation of mankind to promote each others good , is consistent with the care of their own and families welfare . adam had in himself the entire and original dominion over all those things , which after became the subject of particular property ; when his posterity found it necessary to make and allow several shares and allotments to distinct families , so as they were not to incroach , or break in upon one another . but the law of nature did not prescribe the way and method of partition , but left that to occupancy or compact : and so the heads of families upon their settlement in any countrey , had a twofold obligation upon them ; the first was to preserve the interest of the whole body , to which they still were bound , and were to shew it upon such occasions as required it . the next was to take particular care of these shares which belonged to themselves , so as to improve them for their service , and to protect them from the invasion of others . and although this division of property was not made by any antecedent law , yet being once made , and so useful to mankind , the violation of it , by taking that which is anothers right , is a manifest violation of the law of nature . i do not think , that the distribution of ecclesiastical cures , for the greater benefit of the people , is of so strict a nature ; because the matter of property doth not extend to this case in such a manner . but since an vniversal good is carried on by such a division far better than it could be without it , there is an obligation lying on all persons who regard it , to preserve that order which conduces to so good an end. and i cannot see how any persons can better justifie the breach of parochial communion as such , than others can justifie the altering the bounds of mens rights and properties , because they apprehend that the common good may be best promoted by returning to the first community of all things . if our blessed saviour , or his holy apostles in the first founding of churches , had determined the number of persons , or fixed the bounds of places within which those who were ordained to so holy a function , were to take care of the souls committed to them , there could have been no dispute about it among those who owned their authority . but their business was to lay down the qualifications of such as were fit to be imployed in it ; to set before them the nature of their duties , and the account they must give of the discharge of them ; and to exhort all such as under took it to a watchfulness , and diligence in their places ; but they never go about to limit the precincts , within which they were to exercise the duties incumbent upon them . when churches were first planted in several countries , there could be no such things expected as parochial divisions ; for these were the consequents of the general spreading of christianity among the people . as is evident in the best account we have of the settlement of the parochial clergy among us , after christianity was received by the saxons . which was not done all at once , but by several steps and degrees . it cannot be denied by any , that are conversant in our histories , that the nation was gradually converted from paganism by the succesful endeavours of some bishops and their clergy in the several parts of england . not by commission from one person ( as is commonly supposed ) but several bishops came from several places , and applied themselves to this excellent work , and god gave them considerable success in it . thus bizinus did great service among the west saxons ; and felix the burgundian among the east-saxons ; and the northern bishops in the midland-parts , as well as augustin and his companions in the kingdom of kent . and in these midland-parts , as christianity increased , so the bishops sees were multiplied ( five out of one ) and placed in the most convenient distances for the further inlarging and establishing christianity among the people . the bishops were resident in their own sees , and had their clergy then about them , whom they sent abroad , as they saw cause , to those places where they had the fairest hopes of success . and according thereto they either continued or removed them , having yet no fixed cures or titles . all the first titles were no other than being entred in the bishops register , as of his clergy , from which relation none could discharge himself , without the bishop's consent . but as yet the clergy had no titles to any particular places , there being no fixed bounds of parishes , wherein any persons were obliged to be resident for the better discharge of their duties . this state of an vnfixed and itinerant clergy was soon found to be very inconvenient ; and therefore all incouragement was given , where christianity most prevailed , for the building churches at a convenient distance from the cathedral , and setling a number of presbyters together there , which were after called collegiate-churches ; and the great and devout men of that time gave them liberal endowments that they might the better attend the service of god there , and in the countrey about them . but after that the several parts grew to be more populous , and lords of manors , for the conveniency of themselves and their tenants , were willing to erect churches within their precincts , laws were then made , that they might detain one share of the tithes for the supply of this new church ; the other two remaining due to the mother church . and i can find nothing like any allowance for the lords of manors to appropriate the other two parts as they thought fit . for those manors themselves were but parcels of larger parishes ; and the tithes were due from those estates , which were no part of their manors , and therefore they had nothing to do with them . but after the norman invasion , the poor parochial clergy being saxons , and the nobility and bishops normans , they regarded not how much they reduced the inferiour clergy , to enrich the monasteries belonging to the normans , either at home or abroad . and this i take to be the true reason of the multitude of appropriations of two thirds of the tithes in the norman times , and too often with the consent of the bishops , who ought to have shewed more regard to the interest of the parochial clergy than they generally did . but of this i have discoursed more at large in one of the following cases . in the latter end of the saxon times , if we believe those called the confessors laws , after all the danish devastations , there were three or four churches where there had been but one before . by which it appears that the parochial clergy were numerous before the conquest . and within this diocess , in two deanaries of it , there are to be found in doomsday-book above twenty parish-churches : in the deanary of warwick , ten ; and in the deanary of kingstone , fifteen : but of the former seven were appropriated in the norman times ; and of the latter , ten ; by which we may see to how low a condition they then brought the parochial clergy . one church in the former deanary i find built in that time , and that was at exhal ; which was before a chapel to salford , but was erected in the time of h. 1. by the lord of the manor and freeholders , who gave the glebe and tithes , as appears by the confirmation of simon bishop of worcester . many other parochial churches , i doubt not , were built and endowed after the same manner , although the records of them are lost . and as churches were new erected , the parochial bounds were fixed , that the people might certainly know whither they were to resort for divine worship , who were bound to attend them as part of their charge , from whose hands they were to receive the holy sacraments , and whose advice and counsel they were to take in matters which related to the salvation of their souls . now here lies the main difficulty with some people ; they cannot think that parochial bounds are to determine them in what concerns the good of their souls ; but if they can edifie more by the parts and gifts of another , they conclude , that it is their duty to forsake their own minister , and go to such a one as they like . i meddle not with extraordinary occasions of absence , nor with the case of scandalous incumbents , because it is the peoples fault if they be not prosecuted , and the place supplied by better men. but the case , as it ought to be put , is , how far a regard is to be shewed to a constitution so much for the general good , as that of parochial communion is . we do not say , that mens consciences are bound by perambulations , or that it is a sin at any time to go to another parish ; but we say , that a constant fixed parochial communion , tends more to preserve the honour of god , and the religion established among us , to promote peace and vnity among neighbours , and to prevent the mischief of separation . and what advances so good ends , is certainly the best means of edification : which lies not in moving the fansie , or warming the passions , but in what brings men to a due temper of mind , and a holy , peaceable , and unblameable conversation . and as to these excellent ends , it is not only your duty with great zeal and diligence to perswade your people to them ; but to go before them your selves in the practice of them . for they will never have any hearty regard or esteem for what any one says , if they find him to contradict it in the course of his life . suppose it be the peoples fault to shew so little regard to your profession ; yet you are bound to consider how far you may have given too much occasion for it , and their fault can be no excuse for you , if any of your own were the true occasion of theirs . we live in an age wherein the conversations of the clergy are more observed than their doctrines . too many are busie in finding out the faults of the clergy , the better to cover their own ; and among such priest craft is become the most popular argument for their insidelity . if they could once make it appear ; that all religion were nothing but a cheat and imposture of some cunning men for their own advantage , who believed nothing of it themselves ; and that all the business of our profession was to support such a fraud in the world for our own interest , they were very excusable in their most bitter invectives against such priest-craft . for nothing is more to be abhorred by men of ingenuous minds , and natural probity , than to be the instruments of deceiving mankind in so gross a manner . but , thanks be to god , this is very far from being the case among us ; for our profession is built upon the belief of god and providence , the difference of good and evil , and the rewards and punishments of another life . if these things have no foundations , we are certain that the best , and wisest , and most disinterested men in all ages have been in the same fundamental mistakes . and it is now somewhat too late for any persons to set up for sagacity and true iudgment in these matters , above all those of foregoing ages . there is a mighty difference between slight and superficial reasonings , ( although some may be vain enough to cry them up for oracles ) and those which are built on the nature of things , and have born the test of so many ages , and remain still in the same degree of firmness and strength , notwithstanding all the batteries of profane and atheistical wits . for it cannot be denied , that such there have been in former times as well as now ; but that makes more for the advantage of religion , that our modern pretenders are fain to borrow from the old stock ; and scarce any thing worth answering hath been said by them , but hath been often said , and with more force by their masters . and the best philosophers of this age have given up the cause of atheism as indefensible ; so that the being of god and providence seems to be established by a general consent ; and if any secretly be of another mind , they think it not for their reputation to own it . the main pretence now is against revealed religion ; but without offering to shew how so great and considerable a part of mankind as the christian church hath been made up of , came to be so imposed upon , as to a doctrine which advances morality to the greatest height , and gives mankind the most assured hopes of a blessed immortality , when nothing like interest and design as to this world , could be carried on by the first and greatest promoters of it . but we are told in a late complaint made abroad by a friend of our deists ( wherein i am particularly concerned ) that we make objections for them which are most easie to answer , and pass over their most considerable difficulties . which is a very unjust charge , and cannot be made good but by producing those considerable difficulties which we have taken no notice of . for my part , i know of none such : and we make no objections for them ; however , we may think it our duty to lay open the weakness of them , when we are importuned to do it ; which was my case in the treatise i suppose he refers to . if they keep their considerable difficulties to themselves . i know not how we should be able to answer them . but it is the common way in a baffled cause still to pretend , that the main difficulties were not produced . but this is not a proper occasion to insist lon●er on these matters ; my present business is to answer the objection which immediately regards the clergy ; and the summ of it is , that our profession rather hinders than confirms the belief of religion ; because they who plead for what makes for their interest , are always suspected to be swayed more by interest than by reason . to give a full and clear answer to this , we must consider , that however mankind are apt to be swayed by interest , yet the truth and reason of things do not at all depend upon them ; for a thing is not true or false in it self , because it makes for or against a man ; and the measures of judging truth and falshood , are quite of another nature ; and so mens interests come not into consideration . so that in this case they are not to examine whose turn is served , whether such a thing be true or false ; but whether there be sufficient evidence to convince an impartial mind of the truth of it ; for let the reasons be produced by whom they please , the grounds of conviction are the same . if a man in a dispute about surveying a piece of land , which he claimed a right to , should appeal to the elements of geometry in his case , would the evidence be less because he was concerned in the land ? but we proceed farther ; suppose it be for the interest of religion in a nation , for an order of men to be set apart on purpose to attend the services of it ; and that there should be great incouragements for their education ; and a maintenance set apart for their subsistence afterwards , that they may not live in dependance on the humours and uncertain fancies of the people ; how can such a constitution take off from the credibility of that religion which they are to support ? was it any lessening to the authority of the law of moses , that the tribe of levi was so plentifully provided for by god's own appointment ? they were to teach the law to the people in the places where they were dispersed among the several tribes : and suppose it had been then said , why should we believe what you say , when you live by it ? you have cities , and lands , and tithes , and oblations , and dignities among you ; no wonder you set up this law as divine and holy ; but we get nothing by it , but part with a share of our profits to maintain you ? what then ? was the law therefore false , and moses an impostor ? these are hard consequences , but they naturally follow from such a supposition . and if such an inference were not reasonable then , neither will it appear to be so now . but we do not pretend that the parochial settlement of our clergy is by such a divine law as the levitical priesthood was ; but this we do insist upon , that the christian religion being owned and established in the nation , there was a necessary reason from the nature of it , and the obligation to preserve and support it , that there should be an order of men set apart for that end , that they should instruct the people in it , and perform the several offices belonging to it ; and that a sufficient maintenance be allowed them by the law of the land to support them in doing their duties . and i appeal to any men of sense or of common vnderstanding , whether on supposition that our religion is true , these be not very just and reasonable things ? how then can that make a religion suspected to be false , which are very reasonable , supposing it to be true ? if it be true , as most certainly it is , are not they bound to maintain it to be true ? and can it be the less so , because their subsistence depends upon it ? therefore all the impertinent talk of our profession being a trade , can signifie nothing to any men that understand the difference between scarron and euclid , or the way of burlesquing and of demonstration . there is still one common prejudice to be removed , and that is , that too many of those who preach up our religion , as true , do not live as if they believed it to be so . we are very sorry , there should be any occasion given for such a reproach as this ; and we hope there are not so many instances of it , as some would have it believed . woe be to those by whom such offences come . but supposing the instances true , is there any religion in the world , considering the follies and infirmities of mankind , which can secure all the professors of it from acting against the rules of it ? but if such instances are sufficiently proved , there ought to be the greater severity used in such cases ; because religion it self , as well as the honour of our church , suffers so much by them . but it will still be said , that these persons are secret infidels , and believe nothing of what they profess . this is another point , how far bad lives are consistent with sound opinions : some that think that men act consistently , will not allow that bad men can be any other than meer infidels ; but others who consider the prevalency of mens lusts and passions over their reasons , are apt to think that they may retain their good opinions , even when they act contrary to them : but then their consciences fly in their faces , and they condemn themselves for their evil actions . and then these very instances are an argument against infidelity ; for we may justly presume , that they would shake off their fears of another world , if they could . but why should some instances of this nature signifie more against religion , than the many remarkable examples of a godly , righteous and sober life among the clergy , to a stronger confirmation of it ? for they have had greater occasion of searching into all the considerable difficulties about religion , than others can pretend to ; and i do not know any that have imployed most time and pains about it , but have had greater satisfaction as to the truth and excellency of it . thus i have endeavoured to remove the most common prejudices of our times , against our profession . it would now be proper for me to give some particular directions to you , but that is so much the business of the following discourses , that i shall refer you to them ; and commend you to the grace and blessing of almighty god , that you may so carefully discharge your duties in this world , that it may advance your happiness in another . i am your affectionate friend and brother edw. wigorn . hartlebury c. apr. 23. 1698. errata . preface , pag. viii . lin . 7. read birinus . p. xii . l. 7. r. kington . p. 26. l. 21. after fraudes add & . p. 126. l. 11. r. birinus . p. 129. l. 9. r. wulstan . p. 142. l. 7. r. flocks they go to . p. 157. l. 17. after but , insert to perswade you . p. 226. l. 5. for more r. meer . p. 236. l. 9. for titles r. tithes . p. 241. l. 9. r. a●b●rdus . p. 254. l. 17. r. guthrun . p. 256. l. 17. for than r. as . the contents . case i. the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocess , in his primary visitation , &c. p. 1. ii. of the nature of the trust committed to the parochial clergy , &c. p. 103. iii. of the particular duties of the parochial clergy , &c. p. 175. iv. of the maintenance of the parochial clergy by law , p. 229. v. of the obligation to observe the ecclesiastical canons and constitutions , &c. p. 325. to which is annexed a discourse concerning bonds of resignation , &c. a catalogue of books published by the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester , and sold by henry mortlock at the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . a rational account of the grounds of the protestant religion ; being a vindication of the lord archbishop of canterbury's relation of a conference , &c. from the pretended answer of t. c. the second edition . folio . origines britannicae , or the antiquities of the british churches , with a preface concerning some pretended antiquities relating to britain , in vindication of the bishop of st. asaph . folio . irenicum , a weapon-salve for the churches wounds . quarto . origines sacrae : or a rational account of the grounds of christian faith , as to the truth and divine authority of the scriptures , and the matters therein contained . the fifth edition , corrected and amended . quarto . the unreasonableness of separation , or an impartial account of the history , nature and pleas of the present separation from the communion of the church of england . quarto . a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it , in answer to some papers of a revolted protestant , wherein a particular account is given of the fanaticism and divisions of that church . octavo . an answer to several late treatises occasioned by a book , entitled , a discourse concerning the idolatry practised of the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it : part i. octavo . a second discourse in vindication of the protestant grounds of faith , against the pretence of infallibility in the church of rome , in answer to the guide in controversie , by r. h. protestancy without principles , and reason , and religion ; or the certain rule of faith , by e. w. with a particular enquiry into the miracles of the roman church . octavo . an answer to mr. cressy's epistle apologetical to a person of honour , touching his vindication of dr. stillingfleet . octavo . a defence of the discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , in answer to a book entitled , catholicks no idolaters . octavo . several conferences between a romish priest , a fanatick chaplain , and a divine of the church of england ; being a full answer to the late dialogues of t. g. octavo . the council of trent examin'd and disprov'd by catholick tradition , in the main points in controversie between us and the church of rome ; with a particular account of the times and occasions of introducing them . a discourse concerning the doctrine of christ's satisfaction ; or the true reasons of his sufferings , with an answer to the socinian objections , and a preface concerning the true state of the controversie about christ's satisfaction . octavo . second edition . a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity : with an answer to the late socinian objections against it , from scripture , antiquity and reason : and a preface concerning the different explication of the trinity , and the tendency of the present socinian controversie . octavo . second edition . the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's letter concerning some passages relating to his essay of humane understanding , mention'd in the late discourse in vindication of the trinity . octavo . the bishop of worcester's answer to mr. locke's second letter , wherein his notion of idea's is proved to be inconsistent with it self , and with the articles of the christian faith. octavo . sermons preached upon several occasions , in three volumes in octavo . the effigies of the right reverend father in god , edward lord bishop of worcester , engraven on a copper-plate . price 6 d. the bishop of worcester's charge to the clergy of his diocese , in his primary visitation , begun at worcester , september 11 th . 1690. my brethren , this being my primary visitation , i thought it fitting to acquaint my self with the ancient as well as modern practice of episcopal visitations , and as near as i could , to observe the rules prescribed therein , with respect to the clergy , who are now summoned to appear . and i find there were two principal parts in them , a charge and an enquiry . the charge was given by the bishop himself , and was called admonitio episcopi , or allocutio ; wherein he informed them of their duty , and exhorted them to perform it . the enquiry was made according to certain articles drawn out of the canons , which were generally the same ; according to which the iuratores synodi ( as the ancient canonists call them ; or testes synodales ) were to give in their answers upon oath ; which was therefore called iuramentum synodale ; for the bishop's visitation was accounted an episcopal synod . the former of these is my present business ; and i shall take leave to speak my mind freely to you , this first time , concerning several things which i think most useful , and fit to be considered and practised by the clergy of this diocese . for , since it hath pleased god , by his wise and over-ruling providence , ( without my seeking ) to bring me into this station in his church , i shall esteem it the best circumstance of my present condition , if he please to make me an instrument of doing good among you . to this end , i thought it necessary in the first place , most humbly to implore his divine assistance , that i might both rightly understand , and conscientiously perform that great duty which is incumbent upon me ; for without his help , all our thoughts are vain , and our best purposes will be ineffectual . but god is not wanting to those who sincerely endeavour to know , and to do their duty ; and therefore in the next place , i set my self ( as far as my health and other occasions would permit ) to consider the nature and extent of my duty ; with a resolution not to be discouraged , altho i met with difficulties in the performance of it . for such is the state and condition of the world , that no man can design to to do good in it ; but when that crosses the particular interests and inclinations of others , he must expect to meet with as much trouble as their unquiet passions can give him . if we therefore consulted nothing but our own ease , the only way were to let people follow their humours and inclinations , and to be as little concerned as might be , at what they either say or do . for if we go about to rowze and awaken them , and much more to reprove and reform them , we shall soon find them uneasie and impatient ; for few love to hear of their faults , and fewer to amend them . but it is the peculiar honour of the christian religion , to have an order of men set apart , not meerly as priests , to offer sacrifices ( for that all religions have had ) but as preachers of righteousness , to set good and evil before the people committed to their charge ; to inform them of their duties , to reprove them for their miscarriages ; and that , not in order to their shame , but their reformation : which requires not only zeal , but discretion , and a great mixture of courage and prudence , that we may neither fail in doing our duty , nor in the best means of attaining the end of it . if we could reasonably suppose , that all those who are bound to tell others their duties , would certainly do their own , there would be less need of any such office in the church as that of bishops ; who are to inspect , and govern , and visit , and reform those who are to watch over others . but since there may be too great failings even in these ; too great neglect in some , and disorder in others ; too great proneness to faction and schism , and impatience of contradiction from mere equals ; therefore st. ierom himself grants , that to avoid these mischiefs , there was a necessity of a superiour order to presbyters in the church of god ; ad quem omnis ecclesiae cura pertineret , & schismatum semina tollerentur ; as he speaks , even where he seems most to lessen the authority of bishops . but whatever some expressions of his may be , ( when the bishop of ierusalem and the roman deacons came into his head ) his reasons are very much for the advantage of episcopal government . for can any man say more in point of reason for it , than that nothing but faction and disorder followed the government of presbyters , and therefore the whole christian church agreed in the necessity of a higher order , and that the peace and safety of the church depends upon it ; that if it be taken away , nothing but schisms and confusions will follow . i wish those who magnifie s. ierom's authority in this matter , would submit to his reason and authority both , as to the necessity and usefulness of the order of bishops in the church . but beyond this , in several places , he makes the bishops to be successors of the apostles , as well as the rest of the most eminent fathers of the church have done . if the apostolical office , as far as it concerns the care and government of churches , were not to continue after their decease , how came the best , the most learned , the nearest to the apostolical times , to be so wonderfully deceiv'd ? for if the bishops did not succeed by the apostles own appointment , they must be intruders and usurpers of the apostolical function ; and can we imagine the church of god would have so universally consented to it ? besides , the apostles did not die all at once ; but there were successors in several of the apostolical churches , while some of the apostles were living : can we again imagine , those would not have vindicated the right of their own order , and declared to the church , that this office was peculiar to themselves ? the change of the name from apostles to bishops , would not have been sufficient excuse for them ; for the presumption had been as great in the exercise of the power without the name . so that i can see no medium , but that either the primitive bishops did succeed the apostles by their own appointment and approbation , ( which irenaeus expresly affirms , qui ab apostolis ipsis instituti sunt episcopi in ecclesiis ) or else those who governed the apostolical churches after them , out-went diotrephes himself ; for he only rejected those whom the apostles sent ; but these assumed to themselves the exercise of an apostolical authority over the churches planted and setled by them . but to let us see how far the apostles were from thinking that this part of their office was peculiar to themselves , we find them in their own time , as they saw occasion , to appoint others to take care of the government of the churches , within such bounds as they thought fit . thus timothy was appointed by st. paul at ephesus , to examine the qualifications of such as were to be ordained ; and not to lay hands suddenly on any ; to receive accusations , if there were cause , even against elders ; to proceed judicially before two or three witnesses : and if there were reason , to give them a publick rebuke . and that this ought not to be thought a slight matter , he presently adds , i charge thee before god , and the lord iesus christ , and the elect angels , that thou observe these things , without preferring one before another , doing nothing by partiality . here is a very strict and severe charge for the impartial exercise of discipline in the church upon offenders . and although in the epistle to titus , he be only in general required to set in order the things that are wanting , and to ordain elders in every city , as he had appointed him ; yet we are not to suppose , that this power extended not to a iurisdiction over them when he had ordained them . for if any of those whom he ordained ( as believing them qualified according to the apostles rules ) should afterwards demean themselves otherwise , and be self-willed , froward , given to wine , brawlers , covetous , or any way scandalous to the church , can we believe that titus was not as well bound to correct them afterwards , as to examine them before ? and what was this power of ordination and iurisdiction , but the very same which the bishops have exercised ever since the apostles times ? but they who go about to unbishop timothy and titus , may as well unscripture the epistles that were written to them ; and make them only some particular and occasional writings , as they make timothy and titus to have been only some particular and occasional officers . but the christian church preserving these epistles , as of constant and perpetual use , did thereby suppose the same kind of office to continue , for the sake whereof those excellent epistles were written : and we have no greater assurance that these epistles were written by st. paul , than we have that there were bishops to succeed the apostles in the care and government of churches . having said thus much to clear the authority we act by , i now proceed to consider the rules by which we are to govern our selves . every bishop of this church , in the time of his consecration makes a solemn profession , among other things , that he will not only maintain and set forward , as much as lies in him , quietness , love and peace among all men ; but that he will correct and punish such as be unquiet , disobedient , and criminous within his diocese , according to such authority as he hath by god's word , and to him shall be committed by the ordinance of this realm . so that we have two rules to proceed by , viz. the word of god , and the ecclesiastical law of this realm . ( 1 ) by the word of god ; and that requires from us , diligence , and care , and faithfulness , and impartiality , remembring the account we must give , that we may do it with ioy and not with grief . and we are not meerly required to correct and punish , but to warn and instruct , and exhort the persons under our care , to do those things which tend most to the honour of our holy religion , and the church whereof we are members . and for these ends there are some things i shall more particularly recommend to you . ( 1. ) that you would often consider the solemn charge that was given you , and the profession you made of your resolution to do your duty at your ordination . i find by the provincial constitution of this church , that the bishops were to have their solemn profession read over to them twice in the year , to put them in mind of their duty . and in the legatine constitutions of otho , ( 22 h ▪ 3. ) the same constitution is renewed , not meerly by a legatine power , but by consent of the archbishops , and bishops of both provinces ; wherein i● is declared , that bishops ought to visi● their diocesses at fit times , correcting and reforming what was amiss , and sowing the word of life in the lords field ; and to put them the more in mind of it , they were twice in the year to have their solemn profession read to them . it seems then , that profession contained these things in it ; or else the reading that could not sti● them up to do these things . what the profession was which presbyters then made at their ordination , we have not so clear an account , but in the same council at oxford , 8 h. 3. i● is strictly enjoined , that all rector● and vicars should instruct the people committed to their charge , and fee● them , pabulo verbi dei , with the food of god's word ; and it is introduced with that expression , that they might excite the parochial clergy to be more diligent in what was most proper for those times . and if they do it not , they are there called canes muti : and lyndwood bestows many other hard terms upon them , which i shall not mention ; but he saith afterward , those who do it not , are but like idols , which bear the similitude of a man , but do not the offices proper to men. nay , he goes so far as to say , that the spiritual food of god's word is as necessary to the health of the soul , as corporal food is to the health of the body . which words are taken out of a preface to a canon in the decretals de officio iud. ordinarii , inter caetera . but they serve very well to shew how much even in the dark times of popery , they were then convinced of the necessity and usefulness of preaching . these constitutions were slighted so much , that in 9 edw. 1. the office of preaching was sunk so low , that in a * provincial constitution at that time , great complaint is made of the ignorance and stupidity of the parochial clergy , that they rather made the people worse than better . but at that time the preaching friars had got that work into their hands by particular priviledges , where it is well observed , that they did not go to places which most needed their help , but to cities and corporations , where they found most incouragement . but what remedy was found by this provincial council ? truly , every parochial priest four times a year was bound to read an explication of the creed , ten commandments , the two precepts of charity , the seven works of mercy , the seven deadly sins , the seven principal vertues , and the seven sacraments . this was renewed in the province of york , ( which had distinct provincial constitutions ) in the time of edw. 4. and here was all they were bound to by these constitutions . but when wickliff and his followers had awakened the people so far , that there was no satisfying them without preaching , then a new provincial constitution was made under arundel , archbishop of canterbury ; and the former constitution was restrained to parochial priests who officiated as curates ; but several others were authorized to preach ; as ( 1. ) the mendicant friars were said to be authorized iure communi , or rather privilegio speciali , ( but therefore lyndwood saith , it is said to be iure communi , because that privilege is recorded in the text of the canon law ) these were not only allowed to preach in their own churches , but in plateis publicis , saith lyndwood , out of the canon law ( wherein those words were expressed ) and at any hour , unless it were the time of preaching in other churches ; but other orders , as augustinians and carmelites , had no such general license . those preaching friars were a sort of licensed preachers at that time , who had no cures of souls ; but they were then accounted a kind of pastors . for io. de athon . distinguisheth two sorts of pastors ; those who had ecclesiastical offices , and those who had none , but were such only verbo & exemplo ; but they gave very great disturbance to the clergy , as the pope himself confesses in the canon law. ( 2. ) legal incumbents authorized to preach in their own parishes iure scripto . all persons who had cures of souls , and legal titles , were said to be missi à iure ad locum & populum curae suae , and therefore might preach to their own people without a special license ; but if any one preached in other parts of the diocess , or were a stranger in it , then he was to be examined by the diocesan , and if he were found tam moribus quam scientia idoneus , he might send him to preach to one or more parishes , as he thought meet ; and he was to shew his license to the incumbent of the place , before he was to be permitted to preach , under the episcopal seal . and thus , as far as i can find , the matter stood as to preaching , before the reformation . after it , when the office of ordination was reviewed and brought nearer to the primitive form ; and instead of delivering the chalice and patten , with these words , accipe potestatem offerre deo sacrificium , &c. the bishop delivered the bible with these words , take thou authority to preach the word of god , and to minister the holy sacraments in the congregation , &c. the priests exhortation was made agreeable thereto , wherein he exhorts the persons in the name of our lord jesus christ , to consider the weight and importance of the office and charge they are called to ; not barely to instruct those who are already of christ's flock , but to endeavour the salvation of those who are in the midst of this naughty world. and therefore he perswades and charges them from a due regard to christ , who suffered for his sheep , and to the church of christ , which is so dear to him , to omit no labor , care or diligence in instructing and reforming those who are committed to their charge . and the better to enable them to perform these things , there are some duties especially recommended to them , viz. prayer , and study of the holy scriptures , according to which they are to instruct others , and to order their own lives , and of those who belong to them . and that they might the better attend so great a work , they are required to forsake and set aside ( as much as they may ) all worldly cares and studies , and apply themselves wholly to this one thing , that they may save themselves and them that hear them . after which follows the solemn profession , wherein they undertake to do these things . this is that , my brethren , which i earnestly desire of you , that you would often consider . you are not at liberty now , whether you will do these things or not ; for you are under a most solemn engagement to it . you have put your hands to the plough , and it is too late to think of looking back ; and you all know the husbandman's work is laborious and painful , and continually returning . it is possible after all his pains , the harvest may not answer his expectation ; but yet if he neither plows nor sows , he can expect no return ; if he be idle and careless , and puts off the main of his work to others , can he reasonably look for the same success ? believe it , all our pains are little enough to awake the sleepy and secure sinners , to instruct the ignorant , to reclaim the vitious , to rebuke the profane , to convince the erroneous , to satisfie the doubtful , to confirm the wavering , to recover the lapsed ; and to be useful to all , according to their several circumstances and conditions . it is not to preach a sermon or two in a weeks time to your parishioners , that is the main of your duty ; that is no such difficult task , if men apply their minds as they ought to do to divine matters , and do not spend their retirements in useless studies ; but the great difficulty lies in watching over your flock , i. e. knowing their condition , and applying your selves uitably to them . he that is a stranger to his flock , and only visits them now and then , can never be said to watch over it ; he may watch over the fleeces , but he understands little of the state of his flock , viz. of the distempers they are under , and the remedies proper for them . the casuists say , that the reason why there is no command for personal residence in scripture , is , because the nature of the duty requires it ; for if a person be required to do such things which cannot be done without it , residence is implied . as a pilot to a ship , needs no command to be in his ship ; for how can he do the office of a pilot out of it ? let none think to excuse themselves by saying , that our church only takes them for curates , and that the bishops have the pastoral charge ; for by our old provincial constitutions ( which are still in force so far as they are not repugnant to the law of the land ) even those who have the smallest cures are called pastors ; and lyndwood there notes , that parochialis sacerdos dicitur pastor ; and that not meerly by way of allusion , but in respect of the care of souls . but we need not go so far back . for what is it they are admitted to ? is it not ad curam animarum ? did not they promise in their ordination , to teach the people committed to their care and charge ? the casuists distinguish a threefold cure of souls . 1. in foro interiori tantum , and this they say is the parochial cure. 2. in foro exteriori tantum , where there is authority to perform ministerial acts , as to suspend , excommunicate , absolve , ( sine pastorali curâ : ) and this archdeacons have by virtue of their office. 3. in utroque simul , where there is a special care , together with jurisdiction : this is the bishops . and every one of these , say they , secundum commune ius canonicum , is obliged to residence , i. e. by the common law ecclesiastical ; of which more afterwards . the obligation is to perpetual residence , but as it is in other positive duties , there may other duties intervene , which may take away the present force of it ; as care of health , necessary business , publick service of the king or church , &c. but then we are to observe that no dispensation can justifie a man in point of conscience , unless there be a sufficient cause ; and no custom can be sufficient against the natural equity of the case , whereby every one is bound from the nature of the office he hath undertaken . i confess the case in reason is different , where there is a sufficient provision by another fit person , and approved by those who are to take care that places be well supplied , and where there is not ; but yet , this doth not take off the force of the personal obligation , arising from undertaking the cure themselves , which the ecclesiastical law understands to be , not meerly by promise , but cum effectu , as the canonists speak ; which implies personal residence . not that they are never to be away ; non sic amarè intelligi debet , ut nunquam inde recedat , saith lyndwood ; but these words are to be understood civili modo , as he expresses it , i. e. not without great reason . there must not be , saith he , callida interpretatio , sed talis ut cessent fraudes negligentiae , i. e. there must be no art used to evade the law , nor any gross neglect of it . it 's true , the canonists have distinguished between rectories and vicarages , as to personal residence ; but we are to consider these things . 1. the canon law strictly obliges every one that hath a parochial cure to perpetual residence , and excepts only two cases , when the living is annexed to a prebend or dignity ; and then he who hath it , is to have a perpetual vicar instituted , with a sufficient maintenance . 2. after this liberty obtained for dignified persons to have vicars endowed in their places , the point of residence was strictly enjoined to them : and we find in the provincial constitutions a difference made between personatus and vicaria ; but this was still meant of a vicarage endowed . this was in the time of stephen langton , archbishop of canterbury ; and in another constitution he required an oath of personal residence from all such vicars , altho' the place were not above the value of five marks ; which , as appears by lyndwood elsewhere , was then sufficient for maintenance and hospitality . and to cover the shameful dispensations that were commonly granted to the higher clergy , under pretence of the papal power , the poor vicars by a constitution of otho , were bound to take a strict oath of continual residence ; and without it their institution was declared to be null . but even in that case the gloss there saith , that they may be some time absent for the benefit of the church or state ; but not for their own particular advantage . 3. the obligation in point of conscience remains the same , but dispensing with laws may take away the penalty of non-residence in some cases . ioh. de athon . canon of lincoln , who wrote the glosses on the legatine constitutions , doth not deny , but that rectors are as well bound to residence as vicars ; but these are more strictly tied by their oath ; and because a vicar cannot appoint a vicar , but a parson may . and altho' that name among some be used as a term of reproach , yet in former ages personatus and dignitas were the same thing ; and so used here in england in the time of henry ii. but afterwards it came to be applied to him that had the possession of a parochial benefice in his own immediate right ; and was therefore bound to take care of it . for the obligation must in reason be supposed to go along with the advantage ; however local statutes may have taken off the penalty . ii. when you have thus considered the obligation which lies upon you , to take care of your flock , let me in the next place recommend to you a plain , useful , and practical way of preaching among them . i mean such as is most likely to do good upon them ( which certainly ought to be the just measure of preaching . ) i do not mean therefore a loose and careless way of talking in the pulpit , which will neither profit you , nor those that hear you . he that once gets an ill habit of speaking extempore , will be tempted to continue it by the easiness of it to himself , and the plausibleness of it to less judicious people . there is on the other side , a closeness and strength of reasoning , which is too elaborate for common understandings ; and there is an affected fineness of expression which by no means becomes the pulpit : but it seems to be like stroaking the consciences of people by feathers dipt in oil. and there is a way of putting scripture-phrases together without the sense of them , which those are the most apt to admire , who understand them least : but for those who have not improved their minds by education , the plainest way is certainly the best and hardest , provided , it be not flat , and dry , and incoherent , or desultory , going from one thing to another , without pursuing any particular point home to practice , and applying it to the consciences of the hearers . and give me leave to tell you , that meer general discourses have commonly little effect on the peoples minds ; if any thing moves them , it is particular application as to such things which their consciences are concerned in . and here i must recommend to you the pursuing the design of his majesties letter , which hath been some time since communicated to you ; by it you are required to preach at some times on those particular vices which you observe to be most prevalent in the places you relate to , such as drunkenness , whoredom , swearing , profaning the lord's day , &c. if ever we hope to reform them , you must throughly convince them , that what they do is displeasing to god. and there are two sorts of men you are to deal with , 1. profane scoffers at religion . these seldom trouble you ; but if any good be to be done upon them , it is by plain and evident proofs of the good and evil of moral actions . for , as long as they think them indifferent , they will never regard what you say , as to the rewards or punishments of them . 2. stupid and senseless people , whose minds are wholly sunk into the affairs of the world , buying and selling and getting gain . it is a very hard thing to get a thought into them above these matters . and whatever you talk of meer religion , and another life , is like metaphysicks to them ; they understand you not , and take no care to do it : but if you can convince them , that they live in the practice of great sins , which they shall certainly suffer for , if they do not repent , they may possibly be awakened this way ; if not , nothing but immediate grace can work upon them ; which must work on the will , whatever becomes of the understanding . iii. after preaching , let me intreat you to look after catechizing and instructing the youth of your parishes . he that would reform the world to purpose , must begin with the youth ; and train them up betimes , in the ways of religion and virtue . there is far less probability of prevailing on those who have accustomed themselves to vicious habits , and are hardened in their wickedness . it seems strange to some , that considering the shortness of human life , mankind should be so long before they come to maturity ; the best account i know of it , is , that there is so much longer time for the care of their education , to instill the principles of virtue and religion into them , thereby to soften the fierceness , to direct the weakness , to govern the inclinations of mankind . it is truly a sad consideration , that christian parents are so little sensible of their duties , as to the education of their children ; when those who have had only natural reason to direct them , have laid so much weight upon it . without it , plato saith , that mankind grew the most unruly of all creatures . aristotle , that as by nature they are capable of being the best , so being neglected , they become the worst of animals , i. e. when they are brought up without virtue . education and virtue , saith he , is a great thing , yea , it is all in all , and without it they will be much worse than beasts . the main care of the education of children must lie upon parents ; but yet ministers ought not only to put them in mind of their duty , but to assist them all they can , and by publick catechizing , frequently to instruct both those who have not learned , and those who are ashamed to learn any other way . and you must use the best means you can to bring them into an esteem of it ; which is by letting them see , that you do it , not meerly because you are required to do it , but because it is a thing so useful and beneficial to them , and to their children . there is a great deal of difference between peoples being able to talk over a set of phrases , about religious matters , and understanding the true grounds of religion ; which are easiest learned , and understood , and remembred in the short catechetical way . but i am truly sorry to hear , that where the clergy are willing to take pains this way , the people are unwilling to send their children . they would not be unwilling to hear them instructed , as early as might be , in the way to get an estate , but would be very thankful to those who would do them such a kindness ; and therefore it is really a contempt of god and religion , and another world , which makes them so backward to have their children taught the way to it . and methinks those who have any zeal for the reformation , should love and pursue that which came into request with it . indeed the church of rome it self hath been made so sensible of the necessity of it , that even the council of trent doth not only require catechizing children , but the bishops to proceed with ecclesiastical censures against those who neglect it . but in the old provincial constitutions i can find but one injunction about catechizing ; and that is when the priest doubts whether the children were baptized or not ; and if they be born eight days before easter and whitsontide , they are not to be baptized till those days , and in the mean time they are to receive catechism . what is this receiving catechism by children , before they are eight days old ? it is well exorcism is joyned with it ; and so we are to understand by it the interrogatories in baptism : and lyndwood saith , the catechism is not only required for instruction in faith , but propter sponsionem , when the godfather answers , de fidei observantiâ . it is true , the canon law requires in adult persons catechizing before baptism ; but i find nothing of the catechizing children after it ; and no wonder , since lyndwood saith , the laity are bound to no more than to believe as the church believes ; nor the clergy neither , unless they can bear the charges of studying , and have masters to instruct them . this was good doctrine , when the design was to keep people in ignorance . for learning is an irreconcilable enemy to the fundamental policy of the roman church ; and it was that which brought in the reformation , since which a just care hath still been required for the instruction of youth ; and the fifty ninth canon of our church is very strict in it , which i desire you often to consider with the first rubrick after the catechism , and to act accordingly . iv. after catechizing , i recommend to you the due care of bringing the children of your parishes to confirmation . which would be of excellent use in the church , if the several ministers would take that pains about it , which they ought to do . remember that you are required to bring or send in writing , with your names subscribed , the names of all such persons in your parish , as you shall think fit to be presented to the bishop to be confirmed . if you take no care about it , and suffer them to come unprepared for so great , so solemn a thing , as renewing the promise and vow made in baptism , can you think your selves free from any guilt in it ? in the church of rome indeed great care was taken to hasten confirmation of children all they could : post baptismum quam citius poterint , as it is in our constitution provincial ; in another synodical , the parochial priests are charged to tell their parishioners , that they ought to get their children confirmed as soon as they can . in a synod at worcester , under walter de cantilupo , in the time of henry iii. the sacrament of confirmation is declared necessary for strength against the power of darkness ; and therefore it was called sacramentum pugnantium : and no wonder then that the parochial priests should be called upon so earnestly to bring the children to confirmation ; and the parents were to be forbidden to enter into the church , if they neglected it for a year after the birth of the child , if they had opportunity . the synod of exeter allowed two years , and then if they were not confirmed , the parents were to fast every friday , with bread and water , till it were done . and to the same purpose , the synod of winchester in the time of edw. i. in the constitutions of richard , bishop of sarum , two years were allowed , but that time was afterwards thought too long ; and then the priest as well as the parents was to be suspended from entrance into the church . but what preparation was required ? none that i can find : but great care is taken about the fillets to bind their heads to receive the unction , and the taking them off at the font , and burning them , lest they should be used for witchcraft , as lyndwood informs us . but we have no such customs , nor any ▪ of the reformed churches : we depend not upon the opus operatum , but suppose a due and serious preparation of mind necessary , and a solemn performance of it . i hope , by god's assistance , to be able , in time , to bring the performance of this office into a better method ; in the mean time i shall not fail doing my duty ; have you a care you do not fail in yours . v. as to the publick offices of the church , i do not only recommend to you a due care of the diligent , but of the devout performance of them . i have often wondred how a fixed and stated liturgy for general use , should become a matter of scruple and dispute among any in a christian church , unless there be something in christianity which makes it unlawful to pray together for things which we all understand beforehand to be the subject of our prayers . if our common necessities and duties are the same ; if we have the same blessings to pray , and to thank god for in our solemn devotions , why should any think it unlawful or unfitting to use the same expressions ? is god pleased with the change of our words and phrases ? can we imagine the holy spirit is given to dictate new expressions in prayers ? then they must pray by immediate inspiration ( which i think they will not pretend to , lest all the mistakes and incongruities of such prayers be imputed to the holy ghost ) but if not , then they are left to their own conceptions , and the spirits assistance is only in the exciting the affections and motions of the soul towards the things prayed for ; and if this be allowed , it is impossible to give a reason why the spirit of god may not as well excite those inward desires , when the words are the same as when they are different . and we are certain , that from the apostles times downwards , no one church or society of christians can be produced , who held it unlawful to pray by a set-form . on the other side , we have very early proofs of some common forms of prayer , which were generally used in the christian churches , and were the foundations of those ancient liturgies , which , by degrees were much enlarged . and the interpolations of later times , do no more overthrow the antiquity of the ground-work of them , than the large additions to a building , do prove there was no house before . it is an easie matter to say , that such liturgies could not be st. iames's or st. mark 's , because of such errors and mistakes , and interpolations of things and phrases of later times ; but what then ? is this an argument there were no ancient liturgies in the churches of ierusalem and alexandria , when so long since , as in origen's time we find an entire collect produced by him out of the alexandrian liturgy ? and the like may be shewed as to other churches , which by degrees came to have their liturgies much enlarged by the devout prayers of some extraordinary men , such as s. basil and s. chrysostom in the eastern churches . but my design is not to vindicate our use of an excellent liturgy , but to put you upon the using it in such manner , as may most recommend it to the people . i mean with that gravity , seriousness , attention , and devotion , which becomes so solemn a duty as prayer to god is . it will give too just a cause of prejudice to our prayers , if the people observe you to be careless and negligent about them ; or to run them over with so great haste , as if you minded nothing so much as to get to the end of them . if you mind them so little your selves , they will think themselves excused , if they mind them less . i could heartily wish , that in greater places , especially in such towns where there are people more at liberty , the constant morning and evening prayers were duly and devoutly read ; as it is already done with good success in london , and some other cities . by this means religion will gain ground , when the publick offices are daily performed ; and the people will be more acquainted with scripture , in hearing the lessons , and have a better esteem of the prayers , when they become their daily service , which they offer up to god as their morning and evening sacrifice ; and the design of our church will be best answered , which appoints the order for morning and evening prayer daily to be said , and used throughout the year . vi. as to the dissenters from the church ; the present circumstances of our affairs require a more than ordinary prudence in your behaviour towards them . it is to no purpose to provoke or exasperate them , since they will be but so much more your enemies for it ; and if you seem to court them too much , they will interpret your kindness to be a liking their way better than your own ; so that were it not for some worldly interest , you would be just what they are ; which is in effect to say , you would be men of conscience , if ye had a little more honesty . for they can never think those honest men , who comply with things against their consciences , only for their temporal advantage ; but they may like them as men of a party , who under some specious colours , promote their interest . for my own part , as i do sincerely value and esteem the church of england ( and i hope ever shall ) so i am not against such a due temper towards them , as is consistent with the preserving the constitution of our church . but if any think , under a pretence of liberty , to undermine and destroy it , we have reason to take the best care we can , in order to its preservation . i do not mean by opposing laws , or affronting authority , but by countermining them in the best way , i.e. by out-doing them in those things which make them most popular , if they are consistent with integrity and a good conscience . if they gain upon the people by an appearance of more than ordinary zeal for the good of souls , i would have you to go beyond them in a true and hearty concernment for them ; not in irregular heats and passions , but in the meekness of wisdom , in a calm and sedate temper ; in doing good even to them who most despitefully reproach you , and withdraw themselves and the people from you . if they get an interest among them by industry , and going from place to place , and family to family ; i hope you will think it your duty to converse more freely and familiarly with your own people . be not strangers , and you will make them friends . let them see by your particular application to them , that you do not despise them . for men love to value those who seem to value them ; and if you once slight them , you run the hazard of making them your enemies . it is some trial of a christians patience , as well as humility , to condescend to the weaknesses of others ; but where it is our duty , we must do it , and that chearfully , in order to the best end , viz. doing the more good upon them . and all condescension and kindness for such an end , is true wisdom as well as humility . i am afraid distance and too great stiffness of behaviour towards them , have made some more our enemies than they would have been . i hope they are now convinced , that the persecution which they complained lately so much of , was carried on by other men , and for other designs than they would then seem to believe . but that persecution was then a popular argument for them ; for the complaining side hath always the most pity . but now that is taken off , you may deal with them on more equal terms . now there is nothing to affright them , and we think we have reason enough on our side to perswade them . the case of separation stands just as it did in point of conscience , which is not now one jot more reasonable or just than it was before . some think severity makes men consider ; but i am afraid it heats them too much , and makes them too violent and refractary . you have more reason to fear now , what the interest of a party will do , than any strength of argument . how very few among them understand any reason at all for their separation ! but education , prejudice , authority of their teachers sway them ; remove these , and you convince them . and in order thereto , acquaint your selves with them , endeavour to oblige them , let them see you have no other design upon them , but to do them good ; if any thing will gain upon them , this will. but if after all , they grow more headstrong and insolent by the indulgence which the law gives them ; then observe , whether they observe those conditions on which the law gives it to them . for these are known rules in law , that he forfeits his privilege who goes beyond the bounds of it ; that no privileges are to be extended beyond the bounds which the laws give them ; for they ought to be observed as they are given . i leave it to be considered , whether all such who do not observe the conditions of the indulgence , be not as liable to the law , as if they had none . but there is a very profane abuse of this liberty among some , as tho' it were an indulgence not to serve god at all . such as these , as they were never intended by the law , so they ought to enjoy no benefit by it : for this were to countenance profaneness and irreligion , which i am afraid , will grow too much upon us , unless some effectual care be taken to suppress it . vii . there is another duty incumbent upon you , which i must particularly recommend to your care , and that is , of visiting the sick. i do not mean barely to perform the office prescribed , which is of very good use , and ought not to be neglected ; but a particular application of your selves to the state and condition of the persons you visit . it is no hard matter to run over some prayers , and so take leave ; but this doth not come up to the design of our church in that office : for , after the general exhoratation and profession of the christian faith , our church requires , that the sick person be moved to make special confession of his sins , if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter ; and then if the sick person humbly and heartily desires it , he is to be absolved after this manner , our lord iesus christ , who hath left power in his church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him , &c. where the power of absolution is grounded upon the supposition of true faith and repentance ; and therefore when it is said afterwards , and by his authority committed to me , i absolve thee from the same , &c. it must proceed on the same supposition . for the church cannot absolve when god doth not . so that all the real comfort of the absolution depends upon the satisfaction of the person's mind , as to the sincerity of his repentance and faith in christ. now here lies the great difficulty of this office ; how to give your selves and the wounded conscience satisfaction , as to the sincerity of those acts ; i do not mean as to the sincerity of his present thoughts , but as to the acceptableness of his faith and repentance with god , in order to remission of sins . but what if you find the persons so ignorant , as not to understand what faith and repentance mean ? what if they have led such careless and secure lives in this world , as hardly ever to have had one serious thought of another ? is nothing to be done but to come and pray by them , and so dismiss them into their eternal state ? is this all the good you can , or are bound to do them ? i confess it is a very uncomfortable thing to tell men how they are to begin to live , when they are liker to die than to live ( and the people generally have a strange superstitious fear of sending for the minister , while there is any hope of recovery . ) but at last you are sent for ; and what a melancholy work are you then to go about ? you are , it may be , to make a man sensible of his sins , who never before considered what they were , or against whom they were committed , or what eternal misery he deserves by committing them . but i will suppose the best i can in this case , viz. that by your warm and serious discourse , you throughly awaken the conscience of a long and habitual sinner ; what are you then to do ? will you presently apply all the promises of grace and salvation to one whose conscience is awakened only with the fears of death , and the terrors of a day of judgment ? this , i confess , is a hard case ; on the one side , we must not discourage good beginnings in any ; we must not cast an awakened sinner into despair ; we must not limit the infinite mercy of god : but on the other side , we must have a great care of incouraging presumptuous sinners to put off their repentance to the last , because then upon confession of their sins , they can so easily obtain the churches absolution , which goes no farther , than truly repenting and believing . but here is the difficulty , how we can satisfie our selves that these do truly repent and believe , who are out of a capacity of giving proof of their sincerity by amendment of life ? i do not question the sincerity of their present purposes ; but how often do we find those to come to nothing , when they recover and fall into the former temptations ? how then shall they know their own sincerity till it be tried ? how can it be tried , when they are going out of the state of trial ? the most we can do , is to encourage them to do the best they can in their present condition , and to shew as many of the fruits of true repentance as their circumstances will allow ; and with the greatest humility of mind , and most earnest supplications to implore the infinite mercy of god to their souls . but besides these , there are many cases of sick persons , which require very particular advice , and spiritual direction , which you ought to be able to give them , and it cannot be done without some good measure of skill and experience in casuistical divinity . as , how to satisfie a doubting conscience , as to its own sincerity , when so many infirmities are mixed with our best actions ? how a sinner who hath relapsed after repentance , can be satisfied of the truth of his repentance , when he doth not know , but he may farther relapse upon fresh temptations ? how he shall know what failings are consistent with the state of grace , and the hopes of heaven , and what not ? what measure of conviction and power of resistance is necessary to make sins to be wilful and presumptuous ? what the just measures of restitution are in order to true repentance , in all such injuries which are capable of it ? i might name many others , but these i only mention to shew how necessary it is for you to apply your selves to moral and casuistical divinity , and not to content your selves barely with the knowledge of what is called positive and controversial . i am afraid there are too many who think they need to look after no more than what qualifies them for the pulpit ; ( and i wish all did take sufficient care of that ) but if we would do our duty as we ought , we must inquire into , and be able to resolve cases of conscience . for the priests lips should keep this kind of knowledge ; and the people should seek the law at his mouth ; for he is the messenger of the lord of hosts , mal. 2. 7. if this held in the levitical priesthood , much more certainly under the gospel , where the rates and measures of our duties are not to be determined by levitical precepts , but by the general reason and nature of moral actions . viii . among the duties of publick worship , i must put you in mind of a frequent celebration of the lord's supper . there is generally too great a neglect of this , which is the most proper part of evangelical worship . the duties of prayers and praises , are excellent and becoming duties , as we are creatures with respect to our maker and preserver . the duty of hearing the word of god read and explained , is consequent upon our owning it to be the rule of our faith and manners ; and all who desire to understand and practise their duty , can never despise or neglect it . but that solemn act of worship wherein we do most shew our selves christians , is the celebrating the holy eucharist . for , therein we own and declare the infinite love of god in sending his son into the world to die for sinners , in order to their salvation ; and that this is not only a true saying , but worthy of all men to be credited . therein , we lift up our hearts , and give thanks to our lord god ; we joyn with angels and archangels in lauding and magnifying his glorious name . therein , we not only commemorate the death and sufferings of our lord , but are made partakers of his body and blood , after a real , but sacramental manner . therein we offer up our selves to god , to be a reasonable , holy and lively sacrifice unto him . therein we adore and glorifie the ever blessed trinity ; and humbly implore the grace and assistance of our ever blessed mediator . and what now is there in all this , which is not very agreeable to the faith , hope and charity of christians ? nay , what duty is there , which so much expresses all these together , as this doth ? nor , whereby we may more reasonably expect greater supplies of divine grace to be bestowed upon us ? what then makes so many to be so backward in this duty , which profess a zeal and forwardness in many others ? if we had that warmth and fervor of devotion , that love to christ , and to each other , which the primitive christians had , we should make it as constant a part of our publick worship , as they did ; but this is not to be expected . neither did it always continue in the primitive church , when liberty , and ease , and worldly temptations made persons grow more remiss and careless in the solemn duties of their religion . s. chrysostom takes notice in his time of the different behaviour of persons , with respect to the holy ●●charist . there were some who pretended to greater holiness and austerity of life than others , who withdrew from the common conversation of mankind , and so by degrees from joining in the acts of publick worship with them . which did unspeakable mischief to christianity ; for then the perfection of the christian life , was not supposed to consist in the active part of it , but in retirement and contemplation . as tho' our highest imitation of christ lay in following him into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil ; and not in walking as he walked , who frequented the synagogues , and went about doing good . but this way of retirement happening to be admired by some great men , the publick worship came to be in less esteem ; and others upon reasons of a different nature , withdrew themselves from such acts of devotion as required a stricter attendance , and a more prepared temper of mind . and there were some who did abstain , because they were not so well satisfied with themselves as to their own preparations ; and such as these s. chrysostom seems to favour , rather than such who came often without due care , as to the whole course of their lives ; only out of custom , or out of regard to the orders of the church . from hence many thought it better to forbear , as long as they did it not out of contempt . and so by degrees the people were content to look on it as a sacrifice for them to be performed by others , rather than as an office , wherein they were to bear a part themselves ; at least , they thought once or thrice a year sufficient for them . and to this , as appears by our old provincial constitutions , they were forced by severe canons . when the reformation began , this disuse of this holy sacrament was looked on , by the chief reformers , as a great abuse and corruption crept into the church , which ought by all means to be reformed ; and the frequent celebration of it set up in the reformed churches . but unreasonable scruples in some , and misapprehensions in others , and a general coldness and indifference , as to matters of religion , have hitherto hindered the reviving this primitive part of devotion among us . i do not go about to determine the frequency in your parishes , which the scripture doth not as to the christian church , but supposes it to be often done ; but i may require you to take care that christ's institution be observed among you ; and that with your utmost care , both as to the decency and purity of it . the last thing i recommend to you all , is , to have a great care of your conversations . i do not speak it out of a distrust of you ; i hope you do it already : and your case will be so much worse , if you do it not , because you very well know how much you ought to do it . for the honour of god and religion , and the success of your ministry , as well as your own salvation , depend very much upon it . lead your flock by your example , as well as by your doctrine , and then you may much better hope that they will follow you ; for the people are naturally spies upon their ministers , and if they observe them to mind nothing but the world all the week , they will not believe them in earnest , when on the lords days they perswade them against it . and it takes off the weight of all reproof of other mens faults , if those they reprove have reason to believe them guilty of the same . i do not think it enough for a preacher of righteousness merely to avoid open and scandalous sins , but he ought to be a great example to others in the most excellent virtues which adorn our profession , not only in temperance and chastity , in iustice and ordinary charity , but in a readiness to do good to all , in forgiving injuries , in loving enemies , in evenness of temper , in humility and meekness , and patience , and submission to god's will , and in frequent retirements from the world , not meerly for study , but for devotion . if by these and such things you shine as lights among your people , they will be more ready to follow your conduct ; and in probability you will not only stop their mouths , but gain their hearts . for among all the ways of advancing the credit and interest of the church of england , one of the most succesful will be the diligent labours , and the exemplary lives of the clergy in it . but if men will not regard their own , or the churches interest in this matter ; if they will break their rules in such a manner , as to dishonour god , and the church , and themselves by it ; then you are to consider the next thing i was to speak to , which is , ii. what authority is given to us for the punishing offenders in our diocesses by the ecclesiastical law of this realm . for this we are to consider , that our authority herein is not derived from any modern canons or constitutions of this church ( altho' due regard ought to be shewed to them ) but from the ancient common law ecclesiastical in this realm , which still continues in force . for as there is a common law with respect to civil rights , which depends not on the feudal constitutions , altho' in many things it be the same with them ; but upon ancient practice , and general consent of the people from age to age. so , i say , there is a common law ecclesiastical , which altho' in many things it may be the same with the canon law , which is read in the books ; yet it hath not its force from any papal or legatine constitutions , but from the acceptance and practice of it in our church . i could easily shew ( if the time would permit ) that papal and legatine constitutions were not received here , altho' directed hither ; that some provincial constitutions never obtained the force of ecclesiastical laws ; but my business is to shew what did obtain and continue still to have the force of such ecclesiastical laws among us . by the statute of 25 h. 8. c. 19. it is declared , that such canons , constitutions , ordinances , and synodals provincial being already made , which be not contrariant nor repugnant to the laws , statutes , and customs of this realm , nor to the damage or hurt to the king's prerogative royal , shall now still be used and executed as they were afore the making of this act , &c. it 's true , a review was appointed , but such difficulties were found in it , as to the shaking the foundations of the ecclesiastical law here , that nothing was ever legally established in it ; and therefore this law is still in force . in the statute 25 h. 8. c. 21. it is said , that this realm recognizing no superiour under god but the king , hath been , and is free from subjection to any man's laws , but only to such as have been devised , made , and observed within this realm , for the wealth of the same : or to such other , as by the sufferance of the king and his progenitors , the people of this realm have taken at their free liberty , by their own consent , to be used amongst them , and have bound themselves by long use and custom to observance of the same , not as to the observance of the laws of any foreign prince , potentate , or prelate , but as to the customs and ancient laws of this realm , originally established , as laws of the same by the said sufferance , consent , custom , and none otherwise . all that i have now to do ; is to shew what authority the bishops had over the clergy by the ancient ecclesiastical law of this realm ; and what censu●es they were liable to for some particular offences . i. by the ecclesiastical law the bishop is iudge of the fitness of any clerk presented to a benefice . this is confessed by the lord coke in these words : and the examination of the ability and sufficiency of the person presented , belongs to the bishop , who is the ecclesiastical iudge , and in the examination he is a iudge , and not a minister , and may and ought to refuse the person presented , if he be not persona idonea . but this is plain to have been the ancient ecclesiastical law of this realm , by the articul . cleri in edw. ii. time , de idoneitate personae praesentatae ad beneficium ecclesiasticum pertinet examinatio ad iudicem ecclesiasticum , & ita est hactenus usitatum , & fiat in futurum . by the provincial constitutions at oxford in the time of hen. iii. the bishop is required to admit the clerk who is presented , without opposition , within two months , dum tamen idoneus sit , if he thinks him fit . so much time is allowed , propter examinationem , saith lyndwood ; even when there is no dispute about right of patronage . the main thing he is to be examined upon , is his ability to discharge his pastoral duty , as coke calls it ; or as lyndwood saith , whether he be commendandus scientia & moribus . as to the former , the bishop may judge himself ; but as to the latter , he must take the testimonials of others ; and i heartily wish the clergy would be more careful in giving them , by looking on it as a matter of conscience , and not meerly of civility ; for otherwise it will be impossible to avoid the pestering the church with scandalous and ignorant wretches . if the bishop refuses to admit within the time ( which by the modern canons is limited to twenty eight days after the presentation delivered ) he is liable to a duplex querela in the ecclesiastical courts , and a quare impedit at common law ; and then he must certifie the reasons of his refusal . in specot's case it is said , that in 15 hen. 7. 7 , 8. all the iudges agreed , that the bishop is iudge in the examination , and therefore the law giveth faith and credit to his iudgment . but because great inconveniencies might otherwise happen , the general allegation is not sufficient , but he must certifie specially and directly ; and the general rule is , and it was so resolved by the judges , that all such as are sufficient causes of deprivation of an incumbent , are sufficient causes to refuse a presentee . but by the canon law * more are allowed . in the constitutions of othobon , the bishop is required particularly to enquire into the life and conversation of him that is presented ; and afterwards , that if a bishop admits another who is guilty of the same fault for which he rejected the former , his institution is declared null and void . by the canon law , if a bishop maliciously refuses to admit a fit person , he is bound to provide another benefice for him ; but our ecclesiastical law much better puts him upon the proof of the cause of his refusal . but if the bishop doth not examine him , the canonists say it is a proof sufficient that he did it malitiosé . if a bishop once rejects a man for insufficiency , he cannot afterwards accept or admit of him ; as was adjudged in the bishop of hereford's case . if a man brings a presentation to a benefice , the bishop is not barely to examine him as to life and abilities , but he must be satisfied that he is in orders . how can he be satisfied , unless the other produce them ? how can he produce them , when it may be they are lost ? what is to be done in this case ? the canon is express , that no bishop shall institute any to a benefice , who hath been ordained by any other bishop , ( for if he ordained him himself , he cannot after reject him , because the law supposes him to have examined and approved him ) except he first shew unto him his letters of orders , and bring him a sufficient testimony of his fo●mer good life and behaviour , if the bishop shall require it ; and lastly , shall appear upon due examination to be worthy of the ministry . but yet in palmes and the bishop of peterborough's case , it was adjudged , that no lapse did accrue by the clerk's not shewing his orders , for the bishop upon his not coming to him again , collated after six months . but the court agreed , that the clerk ought to make proof of his orders ; but they differed about the manner of their proof . anderson said , the bishop might give him his oath . but if a proof were necessary , and the clerk did not come to make proof , it seems to me to be a very hard judgment . ii. the bishop by the ecclesiastical law , is to visit his diocess , and to take an account of the clergy how they behave themselves in the duties of their places . by the eldest canons i can find , the bishops visitation is supposed as a thing implied in his office ; whereby he is obliged to look after the good estate of his whole diocess , and especially of the clergy in it . in the time of hubert arehbishop of canterbury , in the beginning of king iohn's time , care is taken in the canons then made , that b●shops should not be burdensom to the clergy in the number of the attendants in their visitations , which then were parochial , and the number allowed of twenty or thirty horse , was too heavy for the clergy to bear . and therefore by degrees it was thought fit to turn that charge into a certainty , which was the original of procurations . by the fourth council of toledo , the bishop was to visit his whole diocess , parochially , every year . the gloss saith , if there were occasion for it ; and that the bishop may visit as often as he sees cause ; but if he be hindered , the canon saith , he may send others ( which is the original of the arch-deacon's visitation ) to see not only the condition of the churches , but the lives of the ministers . the council of braga in the latter end of the sixth century , makes this the first canon , that all bishops should visit their diocesses by parishes , and there should first examine the clergy , and then the people ; and in another canon he was required to receive only his cathedraticum , i. e. a certain sum in lieu of entertainment ; which came to be setled by prescription . the council of cavailon in france , a. d. 831. fixed no sum , but desired the bishops to be no burdens to the clergy in their parochial visitations . lyndwood saith , the ancient procuration here , was a day and nights entertainment ; which after came to be a customary payment : but however it was paid , it is an evident proof of the right of the bishops visitations by the ancient ecclesiastical law ; and by such a custom as is allowable by the rules of our common law. iii. there are some faults which make the clergy liable to deprivation by virtue of the ecclesiastical law , which was here received . i shall name only some of them , and conclude ; these being sufficient for my present purpose . i. excessive drinking . all drinking ( ad potus aequales ) was absolutely forbidden to clergymen , on pain of suspension after admonition ; not only by a synodical , but by a provincial constitution under edmund , archbishop of canterbury . the canon law saith in that case , ab officio vel beneficio suspendatur : but our constitution is more severe , à beneficio & officio . the council of oxford not only strictly forbids all clergymen whatever tends to gluttony and drunkenness ; but it requires the bishops to proceed strictly against those who are guilty , according to the form of the general council , i. e. the lateran , 4. viz. by admonition first , and then suspension . lyndwood complains , that this was not so much looked after as it should be , because it brought no profit ; i hope that reason will not hold among those who pretend to reformation ; which will be very defective , if it extend not to our lives as well as our doctrines : for there can be no greater reproach than to see those loose and dissolute in their conversations , who think it their honour to be ministers of a reformed church . it was a stinging reflection upon our church by the archbishop of spalato , ( who was no very strict man himself ) that he saw nothing reformed among us but our doctrines . i hope there was more of satyr than of truth in it ; for i do not question , but there were many then ( as there are now ) of exemplary lives , and unblameable conversations ; but if there be any others , it will be the more shame not to proceed against them ; since even before the reformation , the canons were so strict and severe in this matter . in the council at westminster in henry ii. time , under richard , archbishop of canterbury , all clergymen are forbidden going into taverns to eat or drink , unless upon travelling ; and the sanction of this canon is , aut cesset , aut deponatur . the same was forbidden in the council at york , in the time of richard i. in the council at london under hubert , in the time of king iohn . and since the reformation the same canon is renewed , that no ecclesiastical persons shall at any time , other than for their honest necessities , resort to any taverns or ale-houses . and there have been instances of the severity of our ecclesiastical censures against drunkenness in clergymen . in 8 iac. parker was deprived of his benefice for drunkenness , and moved for a prohibition , but it was denied him . in 9 iac. another was deprived for the same fault ; and the judges at common law allowed the sentence to be good . no doubt there are other instances , but we had not known of these , if they had not been preserved in books of reports . ii. incontinency . lyndwood saith , those who are proved to be guilty of it , are ipso iure privati ; but he thinks a declaratory sentence of the ecclesiastical judges necessary for the execution of it . since the reformation , we have instances of deprivation for adultery in our law books . one 12 eliz. another 16 eliz. a third 27 eliz. these are enough to shew that the ecclesiastical law is allowed by the judges of common law , to continue in sufficient force for deprivation in this case . iii. simony . which is the name given by the ecclesiastical law , to all contracts for gain in the disposing or obtaining any ecclesiastical promotion or ministry . it is true , these do not come up to the very sin of simon magus , which related to the immediate gifts of the holy ghost ; but because the whole ministerial office in all the parts of it ( especially the cure of souls ) is of a spiritual nature ; and all bargains are so repugnant to the design of it , therefore the ecclesiastical law hath fixed that detestable name upon it : for , all contractus non gratuiti in these things , savour of turpe lucrum , and tend to bring in turpe commercium into the church ; which would really overturn the whole design of that ministry , which was designed for the salvation of souls . and therefore it was necessary , that when persons had received ( by the favour of temporal princes and other benefactors , who were founders of churches ) such endowments as might encourage them in their function , that severe laws should be made against any such sordid and mischievous contracts . and such there were here in england long before the excellent stat. of 31 eliz. c. 6. although it seems the force of them was so much worn out , as to make that statute necessary for avoiding of simony ; which is there explained to be corruption in bestowing or getting possession of promotions ecclesiastical . in a council at london under lanfranc , in the conqueror's time , simony was forbidden , under the name of buying and selling of orders . and it could be nothing else before the churches revenue was setled : but in the time of henry i. ecclesiastical benefices were forbidden to be bought or sold , and it was deprivation then to any clergyman to be convicted of it ; and a layman was to be out-lawed , and excommunicated , and deprived of his right of patronage . and this was done by a provincial synod of that time . in the reign of henry ii. it was decreed , that if any person received any money for a presentation , he was to be for ever deprived of the patronage of that church ; and this was not meerly a provincial constitution , but two kings were present ( hen. ii. and his son ) and added their authority to it . this was not depriving a man of his free-hold by a canon , as a learned gentleman calls it ; for here was the greatest authority , temporal as well as ecclesiastical added to it . but we are told , these canons were of as little effect as that of othobon , which made all simoniacal contracts void ; but some of the most judicious lawyers have held , that simony being contractus ex turpi causâ , is void between parties . all that i aim at is to shew , that by our old ecclesiastical law , simoniacus incurred a deprivation and disability before the stat. 31. eliz. and therein i have the opinion of a very learned judge concurring with me . iv. dilapidations . by which the ecclesiastical law understands any considerable impairing the edifices , woods , and revenues belonging to ecclesiastical persons , by virtue of their places . for it is the greatest interest and concernment of the church to have things preserved for the good of successors ; and it is a part of common iustice and honesty so to do . and the lord coke positively affirms , that dilapidation is a good cause of deprivation . and it was so resolved by the judges in the kings bench , 12 iac. not by virtue of any new law or statute , but by the old ecclesiastical law. for which coke refers to the year-books , which not only shew what the ecclesiastical law then was , but that it was allowed by the common law of england ; and we are told , that is never given to change ; but it may be forced to it by a new law , which cannot be pretended in this case . and by the old constitutions here received , the bishops are required to put the clergy in mind of keeping their houses in sufficient reparations , and if they do it not within two months , the bishop is to take care it be done out of the profits of the benefice . by the injunctions of edw. vi. and queen elizabeth , all persons having ecclesiastical benefices , are required to set apart the fifth of their revenue to repair their houses ; and afterwards to maintain them in good condition . v. pluralities . by the ecclesiastical law , which was here received , the actual receiving institution into a second benefice made the first void ipso iure ; and if he sought to keep both above a month , the second was void too . lyndwood observes , that the ecclesiastical law had varied in this matter . and it proceeded by these steps , ( which are more than lyndwood mentions . ) i. it was absolutely forbidden to have two parishes , if there were more than ten inhabitants in them , because no man could do his duty in both places . and if any bishop neglected the execution of it , he was to be excommunicated for two months , and to be restored only upon promise to see this canon executed . ii. the rule was allowed to hold , as to cities , but an exception was made as to small and remote places , where there was a greater scarcity of persons to supply them . iii. if a man had two benefices , it was left to his choice , which he would have : but he could not hold both . this kind of option was allowed by the ecclesiastical law then in force . iv. that if he takes a second benefice , that institution is void , by the third council of lateran , under alexander 3. v. that by taking a second , the first is void ; which is the famous canon of the fourth lateran council . vi. that if he were not contented with the last , but endeavour to keep both , he should be deprived of both . and this was the ecclesiastical law as it was declared in our provincial constitutions . but the general practice was to avoid the former , according to the lateran council . these were very severe canons , but that one clause of the pope's dispensing power , made them to signifie little , unless it were to advance his power and revenue . for when the dispensing power came to be owned , the law had very little force ; especially as to the consciences of men. for if it were a law of god , how could any man dispense with it ? unless it were as apparent that he had given a power in some cases to dispense , as that he had made the law. those casuists are very hard put to it , who make residence iure divino , and yet say the pope may dispense with it ; which at last comes only to this , that the pope can authoritatively declare the sufficiency of the cause : so that the whole matter depends upon the cause ; whether there can be any sufficient to excuse from personal residence . it is agreed on all hands , that the habitual neglect of a charge we have taken upon our selves , is an evil thing , and that it is so to heap up preferments meerly for riches , or luxury , or ambition ; but the main question in point of conscience is , what is a sufficient cause to justifie any man's breaking so reasonable and just a rule as that of residence is . it cannot be denied , that the eldest canons of the church were so strict and severe , that they made it unlawful for any man to go from that church in which he first received orders ; as well as to take another benefice in it : and so for any bishop to be translated from that place he was first consecrated to ; as well as to hold another with it . but the good of the church being the main foundation of all the rules of it ; when that might be better promoted by a translation , it was by a tacit consent looked on , as no unjust violation of its rules . the question then is , whether the churches benefit may not in some cases make the canons against non-residence as dispensible , as those against translations ? and the resolution of it doth not depend upon the voiding the particular obligation of the incumbent to his cure ; but upon some more general reason with respect to the state of the church ; as being imployed in the service of it , which requires a persons having ( not a bare competency for subsistence , but ) a sufficiency to provide necessaries for such service : for those seem to have very little regard to the flourishing condition of a church , who would confine the sufficiency of a subsistence , meerly to the necessaries of life . but it seems to be reasonable , that clergymen should have incouragement sufficient , not only to keep them above contempt , but in some respect agreeable to the more ample provision of other orders of men. and by god's own appointment the tribe of levi did not fall short of any of the rest , if it did not very much exceed the proportion of others . we do not pretend to the privileges they had , only we observe from thence , that god himself did appoint a plentiful subsistence for those who attended upon his service . and i do not know what there is levitical or ceremonial in that . i am sure the duties of the clergy now require a greater freedom of mind from the anxious cares of the world , than the imployments of the priests and levites under the law. but we need not go so far back ; if the church enjoyed all her revenues as entirely , as when the severe canons against pluralities were made , there would not be such a plea for them , as there is too much cause for in some places , from the want of a competent subsistence . but since that time , the abundance of appropriations ( since turned into lay-fees ) hath extreamly lessened the churches revenues , and have left us a great number of poor vicarages , and arbitrary cures , which would hardly have afforded a maintenance for the nethinims under the law , who were only to be hewers of wood , and drawers of water . but this doth not yet clear the difficulty : for the question is , whether the subsistence of the clergy can lawfully be improved by a plurality of livings ? truly , i think this ( if it be allowed in some cases lawful ) to be the least desirable way of any ; but in some circumstances it is much more excusable than in others . as when the benefices are mean , when they lie near each other , when great care is taken to put in sufficient curates with good allowance ; when persons take all opportunities to do their duties themselves , and do not live at a distance from their benefices in an idle and careless manner . but for men to put in curates meerly to satisfie the law , and to mind nothing of the duties of their places , is a horrible scandal to religion and our church , and that , which if not amended , may justly bring down the wrath of god upon us . for the loosest of all the popish casuists look upon this as a very great sin , even those who attributed to the pope the highest dispensing power in this case . but when the great liberty of dispensing had made the ecclesiastical laws in great measure useless , then it was thought fit by our law-makers to restrain and limit it by a statute made 21 h. viii . wherein it is enacted , that if any person or persons having one benefice with cure of souls , being of the yearly value of eight pounds , or above , accept , or take any other with cure of souls , and be instituted , and inducted in possession of the same , that then , and immediately after such possession had thereof , the first benefice shall be adjudged to be void . and all licenses and dispensations to the contrary are declared to be void and of none effect . this , one would have thought , had been an effectual remedy against all such pluralities and dispensations to obtain them ; and this , no doubt , was the primary design of the law ; but then follow so many proviso's of qualified men to get dispensations , as take off a great deal of the force and effect of this law. but then it ought well to be consider'd , whether such a license being against the chief design of a law , can satisfie any man in point of conscience , where there is not a just and sufficient cause ? for , if the pope's dispensation , with the supposed plenitude of his power , could not satisfie a man's conscience without an antecedent cause , as the casuists resolve , much less can such proviso's do it . it is the general opinion of divines and lawyers , saith lessius , that no man is safe in conscience by the pope's dispensation for pluralities , unless there be a just cause for it . no man can with a safe conscience , take a dispensation from the pope for more benefices than one , meerly for his own advantage , saith panormitan ; and from him sylvester and summ. angelica . a dispensation , saith cardinal to-let , secures a man as to the law ; but as to conscience there must be a good cause for it ; and that is , when the church hath more benefit by it , than it would have without it . but the pope's dispensing power went much farther in point of conscience in their opinion , than that which is setled among us by act of parliament . for it is expressed in the statute of 21 hen. viii . that the dispensation is intended to keep men from incurring the danger , penalty , and forfeiture in the statute comprised . so that the most qualified person can only say , that the law doth not deprive him ; but he can never plead that it can satisfie him in point of conscience , unless there be some cause for it , which is of more moment to the church , than a man 's sole and constant attendance on a particular cure is . but this statute is more favourable to the clergy , than the canon law was before , in two particulars . 1. in declaring that no simple benefices , or meer dignities , as the canonists call them , are comprehended under the name of benefices , having cure of souls , viz. no deanary , archdeaconry , chancellorship , treasurership , chantership , or prebend in any cathedral or collegiate church , nor parsonage that hath a vicar endowed , nor any benefice perpetually appropriate . but all these before were within the reach of the canon law , and a dispensation was necessary for them : which shews , that this law had a particular respect to the necessary attendance on parochial cures , and looked on other dignities and preferments in the church , as a sufficient encouragement to extraordinary merit . 2. that no notice is taken of livings under the valuation of 8 l. which , i suppose , is that of 20 e. 1. for that of h. 8. was not till five years after that statute . but after that valuation it was to be judged according to it , and not according to the real value , as the judges declared 12 car. i. in the case of drake and hill. now here was a regard had to the poorness of benefices , so far , that the statute doth not deprive the incumbent upon taking a second living , if the former be under 8 l. the question that arises from hence is , whether such persons are allowed to enjoy such pluralities by law ; or only left to the ecclesiastical law , as it was before ? it is certain , that such are not liable to the penalty of this law ; but before any person might be deprived by the ecclesiastical law for taking a second benefice without dispensation , of what value soever the former were ; now here comes a statute , which enacts , that all who take a second benefice , having one of 8 l. without qualification , shall lose his legal title to the first ; but what if it be under ? shall he lose it or not ? not by this law. but suppose the ecclesiastical law before makes him liable to deprivation ; doth the statute alter the law without any words to that purpose ? the bishop had a power before to deprive , where is it taken away ? the patron had a right to present upon such deprivation ; how comes he to lose it ? and i take it for granted , that no antecedent rights are taken away by implications ; but there must be express clauses to that purpose . so that i conclude , the ancient ecclesiastical law to be still in force , where it is not taken away by statute . and thus , my brethren , i have laid before you the authority and the rules we are to act by ; i have endeavoured to recommend to you , the most useful parts of your duty , and i hope you will not give me occasion to shew what power we have by the ecclesiastical law of this realm to proceed against offenders . nothing will be more uneasie to me , than to be forced to make use of any severity against you . and my hearts desire is , that we may all sincerely and faithfully discharge the duties of our several places , that the blessing of god may be upon us all ; so that we may save our selves , and those committed to our charge . of the nature of the trust committed to the parochial clergy , at a visitation at worcester , october 21 st . 1696. my brethren , i have formerly , on the like occasion , discoursed to you of the general duties of your function , and the obligation you are under to perform them ; and therefore i shall now confine my discourse to these two things : i. to consider the particular nature of the trust committed to you . ii. the obligation you are under to your parochial cures . i. the first is necessary to be spoken to ; for while persons have only so confused and cloudy apprehensions concerning it , they can neither be satisfied in the nature of their duties , nor in their performance of them . and there is danger as well in setting them so high as to make them impracticable , as in sinking them so low as to make , not only themselves , but their profession contemptible . for the world ( let us say what we will ) will always esteem men , not meerly for a name and profession , but for the work and service which they do . there is , no doubt , a reverence and respect due to a sacred function on its own account ; but the highest profession can never maintain its character among the rest of mankind , unless they who are of it , do promote the general good , by acting suitably to it . and the greater the character is , which any bear , the higher will the expectations of others be concerning them ; and if they fail in the greatest and most useful duties of their function , it will be impossible to keep up the regard which ought to be shew'd unto it . we may complain as long as we please of the unreasonableness of the contempt of the clergy in our days , ( which is too general , and too far spread ) but the most effectual means to prevent or remove it , is for the clergy to apply themselves to the most necessary duties , with respect to the charge and trust committed to them . but here arises a considerable difficulty , which deserves to be cleared ; viz. concerning the just measures of that diligence which is required . for , there are some who will never be satisfied that the clergy do enough , let them do what they can ; and it is to no purpose to think to satisfie them who are resolved not to be satisfied : but on the other side , some care not how little they do , and the less , the better they are pleased with them ; and others again , have raised their duties so high , that scarce any man can satisfie himself that he hath done his duty . it is a matter therefore of the highest consequence to us , to understand , what rule and measure is to be observed , so as we may neither wilfully neglect our duty , nor despair of doing it . here we are to consider two things ; 1. how far the scripture hath determined it . 2. what influence the constitution of our church is to have upon us concerning it . 1. the scripture doth speak something relating to it , both in the old and new testament . in the old testament we have the duties enjoyned to the levitical priesthood , and the extraordinary commissions given to the prophets . as to the levitical priesthood , we can only draw some general instructions , which may be of use , altho' that priesthood hath been long since at an end ; christ being our high-priest after another order , viz. of melchisedeck ; and our duty now is to observe his laws , and to offer that reasonable service which he requires . but even from the levitical priesthood , we may observe these things . 1. that although the main of their duty of attendance respected the temple and sacrifices ; yet at other times they were bound to instruct the people in the law. for so moses leaves it as a special charge to the tribe of levi , to teach iacob his iudgments , and israel his law. and to incourage them to do it , they had a liberal maintenance , far above the proportion of the other tribes . for , by computation it will be found , that they were not much above the sixtieth part of the people ; for when the other tribes were numbred from twenty years old , they made six hundred thousand , and three thousand and five hundred and fifty . but the children of levi were reckoned by themselves from a month old ; and they made but two and twenty thousand ; so that if the males of the other tribes had been reckoned , as they were , it is agreed by learned men , who had no fondness for the clergy , that they did not make above a fiftieth or sixtieth part ; and yet they had near a fifth of the profits , besides accidental perquisites , as to sacrifices , and ransoms of the first-born . thus , say they , god was pleased to enrich that tribe which was devoted to his service . but it was not certainly , that they should spend their time in idleness and luxury , but that they might with the greater freedom apply themselves to the study of the law , that they might instruct the people . for the cities of the levites were as so many colleges dispersed up and down in the several tribes , to which the people might upon occasion , more easily resort . 2. that if the people erred thro' ignorance of the law , god himself laid the blame on those who were bound to instruct them . my people , saith god by the prophet , are destroyed for lack of knowledge . if people are resolved to be ignorant , who can help it ? had they not the law to inform them ? but it is observable , that the peoples errors are laid to the charge of the priests , and the punishment is denounced against them . because thou hast rejected knowledge , i will also reject thee , that thou shalt be no priest unto me . it seems the priests were grown careless and negligent , as to their own improvements ; they did not know to what purpose they should take so much pains in studying the law , and the difficult points of it ; they were for a freedom of conversation , and hoped to keep up their interest among the people that way . therefore isaiah call them shepherds that cannot understand ; but were very intent upon their profits , they all look to their own way , every one for his gain from his quarter . but this was not all , for the prophet charges them with a voluptuous , careless , dissolute life . come ye , say they , i will fetch wine , and we will fill our selves with strong drink , and to morrow shall be as this day , and much more abundant . was not this a very agreeable life for those who were to instruct the people in the duties of sobriety and temperance ? it was death for the priests by the law to drink wine or strong drink , when they went into the tabernacle of the congregation ; and the reason given is , that ye may put a difference between holy and unholy , and between unclean and clean ; and that ye may teach the children of israel all the statutes , which the lord hath spoken to thee by the hand of moses . which implies , that those who are given to drinking wine or strong drink , are very unfit to instruct others in the law of god. and god looked on them as such a dishonour to his worship , that he threatens immediate death to them that approached to his altar , when they had drank wine ; and the iews say , that was the reason why nadab and abihu were destroyed . and then god said , i will be sanctified in them that come nigh me . all nations have abhorred sottish and drunken priests , as most unfit to approach to god when they were not themselves ; or to offer sacrifices for others , when they made beasts of themselves . but this was not all ; for god required from them who were to teach others the law , that they should be always in a capacity of understanding and practising it themselves . but if we proceed to the prophets , nothing can be more dreadful , than what god saith to ezekiel , that if he did not warn the people as he commanded them , their blood will i require at thy hand . is this charge now lying upon every one of you , as to every person under your care ? who would not rather run into a wilderness , or hide himself in a cave , than take such a charge upon him ? but we must distinguish what was peculiar to the prophet's immediate commission to go to any particular person in god's name , from a general charge to inform persons in their duties , and to tell them the danger of continuing in their sins . if any fail for want of information , when you are bound to give it , the neglect must fall heavy , and therefore you are bound to take all just opportunities in publick and private to inform those under your care of such sins as you know them to be guilty of ; not with a design to upbraid , but to reform them . in the new testament the charge is general to feed the flock of god ; and to do it willingly , not for filthy lucre , but of a ready mind ; and to be examples to the flock . but st. peter , who gives this advice , doth not determine who belong to the flock ; nor within what bounds it is to be limited ; and there were many flocks in the iewish dispersion , and many elders scattered up and down among them in pontus , asia , galatia , cappadocia , and bithynia ; so that here we have only general and excellent advice for such who had care of the several flocks , to carry themselves towards them with great humility and tenderness , with charity and goodness , as those that made it their business to do good among them , and conduct them in the way to heaven . st. paul , in his charge to those whom he sent for to miletus , tells them , that they must take heed to themselves , and to all the flock , over which the holy ghost hath made them overseers , to feed the church of god , which he hath purchased with his own blood. it 's possible here might be a particular designation of the flock they were to oversee , by the direction of the holy ghost ; but yet the charge is general to take heed to themselves and to the flock , and to promote the good of the church of god , which christ hath purchased with his own blood. which are the most weighty considerations in the world to excite us to the utmost care and diligence in discharge of our duties . in the epistle to the thessalonians they are said to be over them in the lord , and to admonish them . in that to the hebrews , to watch for their souls , as they that must give an account . no doubt , very great care and watchfulness is required in all that take so great and solemn an office upon them ; but where are the bounds and limits set , as to the people , and nature of the duties required from them ? must every man be left to his own conscience and judgment , what , and how far he is to go ? or can we suppose all men equally careful of doing their duties , if no particular obligation be laid upon them ? some of the eloquent fathers of the church , as st. chrysostom , st. ierom , st. gregory nazianzen , and others , have allowed themselves so much in the flights of fancy , and figures of speaking about the height and dignity of the sacred function , as if they had a mind to discourage all men of modest and humble dispositions from undertaking it . i do not wonder that they ran into solitudes , and withdrew from the world upon it ; but i do wonder how they came from thence and undertook the same charge afterwards , without giving an answer to their own arguments . for the world remained just as it was when they left it . mankind were still as impatient of being governed , or told of their faults , as sickle and humoursom , as prone to evil , and untractable to good , as it was before . and could they hope it would ever mend by their running away from it ? or , was their duty become more easie by declining it ; i think it was very well for the church of god , that , notwithstanding their own many arguments , they took the sacred office upon them at last , and did god and the church good service in it . but if men were to judge by their writings upon this argument , one would think none but those who had a mind to be damned , would undertake it . and their great strains of wit and eloquence , if they had any force , would keep the best men out of the church , who were most likely to do god service in it ; and we need no other instances than these very persons themselves . and if all good , and humble , and conscientious men should for the sake of the hardness of the work , decline the church's service , and take any other lawful imployment , what would become of the church of god ? for none that had , or intended to keep a good conscience , could undertake the cure of souls ; and so they must be left to such as had no regard to their own ; but were either ignorant , stupid and senseless creatures , or such as regarded not their own salvation , who durst undertake such a task , as would not only add to their own guilt , but bring the heavy load of other mens faults upon them too . what is now to be done in this case ? hath god really imposed such a task upon all those who enter into this sacred function , that it is morally impossible for an honest man to discharge it with a good conscience ? how then can any such undertake it ? but if it may be done , what are those bounds and rules we are to observe , so as a good man may satisfie himself in a competent measure , that he hath done his duty ? ii. and this is that which i shall now endeavour to clear . for every one who is in orders , hath a double capacity : one with respect to the church of god in general ; another to that particular flock which is allotted to him , by the constitution of this church , and the law of the land. for although the nature of our duty in general be determined by the word of god , as i have already ready shewed , yet the particular obligation of every one to his own flock , is according to that power and authority , which by the rules and orders of this church is committed to him , and is fully expressed in the office of ordination . by which it plainly appears , that the care of souls committed to persons among us , is not an absolute , indefinite , and unaccountable thing ; but is limited , as to place , persons , and duties , which are incumbent upon them . they are to teach the people committed to their charge ; by whom ? by the bishop when he gives institution . they are to give private as well as publick monitions and exhortations , as well to the sick , as to the whle : what , to all ? no , but to those within their cure. they are to banish erroneous doctrines , and to promote peace and love , especially among them committed to their charge . and last of all , they are to obey those who have the charge and government over them . these things are so express and plain in the very constitution of this church , and owned so solemnly by every one that enters into orders , that there can be no dispute concerning them . and from thence we observe several things that tend to the resolution of the main point , as to the satisfaction of doing your duties , as incumbents on your several places . i. that it is a cure of souls limited as to persons and place , i.e. within such a precinct as is called a parish . ii. that it is limited as to power , with respect to discipline . therefore i shall endeavour to clear these two things : i. what the just bounds and limits of parochial cures are . ii. what is the measure of that diligence which is required within those bounds . as to the former , we are to begin with the limitation as to place . i. that it is a cure of souls limited within certain bounds which are called parishes , which are now certainly known by long usage and custom , and ought still to be preserved with great care ; for otherwise confusion and disputes will arise between several ministers , and several parishes with one another . for since the duties and the profits are both limited , it is necessary that those bounds should be carefully preserved , as they generally are by annual perambulations . but there are some who will understand nothing of this bounding of ministerial duties by distinct parishes , who think they are at liberty to exercise their gifts where-ever they are called ; and that it were better that these parochial inclosures were thrown open , and all left at liberty to chuse such whom they liked best , and under whom they can improve most . these things seem to look plausibly at the first appearance , and to come nearest to the first gathering of churches , before any such thing as parishes were known . but to me this arguing looks like persons going about now to overthrow all dominion and property in lands and estates , because it seems not so agreeable with the first natural freedom of mankind ; who according to the original right of nature , might pick and chuse what served most to their own conveniency . but although this were the first state of things , yet the great inconveniencies which followed it , upon the increase of mankind , made division and property necessary ; and altho' there be no express command of god for it , yet being so necessary for the good of mankind , it was not only continued every where , but those persons were thought fit to be punished by severe laws , who invaded the rights and properties of others , either by open violence and rapine , or by secret stealth and purloining i grant , that at first there were no such parochial divisions of cures here in england , as there are now . for the bishops and their clergy lived in common ; and before that the number of christians was much increased , the bishops sent out their clergy to preach to the people , as they saw occasion . but after the inhabitants had generally embraced christianity , this itinerant and occasional going from place to place , was found very inconvenient , because of the constant offices that were to be administred ; and the peoples knowing to whom they should resort for spiritual offices and directions . hereupon the bounds of parochial cures were found necessary to be settled here by degrees , by those bishops who were the great instruments of converting the nation from the saxon idolatry . but a work of this nature could not be done all at once , as by a kind of agrarian law , but several steps were taken in order to it . at first , as appears by bede , they made use of any old british churches that were left standing ; so augustin at first made use of st. martin's near canterbury , and after repaired christs-church , which were both british churches . but ethelbert gave all incouragement both to repair old churches and to build new. however , the work went on slowly ; augustin consecrated but two bishops , which were setled at london and rochester , where ethelbert built and endowed two churches for the bishops and their clergy to live together . in the western parts bicinus built several churches about dorchester , where his see was fixed . wilfred converted the south-saxons , and settled presbyters in the isle of wight , but they were but two . in the kingdom of mercia there were five diocesses made in theodore's time ; and putta , bishop of rochester , being driven from his see , he obtained from saxulphus , a mercian bishop , a church with a small glebe , and there he ended his days . in the northern parts we read of two churches built by two noblemen , ( puch and addi ) upon their own manors . and the same might be done elsewhere ; but bede would never have mentioned these , if the thing had been common . but in his epistle to egbert , archbishop of york , a little before his death he intimates the great want of presbyters and parochial settlements , and therefore earnestly perswades him to procure more . and if egbert's canons be genuine ( of which there are several ancient mss. ) the duties of presbyters in their several churches are set down : however , the work went not on so fast , but in his successor eanbaldus his time , the bishops were required to find out convenient places to build churches in ; and the same passed in the southern parts by general consent . in the council of cloveshoo , we read of presbyters placed up and down by the bishops in the manors of the laity , and in several parts distinct from the episcopal see ; and there they are exhorted to be diligent in their duties . in the times of edgar and canutus , we read of the mother churches , which had the original settlement of tithes , ( after they were given to the church by several laws ) and of the churches built upon their own lands by the lords of manors ; to which they could only apply a third part of the tithes . but in the laws of canutus , we find a fourfold distinction of churches . 1. the head church , or the bishop's see. 2. churches of a second rank , which had right of sepulture , and baptism , and tithes . 3. churches that had right of sepulture , but not frequented . 4. field-churches or oratories , which had no right of burial . the second sort seem to be the original parochial churches which had the endowment of tithes , and were so large , that several other churches were taken out of them by the lords of manors ; and so the parishes came to be multiplied so much , that in the laws of edward the confessor , c. 9. it is said , that there were then three or four churches , where there had been but one before . in this diocess i find by an epistle of wulston , bishop of worcester , to anselm , that before the conquest there were churches in vills , or upon particular manors that were consecrated . and if william the conqueror demolished six and thirty parish churches in the compass of the new forest , as is commonly said , there must be a very great number before the conquest ; although so few are said to appear in doomsday book ; ( yet there are many parochial churches of this diocess in it , above twenty in two deanaries ) but the normans almost ruined the parochial clergy , by seizing the tithes , and making appropriations of them . but in the saxon times the number still encreased , as lords of manors and others were willing to erect new churches , and to have a settled parochial minister among them , who was to take care of the souls of the people within such a precinct , as hath obtained the name of a parish . but parishes now are of a very different extent and value ; but the obligation which the law puts upon them , is the same ; only where the maintenance is greater they may have the more assistants . and from hence came the difference among the parochial clergy ; for , those whose parishes were better endowed , could maintain inferior clerks under them , who might be useful to them in the publick service , and assist them in the administration of sacraments . and this was the true original of those we now call parish-clerks ; but were at first intended as clerks-assistant to him that had the cure ; and therefore he had the nomination of them , as appears by the ecclesiastical law , both here and abroad . and lyndwood saith , every vicar was to have enough to serve him , and one clerk or more ; and by the canon-law , no church could be founded , where there was not a maintenance for assisting-clerks . in the synod of worcester , under walter cantelupe , in henry the third's time , they are called capellani parochiales , and the rectors of parishes were required to have such with them . and the canon law doth allow a rector to give a title to another to receive orders as an assistant to him ; and this without any prejudice to the patron 's right ; because but one can have a legal title to the cure. but lyndwood observes very well , that those who gives titles to others , as their assistants or curates , are bound to maintain them if they want . these are called vicarii parochiales , & stipendiarii ; but conductitii presbyteri , who are forbidden , were those who took livings to farm , without a title . but after appropriations came in , then there were another sort of vicars called perpetui , and were endowed with a certain portion of the temporalities , and were admitted ad curam animarum : but such could not personam ecclesiae sustinere in an action at law about the rights of the church , but as to their own right they might . but still there is another sort of vicars , who are perpetual , but not endowed any otherwise than the bishop did allow a congrua portio ; and this was in appropriations where the bishop consented only upon those terms , as they generally were so made , till the neglect made the statutes necessary , 15 r. 2. 6. and 4 h. 4. 12. the bishops were to make , or enlarge the allowance , say the canonists , after presentation , and before institution , and were to see that it were a sufficient subsistence . but there were some cures which had chapels of ease belonging to them ; and they who offiuated in them , were called capellani , and had their subsistence out of the oblations and obventions , and were often perpetual and presentative . and where the incumbents had several chapels of ease , and only assistants to supply them , the canon law doth not call them rectores , but plebani ; who had a sort of peculiar jurisdiction in lesser matters ; but still they were under the bishops authority in visitations and other ecclesiastical censures , because the care of the whole diocess belonged to him iure communi ; and so it was taken for granted in all parts of the christian world : and especially in this kingdom , where parochial episcopacy was never heard of till of late years . for , nothing can be plainer in our history , than what is affirmed in two of our laws , stat. of carlisle , 25 e. 1. and the stat. of provisors , 25 e. 3. that the church of england was founded in prelacy , or diocesan episcopacy . for our first bishops were so far from being confined to one church or town , that at first in the saxon-division of kingdoms , every bishop had his diocess equal with the extent of the kingdom , except in kent , where one suffragan to the archbishop at rochester was confirmed . the first conversion of the english nation to christianity from paganism , was by the diocesan bishops , who were sent hither from several parts , and the presbyters imployed by them ; and as the number of christians increased , the number of bishops did so too ; so that in the parts of mercia one diocess was divided into five , that they might the better look after the government of them ; and every bishop , as appears by the saxon-councils , was bound to see parochial churches built , and the clergy to be settled in them to attend upon the duties of their function among the people committed to their charge . that which i have aimed at in this discourse , was to shew , that the original constitution of this church , was episcopal ; but yet that the bishops did still design to fix a parochial clergy under them , as churches could be built and endowed . it remains now to shew , that this constitution of a parochial clergy , is more reasonable , than that of an unfixed , and unsettled clergy by law ; which will easily appear , if we consider , 1. the greater advantage as to unity , and real edification among the people . for this makes them to be as one body within certain bounds : and the people know whither to resort for publick worship and sacraments ; and the inconveniencies , as to the difference of mens abilities , is not so great , as the inconveniency of a broken , divided people , as to religion ; which always creates suspicions and jealousies , and generally contempt and hatred of each other . and i think every wise and good christian will consider , that which tends to peace and unity , is really more edifying than a far better talent of elocution , or the most moving way of exciting the fancies and passions of hearers . for , s. paul tells us , charity is beyond miraculous gifts . it is easie to observe , that the wisest methods are seldom the most popular ; because the generality of mankind do not judge by reason , but by fancy , and humour , and prejudices of one kind or other . from hence the heats of enthusiasm , and odd gestures , and vehement expressions , with no deep or coherent sense , take much more with ordinary and injudicious people , than the greatest strength and clearness of reason , or the soundest doctrine , and the most pious exhortation , if they be not set off in such a way as strikes their imaginations , and raises their passions . and this is that which such do commonly call the most edifying way of preaching , which is like the coming up of the tide with noise and violence , but leaves little effect ; whereas the other is like a constant stream which goes on in a steady and even course , and makes the earth more fruitful . the one is like a storm of thunder and lightning , which startles , and confounds , and amuses more ; but the other is like a gentle rain which softens and mellows the ground , and makes it more apt to produce kindly and lasting fruit. we are to judge of true edification , not by the sudden heat and motion of passions , but by producing the genuine effects of true religion ; which are fixing our minds on the greatest and truest good , and calming and governing our disorderly passions , and leading a godly , righteous and sober life . but we too often find violent and boisterous passions , an ungovernable temper , envy , strife and uncharitableness , growing up with greater pretences to zeal , and better ways of edification . i never expect to see the world so wise , as to have persons and things universally esteemed according to their real worth. for there will be a tincture in most persons , from temper , and inclination , and the principles of education ; but generally speaking matters of order and decency , and things which tend to a publick good , affect those most , who have the best judgment and temper ; and irregular heats , and disorderly methods of praying and preaching , those whose religion makes more impression upon their fancies , than their judgments , and is seen more in the inflaming their passions , than in keeping them in their due order . 2. there is a greater advantage as to discipline : for , if among the teachers they are under no bounds nor subjection to a superiour authority , it is very easie to avoid any kind of censure for the most corrupt doctrines or practices . we cannot boast much of the strict exercise of discipline among us ; and one great reason is , that many have more mind to complain of the want of it , than to do their endeavour to amend it . we hear of many complaints of the clergy in general , and sometimes by those who have more mind to have them thought guilty , than to prove them so , for fear they should acquit themselves , or at least the church should not bear the blame of their miscarriages . but we cannot proceed arbitrarily , we must allow them timely notice , and summon them to appear , and a just liberty of defence ; but if upon proof , and sufficient evidence we have not proceeded against them with the just severity of the law , then we ought to bear the blame , but not otherwise . but whatsoever personal neglects or faults there have been , or may be , my business is to shew , that our way is much better fitted for the just exercise of discipline , than that of independant congregations , altho' the managers of them pick and cull out the best they can for their purpose ; and one would think , when they had made choice of members to their mind , and bound them together by an explicit covenant , they should be very easie , and tractable , and submissive to their own discipline . but they have found the contrary by their sad experience ; they grow too heady and wilful to bear any such thing as strict discipline ; for when they had the courage to exercise it , their congregations were soon broken to pieces , and the several divided parts were for setting up new heads one against another , till at last they found it was much easier to be teaching than to be ruling elders . and so they have let the reins of discipline fall to keep their congregations together . but suppose the teachers should fall out among themselves ; as , to give a fresh and late remarkable instance : suppose some set up antinomianism , and preach such doctrines to the people or flocks before you , which others think of dangerous consequence , what is to be done in such a case ? they may send some brethren to enquire whether the matters of fact be true . suppose they find them true , what then ? what is to be done next ? it may be , some would have them come up to their brethren and answer to the accusations brought against them . but suppose they will not ; and others of the brethren say , they ought not ; and so fall into heats and disputes among themselves about it , and make new parties and divisions : is not this an admirable way of preserving peace , and order , and discipline in a church ? and i am as certain , this is not the way of christ's appointing , as i am , that god is the god of order , and not of confusion ; and that when christ left the legacy of peace to his church , he left a power in some to see his will performed . but these things can never be objected against us ; for all are members of the same body , and are governed by certain and known rules ; and if any be guilty of open violation of it , the way is open to accuse and prosecute them ; and if they be found guilty , the censures of the church will render them uncapable of doing it in such a station ; or at least , to bring them to confession of their fault , and promise of future amendment . and now i leave any one to judge , whether the parochial clergy are not under greater and better discipline , than the teachers of the separate congregations . ii. but the great complaint of such men is , that we want parochial and congregational discipline , so that faults should be examined and punished where they have been committed ; but instead of that , all matters are drawn into the ecclesiastical court , and there causes are managed so , as looks rather like a design to punish men in their purses , than for their faults ; and the delays are so great , that the court it self seems to be designed for penance , and grows very uneasie , even to those who are the members of our church . and some think that the proceeding against men upon articles of enquiry , not so agreeable to the rights and liberties of mankind . in answer to this , i shall consider , ( 1. ) the proceedings upon enquiry at visitations . ( 2. ) the method of proceeding in the ecclesiastical courts . ( 3. ) the inconveniencies of parochial discipline . 1. as to enquiries at visitations . they were grounded upon one of the main pillars of our law , viz. an ancient , immemorial custom founded upon good reason : in the first canons that ever were made in this church under theodore , archbishop of canterbury ; the second is , that every bishop is to look after the government of his own diocess , and not to invade anothers . and that in so doing they went about their diocesses in order to an enquiry and correction of miscarriages , is evident from the council under cuthbert , archbishop of canterbury , can. 3. 25. the first council at calechyth , can. 3. the constitutions of odo , archbishop of canterbury , can. 3. and the canon of edgar , can. 3. but in these saxon times , the visitations were annual , which were found inconvenient ; and therefore in the norman times , the archdeacons were taken into a part of the jurisdiction under the bishop , and visited those years the bishop did not . but we meet with no archdeacons with any kind of jurisdiction in the saxon times ; we read indeed sometimes of the name of archdeacons , but they had nothing to do in the diocess , but only attended the bishop at ordinations , and other publick services in the cathedral . lanfranc was the first who made an archdeacon with jurisdiction in his see. and thomas first archbishop of york , after the conquest , was the first who divided his diocess into archdeaconries ; and so did remigius , bishop of lincoln , his large diocess into seven archdeaconries , saith h. of huntingdon : and so it was with the rest ; of which there were two occasions , 1. the laying aside the corepiscopi in the western parts , as assuming too much to themselves . 2. the publick services which the bishops were more strictly tied to , as the king's barons in the norman times : which was the reason not only of taking in archdeacons , but likewise of archpresbyters or rural-deans , who had some inspection into the several deanaries , and assisted the bishop in such things , as they were appointed to do ; and then came in the other ecclesiastical officers , as vicars general , chancellors , commissaries , &c. for we read not of them here at all in the saxon times ; but about the time of hen. ii. the bishops took them for their assistance in dispatch of causes , when the king required their strict attendance on the publick affairs in the supreme court of parliament . 2. as to the method of proceeding in the ecclesiastical courts , it is no other than hath been continued here without interruption , till of late years , ever since the conquest . for the consistory-court , and the rules of proceeding there , were established by a law in the time of william the first . as far as i can find by king edward's laws , c. 4. the bishops did then proceed by the ecclesiastical laws , although they then sat in the county-court ; but this caused so much confusion , that william , by a general consent , and a charter directed to all the people of england , doth separate the ecclesiastical from the temporal courts ; which was enrolled as good law , 2 r. 2. upon occasion of a suit of the dean and chapter of lincoln ; and therefore the charter of remigius , bishop of lincoln , is more mentioned than others , but the same was to all the bishops and counties of england , as appears by other copies of it . thus the consistory-court was first established , as a distinct court from the county-court , which it was not in the saxon times , for then the bishop sate with the civil magistrate in the same court ; and ecclesiastical causes were first heard and decided there . it seems the people wer very unwilling to go to a new place ; and therefore the law is inforced with severe penalties for contempt . and those who object against the reasonableness of the method of proceeding in those courts , must reflect upon some of the wisest nations in the world , who have gone upon the same grounds , in all that have received the civil law , and upon some of the greatest courts at this time in the kingdom , as the chancery and admiralty , which go by the same fundamental rules . as to any objections which arise from the personal faults of those who are imployed in them , that reaches , i am afraid , to all courts ; and it ought to be the work and business of those who look after them , to do what in them lies , to reform them , that others faults may not be laid at their doors . 3. but for those who would have a parochial or congregational discipline set up , as much better , and more effectual , i shall desire them to consider , that since matters of discipline are such , as that in them the reputation and interest of persons is very much concerned , they ought not to be left to arbitrary proceedings of any persons , but they ought to be managed by the certain and common rules of justice ; since every man hath a right to defend himself , when he is accused . and unless there be known and established methods of proceeding agreeable to natural justice , and the laws of the land , nothing would be more grievous and intolerable than the common exercise of a parochial discipline . for , 1. it cannot be presumed , that there will be competent judges . for every one who hath a faculty of preaching , hath not a faculty of judging in such cases . and where discretion and a judgment of circumstances is wanting , an honest mind will not secure men from doing injury , and exposing their judicature to contempt . 2. they have no fixed and established rules of proceeding , as there are in the ecclesiastical courts , which have been continued down from time to time , and allowed by the laws of the land. and what miserable disorder must follow an arbitrary method , when humour , and will , and passion may over-rule justice , and equity , and conscience ? 3. they are not under the check of the law , as the ecclesiastical courts are . for , if they exceed their bounds , either as to the nature of the cause , or the manner of proceeding , they are liable to prohibitions from the king's courts of justice ; but the law can take no notice of parochial or congregational judicatures , and so men may suffer without remedy . 4. they have no way to judge of legal evidence , which is very material when a person is accused . it is one of the nicest points in all criminal proceedings to determine what is good and sufficient evidence . for several things are to be weighed , before either witnesses or testimonies can be allowed . as to witnesses , it is required that they be persons of reputation , and free from infamy of law and fact ; that they be disinterested , and so not liable to the just suspicion of partiality ; that they be men of discretion and sane memory ; and all reasonable exceptions are to be allowed against them . as to testimonies ; they must be by our law upon oath ; and what authority have such persons to give an oath , and why shall a man be liable to suffer by a testimony , without one , when the law requires it ? they must be deliberate , and not given in passion , consistent as to time , place , and other circumstances : they must be certain and positive , and not upon hear-say , or the believing of other persons : they must be free from any just suspicion of contrivance and conspiracy , or any sort of corruption or partiality . and now is every parochial minister , or select congregation fit to judge of these matters , whereon the reputation , and consequently the interest of every person may be so deeply concerned ? 5. they have no way to prevent a percipitate and hasty sentence . suppose a man be accused by one of interest and passion , who possesses others with the same opinion before-hand , and the judges are all prejudiced before the matter comes to be heard ; and in popular assemblies some few men sway the rest , what a case is a person accused unjustly in ? he hath no liberty for others that are not of the congregation , altho' more disinterested , either to come in to judge , or to plead for him : he can have no advocate to defend him , or to shew the weakness , or inconsistency of the evidence against him . in all ecclesiastical courts , they may sometimes proceed summarily , but even then the fundamental rules of the court must be observed , as to proofs and witnesses , or else the sentence is void ; but here the sentence will take place , altho' there hath not been the least colour of justice in the whole proceedings . 6. here is no settled course of appeals in case of a wrong sentence . but where men are liable to mistake and passion , a right of appeal is one of the fundamental parts of justice . and therefore independent and arbitrary courts of judicature , as all congregational churches are , are inconsistent with the common rights of mankind , and that due subordination which ought to be in all societies in order to the preserving order and justice among men. but suppose , parochial discipline so settled among us , as to allow a liberty of appeal , how would the trouble , and vexation , and expence be increased , by going from the parochial sentence to the bishop's court , and from thence still further ? so that if there be some inconveniencies in point of distance , for persons to be summoned to appear at first so far from home , yet there is some compensation by the less trouble and charges , if due care be taken to prevent delays , and unnecessary expences ; which ought to be done : and those who do make the greatest clamour against our courts , are rather willing they should continue such as they may have cause to complain of , than to do their endeavours to reform them . thus i have endeavoured to shew the just bounds and limits of parochial cures . ii. i now come to consider the just measure of that diligence which is required under those limits . for our church requires faithful diligence in preaching , and sacraments , and prayers , and reading the holy scriptures . if then we can understand what this faithful diligence implies , we may come to satisfie our selves whether we do our duty or not . 1. faithful diligence implies serious application of our minds to the main end and design of our holy function : which is to do good to the souls of men , especially to those committed to your charge . and an idle , careless , santering life ; or one too busie and distracted with the cares of the world , are not consistent with it . i do not go about to take you off from necessary business , and reasonable allowances , as to health and studies ; but that the doing good to your peoples souls , ought to be the principal and chief design of your thoughts , studies and endeavours . and if the people be satisfied that this is really your design among them , you will find , that your doctrine will be easier received , your persons esteemed , and your labours valued . it is possible , you may meet with a froward , peevish , self-willed people ; and it is hard when a man is only set to water and mend a hedge made up of briars and thorns ; the more pains he takes , the more scratches he may meet with ; but if it be your lot , be not discouraged from doing your duty : remember what sort of people the prophets were sent to , and what usage they had from them ; what hardships and reproaches christ and his apostles underwent from a very unkind world ; but a patient continuance in well-doing , gave them inward satisfaction in the midst of all , and did by degrees gain the christian doctrine access to the hearts of those who most opposed it . 2. it implies an honest and conscientious care of discharging the known and common duties of your function , as preaching , praying , catechizing , administring sacraments , visiting the sick , &c. a diligent person is one who neglects no good opportunities of doing his business , but watches for them , and studies to improve them to the best advantage . can those satisfie themselves that they use faithful diligence , who shamefully neglect their cures , and care not how seldom they come at them , nor how they are supplied , if they make a good bargain for their own advantage ? i cannot deny , but that according to the laws of the land , and the canons of this church , some persons are allowed to have two several cures , which must imply a non-residence for some time at least , upon one of them . but they still suppose , that there are persons resident upon them , who are allowed by the bishop to be sufficient to discharge the necessary duties of the place , and not to be taken up like post-horses , the next that comes , and to be turned off at the next stage . i think it a very great fault in those who have pluralities , that they look no more after the curates they imploy , and that they do not bring them to the bishop to be approved , and to have their allowance fixed , before they imploy them . they think no more is required but to pay the fees for a licence ; but i have , and shall endeavour to convince the clergy of this diocess , that licences are not to be taken as st. peter took the fish that first came with money in the mouth of it ; i hope to be able to satisfie them , that it is not the fees that we aim at , but at persons doing their duties . and our canons are express , that no curate is to be allowed in any cure of souls , that hath not been examined and admitted by the bishop or ordinary having episcopal jurisdiction , and attested by the hand and seal of the bishop . how then come curates to officiate without ever coming to the bishop at all , or undergoing any examination by him ? this is a plain breach of the canon , and ought to be reformed . i do not say , that such licences as have customarily passed without the bishop's hand and seal , are void ; but i do say , that they are irregular and voidable , and none ought to be allowed , which are not according to the canon ; and that no incumbent ought to take any one for his curate till the bishop hath allowed and approved him under his hand and seal . and this remedy the law gives us against the inconveniencies which attend pluralities by weak and insufficient curates ; but no man is excused either by law or canons from attending the duties of his place at some times in his own person , and that good part of the year ; in which time he ought to do the duties of his place with diligence and care ; and to acquaint himself with his parishioners , in order to the better discharge of his duty towards them . they have very mean thoughts of their holy function , that think the main part of it lies only in the pulpit ( i wish even that were minded more ) but all the ways you can do good among your people , is within the compass of your duty ; not meerly to instruct them in religion , but to prevent quarrels , and contentions , and meetings for debauchery , which tend to corrupt mens minds , and draw them off from the principles as well as practice of true religion : it is your duty to endeavour to make them live like good christians and good neighbours , and to set patterns your selves of sobriety , meekness , charity , and of every thing praise-worthy . 3. faithful diligence implies filling up your vacant hours with the most useful studies , as to the main end of your function . for in your ordination you solemnly promise to lay aside the study of the world and the flesh , and to apply your selves to the study of the scriptures , and such studies as help to the knowledge of the same . but it may be seasonably asked by some , what method and course of studies will best conduce to that end ? to this i shall endeavour to give a short answer so far as it concerns the main end of your function , which it is most proper for me to consider at this time . 1. look well to the temper of your minds , that it be humble , sober , and religious . for a vain , affected and self-opinionated person can never have an inward and hearty relish of divine truths . the scriptures will appear to him either too plain and easie , or too obscure and intricate ; some things will seem low and flat , and others too lofty and poetical . those who read not with a good mind , will have always something or other to cavil at . it is a mighty advantage in all spiritual knowledge to come to it with an unbiassed mind , free from the power of prejudice and evil inclinations . for these give a strange tincture to the mind , and hinder the clear and distinct perception of revealed truths , as above the natural faculties which god hath given us . some are therefore so fond of philosophical speculations , that unless the letter of the scripture suits with them , they are ready to despise it , and only shame and fear keep up any reverence for it in them . some are altogether for mathematical evidence and demonstration , as though the way to salvation were to be shewed by lines and figures ; why do they not first run down all laws and history , because they are not capable of mathematical evidence . and it argues a far greater measure of true understanding to know when to be satisfied , than to be always disputing and cavilling . the plainness of scripture in some places , is no more an offence to one that wisely considers the design of it , than a beaten road is to a traveller who desires to know which is the true way to his journeys end , and the plainer it is , the more he is satisfied with it . but the scripture wants not its depths , which require a very attentive and considering mind , and will afford matter for exercise of thoughts , and frequent and serious meditation . the excellency of the scripture is , that all necessary things are plain ; and such as are not so , although they are not necessary to be known for salvation , yet require our diligence to understand them ; and give great satisfaction as far as we can know them . 2. not to perplex your minds with difficulties above your reach , as in what relates to the eternal decrees , and the particular manner of that unity of the godhead which is consistent with the trinity of persons . for since the scripture doth assert both , we may safely be contented with what the scripture reveals , although the manner of it be incomprehensible . and as to the other the scripture is clear and positive , as to the moral parts of our duties ; and if we are to seek how to reconcile them with gods decrees , we have this certain rule to go by , that without doing our duty , we cannot be happy ; but we may without understanding how the freedom of our wills is consistent with the divine prescience and decrees . 3. not to fix plain and necessary duties upon new and unaccountable theories . as for instance ; there are no duties of greater consequence , than the love of god and our neighbour : but it would be unspeakable mischief to religion to fix the love of god upon so absurd a principle as his being the immediate cause of all sensation in us . and it would have made the christian doctrine ridiculous to found its fundamental precepts on extravagant notions , and mystical contemplations . and so for the love of our neighbours to allow only a love of benevolence and charity , and not of delight and complacency , is to make nice distinctions , where god hath made none . but to take away the love of complacency in friends and relations , and the blessings which god gives for the comfort of life , is to overthrow the due sense of god's goodness in giving them ; and to take away a great measure of that gratitude we owe to god for them . but when any seem very fond of such notions , and shew so much self-complacency in them ; it is impossible upon such principles that they should love their neighbours as themselves . 4. if you would understand the new testament aright , fix in your minds a true scheme of the state of the controversies of that . time , which will give you more light into the true knowledge of the scriptures , than large volumes of commentators , or the best systems of modern controversies . as what the iewish notions of justification by works , and expiation of sin , were ; and of god's decrees of election and reprobation as to themselves : and what the principles of the judaizing christians were , as to the joyning the law and the gospel , and the pythagorean superstition together . and what the gnosticks , who were professed libertines , held , as to grace , redemption , liberty , government , &c. all which tend very much to the clearing the sense of the new testament . 5. where the sense appears doubtful , and disputes have been raised about it , enquire into the sense of the christian church in the first ages , as the best interpreter of scripture ; as whether the apostles left bishops or presbyters to succeed them in the government of churches ; whether the apostles appointed the lords day to be observed as the day of publick worship ; whether baptism were not to be administred to infants as well as circumcision , both being seals of god's covenant ; whether divine worship doth not belong to christ , and were ●o● given to him in the hymns and doxologies of the primitive church ; and , whether divine worship can be given to any creature ; whether the form of baptism was not understood so , as to imply a trinity of persons ; and , whether all true christians were not baptized into this faith ; and consequently , whether denying the trinity be not renouncing christian baptism . these and many other such questions of great importance , receive great light from the writings of the first ages . but some rules may be very useful for right judging the sense of those times . 1. to distinguish the genuine and supposititious writings of that time. this hath been examined with so much care by learned men of this last age , that it is no hard matter to make a true judgment about them . 2. in those that are genuine , to distingush the sense of the church , delivered by them , from their own particular opinions ; the sense of the church is best known by publick acts , as by creeds , sacraments , hymns , prayers and censures of such as oppose or contradict them . 3. to put a difference between the authority of private persons , and of the bishops and governours of the church , who may be presumed to understand the sense of the church , and the doctrine of the apostles better than the other . and so clemens , ignatius , polycarp , theophilus , and irenaeus are more to be trusted , as to the sense and practice of the christian church , than such as hermes , and papias , and tatianus , who had neither the judgment nor the authority of the other . 4. that may be justly looked on as the sense of the church , which is owned both by the friends and the enemies of it . the enemies of christianity charged them with many things , which the apologists utterly denied . now we find pliny charging the christians with singing hymns to christ , as to god ; several christian writers of that time mention this , but never go about to soften , or to excuse , or deny it . and so we find lucian deriding the christians for the doctrine of three and one ; which the apologists of that time are so far from denying , that they assert and vindicate it , as appears by athenagoras and others . but these things i only touch at , to shew how the sense of the church is to be taken , and how from thence the sense of the scriptures may be cleared . of the particular duties of the parochial clergy , at a visitation , october 27 th . 1696. my brethren , as often as it pleases god in his wise providence to bring me among you in the ordinary course of my visitation , i cannot satisfie my self that i do my own duty , unless i put you in mind of doing yours . we live in an age , wherein the contempt of the clergy is too notorious not to be observed ; but the true reasons are not so well considered as they ought to be . some , to increase the contempt of the clergy , have given such reasons of it , as seem to make it a light and jesting matter ; but truly it is very far from being so : for the contempt of religion is oft-times both the cause and the effect of it . it is not at all to be wondred at , that those who hate to be reformed , should hate those whose duty and business it ought to be to endeavour to reform them . but when religion is struck at through our sides , we ought with patience to bear the wounds and reproaches we receive in so good a cause . wo be to us , if those who are enemies to religion , speak well of us : for it is a strong presumption that they take us to be of their side in our hearts , and that we are distinguished only by our profession , which they look on only as our trade . and we give too much occasion for such suspicions of us , if we do not heartily concern our selves for the honour and interest of true religion in the world , whatever we may suffer , as to our reputation , for the sake of it . it is possible , that if we go about to humour such persons in their infidelity and contempt of religion , we may escape some hard words for the present , but they cannot but have the greatest inward contempt and hatred of all those who live upon religion , and yet have not the courage to defend it . and what satisfaction can such have , when they reflect upon themselves , and think what occasion they have given to confirm such persons in their infidelity , and to make them think the worse of religion for their sakes . the best thing we can do to recover the honour of religion , and to set our profession above contempt , is to apply our selves seriously and conscientiously to do our duties . for if others find that we are in earnest , and make it our great business to do all the good we can , both in the pulpit , and out of it ; if we behave our selves with that gravity , sobriety , meekness and charity which becomes so holy a profession , we shall raise our selves above the common reproaches of a spiteful world ; and do what lies in us to stop the mouths at least , if not to gain the hearts of our enemies . for the real esteem which men have of others , is not to be gained by the little arts of address and insinuation , much less by complying with them in their follies ; but by a steady and resolute practice of our own duties , joyned with a gentle , and easie , and obliging behaviour to others , so far as is consistent with them . but a proud , supercilious , morose behaviour towards our greatest enemies , doth but make them much more so ; if any thing softens them , and makes them more tractable , it will be , joyning a firmness of mind , as to our plain duties , with humility and kindness in other matters . but what are these duties we are obliged to so much care in the performance of ? there is a twofold obligation lying upon us . i. that which is more general from the nature and design of our imployment ; which is the cure of souls ; and that requires great diligence and faithfulness , frequent recollection and consideration , serious application of our selves to divine studies and imployments ; a prudent use of the best methods for the convincing , reproving , directing and assisting those who are committed to our care. and all these are implied in the nature of our office , as it is set forth in holy scripture ; wherein we are described as laborers , and therefore must take pains , and not spend our time in vain and idle company : as teachers , and therefore ought to be stored with a good stock of knowledge our selves , and be ready to communicate it to others : as pastors , and so we ought to look after our flock , and not leave them to the careless management of others , who are not so concerned for their welfare , as we ought to be : as ambassadors from christ , and therefore we are bound to look after the business we are sent upon and the great weight and importance of it , as to your own salvation as well as others : as stewards of the mysteries of god , and the first thing required in them , is to discharge their trust honestly and faithfully , remembring the account they must give to god. but these , you may say , are only general things , and do not determine and limit our duties within certain bounds ; what is there which doth fix and determine our duties , as to the station we have in this church ? ii. i come therefore to the special duties , which by the ancient constitution of this church , and the ecclesiastical laws of it , are incumbent upon you . and you are to consider , that as the law hath taken care for your maintenance and subsistence in doing your duties ; so it doth suppose your careful performance of them , not only in regard to the general rule of conscience , but to that particular obligation you are under , as members of this church . and therefore i shall enquire into two things : i. the duties you are under this obligation to . ii. the incouragement which the law gives in consideration of it . i. the duties are of two sorts : 1. publick and solemn . 2. private and occasional . 1. publick and solemn ; and those either respect the time , or the duties themselves . 1. as to the times of solemn and publick worship , which are the weekly lord's days , and the other holy-days . 1. i begin with the observation of the lord's days ; which i shall now make appear to have been set apart for the solemn worship and service of god , especially by the clergy , from the first settlement of a parochial clergy in this church . in a provincial council held at cloveshoo or cliff , a. d. 747. the king and nobility being present ( where the archbishop and bishops assembled for regulating the worship of god in parochial churches then newly erected in many places ) the fourteenth canon is express , that the lord's day ought to be celebrated with due veneration , and devoted only to divine worship ( divino tantum cultui dedicatus ) and the presbyters are required to officiate in their several churches , both in preaching and praying ; and the people are required to let alone their common worldly affairs , and to attend the publick worship of god. the canons of egbert , archbishop of york , are as clear and full for the northern province , as the other for the southern , can. 104. that nothing is to be done on the lord's day , but what tends to the worship and service of god. and can. 36. that christ sanctified the lord's day by his resurrection . but because these canons of egbert will be often used , something ought to be observed to clear their authority . sir h. spelman saith , there are several ancient mss. of them . mr. selden owns the cotton ms. to be of the time of h. 1. but he suspects that another made the collection , and put it under his name . but it was no strange thing for the great bishops to make such a collection of canons ; for so it was done by theodore , archbishop of canterbury ; by theodulphus of orleans ; isaac lingonensis , chrodegangus , herardus , hincmarus , &c. and egbert was not only a great man , brother to the king of the northumbrians , but a great promoter of learning and ecclesiastical discipline , as appears by his dialogue about the latter , and the other by alcuin's epistles about him , and bede's epistle to him a little before his death . and the agreement between the capitulars and these canons , might come from alcuin's carrying them over into france with him . in the saxon canons , c. 24. it is said , that the lord's day on which our saviour rose from the dead , is to be devoted wholly to the service of god , excepting only works of necessity and charity . these canons are translated from those of theodulphus , bishop of orleans , a. d. 786. and it is observable , that as the christian religion prevailed in these northern parts , so the religious observation of the lord's day was enforced , as appears by the canons of the gallican church , as well as this . as in the famous canon of the council of mascon , a. d. 585. where the bishops assembled , complain of the neglect of the lord's day , and agree to put the people upon a stricter observance of it . and so before in the council of orleans , a. d. 538. but in both these canons they avoid a iewish superstition as well as profane neglect . they allowed both works of necessity and conveniency , and did not place the observation in a bare rest , but in attendance on the worship of god ; and forbad all manner of secular imployments which were inconsistent with it . nay , theodulphus his canon goes higher , tantummodo deo vacandum , the whole day ought to be spent in religious and charitable imployments . the greatest men in our saxon churches asserted the same . bede saith , that the apostles appointed the lord's day to be observed with religious solemnity , and therein we ought to devote our selves to the worship of god ; tantum divinis cultibus seviamus . and to the same purpose speaks alcuin , who was bred up under egbert , archbishop of york , and calls bede the greatest master of his time ; and in another place he saith , one seventh day is set apart among christians , as another had been among the iews for the service of god ; and that therein we ought to attend to the care of our souls , and to lead a spiritual life . bede distinguishes between the patriarchal and iewish sabbath . the latter he calls a carnal , and the other a spiritual sabbath ; the former lay in a strict abistnence from labour , but the other in prayer , and devotion , and spiritual contemplations . the iewish rest , he saith , was inutile , 〈◊〉 , & luxuriosum . for the 〈…〉 ●llowed recreations and sports on their sabbaths ; vacant ab opere bono , saith he , non ab opere nugatorio . vacant ad nugas , saith s. augustin ; but he saith , they had better plow or dig , than dance on that day , or sit in the theater . and he tells us , that the heathens objected against the iews , that they spent one day in the week in idleness . for they supposed the bare rest to be the sanctification of the day which was commanded ; and the spending any part of it in the publick worship , to be voluntary devotion . but the better sort of the iews thought the rest was appointed for the knowledge of the law , and spiritual imployments . so philo , iosephus , aben-ezra , kimchi , and menasseh ben israel . it seems most reasonable in this case to distinguish between the legal rest strictly required by the fourth commandment , and the original rest in remembrance of god's resting from the work of creation . the former was a sign between god and the people of israel , as it is often called in scripture ; and the other was a commemorative sign , but such as excited them to the worship of the creator ; and therefore the patriarchal sabbath , as bede observes , was of a spiritual nature . and such a spiritual sabbath , as s. augustin calls it , ought to be observed by christians in the duties of god's worship , as well as in spiritual and holy thoughts . but the iewish sabbath , he often-saith , doth not oblige christians . i the rather mention him , because bede followed his doctrine herein ; and that of gregory i. who was the great instrument of promoting the conversion of our ancestors to christianity . and he declares himself fully , both as to the cessation of the iewish sabbath , and the religious observation of the lord's day . it seems there were some then , as there are among us now , who were for the strict observation of the saturday-sabbath . but gregory saith , they might as well insist upon circumcision and sacrifices , as the iewish sabbath . but yet he adds , we ought on the lord's day to abstain from worldly imployments , and devote our selves unto prayers , that we may make some amends for the weeks negligence , by the devotions on that day . and this devoting the lord's day to the service of god , is entred into the body of the canon law ; and taken out of ivo , and by him from the canons of the gallican church , as appears by several councils . our lyndwood mentions that canon as in force here , die dominicâ nihil aliud agendum , nisi deo vacandum . and he takes some pains to explain it , by distinguishing , 1. works servile materially and formally , as plowing , sowing , markets , law-days , &c. these are generally forbidden . 2. acts spiritual materially and finally , as all acts of piety and devotion , and these we ought to attend upon with care and diligence . 3. acts not servile in themselves , but done for a servile end , as studies and designs for gain . 4. acts servile in themselves , but not so in their end ; as the man's taking up his couch on the sabbath-day , whom christ cured . he affirms , that there is a moral part in the fourth commandment , which , he saith , is a spiritual rest , or a time set apart for god's service : which he takes from aquinas , who saith the substance of the command is moral ; but he doth not make it to be one day in seven , but some determinate time , which , he saith , the church may appoint ; but then it must be imployed in the service of god ( vacare rebus divinis ) as things were said to be sanctified under the law , which were applied to god's service . but notwithstanding this judgment of aquinas , some great men in the church of rome have thought one day in seven , moral ; and that the proportion which god himself had appointed , cannot be lessened . for altho' mankind could not by natural reason find out the proportion , yet being once revealed , it doth not cease to oblige , unless something figurative and symbolical , or peculiar to the iewish nation be discovered in it . bellarmin makes that the reason of the institution of the lord's day , because god's law required that one day in seven should be set apart for the worship of god ; but the apostles thought it not fit to observe the iewish sabbath , and therefore changed it into the lord's day . covarruvias saith , that all divines agree with aquinas , that there is something moral in the fourth command , which continues to oblige ; and that the lord's day is of divine institution . and to him the roman editors of the canon law referr , as to this matter . azorius confesseth , that the observation of the lord's day hath something of the divine and natural law in it , which requires one day in a week should be consecrated to the service of god , and that it is most agreeable to reason . and he adds , that panormitan , sylvester , and other canonists held the lord's day to be of divine institution . suarez saith , that the church doth observe one day in seven by virtue of the divine law ; that proportion being so agreeable to natural reason , that it cannot be altered . thomas waldensis , who lived here in the time of h. 5. observes , that even then there were two extreams in mens opinions about the observation of the lord's day ; some allowed no kind of work , and others , any . but he shews , that the law of nature requires some solemn days for divine worship ; and that then there ought to be a rest from other labours , because they hinder the mind from that attention necessary to the service of god : and necessary works are left to a few , that others may be more at liberty . in the saxon laws we find many against the profanation of the lord's day by slavish imployments , by markets and trading , by folkmotes and law-suits , &c. so that great care was taken then , that the lord's day should be duly observed . after the norman times , we have several constitutions to inforce the strict observation of the lord's day . in the time of h. 6. hubert de burgo saith , that custom may derogate from other holy-days , but not from the lord's day ; because they are not commanded by god , as that is . since the reformation our book of homilies goes upon the same grounds which were used in the saxon times , viz. that the iewish sabbath doth not oblige us ; but however to observe the like proportion of time , and devote it to the service of god. mr. hooker saith , that we are to account the sanctification of one day in seven a duty which god's immutable law doth exact for ever . but what is meant by this sanctification of one day in seven ? if it be understood according to the old canons , it will fill scrupulous minds with more doubts and fears about the right observation of it . origen saith , the observation of the christian sabbath lies in these things ; 1. a forbearance of worldly business . 2. attendance on the publick worship . 3. divine meditation on things invisible and future . haec est observatio sabbati christiani . and in another place , he requires besides publick worship , private meditation and reading the holy scriptures . s. chrysostom insists very much upon the same in several places , and on different occasions . and altho' it be in his popular sermons , yet he would certainly not put them upon any thing , but what he thought very fit to be done . and they must have a mean opinion of him , who think his eloquence carried him too far in this matter . i shall conclude with the opinion of lyndwood , a learned and judicious canonist ; and he observes a threefold sanctification of the lord's day . 1. by abstinence from sin , which is necessary at all times . 2. by abstinence from such bodily labours as hinder the mind's attendance upon god's service . 3. by the whole imployment of our minds in divine matters ; and this he calls the perfect observation of it . these things i have the more largely insisted upon , to shew , that the religious observation of the lord's day , is no novelty started by some late sects and parties among us , but that it hath been the general sense of the best part of the christian world , and is particularly inforced upon us of the church of england , not only by the homilies , but by the most ancient ecclesiastical law among us . but this is not all , for the ancient as well as modern canons require the observation of holy-days likewise . the canons of egbert require not only prayers , but preaching then , can. 1. 3. the council of cloveshoo , can. 13. distinguishes the holy-days relating to our saviour , from the rest ; and saith , they are to be observed in a solemn and uniform manner , and the rest according to the roman martyrology ; which , i suppose , were those repeated then in the diptychs of the church ; which custom continued longer at rome , than in other churches ; but it was generally disused before the time of charles the great . the custom in rome , in gregory's time , was to observe the saints days with the solemn service at one church , as appears by his homilies on the evangelists , which were many of them preached on those occasions ; as of s. felicitas , hom 3. s. agnes , hom. 11 , 12. s. felix , hom. 13. s. pancrace , hom. 27. &c. and of others who were roman martyrs ; and therefore had a particular solemnity appointed for them . but as to other saints days , it appears by the antiphonarius and sacramentary of gregory i. that they had particular anthems and collects proper for them in the offices of the day ; but i do not find that the generality of the people were so strictly tied up , when the offices were over , as they were on the lord's days , and the greater festivals relating to our saviour . in the council of cloveshoo , can. 13. i observe , that the natalitia sanctorum , i.e. the anniversary saints days , were observed with particular psalmody and anthems ; and can. 17. the days of gregory and augustin , the two great instruments of converting the nation , were only to be kept as holy-days by the clergy , without any particular obligation on all the people . so that the holy-days of strict observation then , seem to have been no other than those which relate to our saviour , called dominicae dispensationis in carne festivitates ; the rest had some proper offices which were performed on their days ; but the people were to attend them , as well as they could ; but after there was not this strictness required , as upon the greater holy-days ; and as it was in the church of rome afterwards , when they made the obligation of conscience to extend to all holy-days appointed by the church . but it is observable , ( 1. ) that this obligation is taken from those canons which mention only the lord's day , as appears by bellarmin . ( 2. ) that they kept up the distinction of greater and lesser holy-days . ( 3. ) that they allow the bishop to dispense , as to some works on holy-days . lyndwood observes , that the abstinence from work is not alike , but as the church hath required it ; and that if a bishop's licence cannot be had , a less will serve . our church , can. 13. requires holy-days to be observed with works of piety , charity , and sobriety ; but gives no rule as to abstinence from works , or the strict obligation of conscience . 2. i now come to the particular duties of the clergy on the days which are solemnly devoted to the service of god. 1. the constant and devout attendance upon , and solemn reading the prayers of the church , as they are appointed . in the old saxon canons the presbyters are required to officiate constantly at prayers in their churches ; so in the council at cloveshoo ; can. 8. the canons of egbert , can. 2. canons of edgar , can. 45. but how if the people will not come to the prayers ? you ought , what lies in you , to remove the causes of such neglect ; which arises generally from these things ; either a gross stupidity and regardlesness of religion , which is too common in the world , or from prejudice and principles of education , or the interest of a party ; or from not reading the prayers with that attention and devotion which is fit to raise an esteem of them . the other two , you ought to do what you can to remove ; but this is your own fault if you do it not . we are not to please the fancies of people by an affected variety of expressions in prayers ; but we ought to do what we can to excite their affections , which is done as much by the due manner of reading , as by figures in speaking . and the people are uneasie at staying , when they see the minister read them so fast , as though he minded nothing so much as to be at the end of them ; or when he mangles them so , as if he had a mind to make the people out of love with them . 2. the next duty is preaching ; and truly that need to be looked after , when the esteem of our profession depends so much upon it . we have none of those methods which those on both sides make so much use of ; we can neither comply with the people in gestures , and phrases , and enthusiastick heats , nor with the superstitious devotions and priest-craft of others . of all churches ours hath the least reason to be charged with it , since they let go so many advantages over the people by the reformation . thanks be to god , we have scripture , and reason , and antiquity of our side ; but these are dry and insipid things to the common people , unless some arts be used to recommend them . but since our main support lies in the honesty and justice of our cause , without tricks and devices , we ought to look very well to that part of our profession which keeps up any reputation among the people ; and that is preaching . those who are so weak or lazy , as to be glad to have that laid aside too , in a great measure , never well considered the design of our profession , or the way to support it . it 's true , for some time preaching was an extraordinary thing in the church ; and none but great and eloquent men of authority in the church were permitted to preach , and the greatest bishops were then the preachers , as appears by the sermons of s. ambrose , s. chrysostom , s. augustin , &c. and even some of the bishops of rome , whatever sozomen saith , were frequent preachers , as appears by gregory's homilies on ezekiel and the gospels . and if it were not then practised he did very ill to complain of the burden of it , and the danger of neglecting it . but in other churches while the bishop and the presbyters lived together , before parochial cures were settled , the presbyters had no constant office of preaching , but as the bishops appointed them occasionally . but afterwards , when the presbyters were fixed in their cures , they were required to be very diligent and careful in preaching , or instructing the people committed to their charge , as may be seen in many early canons of the gallican church ; and so it was here in england : council of cloveshoo , c. 8. 14. egbert , can. 3. and that not only in the moving way in the pulpit , but in the familiar and instructing way , which we call catechizing ; concil . cloveshoo , c. 11. can. egbert . 6. both ought to be done , because they are both very useful . the principles and foundations of religion must be well laid , to make the people have any taste or relish of preaching ; otherwise it is like reading mathematicks to those who understand not numbers or figures . erasmus observes , that the sense of religion grows very cold without preaching ; and that the countess of richmond , mother to h. 7. had such a sense of the necessity of it in those times , that she maintained many preachers at her own charges , and imployed bishop fisher to find out the best qualified for it . and since the reformation the church of rome hath been more sensible of the necessity of it , as appears by the council of trent . cardinal borromeo , one of the most celebrated saints since that time , frequently insists upon it , gives directions about it , and speaks of it as a thing , which tends very much to the glory of god , and the salvation of souls . and to the same purpose other great men among them , as cardinal palaeotus , godeau , bordenave , and others . would it not then be a great shame for us , who pretend to a zeal for reformation and the true religion , to neglect or lessen the reputation of those things which our adversaries have learnt from us , and glory in them ; and those are diligence in preaching and catechizing ? which none can despise who value religion , none can neglect who have any regard to the interest or honour of their profession . 3. the next duty is the solemn administration of the sacraments , which ought to be done in the publick assemblies , where there is not a great reason to the contrary . the saxon canons are express , that baptism , unless in case of necessity , should be administred only in due times and places , egber . can. 10 , 11. while the ancient discipline was kept up , and baptism only celebrated at the great festivals , there was a necessity of its being publick ; and the catechumens underwent several scrutinies , which lasted several days in the face of the church , as s. augustin observes , after they had been kept under private examination for some time before . but when whole nations were not only converted , but infants generally baptized , the former method of discipline was changed . but yet the church retained her right as to satisfaction about the due admission of her members . and that is the true reason why , after private baptism , the child is required to be brought to the publick congregation . for baptism is not intended to be done before a select number of witnesses , but in the face of the church , which is the regular and solemn way ; however , the bishop may dispense in some particular cases , which he judges reasonable . at first baptism was administred publickly , as occasion served , by rivers ; as bede saith , paulinus baptized many in the rivers , before oratories or churches were built . afterwards the baptistery was built at the entrance of the church , or very near it ; which is mentioned by athanasius , s. chrysostom , s. ambrose , s. augustin , &c. the baptistery then had a large bason in it , which held the persons to be baptized , and they went down by steps into it . afterwards when immersion came to be disused , fonts were set up at the entrance of churches : but still the place was publick . but in case of necessity there is a form prescribed ; and i do not see how any , without leave , can use the form of publick baptism in private houses ; which is against both our ancient and modern canons . in the greek church it is deprivation to do it ; and the synod under photius confirms it , both as to the eucharist and baptism , because publick order is to be preserved . but it is there understood to be done in opposition to the bishop's authority , whose consent may make the case different , if they judge it reasonable . but ministerial officers are not judges in an equitable case against a standing rule . 4. another duty of the parochial clergy is , to be able and ready to resolve penitential cases , which relate to the internal court of conscience , and not the external and judiciary court , which respects the honour of the church , as to scandalous offences committed by the members of it . and this takes in the private and occasional duties of the parochial clergy ; for they ought to inform themselves of the spiritual condition of their people , that they may be able to give suitable advice and directions to them both in health and sickness : but chiefly to be able to give them safe and seasonable advice under troubles of conscience by reason of wilful sins . duarenus , a very considerable lawyer , thinks the main business of the clergy , as to the cure of souls , lies in the power of binding and loosing , i. e. in dealing aright with the consciences of men , as to the guilt of their sins . and the rules of the penitential court , are different from those of the ecclesiastical court , as well as the end is different . in the saxon times , there were both here . there were ecclesiastical law which related to judicial cases , wherein a publick penance was injoyned in order to the churches satisfaction . but there were many cases which were not publick , and yet great care was to be used , as to the direction of penitents , as appears by the penitentials of theodore and bede in the saxon times . whereby we learn that a difference was to be observed , as to the nature of offences , and the circumstances of persons and actions , and the measure of contrition ; and the particular method is set down in the penitential books , which was in very material circumstances different from the methods used in the church of rome . but it is a thing necessary for every parochial minister to be able to settle doubting consciences , and to put them into the best methods of avoiding sin for the future , without which the absolution of the priest signifies nothing . for where god doth not absolve , the church cannot . 5. giving a good example to the people committed to your charge . this is often mentioned in the saxon canons : council at cloveshoo , c. 8. canons of egbert , 14 , 15 , 18 , 19 , 33. in the laws of alfred , c. 3. of edward c. 3. constit. of odo , c. 4 , 5. of edgar , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 64. of canutus , c. 26. and in the conclusion of one collection of his laws are these words , happy is that shepherd , who by his good life and doctrine leads his flock to eternal and heavenly ioys ; and happy is that flock that follows such a shepherd , who hath rescued them out of the devil's hands , and put them into god's . 6. lastly the performance of all these duties supposes a constant residence among your people ; without which it is impossible to discharge them in such a manner , as to give them and your selves full satisfaction . this , i am sensible , is a very nice and tender point ; and the difficulties of it do arise from these things : on one side it is said , 1. that there is an allowance by the law given to several persons to hold more benefices than one ; and since the distribution of benefices is not by the law of god , but by the law of the land , what fault is there in making use of the privileges which the law gives ? but there cannot be constant residence in more places than one . 2. that the general service of the church is more to be preferred than taking care of a particular parish ; because the necessary duties of a parish may be supplied by persons approved by the bishop , and a single living seldom affords a sufficient competency for persons to be capable of publick service . 3. that the way of subsistence for the clergy , is now much altered from what it was when celibacy was enjoyned . for a competency was always supposed where residence was strictly required ; and what was a competency to a single person , is not so to a family . 4. that the church hath a power of relaxing the severity of ancient canons from the different circumstances of things ; and when the general good of the church may be more promoted therein ; as in the removal of clergymen from one diocess to another , and the translation of bishops . 5. that the case is now very different , as to dispensations , from what it was in the church of rome , as to the number of benefices , and the manner of obtaining them ; that a great restraint is laid by our laws upon pluralities , and our own metropolitan is the judge when they are fit to be granted . but on the other side it is objected , 1. that in the first constitution of parochial churches , every incumbent was bound to a strict residence ; so in the canons of egbert , can. 25. presbyters are said to be settled in those churches , which had a house and glebe belonging to them ; and many canons were then expresly made , that no person should have more than one church ; and it is said in the capitulars , that this had been several times decreed . and so it is in herardus his collection of canons , can. 49. in isaac lingonensis , tit. 1. c. 24. in chrodegangus , c. 67. in ivo carnotensis , part . 3. c. 51. in regino , l. 1. c. 254. the like we find in the spanish churches , concil . tolet. 16. c. 5. and thence in the canon●law , c. 10. q. 3. c. 3. and in the greek churches , concil . 7. can. 15. c. 21. q. 1. c. 1. and as soon as the abuse crept in in these western churches , it was complained of , and endeavoured to be redressed , concil . paris . 6. c. 49. concil . aquisgran . 2. part . 2. c. 5. concil . metens . c. 3. that afterwards , not meerly the mendicant friars complained of them , as some have suggested , but some of the greatest bishops have been zealous against them , as gulielmus parisiensis , peraldus , archbishop of lions , iacobus de vitriaco bishop of acon , robert de c●orton cardinal ; guiard bishop of cambray ; and gregory ix . declared , that he could only dispense with the penalty of the law. after a solemn disputation at paris , it was determined against pluralities , if one benefice be sufficient ; and all the divines joyned with the bishop therein , except two ; so that it seemed to be the current opinion of the learned and pious men of that time. aquinas saith , it is a doubtful point , but cajetan is positive against them . so that all the zeal against pluralities , is not to be imputed to the piques of the friars against the secular clergy ; although there is no question but they were so much the more earnest in it ; but in the council of trent the bishops of spain were the most zealous , as to the point of residence , and the friars against it , as appears by catharinus and others . 2. setting aside all authorities , the argument in point of conscience , seems the strongest against non-residence ; because persons have voluntarily undertaken the cure of souls within such limits ; and although the bounds be fixed by human authority , yet since he hath undertaken such a charge personally , knowing those bounds , it lies upon his conscience to discharge the duties incumbent upon him , which cannot be done without constant residence , as the magistrates are bound in conscience to do their duty , although the bounds are settled by human laws : and so in the case of property , human laws bind so that it is a sin to invade what is settled by them . and if it be left to a man's conscience , whether a man answers his obligation more by personal attendance , or by a curate ; whether the honour of religion , and the good of souls be more promoted , and the peace of his own mind secured by one or the other , it is no hard matter to judge on which side it must go . it is impossible to defend all the arguments used in the old canons against pluralities , as that polygamy is unlawful under the gospel : so that , as a bishop hath but one city , and a man but one wife , so a presbyter ought to have but one church : that no man can serve two masters , &c. but all their reasons were not of this sort . for , the council of toledo speaks home , that one man cannot perform his duty to more than one charge . to the same purpose the sixth council at paris ; and withal , that it brings a scandal on the christian church , and an hinderance to publick worship , and the good of souls , and savours too much of a worldly mind ; which are weighty arguments . the only considerable thing on the other side , is , that the bishops are to take care that the places be duly supplied ; but whether it be done by parson , vicar or curate , is not material . but this will not hold . for , ( 1. ) the care of souls is committed personally to him that doth undertake it . and a regard is had to the qualifications of the person for such a trust , by the patron that presents , and the bishop who admits and institutes the person so qualified . ( 2. ) the old canons were very strict as to personal residence , so as to fix them in their cures from which they could not go away when they pleased , which they called promissionem stabilitatis . our saxon canons are clear , as to the personal cure , can. egbert . 1. 4 , 6. populo sibi commisso ; and no presbyter could leave his cure and go to another only for honour or profit , can. 13. and none could go from one bishop to another , without his diocesan's leave , concil . herudford . c. 5. egbert . de eccles. instit. p. 97 , 100. and when the bishop gives institution , he commits the care of souls to the incumbent , and not meerly the care that divine offices be there performed . but yet it is well observed by aquinas , that if the having more benefices than one were a thing evil in it self , it could in no case be dispensed with ; but there are some actions which in general are irregular , yet in some cases may be justified ; especially , if they be extraordinary , as to publick service and usefulness , &c. and to the same purpose cajetan speaks ; but he saith , the cases that make it lawful , must relate to a publick , and not a private good ; but he mentions these things which excuse from residence ; 1. lawful impediments , as to health , &c. 2. publick service . and others say , a geometrical proportion ought to be observed in the distribution of ecclesiastical benefices , and not an arithmetical , i. e. a regard ought to be had to the merits and capacities of persons ; as a commander hath more pay than many common souldiers ; but this reaches only to the value , and not to the number of benefices . but the question still remains , whether a legal dispensation take not off the obligation in point of conscience , since it is allowed by law , and the curate appointed by the bishop , who committed the cure of souls to him ? in answer to this , we must consider , 1. that the law proposes in dispensations very allowable ends , as publick service , incouragement of learning , reward of merit ; and therefore doctors by favour have not the privilege which others have ; and in case of incompetency , as it was then judged , no legal dispensation was needful . 2. some ancient canons took care of the supply of the place by competent persons , and in that case abated the rigour of the canon . for sirmondus saith in the canon of the council of nantz , against pluralities , this clause was added , unless he hath presbyters under him to supply the duties of his place : and the same clause is in regino , l. 1. c. 254. and regino puts it among the articles of enquiry , as to the clergy , if any had more churches than one without presbyters to assist him . and in their old admonition to them at visitations it is to the same purpose , but in others it is left out . thomassin is of opinion , that the former enquiry related to those who had chapels , and not to more churches ; because then there were none that had titles upon anothers benefice ; but these words are express as to more churches . it 's true , there were no such titles then ; for a title in the old canon law , was the relation which a clergyman stood in to the bishop of his diocess , being one of his clergy ; and so the greek canonists understand a man 's not being ordained without a title , and not having two churches ; i. e. not to have relation to two diocesses , and so sine titulo , is without being owned by some bishop ; and this was that which they thought ought to be strictly observed ; and to which purpose many canons were made , both ancient and later ; and if any deserted their bishop , they were liable to deprivation . afterwards the word , title , came to be applied to parochial churches ; but there were some who found out , that the ancient canons had another sense . thence in the council of placentia in the canon sanctorum dist. 70. c. 2. it was decreed , that one might have two churches in the same diocess , but not two preferments in several cathedrals . and in the council of clermont , a. d. 1095. the reason is given , because according to the canons no man could have-two titles ; and every one was bound to hold to the title to which he was first ordained . but after all , the council of nantz shews plainly , that more parochial titles were then allowed , if well provided for , by such persons as the bishop of the diocess approved . now this very much alters the state of the case ; for then the obligation is real , and not personal . 3. it was agreed by the ancient canons , that where there was an incompetency of maintenance , they allowed an union for support ; now that is but the bishop's act in joyning what had been divided , supposing a sufficient subsistence : and a reasonable distance with the bishop's allowance , hath the same equity ; i.e. the bishop's act may unite two small benefices for a support , not by a perpetual union , but so long as he sees cause , which our law doth still allow , under such a value . but it is rather a dispensation than an union ; for the rights continue distinct . in the court of rome there were prerogative unions ad vitam , which were very scandalous , and are owned by the best canonists to be destructive of all order , and invented to defeat the canons against pluralities . but the unions which the law allows , are only those where two distinct benefices are made one for a competent subsistence ; and then if the union be reasonable , the dispensation within due distance is so too . balsamon saith , in the greek church pluralities are not forbidden , if they be near , and under the same bishop ; but they did not allow the same man to be under two bishops . in the capitulars that clause is added , that no man shall have more livings than one , si facultas suppetit , if it affords a reasonable subsistence . and therefore in case of incompetency of maintenance , of a good provision for curates , and of publick service , the severity of the ancient canons is with reason abated , and a person is supposed to undertake the cure , with those measures which the law and canons allow . but every man who regards the doing his duty out of conscience , will consider how much lies upon himself ; and that the original intention of the church and laws , was , that no man should undertake more than he was willing and ready to discharge , as far as one man's abilities could go . for , in great cities , one great parish requires more than several churches in the countrey ; and in such cases an equitable construction must be put upon such canons , which require personal performance of these duties . of the maintenance of the parochial clergy , by law . the subject i intend now to consider , is the incouragement which the parochial clergy have by law for the doing their duties : which are the manse , the oblations , and the tithes . i. the manse , or house and glebe . in the canons of egbert it is said , can. 25. that an entire manse ought to belong to every church , without any other than ecclesiastical service . by a manse , mr. selden saith , in the old charters the same is meant as a casat or hyde of land. bignonius and sirmondus say , so much glebe as was an imployment for an husbandman and two servants . spelman saith , it takes in the house too . lyndwood saith , as much land as would imploy a yoke of oxen ; and so the gloss on the canon law. but in another place the gloss saith , the manse is the original endowment of the church , without which it cannot be supplied : and without which it could not be consecrated . for the endowment was first to be produced before the building , collatâ primitùs donatione solemni , are the words of the canon law. and the same appears by concil . valent. 3. c. 9. concil . bracar . 2. c. 5. vit. udalrici c. 7. regino l. 1. c. 23 , 24. which is there explained to be a substantial sustenance for those who were to attend the service of that church . and in the acts of consecration of a parochial church in baluzius , the bishop in the first place declares himself satisfied with the endowment , unde dignè domus dei sustentaretur . and upon this the original right of patronage was founded , not upon the soil , which gave no title , where there was not a church built and endowed with a competent subsistence . so that all advowsons or rights of presentation in private patrons , were at first appendant to manors , and not in gross ; because the right came from the endowment out of the manor : and the name of patron in the sense of the feudal law , is the same with lord of the fee , and so beneficium is a feudal term ; and till the feudal law prevailed , the name of patrom is rarely used in this sense . and when it came to be used , the patrons in france would have brought those who had their benefices to a kind of feudal service , and to have received investiture from them . this mr. selden drives at , as though the patrons had the right of investiture belonging to them , because some such practice is often complained of in the french canons , and as often condemned , not meerly by ecclesiastical canons , but by as good laws as any were then made . it cannot be denied that bad practices are the occasion of making good laws ; but doth it follow that those practices which were against law , were the law of that time ? yet this is mr. selden's way of arguing ; he grants , that there were laws made , but they were little obeyed . must we therefore conclude those illegal practices to have been the standing law , and the laws themselves to be illegal ? there were two things aimed at by those patrons . 1. to keep the clergy in a sole dependance on themselves , witout regard to the bishop's authority . 2. to make such bargains with them as they thought fit . both these were thought necessary to be redressed by laws , since the canons were slighted by them . and if the practice be good against law in one case , why not in the other also ? why is not simony justified , as well as the patron 's absolute power over the incumbents ? but the laws were severe against both . for in the time of lud. pius , a. d. 816. there was a solemn assembly of the estates of the empire , where several ecclesiastical laws were passed , and among the rest , these two : 1. that no presbyters should be put in , or put out of churches , without the authority and consent of the bishops ; and that the bishops should not refuse those who were presented , if they were probabilis vitae & doctrinae , i.e. such as the bishops could not object against either for life or learning . 2. that every church should have an entire manse belonging to it , free from any feudal service ; but if they had other estates of their own , for them they were to answer to the lords of the manor , as others did . and from hence this came into the collections of ivo , regino , burchardus , and gratian , and passed for a law generally received . as to the former , a new sanction was added to it in another assembly at worms , a. d. 829. c. 1. and repeated in the capitulars , l. 5. c. 98. addit . 4. c. 95. and the like as to the latter , l. 5. c. 100. capit. a. 829. c. 4. but it seems there were some still continued obstinate in their former practices , and therefore these laws were reinforced in another assembly , a. d. 869. in the time of carolus calvus , who mentions the laws of his father and grandfather to the same purpose , c. 9. and there takes notice of the contrivances made use of to defeat the intention of those laws ; and the bottom of all is there said to be abominable simony . which shews , what it was which these patrons aimed at , by claiming investiture without the bishop . and it was then judged necessary , that the bishop's consent was required to prevent this mischief . but still some patrons required feudal service for the glebe they had given to the church ; but the law commands them to restore it free from such service , capit l. 5. c. 100. addit . l. 4. c. 98 , 163. and after much struggling , hinomarus , who lived at that time , saith , that these laws were observed . the patron 's right by virtue of the endowment , was not disputed ; but an arbitrary power , as to the incumbents , was utterly denied them ; and they were put under the bishop's care , who was to receive complaints against them , and to proceed according to the churches canons . but i am apt to think that all this stir in france did not arise from the pretence of original donation and endowment of churches , but from the infeodation of church lands and titles , by charles martel ( as an old ms. in filesacus saith ) and others in france , whose custom it was to give them in recompence to their souldiers , who then looked on them as their own , and were hardly brought to any reasonable allowance for the clergy which supplied them . these were called beneficia in the capitulars , and they were to pay nonae & decimae , i.e. a fifth part out of them , which was obtained with much difficulty , as appears by the many laws made about them . in the council at leptins , a.d. 743. carolomannus , son to charles martel , owns the letting out some of the church lands sub precario & censu , upon a reserved rent , can. 2. capit. l. 5. c. 3. but then it was barely for life . but the consequence was , that it was very hard to recover either the lands or the reserved rents , and they put in clergy-men , and put them out as they pleased , because they held these lands as beneficiary tenures from the crown . so that it was the work of more than an age to put the church there in any tolerable condition . but this seems to be very much mistaken , when it is brought to prove the right of patronage from the endowment , as to the disposal of benefices . but the right of patronage by the first building and endowing the church , is owned by the civil law in iustinian's novels , 123. c. 18. and two things were there required ; 1. a sufficient maintenance for the clergy who were nominated . 2. the bishop's satisfaction as to their fitness ; about which he speaks in another novel , 56. tit. 12. c. 2. and he elsewhere requires , that before any churches were built , the bishop should see that there were sufficient maintenance for those who were to officiate , novel , 66. tit. 22. the same right obtained here upon the same grounds , as appears by the barons answer to gregory ix . who affirm , that they had it ever since christianity was founded here . they mean , ever since parochial churches were endowed by their ancestors ; for there could be no such right of patronage before . and such patrons were here called advocati ecclesiae , as appears by ioh. sarisbur . ep. 6. 119. and the ius advocationis , as our lawyers tell us , is a right which a person hath to present to a vacant benefice in his own name ; which is agreeable to what bracton and fleta had said long before . but it doth not appear by them how the names of patron and advocate came to be so applied . among the romans , saith asconius pedianus , the patron was he that pleaded the cause of another ; the advocate , he that appeared in court on his behalf . but this doth not reach to the ius advocationis which we are now about . in the ninety seventh canon of the african code , an allowance is made for the churches to have advocates to solicite their causes at court. from hence the greater churches and monasteries had their proper advocates appointed them by the king , as bignonius observes ; and in the old charters of aub. miraeus , several such advocates are appointed ; and it appears to have been an honorary title , and great men were pleased with it . miraeus faith , it was accounted a considerable honour at that time . and so by degrees the founders of parochial churches came to have the title of patrons and advocates of them ; and the right they injoyed , the right of advowson as well as patronage ( not as some ridiculously talk of advocat se , or advocat alium ) because the trust and care of those churches , endowed by their ancestors , was fallen to them , and they were bound to look after , and to defend the rights of them ; and so lyndwood explains it . ii. the next thing to be considered , is the oblations of the people , which in those elder times were so free and large , that ( which may seem incredible now ) there were persons who would build churches on their own land to have a share in the oblations , as is affirmed in one of the spanish councils , and there forbidden with great severity . it was not , as the gloss on the canon law understands it , to make a bargain for the right of patronage , but it is expressed to have an equal share with the clergy in the oblations of the people . it is observed by agabardus , that the devotion of persons in the first ages was so great , that there was no need to make laws or canons for the supplies of churches , since they were so amply provided for by the liberality of the people . thence we read of the deposita pietatis in tertullian , which were voluntary oblations ; and out of which were made divisiones mensurnae in s. cyprian , and the sportulae , which were the allowances made to the clergy out of the common stock ; and they who received them , and not those who gave them ( as mr. selden fancies ) were called sportulantes fratres ; and the allowances were then stiled stipes & oblationes , which were so considerable , that st. cyprian blamed some for their setting their hearts too much upon them ; stipes , oblationes , lucra desiderant , quibus prius insatiabiles incubabant ; which could not be said of any meer necessary subsistence ; these they received tanquam decimas ex fructibus , as st. cyprian speaks , in lieu of tithes at that time , when the most of the christian church inhabited the cities , and gave out of their stock to maintain the church , and those who attended upon the service of it . but when christianity came to spread into the countries , then a more fixed and settled maintenance was required , but so as to retain somewhat of the ancient custom in voluntary oblations . no sooner was christianity settled in france , but we read of lands given to the church by clodovaeus after his conversion ; these are owned by the first council of orleans called in his time , a. d. 511. and were put into the bishop's hands , and to be distributed by him for repairs of churches , maintenance of the clergy , and other pious uses , can. 5. 14 , 15. but besides these , we read still of oblations made by the people on the altar , both in the mother-church , and in parochial churches . if in the mother-church one moiety went to the bishop , the other to the clergy ; if in the other , only the third part to the bishop . in the second council of mascon , can. 4. we find it required , that all the people make an oblation of bread and wine at the altar ; and this was a. d. 585. but besides , the next canon insists on the payment of tithes , as founded on the law of god , and the ancient custom of the church , which is thereby reinforced ; unde statuimus & decernimus ut mos antiquus reparetur ; which words are not fairly left out by mr. selden , because they shew that there was only in this canon a renewing of an ancient custom , which had obtained , but was now growing into disuse . for this council of mascon was called on purpose to restore what they found too much declining , as to religion ; and they begin with the observation of the lord's day , and after , add this , wherein they complain of the neglect of that which their predecessors observed , as founded on the law of god. so that there can be no doubt of the custom of paying tithes in france , from the time of receiving christianity ; and that this custom declined as their religion did . in the council of nantz , about a. d. 658. oblations and tithes are mentioned together , c. 10. as making up the churches stock , which was to be divided into four parts , to the bishop , and to the clergy , and to repairs , and to the poor . but besides the oblations of the living , it was then common to make oblations at their death ; and these were called oblationes defunctorum , and severe canons were made against the detainers of them , concil . vas. i. c. 4. agath . c. 4 , 13. q. 2 , 9 , 10 , 11. and so much appears by those canons which forbid exactions at funerals , concil . tribur . c. 16. nannet . c. 6. where an exception is made as to voluntary gifts , either by the parties deceased , or by the executors . but here , in the saxon times there was a funeral duty to be paid , called pecunia sepulchralis & symbolum animae , and a saxon soul-shot ; this is required by the council at aenham , and inforced by the laws of canutus , c. 14. and was due to the church the party deceased belonged to , whether he were there buried or not . some take this for the foundation of mortuaries ; but then the money must be turned into goods . for in glanvil's time , a freeholder is allowed to make his will of other things , provided that he give his first best thing to his lord , and his second to the church . and this was not originally pro animâ defuncti , as lyndwood thinks , from the modern canonists de consecrat . c. 12. but it was a right of the church settled on the decease of a member of it , as appears by the law of canutus . others have said , that it was in lieu of tithes substracted , and oblations not duly made . so simon langham in his constitution about mortuaries , which was made to explain a former constitution of robert winchelsee , because the people were observed not to pay their tithes and oblations as they ought . but he did not go about to settle a right which had not been before , but to prevent suits about that which was to be taken for a mortuary ; and he declares , that where there was a choice of three or more , the second was to be for the mortuary , de sepult . f. 93. b. so that r. winchelsee supposes it to be an ancient right . indeed in the cotton ms. of the council of merton , where this constitution is extant , the reason is given , that it was required by way of compensation for the neglect of tithes and oblations . in the synod of winchester , in his time , a constitution is made for the uniform payment of mortuaries in that diocess , the second best of the goods or chattels was to be paid in lieu of tithes unpaid . in the synod of exeter of pet. quivil , 15 e. 1. the reason is given for the neglect of all parochial duties ; but there it is said , that some pleaded custom against the payment of them , and others , as to the manner ; and although this council endeavoured to settle an uniform payment , yet the statute of circumspectè agatis , leaves the whole matter to custom , ubi mortuarium dari consuevit . from whence my lord coke inferrs , that there is no mortuary due by law , but only by custom . the true inference was , that the contrary custom had altered the law from what it was in the times of canutus and glanvil . but that the prevailing custom became the standing law , as to mortuaries , appears by the statute of 21 h. 8. c. 6. which limits the payment where the custom continued , but allows liberty for free oblations : and this free oblation was then called cors presentè , and was distinct from the mortuary in lieu of tithes , as appears by the instances in sir w. dugdale . but i return to other oblations , which lyndwood distinguisheth into those by way of gift , and such as became due . for these latter , he insists on c. omnis christianus in the canon law , de consecr . d. 1. c. 69. which requires that every one who approaches the altar , make some oblation . where the gloss saith , it is but counsel at other times , but a command on the festivals . for this 16 q. 1. c. 55. is produced , quas populus dare debet ; but it is there interpreted of the case of necessity : hostiensis thinks all are obliged on great festivals , and that the general custom lays an obligation ; but lyndwood thinks the custom of particular churches is to be observed . in the synod of exter before-mentioned , oblations are said to be of divine right , and that every parishioner is obliged to make them ; but the time is limited to christmas , easter , the saints-day of the church and the dedication , or all-saints . so that four times in the year they were required to make oblations after the age of fourteen . and so giles , bishop of sarum , debent offerre ex debito quater in anno . in the synod of winchester , none were so obliged till eighteen , and having goods of their own . but i observe , that in the ancient canons here , by the oblations , such things were then understood , as were for the support of the clergy : thence several canons were made against those who turned them another way . so in the council of london under archbishop stratford , oblations are declared to belong only to ecclesiastical persons . and so lyndwood saith , the goods of the church are called oblations . and in case the mother-church were appropriated , the oblations and obventions made in the chapel of ease , did not belong to the convent , but to the persons who officiated there . these were called by the name of the altarage , and were generally expressed under that name in the endowment of vicarages ; but when these were too small for the maintenance of the vicar , those small tithes which were joyned with them , were comprehended under that name ; and so it hath been resolved in the courts of law upon a solemn hearing . iohn de burgo , in his pupilla oculi , speaking of oblations , saith , that persons may be bound to them four ways : 1. by contract upon the foundation of the church , which amounts only to a pension upon endowment . 2. by promise either living or dying . 3. by necessity , when the parochial minister cannot be supported without it . 4. by custom , in the greater solemnities ; but he saith , the proportion and kind are left to discretion ; which made oblations sink so low , that the parochial clergy must have starved , if they had nothing else to support them . but besides these , he mentions occasional oblations upon particular services , as at marriages , christenings , funerals , &c. concerning which we have several constitutions against those who went about to hinder them , or to reduce them to a small quantity . the easter-offerings are none of these voluntary oblations , but a composition for personal tithes payable at that time ; of which i may have occasion to speak more afterwards . but in the saxon times here were other sorts of oblations ; as ( 1 ) the cyrycsceat or first-fruits of corn payable at s. martin's day , ina ll. 4. 62. edmund . c. 2. and is often mentioned in doomsday-book , and in fleta l. 2. c. 47. malmsb. l. 2. c. 11. and the oblation of poultrey at christmas is mentioned in doomsday , under that title . ( 2. ) there was here another kind of oblation called plow-alms , which was a peny for every plow between easter and whitsontide . this is mentioned in the laws of king ethelred , and required to be paid fifteen days after easter , although it be called eleemosyna aratralis . in the endowment of the vicarage of s. ives , plow-alms is mentioned besides the altarage and obventions . but all these oblations made a very poor subsistence for the parochial clergy . iii. and therefore i come to the main legal support of the parochial clergy , which is in tithes . concerning which i shall proceed in this method ; i. to consider the foundation in law which they stand upon . ii. the rules of law which are to be observed about them . i. as to the foundation they stand upon in point of law. my lord coke not only saith , that the parochial right of tithes is established by divers acts of parliament ; but he mentions the saxon laws before the conquest for the payment of tithes of edward and gathrun , ethelstan , edmund , edgar , canutus , and king edward ' s , confirmed by william i. hobart saith , that tithes are things of common right , and do of right belong to the church . and since parishes were erected , they are due to the parson ( except in spiritual regular cases ) or vicar of the parish . in the register of writs , a book of great authority , there is a writ of consultation for tithes , wherein they are owned to be of common right , as well as immemorial custom , due to the rector within the limits of his parish . lord chief justice dyer saith , that tithes can never be extinguished , because they are of common right . the same is affirmed by justice dodderidge in the case of fosse and parker . in pieddle and napper's case , tithes are said to be an ecclesiastical inheritance collateral to the estate in land , and of their own nature due to an ecclesiastical person : and , that all lands of common right are to pay tithes . therefore it is said by hobart in slade's case , that no land can be discharged of tithes , although it may be discharged of the actual payment . in popham's reports we read , that it is a maxim in law , that all persons ought to pay tithes , and all lands shall be charged with them of common right . so that if the judgment of some of the greatest men of the profession may be taken , nothing can be more clear and evident than the legal right of tithes . but it falls out unhappily among us , that nothing hath been the occasion of so much difference and contention between the incumbents and their parishioners , than the point of the payment of tithes . so that some have wished them changed into some other way of maintenance ; but i cannot see any reason why so ancient , so legal , so just a maintenance should be changed into any other , which would less answer the end , and be liable to as many difficulties , if not far more ; but every change of this kind , where we cannot be secured of the event , is very dangerous , especially when it proceeds from want of judgment or ill-will to the profession ; both which are to be suspected in this case . if the ill humours of some people could be changed , it would signifie far more to the quiet of the clergy , than altering their legal maintenance . therefore the best way is to enquire into the reasons of this dissatisfaction , that we may find out the proper methods to remove it , and thereby to prevent the troublesom and vexatious suits about them , which make the parochial clergy so uneasie , and their labour often unsuccessful with the people . and there is a twofold dissatisfaction which lies at the bottom of most of these contentions about tithes . 1. in point of conscience . 2. in point of law. 1. in point of conscience . there is a sort of people among us , who are very obstinate in this matter , and will rather chuse to go to prison and lie there , than pay their tithes . i have often thought whence such a stiffness should arise in a matter of legal right . if they had opposed all determinations of property by law , they had been more consistent with themselves ; but to allow the law to determine the right as to nine parts , and not as to the tenth , is not to be reconciled . for if the question be concerning the other parts , to whom they do belong , may not men as well dispute the matter of dominion and property in them ? may they not say , that the seed is our own , and the labour and charges our own ; why then shall i answer to another for the profit which arises from my pains and expence ? if it be replied , that the law hath given the property of the land to one , and the use to another , why may they not pretend this to be an unreasonable law to separate one from the other , since land was given for the use ; and the original right of dominion was from what was necessary for use ; therefore the separating right and use , is an incroachment on the natural rights of mankind . and there seems to be more colour for this , than for any to allow the laws to determine the right of nine parts to belong to the lord of the soil , but the tenth by no means to go that way , which the law of the land hath long since determined it . so that the lord of the soil either by descent or purchase , can claim no right to it ; for neither did his ancestors enjoy it , nor those who sold the land to a purchaser consider it as his own , for then he would have had the value of it . the tenth part then is set aside in valuation of estates , as already disposed of ; and the question is , whether the same law which settled the right to the other , shall determine this likewise ? is it not a part of natural injustice to detain that which by law belongs to another ? and is not the law the measure of right in cases of difference between man and man ; why then should not the law fairly and equally determine this matter , to whom the tenth of the profits belongs ? but still they say , it is against their conscience , and they cannot do it . is it against their conscience to do acts of natural justice , not to detain that from another , which of right belongs to him ? but it is in vain to argue with people , who do not judge of things by the common light of reason and justice , but by an unaccountable light within them , which none can judge of but themselves ; and in matter of interest men are the worst judges in their own case . 2. therefore i come to those who are capable of being argued with ; such , i mean , who are unsatisfied in the point of law , not in general , but in particular cases , from whence suits arise , and those are often from these causes : 1. not duly considering the just measure and extent of the rules of law for the payment of tithes . 2. not attending to the exemptions , or discharges by law from the payment of tithes . the best way i know to prevent troublesome suits about tithes , is to enquire diligently into these two things : 1. the rules of law for the payment of tithes . one might have justly expected , that in a matter of common right and daily practice , and wherein the peace and quiet of the people is so much concerned , as well as of the clergy , the rules of law should have been plain , and clear , and liable to as few exceptions as possible ; but instead of this , there is not one general rule in this matter , but hath several exceptions ; and different opinions have been about them by the great men of the law , which hath given too much occasion to the multitudes of suits which have been in the matter of tithes ; so that the clergy are not so much to blame , if they are unavoidably involved in suits by the perplexity of the law , and the different resolutions which have been made about the cases reported by them . this i shall make appear by examining some of the most general rules of law , and comparing them with the resolutions which have been made in particular cases . 1. one of the most standing rules of the law , is , that tithes are only to be paid of things which do annually increase , ex annuatis renovantibus simul & semel . but is this rule allowed in all cases ? 1. from hence coke concludes , that no tithes are to be paid of minerals , or of what is of the substance of the earth ; and so stone , turff , tinn , lead , coals , chalk , pots of earth , are denied to be titheable . but i find , 5 h. 4. n. 65. a petition of the commons was denied about being sued in the ecclesiastical courts for tithes of stone and slat taken out of their quarries . the petition was renewed , 8 h. 4. and then the king's answer was , that the former custom should continue . and so about tithes for sea-coals , 51 e. 3. n. 57. from whence it appears , that these things might be tithed by ancient custom , and that was not thought fit to be altered . but , 34 eliz. it was resolved in the kings-bench , that no tithes are due of quarries of slat or stone , in the case of lysle and wats . here was no regard to custom , and a reason is given , which deserves to be considered , viz. that he may have tithes of the grass or corn which groweth upon the surface of the land where the quarry is . but how if there be none ? as lands where quarries are , seldom afford tithes . but the note on the register saith , that if corn do grow there , tithe of it would be due however . so that here we have a rule against an ancient custom and rule too . but it cannot be denied , that fitz-herbert and brook say , that there is no tithe of quarries , or coals , or such things ; and it was so adjudged , 11 iac. and 14 iac. and in other cases since . and yet after all , rolls yields , that a custom in these cases is to be allowed ; so that the general rule is to be understood so , as there be no custom to the contrary . and as to minerals , it is determined by a late writer , that by custom tithes may be due of them , although they do not annually increase . and my lord coke mentions king iohn's grant to the bishop of exeter of the tithe of his tinn-farm . and a good author assures us , that in places of lead-mines , the tithe of lead is the chief part of the ministers maintenance . therefore my lord coke concludes his discourse of tithes with this general rule , that by custom a parson may have tithes of such things as are not titheable of common right . 2. from hence it is concluded , that no tithe can be due for houses , because they have no annual increase . this was solemnly debated in dr. grant's case , 11 iac. and that there was no tithe due , was proved by the counsel from the register , fitz. h. n. b. brook , &c. but it was resolved by the court , that although houses of themselves were not titheable , yet there might be a modus decimandi on the ground on which the houses stood , and the houses did not take away the right before ; and in most ancient cities and burroughs there was such a modus for the maintenance of their minister . i grant that there was a certain modus decimandi upon houses , but not upon the account of the ground they stood upon ; but there was a customary duty upon houses in lieu of tithes , and were accounted a sort of praedial tithes , although they were called oblationes de domibus , as lyndwood saith , and were distinct from personal tithes , for the iews were bound to pay tithes of houses , but not personal . such was the rate on houses in london : but in dr. layfield's case it was denied , that there could be a prescription of tithes upon houses , because they are to be paid only for the increase of things . what is now become of the former modus decimandi , when a prescription was here insisted upon and denied ? so that here were different opinions , a special custom was allowed upon good reason ; and here a prescription disallowed upon such a reason as would have overthrown the former custom , and yet the law was the same still . 3. from hence it would follow , that if this rule hold , things which have not an annual increase would not be titheable : then no tithe of saffron would be due , whose heads are gathered but once in three years , nor of sylva caedua , under twenty years ; and yet this was allowed in parliament at sarum , saith the register , notwithstanding it was not renewed every year . and rolls saith , that tithes shall be paid of beeches , hazle , willows , holly , alder , maple , even after twenty years , because they are not timber . but what if willows be used for timber ? then hobart saith , they ought to be excepted . if young trees grow in a nursery , and be sold , it is allowed that tithes shall be paid of them , and these are not renewed every year . and what becomes now of this general rule , when so many exceptions are made to it ? 4. if this rule hold , there can be no tithes of after-pasture , for the rule is simul & semel . and my lord coke saith , it was adjudged , 8 iac. that a parson shall not have two tithes of land in one year ; and he instances in the hay and after-pasture , &c. and yet rolls affirms , that it is due by law , unless there be a prescription to the contrary ; and he saith , the iudgment was given upon the prescription . and therefore he resolves it into a modus decimandi . but he mentions several judgments , that no tithe is due for after-pasture , where tithe-hay hath been paid before ; which must be where there was no custom to the contrary , or else he must contradict himself . and so yelverton saith in the case of green and austen , that of common right , tithe-hay discharges the tithe of the after-pasture . but crook saith , that in that case the court went upon the prescription , and allowed it to be good . how could it go upon both ? and sir s. degge is positive , that if a meadow affords two crops , the parson shall have tithe of both . how can these things consist ? or what authority may we rely upon in such difference of opinions ? 2. another rule in law is , that things which are ferae naturae , are not tithable . but here we are to seek what things are ferae naturae ? whether such things as may be tamed and kept under custody , and become a man's property , are ferae naturae ? is it not felony to steal rabbets or pigeons ? if it be , they must be some man's property ; and if they be a man's proper goods , how can they be said to be ferae naturae ? for the meaning was , that no man was to pay tithes for that which was not his own . are not bees ferae naturae , as much as pigeons and rabbets ? but the tithe of bees is allowed to be paid by the tenth of the honey and wax . but rolls saith , that it was doubted whether a tenth swarm were a good modus for the tithe of bees , because they are ferae naturae . the reason is , because they are left wild , and under no custody ; but if they went into several hives belonging to the proprietor , they might be tithable by the hives . and so for pigeons under custody in a dove-house , they are a man's property , and therefore tithable : as it hath been several times resolved in courts of law , 14 iac. in whately and fanbor's case , in iones and gastrill's case , a prohibition was denied ; and justice dodderidge declared , to whom the court assented , that tithe was due both of young pigeons and conies . but the prevailing opinion hath been , that if they are consumed in the house , they are not tithable , but if sold , they are . but are they not ferae naturae as well when they are sold at market , as when they are eaten at home ? why then are they tithable in one case , and not in the other ? if they are tithable at all , they are so where-ever they are spent ; for in tithing , the nature of the thing is to be considered , and not the place of spending it . for upon the same reason there would be no tithe of corn spent at home , or pigs , calves , &c. and therefore i look on the reason as of worse consequence , than the total denying the payment . for who can tell how far this reason may be carried in other cases ? but it is resolved in many cases , that though they are ferae naturae , yet by custom they may be tithed ; and so for fish. custom it seems hath the power of reducing things ferae naturae to the same condition with other things . but as far as i can find , these things by our old constitutions , were as tithable as other things ; but the notion of their being ferae naturae being started , served as a plea against them , where the custom was not continued ; and where it was beyond all dispute , then they said , they were not tithable in themselves , but only by custom ; or not by law , but by custom ; and yet such customs make a part of our law. in several ancient appropriations , fish , and pigeons , and rabbets are expresly mentioned , as given together with other tithes ; so that in those times both law and custom went together . for the lords of manors were not wont to give tithes which were not otherwise due . 3. but what is to be done with those lands which might afford tithe , if the increase of grass were suffered but the owners feed cattel upon it , and so there can be no tithes , what remedy doth the law afford in this case ? 1. it is agreed that no tithe is due , if no other cattel be fed , but such as the owner pays tithe for , or are imployed in plowing , or any other way which is for the benefit of the incumbent of that parish where they are fed . for otherwise they are but as barren cattel to him . 2. that there is a certain rate due for the agistment of barren cattel , iure communi , and so delivered by hales then chief baron , according to the value of the land , unless custom hath determined otherwise . and so for guest-horses , &c. unless the inn-keeper had paid tithe-hay , say some , or the custom be otherwise : but none for saddle-horses for the use of the owner . one of the judges dissenting , because not intended for husbandry . but for unprofitable cattel the tenth part of the bargain is due , or according to the value of the land , and the owner of the cattel is compellable to pay . 3. if profitable and unprofitable be mixed , so as the latter be the greater number , then herbage must be paid for them , and tithe in kind for the profitable ; but if the profitable be the greater number , it is questioned whether the other are not excused ; but no law or precedent is produced for it : and there seems to be no reason , if pasturage be due for unprofitable cattel , why they should be excused because there are more profitable , unless their number be inconsiderable . these things i have only briefly touched at , that you may the better govern your selves in disputes of this nature ; and as you are not to lose the just rights of the church , so neither is it for your interest or honour to be engaged in them , where the law will not bear you out . ii. the next thing necessary to be considered , is , the legal discharges from the payment of tithes . for , although the reason of the payment of them be founded on the law of god , and the settlement of tithes among us hath been by ancient and unquestionable laws of the land , yet the recovery of tithes when unjustly detained , can be no otherwise than by the law of the land , as it is now in force . and if these do allow several discharges and exemptions not to be found in the ancient laws or practice , we shall but involve our selves in fruitless-contentions , if we dispute those limitations which the law hath put upon the payment of tithes . and therefore our business is to enquire and satisfie our selves , as well as we can , about the nature and extent of these limitations . now there are four sorts of discharges of the payment of tithes allowed . 1. by appropriations to monasteries . 2. by privileges of particular orders . 3. by prescription and real compositions . 4. by unity and possession . of these i shall discourse in order , so as to clear the greatest difficulties , with respect to them . 1. as to appropriations . by the statute of dissolution , 31 h. 8. 13. the new possessors are to enjoy their parsonages appropriated , tithes , pensions , and portions , and all other lands belonging to them , discharged and acquitted of the payment of tithes , as freely , and in as ample a manner as they were enjoyed before . 32 h. 8. 7. it is enacted , that no persons shall be compelled , or otherwise sued to yield , give or pay any manner of tithes for any mannors , lands , tenements , or other hereditaments , which by laws or statutes of this realm are discharged , or not chargeable with the payment of any such tithes . so that we must enquire into the state of parsonages appropriated before the dissolution , and how the payment of tithes stood then . i will not deny that there were churches appropriated to monasteries in the saxon times ; but if mr. selden's doctrine hold good , as to the arbitrary consecration of tithes till the twelfth century , those churches cannot carry the tithes along with them , but only such glebe and oblations as belonged to them . for how could the tithes pass with the churches , if they were not then annexed to them ? but he confesses , that the mention of tithes with churches in appropriations , was rare , or not at all till after the normans . the reason might be , that the separation of tithes from the churches , was not known till the norman times . for the norman nobility took little notice of the saxon laws about tithes ; but finding tithes paid out of the lands within their manors , they thought they did well , if they gave the whole tithes , or a portion and share of them , as they thought fit , to some monastery either abroad or at home . and this i take to be the true account of the beginning of appropriations among us . it were endless to give an account of the appropriations made by the normans , for the monasticon is full of them . william i. gave several churches with their tithes to battle-abbey . william rufus added more . h. 1. to the monastery of reading , several churches in like-manner ; and h. 2. more . hugh earl of chester , gave the tithes of several manors to the monastery of st. werburg , in the time of william i. of which kind the instances are too many to be mentioned ; instead thereof , i shall set down the state of the parochial clergy under these appropriations , which was very mean , and intended so to be , being supplied by the english clergy . 1. where the churches and tithes were appropriated to a monastery , the vicar had only such a competency as the bishop thought fit to allow , till vicarages came to be endowed : for right understanding this matter of appropriations , as it stood here in england , these things are to be considered . 1. that there was a parochial right of tithes settled in the saxon times : which i infer from the laws of edgar and canutus , where the tithes are required to be paid to the mother-church ; and if the lord of a manor have a church on his own free-land , he may retain a third part of the tithes for the use of it . these laws are so plain and clear , that mr. selden does not deny them ; and he confesses , the first limitation of profits to be contained in them . but what is to be understood by the mother-church to which the tithes were given ? mr. selden would have it the monastery or mother-church ; but afterwards he grants , that a parochial right to incumbents was hereby settled ; which is the first legal settlement of tithes in a parochial manner : but these laws of edgar and canutus were so solemnly enacted , that , as mr. selden observes , they were particularly called , leges anglicae , the old english laws in the old latin mss. it is a commonly received opinion among the lawyers of the best rank , that before the lateran council there was no parochial settlement of tithes here . my lord coke found no such decree of the lateran council under alexander 3. 5 h. 2. a. d. 1179. and therefore he refers it to a decretal of innocent 3. as to the lateran council which lyndwood mentions , it plainly speaks of feudal tithes , which a person enjoyed by the churches grant , and such might before that council , be given to what church the person pleased . but is there no difference between feudal and parochial tithes ? and what proof is there of any ancient infeodations of tithes here ? mr. selden himself thinks lyndwood applies the custom of other countries to his own . but as to the parochial right of tithes among us , it stands thus : by the saxon laws the parochial was settled . after the norman invasion these laws were neglected and slighted by the normans ; h. i. by his charter restored them , h. 1. c. 11. and the very words of the laws of edgar and canutus are repeated . the normans went on notwithstanding , and so these laws were discontinued in practice . but hadrian 4. who was an englishman by birth , observing the disorderly payments of tithes here , published a constitution to require the parochial payment of them , as is observed by p. pithaeus , a very learned and impartial man. after him alexander 3. in a decretal directed to the archbishop of canterbury and his suffragans , complains , that whereas the parishioners had formerly paid their tithes entirely where they ought to pay them , the contrary custom had obtained ; and some withdrew the tithe of wooll , fish , and mills ; therefore he requires the strict payment of them to the churches to which they were due . the latter part only is in the canon law , but the former is added from the ancient copies by pithaeus . as to the decretal of innocent iii. to which my lord coke refers , and mr. selden thinks was mistaken for the lateran council , being brought into england with it ; there is such an epistle extant in the collection of his epistles , but not put into the canon law , and was nothing but an inforcement of the former laws , and a declaring the contrary custom void , which had too much obtained since the norman times . but in a decretal extant in the canon law , de decim . c. 29. he acknowledges the parochial payment of tithes to be due by common right , cum perceptio decimarum ad paroeciales ecclesias de iure communi pertineat . can any thing be plainer than that the parochial right could not depend upon his decretal epistle , when himself confesses that they were due by common right ? we do not deny that he inforced the payment which had been so grosly neglected in the norman times , and the most they would be brought to in many places , was to pay only a third part to the parish-priest who officiated , and gave the rest to monasteries , and often appropriated the whole tithes to them , either at home or abroad , as will abundantly appear by the monasticon ; from whence it is plain , that they looked on tithes in general , as due to the church , as appears by very many of their ancient charters ; but they thought they did very well when they appropriated them to monasteries of their own erection , or others , as they thought fit . but this humour took so much among the norman nobility , and served so many purposes of honour and devotion , as they thought ( besides reason of state ) that the parochial clergy were reduced to so poor a condition , that alexander iv. complained of it as the bane of religion , and destruction of the church , and as a poison which had spread over the whole nation . and it must be very scandalous indeed , when the pope complained of it : for the monks that were able , generally got their appropriations confirmed in the court of rome . 2. there was a competency to be settled on the parochial clergy by the bishops consent , which was required in order to the confirming an appropriation ; as may be seen in multitudes of them in the monasticon , besides those which are preserved in the churches registers . sometimes the endowment is expressed , and at other times it is reserved in the bishop's power to do it as he sees cause . but the bishops were either so remiss in those times , or the monks so powerful at rome , that the poor vicars fared so hardly , that in the time of h. 2. alexander iii. sent a reprimand to the bishops for favouring the monks too much , and the clergy too little ; and therefore requires the bishops to take care that the vicar had a competent subsistence , so as to be able to bear the burden of his place , and to keep hospitality . this was directed to the bishop of worcester ; for it seems so long since the poor vicars here were hardly provided for . and yet i have seen several forms of appropriations made by the bishops here , after the conquest , wherein there is a twofold salvo ; one for the bishop's right , and another for a sufficient maintenance for the curate , although the church were appropriated ad communem usum monachorum , as of wolstan , roger , and of william in the time of hen. ii. when alexander iii. lived , and of walter de grey , sylvester , &c. but it seems where a competent subsistence had been decreed , the monks took the first opportunity to lessen it ; which occasioned another decretal in the canon law , wherein any such thing is forbidden , without the bishop's consent . in other places they pleaded custom for it ; thence came another decree of the lateran council , to void all such customs by whomsoever introduced , where there was not a competent subsistence for him that served the cure. the monks were still refractary in this matter ; and because the bishops had power to refuse any person presented by the monks , unless they did consent to such a reasonable allowance as the bishop thought fit ; therefore they grew sullen , and would not present ; in which case another decretal was made to give the bishop power to present . and after all , clement v. de iure patron . c. 1. reinforced the former decretals , and injoyned the diocesans in the strictest manner , not to admit any person presented to a cure , where the church was appropriated , unless sufficient allowance were made by the bishop's consent and approbation , and all custom and privileges to the contrary are declared to be void . but how far doth this hold among us now , since the appropriations are become lay-fees , and the bishop's power is not mentioned in the statute of dissolution ? to this i shall give a clear answer , but i doubt not satisfactory , to all parties concerned . for as necessity and power , so some mens interest and reason live very near one another . 1. the statute of dissolution leaves all matters of right as to persons interested just as they were before . for by the surrender the king was to have the monasteries and tithes in as large and ample a manner as the abbots then had them in right of their houses , and in the same state and condition as they then were , or of right ought to have been : and so res transit cum suo onere . but this is not all : for there is an express salvo for all rights , claims , interests , &c. of all persons and bodies politick . so that if by the law of england there was such an antecedent right in the vicar to his allowance , and in the bishop to assign it , it is not taken away by this statute , nor any other . 2. by the law of england the bishop had a right to provide a competent maintenance for supplying the cure upon an appropriation . we are told by an unquestionable authority in point of law , that 9 car. 1. this point was brought before the kings bench , in the case of thornburgh and hitchcot . the vicar complained , that the church was appropriated , and that he wanted a competent maintenance ; a prohibition was prayed , but denied upon this reason , that the vicar had reason for his suit , and that the ordinary might compel the impropriator to make it greater ; because in all appropriations that power was reserved to the ordinary . and so in the year-books it is allowed , that the ordinary may increase or diminish the vicar's portion , 40 e. 3. cas. 15. f. 28. by our provincial constitutions , the bishop is to take care that the vicar have a competent allowance ; which at that time was set at five marks ; but lyndwood observes , that as the price of things rose , so the allowance was increased , and in stipendiaries it was then advanced to eight or ten marks ; which , according to sir h. spelman's computation , comes to above sixty pounds per annum . but some have told us , that by some old statutes , even beneficed persons were not by law to have above six marks per annum ; for this was the sum allowed to parish priests ; which is so gross a mistake in any that pretend to law or antiquity , that it is to be wondred how they could fall into it . the truth of the case was this ; the parochial chaplains or priests were complained of , 36 e. 3. n. 23. that they could not be gotten to attend after the plague , but at excessive rates ; upon this a provincial constitution was made , extant in the parliament rolls , wherein they are obliged to demand no more than six marks . but who were these parish-priests ? not such as had the legal endowments , but those who depended on the good-will of the parson or people , and were hired to officiate in chapels of ease , or to perform offices for the dead , which were so frequent at that time . and these were called annual chaplains , or masse chaplains , and were distinguished from domestick chaplains who officiated in great mens houses in their private oratories , and from beneficed persons , as appears by many constitutions . but whatever was understood by the act of parliament then , it was repealed 21 iac. 1. 28. 3. the law of england , as to a competent subsistence for the vicars or curates in appropriated churches , is founded on very good reason . for the tithes were originally given for the service of the church , and not for the use of monasteries . and this was a hard point for the monks to get over , since the tithes were given for the maintenance of the clergy , and they were none of the clergy , how they came to have a right to the tithes . it is certain , that the state of the clergy and the monastick state were different ; and the offices of the clergy and of the monks were inconsistent , if they held to their rules ; how then came the monks to take the maintenance which belonged to the clergy for other offices , as though they were originally intended for them ? for which there is no colour or pretence . this point was debated between two great men of their times , s. bernard and petrus cluniacensis : the former a cistertian monk , declared himself unsatisfied with the monks taking the maintenance of the parochial clergy from them , which was given on purpose to attend the cure of souls . but , said petrus cluniacensis , do we not pray for their souls ? but the cure of souls is another thing ; and by the canons of the church the monks were forbidden to meddle in parochial offices of preaching , baptizing , visiting the sick. so that it might bear a question in law , whether a monastery were capable of an appropriation , since by the ecclesiastical law , they are not an ecclesiastical body ? and for that reason hobart saith , a nunnery is not ; and the same reason will hold for the other . the cistertian order was at first very scrupulous in this matter , when they came hither , and pretended to live only on their own lands , and disliked appropriations , as great injuries to the clergy , and called it sacrilege to take their tithes away from them . this was wisely done of them at first to ingratiate themselves with the clergy , and to get as good lands as they could . but after a while they abated their zeal , and then they pretended to do nothing without the bishops consent ; till at last they were as ready as any , and got as large privileges to exempt their lands from payment of tithes , under which the clergy suffer to this day . but to return to the beginning of appropriations among us . after the normans coming , they stood upon no niceties of law , or original grants , but they took possessions of the tithes of their manors , and disposed them as they pleased . the poor parochial clergy were english , whom they hated , and cared not how poor they were ; the bishops were normans , as fast as they could make them ; and the business of the great men , was to incourage the norman monks that came over , and to build and endow monasteries for them to pray for their souls , which they minded so little themselves ; and this i take to be the true account of the beginning and increase of appropriations in england , which at first were only permitted , but are confirmed by the law since the statute of dissolution . ii. in some appropriations there were vicarages endowed , and here the difficulty lies in distinguishing the tithes which belong to one from the other . before the statutes for endowment of vicarages , in case of appropriations , 15 r. 2. 6. 4 h. 4. 12. there were endowments made , where the bishops took care of it ; but they were generally so remiss in it , that those statutes were thought very necessary ; and one , it● seems , was not sufficient . for they eluded the former by appointing vicars out of their own body ; but the latter statute requires , that the vicar shall be a secular person , and made spiritual vicar , and have such an endowment as the ordinary should think fit , otherwise the appropriation to be void . the scandal of the appropriations was made so great by the greediness of the monks , and easiness of the bishops , that i find in the parliament rolls 2 h. 4. 51. a petition of the commons , that no appropriations should be made for the future ; but afterwards they came to that temper which is expressed in the statute 4 h. 4. and that before those statutes , there was no necessity of the endowment of a vicarage , is plain from the occasion of making them ; and so it hath been agreed in the courts of law in the case of britton and ward . but the main difficulty is , to state the tithes which belonged to the vicarage and to the appropriation ; because there was no certain limitation either as to quantity or kind , although generally the great tithes of corn and hay went with the parsonage , and the small tithes and obventions , and altarage with the vicarage . the best rules i can find to be satisfied in this matter , are the endowment , or prescription . and where the endowment is found , yet there may be a prescription for tithes not mentioned ; because the bishop had a power reserved to increase the allowance : as in the case of the vicar of gillingham , who sued for customary tithes not mentioned in the endowment ; and he recovered them on this presumption , that the vicarage might be augmented with those tithes ; and in case of long possession , it is there said to have been often so held and ruled . sometimes there is a difficulty in the sense of the words of the endowment , as in the case of barksdale and smith , whether decima garbarum in w. implied tithe-hay ; but it was resolved , that although garba seems to relate to corn , de omni annonâ decima garba deo reddenda est . l. edw. confess . c. 8. at least , to something bound up ; and so lyndwood applies it to faggots ; yet the custom was thought sufficient to extend it to tithe-hay ; and for tithe-wood in renoulds and green's case . but the greatest difficulty hath been about small tithes , which is the common endowment of vicarages . in the case of ward and britton , one point was , whether lambs were small tithes or not . noy pleaded custom for it . the councel on the other side said , that small tithes were such as grew in gardens ; but lambs were a sort of praedial tithes ; however , it was yielded , that custom might bring them under small tithes . another point about small tithes , was about saffron growing in a corn-field , in the case of bedingfield and freak , and it was resolved to be small tithes . but the ground of that resolution was questioned in the case of udal and tyndal ; some said it was , because saffron was small tithes where-ever it grew : others , that by the endowment , the parson had only reserved the tithe of corn and hay . but suppose whole fields be planted with woad , which grows in the nature of an herb , is this to be reckoned among small tithes ? crook seems to deliver the sense of the court so , in the former case ; but hutton reports it , that it might come to be majores decimae and praedial , if it came to be the main profits of the place . and the like may hold as to hemp , hops , wooll and lambs . it 's there said , that all these new things , as saffron , hemp , woad , tobacco , &c. are to be reckoned among small tithes , unless there be some material circumstance to the contrary . but who is to be judge of that ? and what proportion changes small tithes into greater ? but what if the endowment be so expressed , that only tithes of corn and hay be reserved to the parson ? then rolls thinks all the rest falls to the vicar by construction of law. by the word altarage , it was resolved in the exchequer , upon a solemn hearing , 21 eliz. and after confirmed in the case of wood and greenwood , not meer oblations are to be understood , but whatever custom hath comprehended under it . and i find in the settlement of the altarage of cockerington by rob. grosthead , bishop of lincoln , not only oblations and obventions , but the tithes of wooll and lamb were comprehended under it . ii. the next discharge of tithes , is by the privileges of particular orders allowed by our law. for it is , to be observed , that no bulls of popes make a legal discharge ; but in such cases where the law allows them , and my lord coke thinks it cannot be insisted upon without danger of a praemunire . for when the cistertians had procured new bulls to inlarge their privileges , as to their lands in the hands of farmers , a law was passed against it , 2 h. 4. c. 4. which was grounded on a petition in parliament shewing the novelty and mischief of it . it was affirmed by our great lawyers , that the pope's act in dissolving the body of the templars , which was done , 5 e. 2. had no effect here till the 17 e. 2. when the parliament gave their lands to the hospitallers . and that the pope could not by his bull dissolve a vicarage after they were made perpetual by the statute ; so that our own law is to govern in this matter . but what orders had exemption from tithes by our law ? at first most of the orders of monks had it for lands in their own hands . this by hadrian iv. was restrained to the cistertians , templars and hospitallers , which is owned in the canon law by a decretal of alexander iii. who declares it not to be intended for lands let out to farm . innocent iii. restrains it to such lands as they were then in possession of ; but my lord coke makes the grant to be from innocent iii. in the council of lateran , 17 john ; but he adds , that it extends only to the lands which they had before ; which was all that was done then . but he saith , that this privilege was allowed by the general consent of the realm ; however that were , it is certain that the lateran council made no restriction to the three orders . but what shall we say to the praemonstratenses , of whom he saith , that they were discharged by a bull of innocent iii. this point was disputed in the case of dickenson and greenhow . it was not denied , that they had obtained such a bull , but it was denied that it was ever received here . on the other side , it was said , that their bulls were confirmed ; which doth not appear , nor that any judgment was given in the case . there is a bull extant in the collection of innocent's epistles , to exempt the praemonstratenses from the tithes of lands in their own hands ; but this was granted in the first year of innocent iii. sometime before the lateran council , and they might enjoy the same privileges with the cistertians , if it could be proved , that they were as generally received , which hath not yet been done . as to the cistertians themselves , there are considerable limitations of their privileges . 1. they must relate to lands in their possession before the lateran council , a. d. 1215. 17 of king iohn . and in matters against common right , the proof in reason ought to be on those who pretend to particular privilege . but it 's certain the cistertian order hath had many lands in england since that time ( and it were no hard matter to find them out . ) but , suppose they were actually discharged at the dissolution , and the proprietaries were to enjoy them in the state they found them , is not this a sufficient discharge ? yes , if it be a legal discharge ; for the statute only puts them into the same legal capacity they were in before ; but if they were lands given since the lateran council , they were not in a capacity to be discharged by law ; for it was not otherwise received . 2. this privilege doth not exclude ancient compositions , as to their demesn lands . for these privileges did not go down so easily , but where there were rectors able to contest it , they brought even the cistertians to compositions . and the pope himself appointed commissioners here to compound the matter : as between the monastery of pipewel and hugh patesbul rector of eltyndon , which ended in a composition of six marks per annum for the tithes of their demesns . and another between the vicar of dunchurch and the same monastery ; and between the rector of wynswick for the tithes of ten yard-lands in colds-abbey . all which i have perused in the register of that monastery ms. 3. the privilege doth not hold where the monasteries were under value , and came to the king by the statute 27 h. 8. unless they were continued , and came within the statute of dissolution , 31 h. 8. and it ought to be proved that they continued separate ; for if their lands were given to the greater monasteries , they did not retain the privilege upon dissolution . but there is a much harder point concerning the hospitallers ( who had the lands of the templers after 17 e. 2. ) their lands were not given to the king by the statute of dissolution , 31 h. 8. but 32 h. 8. c. 24. and the clause of exemption was left out of the grant. upon which a great question hath risen , whether their lands are exempt or not ? and judgment was given against them in the case of cornwallis , or quarles and spurling . but in the case of whiston and weston , it was argued , that the king had the same privileges which the hospitallers had . but it was replied , that other lands given to the king after that act , had not those privileges , as chanteries , &c. it was said , that it was , because they were not regular ecclesiastical bodies : which was a strange answer , considering what sort of ecclesiastical bodies the hospitallers made , when only the grand master and two chaplains are bound to be ecclesiasticks ; and in foreign judicatures they were denied to be any part of the clergy , being only an order of knights under some particular regulations . but suppose them capable of appropriations of tithes , yet when the body is dissolved , the appropriation falls of it self , unless continued by act of parliament , as those of the templars were to them ; and those of the monasteries by 31 h. 8. but where there is no clause to continue the appropriation , it must be understood to be left to the natural course of things , and so the appropriation sinks . iii. the third legal exemption is from prescription , and ancient compositions . this seems a difficult case , because something less than the real value is to be taken , and the rule in lyndwood is , non valet consuetudo , ut minus quam decima solvatur ; but in all such prescriptions and compositions there is less than the true value . to clear this matter , i shall shew , 1. that by our ecclesiastical law , all compositions are not condemned . 2. that by the common law all prescriptions are not allowed . and if these things be made out , it will follow , that where the compositions and prescriptions are legal , the clergy may with good conscience submit to them , as they do in other matters of law. 1. as to the ecclesiastical law , lyndwood himself makes these limitations ; 1. in case of personal tithes . he grants that as to them , a man may with a good conscience observe the custom although it be under the real value . now these are founded on the same laws that praedial and mixt tithes are ; and by the stat. 2 e. 6. c. 13. they are reduced to a customary payment before easter , as it had been used forty years before : but besides these there were offerings to be compounded for , and the easter duties are a kind of composition for personal tithes . 2. in small tithes , the customary payment is allowed . the payment in lyndwood's time , was 6 ob . for six lambs , because it was the tenth of the value at that time of a lamb of a year old ; the seventh lamb was to be paid in kind , for which 3 ob . were to be paid back , because three lambs were wanting of the number ten. but can any one believe that 5 d. was the true value then of a lamb of a year old ? and lyndwood doth not suppose it be the exact value ; but it was such as the provincial constitution determined , and he allows compositions super minutis decimis . 3. compositions were allowed with the bishop's consent with lay-persons for their tithes . as to what is past , there was no doubt ; but for the future he saith , it doth not hold sine iudicis auctoritate ; which implies , that by his consent it may . and if so , then a modus decimandi so qualified , is allowed by the ecclesiastical law. such compositions as these were entred into the bishop's registries , and if they were then made upon a valuable consideration at that time , i doubt the force of custom will get the better of the reason that may be taken from the great difference of valuation of things . 2. let us now consider what prescriptions and compositions are not allowable at common law. 1. no prescription de non decimando , is allowed among lay-persons , because none but spiritual persons are by the law capable of tithes in their own right . a lay-man , saith mr. selden , cannot be discharged of all payment by meer prescription , unless he begin the prescription in a spiritual person . and to the same purpose our great lawyers speak . but in the famous case of pigot and hern , a distinction was found out , which may prove of dangerous consequence , viz. that although the lord of a manor cannot prescribe for tithes , because he is not capable of them by our law , yet he may prescribe for a tenth shock , as a profit apprendre , as a thing appurtenant to his manor ; and so he may have decimam garbam , but not decimas garbarum . upon which resolution it is said in the bishop of winchester's case , that the lord of a manor may have tithes as appurtenant to his manor : for which there is no foundation in our ancient laws or customs , that i can find , and is inconsistent with what is before acknowledged , that none but spiritual persons are capable of tithes . but in plain truth , this case is not truly represented ; and my lord chief justice hobart , a person of great judgment and learning in the law , hath told the world , that this famous reporter hath sometimes given his own opinion , and that sudden , instead of the resolution of the court , which must take much off from the authority of his reports ; especially when the case is differently reported by others ; as it falls out in this case . for serjeant moor , who was of councel in that case , saith , that the defendant pleaded a modus decimandi in satisfaction for tithes , which was 6 s. per annum : but as to the other point , whether such an ancient modus being made with the lord of a manor , binds the copy-holders , it is out of our way ; but surely there ought to be good proof , that the modus was made before the copy-holds holds were granted , which is not offered , but only that it might be so ; which deserves no other answer , but that it might not be so . and it is hard indeed , when judgments are given upon possibilities . and for the distinction of decima garba and decimae garbarum , in a composition for tithes , is the same thing . mr. selden , as to this case of pigot and hern , saith , it was an inheritance of tithes from immemorial time , by virtue of an ancient composition . and he would not understand the judges in any other sense : for no kind of infeodation of tithes is allowable here , he saith , so as to create in lay-men a perpetual right to them ( except only by the statute of dissolution of monasteries ) unless it be derived from some ancient grant of discharge from the parson , patron and ordinary , with a consideration of recompence to the parson ; and that either from time immemorial , or ancient composition . and to the same purpose he speaks in another place , where he owns , that by our law every parson had a common right to the tithes of all annual increase ( praedial or mixt ) within the limits of his parish ; and any title or discharge must be specially pleaded . 2. where a prescription is pleaded de modo decimandi , the actual recompence by composition must be shewed . for , as my lord coke saith , a modus decimandi is intended as a yearly sum in way of satisfaction for the tithes to the parson ; which rolls calls the actual recompence . in the register the account of the modus decimandi is thus set down : 1. there was a real composition , as four acres of land for some small tithes . 2. there was an agreement in writing , by the consent of ordinary and patron . but my lord coke saith , the modus may as well be for a sum of money as for land. suppose no ancient composition in writing can be produced , how far doth a prescription hold ? 1. it must be immemorial , or time out of mind . here a great point arises fit to be considered : suppose the thing it self hath been within memory , as improvements by hops , fruit-trees , &c. doth not a composition bind in this case ? i answer , that we are to distinguish personal contracts from real compositions . in the case of hitchcock and hitchcock , there was a contract between the vicar and parishioners , but it was denied to be a real composition , although confirmed by the ordinary , and affirmed not to be binding to the successors . a composition by a meer verbal agreement in the case of hawles and bayfield was declared to be neither binding to the party nor his successors . but in the case of tanner and small it was declared to hold for years , but not for life . my lord coke seems to be of opinion , that if it be a prescription , it must be time out of memory of man ; but that a real composition may be either before , or within memory of man ; but then it must be by parson , patron , and ordinary . it is well observed by sir simon degge in his useful book about these matters , that although real compositions are supposed in law to be the foundation of prescriptions de modo decimandi , where the patron , ordinary and parson did consent to them ; yet that the most of them have grown up by the negligence and carelesness of the clergy themselves , which , i am afraid , is too true . and he is of opinion , that no real composition can be made now to bind the successor , since the statute , 13 eliz. c. 10. which restrains all binding grants to one and twenty years , or three lives ; and if so , then the consent of patron and ordinary cannot make it good . 2. it must be reasonable , and therefore it hath been rejected in these cases : 1. if it be a prescription to pay a certain tithe without the parson's view of the nine parts , because , saith hobart , it is against the law of partition , in the case of wilson and the bishop of carlisle . 2. if there be no recompence to the parson , as in the case of scory and barber , the prescription was founded on the parishioners finding straw for the body of the church . 3. if it be for paying only what was due in lieu of other tithes ; as in the case of ingoldsby and iohnson , that they paid their other tithes in lieu of tithes of dry cattel ; or in case a load of hay be prescribed for in lieu of tithe-hay , or ten sheafs of corn for the tithe of all the rest . 4. if it be not for something certain and durable . for this , saith hobart , shews an original weakness in the composition ; being of a thing certain and durable for that which is not so . iv. the last exemption or discharge that is pleaded as to the payment of tithes , is unity of possession : that is , where a monastery had the right of tithes by appropriation , and had other lands which did not pay tithes , because the owners were to receive them , these were actually free at the time of dissolution ; and the question is , whether they are legally so by virtue of the statute ? it cannot be denied , that unity of possession is in it self no legal discharge ; but whether by the words of the statute the judges were divided in opinion . but afterwards in the case of green and bosekin the judges allowed it , so it were not a meer unity of estate , but of occupation . hobart saith , that after it had been long controverted , it was received as the common opinion . coke , that where unity of possession gives a discharge , the title must be clear , the non-payment general , and the prescription time out of memory ; but if the appropriation were made in the time of ed. 4. h. 6. it could not be discharged by unity ; nor if it were a late abby-prescription . thus i have endeavoured to lay this matter before you as briefly and clearly as i could , from the best light i could get , that i might give you such directions , that you may neither run into needless and vexatious suits , nor be run down by frivolous pretences . it is your great advantage that you have the law of your side , if you understand it a right ; but have a care of being set on by such , whose interest it is to promote suits ; and i am sure it is yours to prevent them , if it be possible , and as much as lies in you . the church's right is not to suffer by your negligence ; and you are not to make the church to suffer by your contentions . he that loves going to law , seldom fails of having enough of it ; he suffers in his purse , in his reputation , in his interest , and the church suffers by his means . endeavour to gain , as much as may be , the love of your people by a kind , modest , courteous and peaceable behaviour , which is the best way to prevent , or to compose differences . if you are forced to sue for your maintenance , let them see that you are forced to it , and that you are always willing to put an end to all such disputes , if the church's right be secured , which you are bound to preserve . of the obligation to observe the ecclesiastical canons and constitutions , at a visitation october 29 th . 1696. in speaking clearly and distinctly to this case , there are these two things to be considered ; i. by what authority they do oblige , ii. in what way and manner they oblige . i. the first thing to be considered , is the authority by which ecclesiastical canons and constitutions do oblige . for , if there be not sufficient authority , there cannot be that obligation on conscience , which supposes a legal exercise of power , or a just right to command . our obedience to the orders of our superiours , is due by virtue of that divine law which requires us to be subject for conscience-sake : but our obedience is to be regulated by the order of iustice , i.e. it ought to be according to law. therefore it is necessary , in the first place , to enquire , whether there be among us any such things as ecclesiastical laws , i.e. such rules , which according to the constitution of our government , we are bound to observe . for we are members of a church established by law ; and there are legal duties incumbent on us , with respect , not only to the laws of god , but of the realm . for , although our office and authority , as church-men , hath a higher original ; yet the limitation of the exercise of it , is within such bounds as are allowed and fixed by the law of the land. it is therefore a matter of great consequence to us to understand how far our ecclesiastical constitutions are grounded upon the law of the land , which cannot be done without searching into the foundations of our laws . which lie in three things : 1. immemorial custom . 2. general practice and allowance . 3. authority of parliament . and i shall endeavour to shew how far our ecclesiastical constitutions are founded on these . 1. immemorial custom . our greatest lawyers allow ancient custom to be one of the foundations of our laws ; and my lord coke calls it one of the main triangles of the laws of england . i suppose he means foundations . and another saith , that the common law of england is nothing else but the common custom of the realm . my lord chief justice hales saith , that the common usage , custom and practice of the kingdom , is one of the main constituents of our law. coke quotes bracton ' s authority to prove , that custom obtains among us the force of a law , where it is received and approved by long use. and of every custom , he saith , there be two essential parts , time and usage ; time out of mind , and continual and peaceable usage without interruption . but in case of prescription or custom , he saith , that an interruption of ten or twenty years hinders not the title , but an interruption in the right ; the other is only an actual suspension for a time . it may be asked , how time and usage come to make laws , since time hath no operation in law , saith grotius ? not of it self , as grotius there saith , but with the concurrence of other circumstances it may . bracton saith , longa possessio parit jus possidendi ; and by a long and peaceable possession dominion is transferred , without either title or delivery ; which he founds on this good reason , that all claims of right ought to have a certain limitation of time , and length of time takes away any proof to the contrary . littleton saith , that time out of memory of man , is said to give right , because no proof can be brought beyond it . and this he calls prescription at common law , as it is distinguished from prescription by the several statutes of limitations . but whence is it then , that an immemorial possession gives right ? is it from the meer silence of the parties concerned to claim it ? no , silence gives no consent , where ignorance or fear may be the cause of it . and is it a punishment upon the neglect of the party concerned ? so bracton saith , time doth it per patientiam & negligentiam veri domini . but meer neglect doth not overthrow right , unless there be an antecedent law to make that neglect a forfeiture ? is it from a presumptive dereliction ? but that supposes not bare continuance of time , but some kind of voluntary act , which implies a sort of consent which doth not appear in this case . and it is a great mistake in those , who think there is no presumptive dereliction , where there is not a full consent ; for it may be , where there is the consent of a mixt will , i.e. partly voluntary , and partly involuntary ; when the circumstances are such , as the person rather chuses to leave his right , than submit to the lawful conditions of enjoying it : as if a man would rather quit his fee than perform the service which belongs to it . is it from the common interest of mankind , that some bounds be fixed to all claims of right ? because otherwise that men will be liable to perpetual disturbance , if the right be permitted to be claimed beyond any possibility of proof . or is it , lastly , that in such nations where immemorial custom obtains the force of a law , it seems agreeable to the foundations of law , that a long continued possession should carry right along with it . and this was the case here in england , as not only appears by what bracton hath said , but glanvil makes a great part of our law to consist of reasonable customs of long continuance . and st. germain affirms ancient general customs to be one of the principal foundations of our law ; and that they have the force of laws , and that the king is bound by his oath to perform them . and it is worth our while to observe what general customs he doth instance in ; as the courts of equity and law , the hundred court , the sheriffs turn , the court baron , &c. which depend not upon acts of parliament , but the ancient custom of england , which he calls the common law. and among these ancient customs , he reckons up rights of descent , escheats , the different sorts of tenures , freeholds , and the laws of property , as they are received among us . we are now to enquire , how far any of our ecclesiastical constitutions can be said to be built upon this foundation ; and upon immemorial custom generally received . 1. i place ( 1. ) the distribution of this national church into two provinces , in each whereof there is an archbishop with metropolitical power , which lies chiefly in these things , ( 1. ) the right of consecration of his suffragans . ( 2. ) the right of visitation of every diocess in such way and manner as custom hath settled it . ( 3. ) the right of receiving appeals from inferiour courts of judicature in ecclesiastical matters . ( 4. ) the right of presiding in provincial councils of the suffragans of his province ; which by the most ancient constitutions of this church , were to be held once a year ; so it was decreed in the council under theodore , a. d. 673. but by the difficulties of the times , they were discontinued ; and so the authority of examining things through the province , came by a kind of devolution to the archbishop and his courts . ( 5. ) the custody of vacant sees , by the custom of england , falls to the metropolitan , if there hath been no custom or composition to the contrary . and so it hath been upon solemn ▪ debates resolved in our courts of common law. coke thinks that of common right it belongs to the dean and chapter , but by custom to the archbishop . but panormitan saith , there was no pretence of common right for them , till the time of boniface viii . 2. the ordinary jurisdiction of every bishop over the clergy of his own diocess . this is as ancient as christianity among us . for no sooner were churches planted , but there were bishops set over them ; who had from the beginning so much authority , that none of the clergy could either receive or quit his benefice without their consent and approbation ; and they were all bound to give an account of their behaviour at their visitations ; and in case of contempt , or other misdemeamours , they were to proceed against them according to the canons of the church . i do not say the diocesses were at first all modelled alike , or with the same bounds which they now have ; which was unreasonable to suppose , considering the gradual conversion of the nation . for at first there was but one bishop in every one of the saxon kingdoms , except kent , where was but one suffragan to the metropolitan for some time , till the kingdoms came to be united ; or the kings consented to an increase of several diocesses , and uniting them under one metropolitan , which was a work of time. but in all the saxon councils we find no mention of any ecclesiastical jurisdiction , but what was in the bishops themselves , concil . cloveshoo , can. 1 , 4 , 5. concil . cealchyth . can. 1. egbert canon . c. 45 , 62. the first who began to seek for exemptions , were the abbots , who were under the bishop's jurisdiction , who was too near them ; and therefore they endeavoured to get under the pope's immediate jurisdiction by charters of exemption , which the great abbies either procured or made ; and the more ancient the more suspicious . but the lord chancellor and three chief judges declared , that by the common law of england , every bishop in his diocess , and the archbishops in convocation may make canons to bind within the limits of their jurisdiction . 3. the subordinate jurisdiction which was lodged in the bodies of the clergy resident in cathedral churches , and of archdeacons in the several diocesses : i cannot find either of these to have had any jurisdiction here before the conquest , neither were there any courts of justice out of the several counties before ; for all causes were transacted in the county-courts and sheriffs turns , and appeals lay from them to the supreme judicature of the king and the lords . but this doth not hinder but these courts may be founded on the law of england . and so the original jurisdiction , which of right belonged to the bishop , might by degrees , and a gradual consent , come to be committed , as to some parts , to the bodies of cathedral churches , and to the archdeacons , who are , saith my lord coke , sixty in england . we are told in a late case of woodward and fox , that there are archdeaconries in england by prescription , which have no dependency on the bishop , but are totally exempt . and for this godolphin is cited , who refers to the gloss on the legatine constitutions , f. 27. where we read of some archdeacons having a customary and limited iurisdiction separate from the bishop , for which a prescription lies . but this is only for some special iurisdiction ; as the archdeacon of richmond for institutions , which came first by grant from the bishops ; but that not being to be produced , they insist upon custom and prescription , as the deans and chapters do , where the ancient compositions are lost . but none who understand the ancient constitution of this church , can suppose either of them to have been original , since the right to the jurisdiction of the diocess was in the bishop , before there were here either archdeacons or chapters with jurisdiction . in the case of chiverton and trudgeon , it was declared , that an archdeacon might have a peculiar jurisdiction , as to administration , &c. as the dean of st. paul's had at s. pancras ; and so the archdeacon of cornwall , as to wills. in the case of gastril and iones the chief justice declared , that the archdeacon is the bishop's officer , and his authority subordinate to the bishops , and granted by them ; but if special custom be pleaded , that must be well proved ; to which dodderidge agreed . but we must distinguish between archdeaconries by prescription , for which i can find no foundation ( being all derived by grant from the bishop ) and archdeacons having some kind of iurisdiction by prescription , which others have not ; which cannot be denied . all the power which the archdeacons have by virtue of their office , is per modum scrutationis simplicis , as lyndwood speaks , tanquam vicarius episcopi : whatever power they have beyond this , is not iure communi , but iure speciali , and depends either upon grant or custom ; which the gloss on the legatine constitutions calls a limited iurisdiction . the archdeacon's court is declared by the judges in woodward ' s case , to have been , time out of mind , settled as a distinct court , from which there lies an appeal to the bishop's court , by the statute , 24 h. 8. c. 12. and so the archdeacon's jurisdiction is founded on an immemorial custom , in subordination to the bishops . as to deans and chapters , i observe these things : 1. that although ecclesiastical bodies in cathedrals were very ancient , yet we read not of any jurisdiction peculiar to themselves , during the saxon times . my lord. coke saith , there were chapters , as the bishop's council , before they had distinct possessions . and by their books , he saith , it appears , that the bishops parted with some of their possessions to them , and so they became patrons of the prebends of the church : such were london , york and litchfield . 2. that several of our chapters were founded and endowed by the bishops since the conquest : such was that of salusbury by osmund out of his own estate , as appears by his charter , and the confirmation of h. 2. so was that of lincoln by remigius , who removed the see from dorchester thither , and placed there a dean , treasurer , praecentor , and seven archdeacons , as henry of huntingdon saith , who lived near the time . and in following times those of exeter and wells were settled as dean and chapter ; for they were ecclesiastical bodies before , but not under that denomination . 3. that some had the legal rights of dean and chapters , as to election of bishops , and confirmation of leases , &c. but were a monastick body consisting of prior and convent : such were canterbury , winchester , worcester , after the expulsion of the secular canons ; for the monks not only enjoyed their lands , but were willing enough to continue the name of dean among them as at canterbury , after dunstan's time , agelmothas is called dean ; in worcester wolstan is called dean when he was prior ; and winsius , upon the first change , is said to be placed loco decani , by florence of worcester . at norwich , herbert the bishop founded the prior and convent out of his own possessions in the time of william ii. and they became the chapter of the bishop by their foundation . now as to these , it is resolved in the dean and chapter of norwich's case , that when the king transferred them from a prior and convent , the legal rights remained the same . and in hayward and fulcher's case , the judges declared , that an ecclesiastical body may surrender their lands , but they cannot dissolve their corporation , but they still remain a chapter to the bishop . and it was not only then delivered , but since insisted upon in a famous case , that it was the resolution of the iudges , that a surrender cannot be made by a dean and chapter , without consent of the bishop , because he hath an interest in them . 4. that h. 8. endowed some as chapters to new erected bishopricks , as chester , bristol , oxford , &c. 31 h. 8 , 9. 34 h. 8. 17. and united others , as bath and wells , and coventry and litchfield , 33 h. 8. 30. 34 h. 8. 15. 5. that where the custom hath so obtained , there may be a legal-chapter without a dean ; as in the diocesses of s. david's and landaff , where there is no other head of the chapter but the bishop ; but they must act as a distinct body in elections and confirmations of grants by the bishops . 6. that by the ancient custom of england , there are sole ecclesiastical corporations as well as aggregate . a sole ecclesiastical corporation , is , where a single person represents a whole succession , and under that capacity is impowered to receive and to convey an estate to his successors : as bishops , deans , archdeacons , parsons , &c. but parsons and vicars are seized only in right of the church , but as to a bishop , he may have a writ of right , because the fee-simple abideth in him and his chapter ; and so may a dean and master of an hospital : and these are called bodies politick by littleton . that the exercise of the bishop's power may be restrained by ancient compositions , as is seen in the two ancient ecclesiastical bodies of st. paul's and litchfield . concerning which , it is to be observed , that where the compositions are extant , both parties are equally bound to observe their parts . thus by the remisness and absence of the bishops of litchfield from their see , by going to chester , and then to coventry , the deans had great power lodged in them , as to ecclesiastical jurisdiction there . after long contests , the matter came to a composition , a. d. 1428. by which the bishops were to visit them but once in seven years , and the chapter had jurisdiction over their own peculiars . so in the church of sarum the dean hath very large jurisdiction , even out of the bishop's diocess ; which makes it probable to have been very ancient ; but upon contest , it was settled by composition between the bishop , dean , and chapter , a. d. 1391. but where there are no compositions , it depends upon custom , which limits the exercise , although it cannot deprive the bishop of his diocesan-right . 4. the delegate jurisdiction which was committed to the several officers of the bishops courts , and the manner of their proceedings , is founded upon immemorial custom . in the saxon times i find no delegation of ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; for the bishops sate in person in the county-courts , and there heard ecclesiastical causes , as appears by the charter of h. 1. when he pretended to restore the saxon laws , c. 7. but william i. had settled the consistory-court by as good a law as any was made at that time , distinct from the county-court , and required all ecclesiastical causes to be there heard ; and his son h. 1. did but make a shew of restoring the saxon laws , and the former law came to be generally received ; and so mr. selden yields , that it grew to be a general law ; which shews that it obtained the force of a law by consent , as well as by authority . the consistory-courts being thus settled , and numbers of causes there depending , and the bishops being then by h. 2. in the constitutions of clarendon strictly tied to attendance upon the supreme courts of judicature , with other barons , there came a necessity of taking in other persons with a delegated power to hear causes , and to do such other acts of jurisdiction as the bishops should appoint . for it was still allowed that iure communi , the jurisdiction was in the bishop ; but iure speciali , & in auxilium episcopi , it might be delegated to others . and so it hath been here received , and not only here , but it hath been the general practice of christendom . as to the manner of proceeding in the ecclesiastical courts , it is the same in all parts , and built on the same grounds with those of our courts of equity and admiralty , which are as different from those of the common law. 5. the settling parochial rights , or the bounds of parishes depends upon an ancient and immemorial custom . for they were not limited by any act of parliament , nor set forth by special commissioners ; but as the circumstances of times , and places , and persons did happen to make them greater or lesser . in some places parishes seem to interfere , when some place in the middle of another parish belongs to one that is distant ; but that hath generally happened by an unity of possession , when the lord of a manor was at the charge to erect a new church , and make a distinct parish of his own demesns , some of which lay in the compass of another parish . but now care is taken by annual perambulations to preserve those bounds of parishes , which have been long settled by custom . but the bounds of parishes is not allowed to belong to the ecclesiastical jurisdiction . ii. the next foundation of law is a general practice , and allowance i.e. when things of themselves do not oblige by the authority of those that made them ; yet being generally received and allowed , they thereby become law to us . this we have in an act of parliament , 25 h. 8. c. 21. wherein it is said , that the people of england are only bound to such laws as are properly their own , being in subjection to no foreign legislative power . but were not many things here received for laws , which were enacted by a foreign authority , as the papal and legatine constitutions ? true , say they , but it is not by virtue of their authority , but by the free consent of the people in the use and allowance of them : and so they are not observed as the laws of any foreign prince , potentate , or prelate , but as the customed and ancient laws of this realm , originally established as laws of the same , by the said sufferance , consent and custom , and no otherwise . so that here we have a full and express declaration by parliament ; that such canons as have been received and allowed by ancient custom , make a part of our laws , and continue to oblige , provided that they be not repugnant to the king's prerogative , nor to the laws , statutes , and customs of the realm , as it is expressed in another act of the same parliament , 25 h. 8. c. 19. the ecclesiastical laws , saith my lord coke , are such as are not against the laws of the realm , viz. the common law , and the statutes and customs of the realm : and according to such laws the ordinary and other ecclesiastical iudges do proceed in causes within their conusance . so that by the acknowledgement of this great oracle of the common law , there are laws ecclesiastical in force among us , and causes to be judged by those laws , and officers appointed by the law to proceed according to them . the ecclesiastical laws and ordinances are owned by the statute , 27 h. 8. c. 20. 32 h. 8. c. 7. 35 h. 8. c. 19. after the commission appointed for the review of them . 1 e. 6. c. 2. the ecclesiastical courts are appointed to be kept by the king's authority , and process to be issued out in his name in all suits and causes of instance between party and party , where the causes are particularly mentioned , which belong to those courts , and no alteration is made in them , as to their powers , but only that the process should be in the king's name . but some persons in our age , who love to be always starting difficulties to humour such as bear ill . will to our constitution , have 〈…〉 although this act was 〈…〉 m. 2. yet that repeal 〈…〉 ●ac . 25. n. 48. therefore 〈…〉 stat. 1 e. 6. is 〈◊〉 but the plain and short answer is this , that there was no need of any debate about the repeal of the statute of e. 6. after the first of q. eliz. because then the statute , 25 h. 8. c. 20. was expresly revived , wherein the bishops were impowered to act as before they might have done , according to the laws and customs of the realm . by which no less men of the law than coke , popham , and other judges did think the stile of the court , and manner of their proceedings was comprehended . and the ancient episcopal iurisdiction is declared to be according to law , by the stat. 1 el. c. 1. and all foreign iurisdiction is abolished , and the ecclesiastical iurisdiction annexed to the crown of this realm ; which is owned by every bishop when he takes the oath of supremacy . how then can it be imagined , that he should do any more to the prejudice of the crown , by the process being in the bishop's name , than the lord of a manor doth , when he keeps his courts in his own name ? to suppose that it is owning a foreign iurisdiction , is ridiculous ; for the bishops of england never pretended to act as ordinaries , by virtue of a jurisdiction from the pope , but by virtue of their original authority which they had by the laws of the realm , as to their exterior jurisdictions . and the authority they then acted by from the pope , was in cases extraordinary , when they were delegated by particular commission . and if there had been any real derogation from the king's prerogative , in the process being in the bishop's name , can any man of sense imagine , that it would have been permitted in such jealous times as to supremacy , as the latter end of h. 8. and the whole reign of q. elizabeth were , wherein the bishops wanted not enemies , but their malice would have been too apparent , if they had insisted on such objections ? but to proceed in shewing that the ecclesiastical laws have been owned by acts of parliament since the reformation , 2 e. 6. c. 13. n. 13. the ecclesiastical iudges are required to proceed according to the king 's ecclesiastical laws . and to the same purpose , 1 el. c. 2. n. 23. accordingly my lord coke frequently owns the ecclesiastical laws and iurisdiction , so they be bounded by the laws of the realm ; of which there can be no question . for deciding of controversies , and for distribution of iustice , saith he , there be within this realm two distinct iurisdictions ; the one ecclesiastical , limited to certain spiritual and particular cases ; the other secular and general , for that it is guided by the common and general law of the realm . and to the same purpose my lord chief justice hales in several places in a ms. discourse of the history and analysis of the common law , ch . 1 , and 2. but here the great difficulty lies in finding out what these canons and constitutions are , which have been so received and allowed by our laws . for it is certain , that several canons made by popes , were not received here , as in the statute of merton , about legitimation of children born before marriage , stat. mert. c. 9. where the lords declared they would not alter the old laws for a new canon . for alexander iii. in the time of hen. ii. had made a canon to that purpose ; but as glanvil saith , it was contra jus & consuetudinem regni . the canon to take away the benefit of the clergy from bigami , was debated in parliament how far it should be received , and the sense there declared , which was complained of , 51 e. 3. and taken away , 1 e. 6. c. 12. the canon against investiture of bishops by a lay-hand , was never here received ; for although h. 1. after a long contest gave it up , yet it was resumed by his successors . the canons for exemption of the clergy , were never fully received here . some lawyers say , it was never observed ; i suppose they mean , according to the canons , but that they had legal privileges here , although not a total exemption , cannot be denied by any one versed in our laws from the saxon times . the pope's canon for the clergy not being taxed without his consent , was never received , as appears by the contests about it in the time of e. 1. and their submission afterwards . the pope's canons about appeals , provisors , dispensations , &c. were never received by such a general consent as to make them laws ; they were sometimes practised by connivence , and the kings , when it served their purposes , let them alone ; but as often as there was occasion , they were contested and denied , and statutes made against the execution of them . some canons i find disputed , whether they were received by the law of england or not . as the canon against clergy mens sons succeeding their fathers in their benefices immediately , without a papal dispensation ; is not only a part of the canon law , but enter'd in our provincial constitutions . but in the case of stoke against sykes , it was held by dodderidge and iones , two learned judges , that this canon was not received here . and dodderidge instanced in two other canons not received ; as against a man's marrying a woman he had committed adultery with ; and a lay-man's not revoking his first presentation . and sir iohn davis mentioned reckoning the months for presentation by weeks , and not by the calendar . but both these are disputable points . for some say , as to the former , that none but the king can revoke a presentation . but the canonists think a private patron may vary with the bishop's consent . and as to the way of computing the months , it hath been differently resolved ; but in catesbie's case , it was determined to be calendar-months for many reasons . but in the ancient resolution in the time of e. ii. the tempus semestre was reckoned from notice to the patron , and not from the death of the incumbent . rolls saith , by our law it is from the time the patron might have notice , with regard to the distance of the place where the incumbent died : which leaves the matter uncertain . but the register reckons from the vacancy . in many other cases the foreign canons were not received , for they allow but four months to a lay-patron , but our law six months ; they deny any sale of a right of advowson , but our law allows it , and a separation of it from the inheritance , which the canon law allows not ; and so in other particulars , but these are sufficient to my purpose . it is observable , that after the council of lions , where the pope was present , peckham , archbishop of canterbury , called a provincial council , wherein he mentions the difference of our customs from all others , and a temperament to be made suitable to them . and our judges in the great case of evans and ayscough , declared , that no canons bind here , but such as are recieved by the realm . and dodderidge said , that our ecclesiastical law doth not consist of the pope's decretals , but is an extract out of the ancient canons , general and national . but the judges agreed , that when they are received , they become part of our law. lord chief justice vaughan saith , that if canon law be made a part of the law of the land , then it is as much the law of the land , and as well , and by the same authority , as any other part of the law of the land. in another place , that the ancient canon law received in this kingdom , is the law of the kingdom in such cases . in a third , that a lawful canon , is the law of the kingdom , as well as an act of parliament . iii. i now come to the third thing , viz. the power of making canons by act of parliament . this is founded on the statute 25 h. 8. c. 19. the words are , that no canons , constitutions and ordinances , provincial or synodal , shall be made , promulged and executed without the king 's royal assent or licence . canons so made , and authorized by the king's letters patents , according to the form of the statute , are said by lord chief justice vaughan , to be canons warranted by act of parliament . and such he affirms the canons of a. d. 1603. to be . but some have objected , that these are only negative words , and are not an introduction of a new law , but a declaration of what the law was before . but my lord coke with far greater judgment , limits that expression , that what was then passed , was declaratory of the common law , to that clause , that no canons should be in force , which were repugnant to the laws of the realm . but as to the making of new canons , he only saith , that their iurisdiction and power is much limited , because they must have licence to make them , and the king 's royal assent to allow them , before they be put in execution . but he never imagined the sense of the statute to be , that no canons could be made but in parliament , or that the king had not a power to confirm new canons made by the convocation . as to the law , as it stood before , we must distinguish these two things ; 1. convocations called by the king 's writ to the bishops , and the body of the clergy , could never assemble without it . but the writ for the convocation to sit with the parliament , ( not together in place , but at the same time ) is contained in the writ to the bishop , and begins with the clause , praemunientes . and it is most probable , that it began on the same ground that the attendance of burgesses did , viz. that when they were brought into the payment of subsidies , they ought to give their consent . for i find , that in the time of h. 3. a. r. 39. the inferiour clergy complained , that they were taxed without their consent . 2. convocations called by the king 's writ to the archbishops ; and in this province the archbishop sends his mandate to the bishop of london , who is to summon all the bishops , &c. to appear at a certain time and place , and to act as they receive authority from the king. the not distinguishing these two writs , hath caused so much confusion in some mens minds , about the rights of the convocation : for they imagine that the convocation , as it treats of ecclesiastical matters , sits by virtue of the first writ , which is in the bishops summons to parliament ; but that related to them as one of the three estates of the realm , whose consent was then required to their own subsidies , which were distinctly granted , but confirmed by the other estates . but the other writ was directed to the archbishop , by which the bishops and inferiour clergy were strictly required to appear , and then to understand the king's further pleasure , as appears by the most ancient . writs for a convocation . which shews , that the convocation , properly so called , is an occasional assembly for such purposes as the king shall direct them when they meet . and this was the true foundation upon which the statute , 25 h. 8. was built . for it cannot be denied , that in fact there had been convocations for ecclesiastical purposes called without the kings writ , by virtue of the archbishop's legatine power , which was permitted to be exercised here , although it were an usurpation upon the king 's right . so even in the time of h. 8. although there were a convocation summoned by the king 's writ to the archbishop of canterbury , yet cardinal wolsley , by virtue of his legatine power , superiour to that of the archbishop , removed the convocation to another place , and presided in it : which was as great an affront to the king 's as well as the archbishop's authority , as could well be imagined . but this was then patiently born : wherefore the statute is to be understood of legal , and not of legatine convocations . but when h. 8. was sufficiently provoked by the court of rome , he resolved to resume the ancient and legal rights of the crown , how soever disused by modern usurpations . and among these he claimed this of summoning the convocation , and directing the proceedings therein . the difference of these writs will best appear by the instance of the convocation , a. d. 1640. in the year , 1639. about the first of february the parliament writ was issued out to the bishops for calling their clergy to parliament ; and this is only ad consentiendum iis quae tunc ibidem de communi concilio regni nostri contigerint ordinari . the other writ for the convocation to the archbishops was issued out the twentieth of february , and had this clause , ad tractandum , consentiendum , & concludendum super praemissis & aliis quae sibi clarius exponentur ex parte meâ . the parliament at that time being dissolved , it 's certain the convocation sitting by virtue of the writ to the bishops must fall with it : but a great question arose , whether the convocation sitting by the writ to the archbishops , was dissolved , or not ? and the greatest judges and lawyers of that time were of opinion it was not . but those were not times to venture upon such points , when people were disposed to find fault , as they did , to purpose when the next parliament met ; who made use of the sitting of this convocation and the canons then pass'd , as one of the popular themes to declaim upon against the bishops , and to inflame the nation against the whole order . the greatest objection in point of law , was , that the commission had a respect to the convocation sitting in parliament-time , which began 13 april 1640. and the commission bore date april 15. the parliament was dissolved may 5. and the 12th of may a new commission was granted , which made void that of the fifteenth of april ; and so what was done by virtue of that , must be done out of parliament , and so not in convocation , according to 25 h. 8. 19. although these canons were confirmed by the king's authority the thirtieth of iune the same year . after the king's restoration , an act of parliament passed for restoring the bishops ordinary jurisdiction ; wherein a clause is added , that this act did not confirm those canons of 1640. but left the ecclesiastical laws as they stood 1639. which act being passed by the king's assent , it voids the former confirmation of them , and so leaves them without force . but the alteration of our law by the act , 25 h. 8. c. 19. lay not in this , that the convocation by the king 's writ to the archbishop , could not sit but in parliament-time ( although that in all respects be the most proper time ) for there is not a word tending that way in the statute ; but provincial councils having been frequently held here , without any writ from the king , and therein treating of matters prejudicial to the crown , by virtue of a legatine power , there was great reason for the king to resume the ancient right of the crown . for so william i. declared it in eadmerus , that nothing should be done in provincial councils without his authority . but afterwards we find hubert , archbishop of canterbury , holding a provincial council against the king's prohibition ; and several writs were sent to them to prohibit their meddling in matters of state in prejudice to the crown , 18 h. 3. under penalty of the bishops forfeiting their baronies ; and to the like purpose , 35 e. 1. 15 e. 2. 6 e. 3. which seems to be a tacit permission of these provincial councils , provided they did nothing prejudicial to the crown . and from such councils came our provincial constitutions , which lyndwood hath digested according to the method of the canon-law , and hath therein shewed what part of the canon-law hath any force here ; not by virtue of any papal or legatine power , but by the general consent of the nation , by which they have been received among us . but my business is not now with canons so received , but with canons made according to the statute , 25 h. 8. 19. for it is ridiculous to imagine those are only negative words , for then they exclude the king's power of calling a convocation , as well as confirming the acts of it . for to what purpose is the king 's writ to call them together , if being assembled they can do nothing ? but i have already mentioned my lord chief justice vaughan's opinion , that the canons made a. d. 1603. are warranted by 25 h. 8. c. 19. it was urged by the council in the case of grove and eliot , 22 carol. 2. that no canons can alter the law , which are not confirmed by act of parliament . but it was said on the other side , that these canons had been always allowed , having been confirmed by the king. one of the judges said , that the king and convocation cannot make canons to bind the laity , but only the clergy . but vaughan said , that those canons are of force , although never confirmed by act of parliament , as no canons are ; and yet , saith he , they are the laws which bind and govern in ecclesiastick affairs . the convocation , with the licence and assent of the king , under the great seal , may make canons for regulation of the church , and that as well concerning laicks as ecclesiasticks ; and so is lyndwood . there can be no question in lyndwood's time , but ecclesiastical constitutions were thought to bind all that were concerned in them ; and the ecclesiastical laws which continue in force by custom and consent , bind all ; the only question then is about making new canons , and the power to make them , is by virtue of an act of parliament , to which the nation consented ; and so there need no representatives of the people in convocation . and no such thing can be inferred from moor , 755. for the judges declared the deprivation of the clergy for not conforming to the canons , to be legal ; but they say nothing of others . but in the case of bird and smith , f. 783. the chancellor and three chief judges declared , that the canons made in convocation by the king's authority , without parliament , do bind in ecclesiastical matters , as an act of parliament . and therefore i proceed to shew , ii. in what manner we are obliged to the observation of these canons ; concerning which i shall premise two things ; 1. that i meddle not with such canons as are altered by laws ; for all grant , that unless it be in moral duties , their force may be taken away by the laws of the land. 2. there are some canons , where the general disuse in matters of no great consequence to the good of the church , or the rights of other persons , may abate the force of the obligation ; especially when the disuse hath been connived at , and not brought into articles of visitation , as can. 74. about gowns with standing collars , and cloaks with sleeves . but the general reason continues in force , viz. that there should be a decent and comely habit for the clergy , whereby they should be known and distinguished by the people ; and for this , the ancient custom of the church is alledged . but here a very material question arises , how far custom is allowed to interpret and alter the force of canons made by a lawful authority : for where a custom prevails against a standing rule , it amounts to this , whether practice against law , is to have more force than the law. and how can there be a reasonable custom against a law built upon reasonable grounds ? but on the other side , if custom hath no power in this case , then all the ancient canons of the church do still bind in conscience , and so we must not kneel at our prayers on sundays , nor between easter and whitsontide , which were thought to be made upon good reason at first ; and so many other canons which have long grown into a disuse . so that if we do strictly oblige persons to observe all ecclesiastical canons made by lawful authority , we run men into endless scruples and perplexities ; and gerson himself grants , that many canons of general councils have lost their force by disuse , and that the observation of them now would be useless and impossible . but on the other side , if meer disuse were sufficient , what would become of any canons and constitutions , where persons are refractary and disobedient ? this is a case which deserves to be stated and cleared . and we are to distinguish three sorts of customs . 1. customs generally obtaining upon altering the reason of ancient canons . 2. customs allowed upon the general inconveniency of modern canons . 3. customs taken up without any rules or canons for them . 1. as to general customs against ancient canons where the reason is altered ; i see no ground for any to set up those canons , as still in force , among us : for this must create confusion and disorder , which those canons were designed to prevent ; and the laws of the land do certainly supersede ancient canons , wherein the necessary duties of religion are not immediately concerned . for we must have a care of setting up ancient canons against the authority of our laws , which cannot be consistent with our national obligation , nor with the oath of supremacy . 2. as to customs relating to modern canons , if it hath any force , as to altering the obligation . 1. it must be general ; not taken up by particular dissaffected persons to our constitution ; for the custom of such men only shews their wilful disobedience and contempt of authority ; and all casuists are agreed , that contempt of lawful authority , is a wilful sin : which supposes a wilful neglect upon knowledge and admonition of their duty . for contempt is , nolle subjici cui oportet subjici ; and a lesser fault commited with it , is a greater sin than a greater fault in it self committed without it , i.e. by meer carelesness and inadvertency . but where there is an open and customary neglect , there is a presumption of contempt , unless some great and evident reason be produced for it . i do not say the bare neglect doth imply contempt in it self , but where there is admonition and a continuance after it , there is a down-right and positive contempt . but where the disuse is general , not out of contempt , but upon other reasons ; and there is no admonition by superiours , but a tacit connivence ; there is a presumtion of a consent towards the laying aside the strict obligation of the canons relating to it . 2. it must be reasonable ▪ i.e. on such grounds as may abate the force of the obligation . for there is a difference between a custom obtaining the force of a law , and a custom abating the force of a canon : in the former case the custom must be grounded on more evident reason than is necessary for the latter . wherein the casuists allow a permission of superiours joyned with reasonable circumstances , to be sufficient . but how can acts of disobedience make a reasonable custom ? cajetan saith , they are to blame who began it , but not those who follow it , when the custom is general . and suarez saith , it is the common opinion . the canonists say , if a custom be against a rule , the reason must be plain ; if only besides the rule , and be not repugnant to the end and design , the reasonableness when it becomes general , is presumed . but if the superiours take notice of it , and condemn it , it loses the force of custom , unless a new reason or higher authority appear for it . 3. but what is to be said for customs taken up without rules or canons ; of what force are they in point of conscience ? 1. it is certain , that no late customs brought in by such as have no authority to oblige , can bind others to follow them . for this were to lay open a gap to the introducing foolish and superstitious customs into the church , which would make distinctions without cause , and make way for differences and animosities , which all wise and good men will avoid as much as may be . it is a rule among the casuists , that voluntary customs , although introduced with a good mind , can never oblige others to observe them . and suarez yields , that a bare frequent repetition of acts cannot bind others , although it hath been of long continuance . 2. if the customs be such as are derived from the primitive times , and continue in practice , there is no reason to oppose , but rather to comply with them ; or if they tend to promote a delight in god's service . as for instance : 1. worshipping towards the east , was a very ancient custom in the christian church . i grant that very insufficient reasons are given for it ; which origen would not have men to be too busie in inquiring into , but to be content that it was a generally received practice , even in his time ; and so doth clemens alexandrinus before him , who thinks it relates to christ , as the sun of righteousness . tertullian and s. basil own the custom , and give no reason . but of all customs that of contention and singularity , where there is no plain reason against them , doth the least become the church of god. 2. the use of organical musick in the publick service . if it tends to compose , and settle , and raise the spirits of men in the acts of worship , i see no reason can be brought against it . if it be said to be only a natural delight , that reason will hold against david , who appointed it by god's own commandment . they who call it levitical service , can never prove it to be any of the typical ceremonies , unless they can shew what was represented by it . i come now to the measure of the obligation of the canons in force . and therein a great regard is to be had to the intention of that authority which enjoyns them ; and that is to be gathered from three things ; 1. the matter . 2. the words and sense of the church . 3. the penalty . 1. as to the matter . if it be in it self weighty , and tends to promote that which is good and pious , and for the honour of god , and service of religion , it cannot be denied but these canons do oblige in conscience . bellarmin distinguishes between laws of the church , which , he saith , are very few , and pious admonitions and good orders , which are not intended to oblige men to sin , but only in case of contempt and scandal . and as to the feasts and fasts of the church , which belong to the laws , he saith , they have mitissimam obligationem ; so any one would think , who considers how many are exempted , and for what reasons . gerson saith , that no human constitutions bind as to moral sin , unless it be founded on the law of god ; as he confesses the church's authority is , as to circumstances ; and then he thinks it obliges in conscience . the substance of his opinion , which hath been much disputed and controverted by modern casuists , lies in these things : 1. that where ecclesiastical constitutions do inforce any part of the law of god , although it be not expresly contained therein , they do immediately bind the consciences of men. 2. that where they tend to the good of the church , and the preservation of decency and order , they do so far oblige , that the contempt of authority therein , is a sin against the law of god. 3. that where the injunctions of authority are for no other end , but to be obeyed , he doth not think that there is any strict obligation in point of conscience . and so far cajetan agrees with him . and although the other casuists seem to be very angry with him , yet when they require a publick good , and the order of the church to be the reason of ecclesiastical laws , they do , in effect , agree with him . now as to the matter of our canons which respect the clergy , there are two especially which bind them strictly ; 1. the canon about sobriety of conversation , can. 75. yes , some may say , as far as the law of god obliges , i.e. to temperance and sobriety ; but the canon forbids resorting to taverns , or alebouses , or playing at dice , cards , or tables ; doth this canon oblige in conscience in this manner ? if it were a new thing that were forbidden , there were some plea against the severity of it ; but frequenting publick houses is forbidden by the apostolical canons , which are of great antiquity , by the council of laodicea , and in trullo , and many others since . and by the apostolical canons any presbyter playing at dice , and continuing so to do after admonition , is to be deprived . the illiberitan council makes it excommunication to play at dice . not meerly for the images of the gentile gods upon them , as albaspinaeus thinks , but because the thing it self was not of good report , even among the gentiles themselves ; as appears by cicero , ovid , suetonius , &c. as giving too great occasion for indecent passions , and of the loss of time . hostiensis reckons up sixteen vices that accompany it , which a clergyman especially ought to avoid . and playing at dice was infamous by the civil law. iustinian forbids clergymen not only playing , but being present at it . it was forbidden in the old articles of visitation here , and in several diocesan synods , spelm. ii. 192 , 252 , 298 , 367 , 450. so that there can be no reason to complain of the severity of this canon , which so generally obtained in the christian church . ii. the canons which relate to ministers discharging the several duties of their function , in preaching , praying , administring sacraments , catechizing , visiting the sick , &c. which are intended to inforce an antecedent duty ; which we can never press you too much or too earnestly to ; considering that the honour of religion , and the salvation of your own and the peoples souls depend upon it . ( 2. ) the next way of judging the church's intention , is by the words and sense of the church . cajetan thinks the general sense is the best rule . navarr saith to the same purpose , although some words are stricter than others . suarez , that the main obligation depends on the matter , but the church's intention may be more expressed by special words of command . tolet relies most upon the sense of the church : but the sense of the church must be understood , whether it be approving , or recommending , or strictly commanding , according to the obligation of affirmative precepts , which makes a reasonable allowance for circumstances . and so our church in some cases expresly allows reasonable impediments . and in precepts of abstinence , we must distinguish the sense of the church , as to moral abstinence , i.e. subduing the flesh to the spirit ; and a ritual abstinence in a meer difference of meats , which our church lays no weight upon ; and a religious abstinence for a greater exercise of prayer and devotion , which our church doth particularly recommend at particular seasons , which i need not mention . ( 3. ) by the penalties annexed , which you may find by reading over the canons , which you ought to do frequently and seriously , in order to your own satisfaction about your duties , and the obligation to perform them . but some may think , that such penal canons oblige only to undergo the punishment . to which i answer , that the case is very different in an hypothetical law , as suarez calls it ; when laws are only conditional and disjunctive , either you must do so , or you must undergo such penalty , which is then looked on as a legal recompence ; and ecclesiastical constitutions , where obedience is chiefly intended , and the penalty is annexed only to inforce it , and to deterr others from disobedience . for no man can imagine that the church aims at any man's suspension or deprivation for it self , or by way of compensation for the breach of its constitutions . and now give me leave not only to put you in mind , but to press earnestly upon you the diligent performance of those duties , which by the laws of god and man , and by your own voluntary promises when you undertook the cure of souls , are incumbent upon you . it is too easie to observe , that those who have the law on their side , and the advantage of a national settlement , are more apt to be remiss and careless when they have the stream with them , than those who row against it , and therefore must take more pains to carry on their designs . as those who force a trade must use much more diligence , than those who go on in the common road of business . but what diligence others use in gaining parties , do you imploy in the saving their souls : which the people will never believe you are in earnest in , unless they observe you are very careful in saving your own by a conscientious discharge of your duties . they do not pretend to fineness of thoughts , and subtilty of reasoning , but they are shrewd judges whether men mean what they say , or not ; and they do not love to be imposed upon by such a sort of sophistry , as if they could think that they can have such a regard to their souls , who shew so little to their own . therefore let your unblameable and holy conversations , your charity and good works , your diligence and constancy in your duties , convince them that you are in earnest ; and they will hearken more to you , than if you used the finest speeches , and the most eloquent harangues in the pulpit to them . these , the people understand little , and value less ; but a serious , convincing , and affectionate way of preaching , is the most likely way to work upon them . if there be such a thing as another world , as no doubt there is , what can you imploy your time , and thoughts , and pains better about , than preparing the souls of your people for a happy eternity ? how mean are all other laborious trifles , and learned impertinencies , and busie inquiries , and restless thoughts , in comparison with this most valuable and happy imployment , if we discharge it well ? and happy is that man , who enjoys the satisfaction of doing his duty now , and much more happy will he be whom our lord , when he cometh , shall find so doing . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61555-e120 pag. 277 , &c. histoire des o●●●ages des scavans . août , 1697. p. 551. notes for div a61555-e2560 regino . l. 2. p. 205. hispan . concil . p. 29. regino collect. canon . lib. 2. p. 204. burchard . l. 1. c. 91 , 92. gratian 35. q. 5. c. 7. hieron comment . ad titum . epist. ad 〈◊〉 advers . luciferian . hier. in psal. ad evagr. ad marcel . cyprian . ep. 3 66. aug. in ps. 44. 44. ambros. ad eph. 4. 11. 1 cor. 12. 28. theod. ad 1 tim. 1. 3. iren. l. 3. c. 3. 3 iohn 9 , 10. 1 tim. 3. 2 , 3 , &c. 5. 22. 19. 20. 21. titus 1. 5. de voto & voti redempt . lyndw. f. 103. concil . anglic. vol. 2. f. 182. constit. othon . f. 292. concil . angl. vol. 2. f. 227. constit. provinc . de officio archi-presbyteri , f. 33. concil . anglic. vol. 1. p. 183. lyndw. v. latratuf . 33. v. pabulo v. dei. * prov. constit . de offic. arch-presbyt . f. 282. concil . anglic. vol. 2. p. 332. concil . anglic. vol. 2. p. 700 , 707. concil . anglic. 2 vol. p. 649. constit. de haeret . f. 156. lyndw. f. 156. c. dudum . clem. de sepulturis . io. de athon . in constitut. othobon . f. 46. c. dudum de sepulturis . non potest esse pastoris excusatio , si lupus oves comedit , & pastor nescit . extr. de reg. juris c. 10. reginald . praxis , l. 30. tr . 3. c. 5. p. 52. constit. provinc . de clericis non resid . c. quum hostis . ioh. athon . ad constit. othon . f. 14. reginald . ib. n. 53. can. relatum ex. de cleri●is non resid . lyndw. in c. ●uum hostis . residcant cum effectu . ioh. de athon . in constit. othon . f. 14. continui . can. extirpand . de praebend . & dign . de praesumpt . f. 55. 2. de cleri●● non resident . cum hostis , &c. lyndw. f. 34. ioh. de athon . in constit. othon . f. 12. otho de instit. vic. f. 14. othobon . f. 46. ioh. de athon . in constit. othon . can. quia nonnulli de clericis non resid . quadril . 1. 1. c. 5. plato de leg. l. 6. arist. polit. l. 1. c. 2. nicom . l. 2. c. 1. 7. c. 7. 〈◊〉 . 24. de 〈…〉 c. 4 ▪ lyndw. pr●v . c●st . f. 134 , 135. concil . anglic. 2 vol. 324 , 330. de c●nse●r . dist. 4. c. 54 , 57. lynd. f. 1. 11. sciat . si enim habeant expensas & magistros , peccarent , nisi plus sciant quam laici . provine . constit . de sacra vnct. f. 18. concil . angl. 2. vol. p. 353. c●●cil . angl. 〈◊〉 2. p. 14● , 1●● . 〈…〉 . p. 44● . ● . 143. lyndw. f. 19. orig. in iur. h●m . 14. p. 14. ed. 〈◊〉 . 11. q. 3. c. 63. lyndw. ad l. de poenis . f. 161. extr. de priv. c. porro in gloss. in 〈…〉 17. in ephes. hem. 3. concil . angl. tom. 2. p. 144 , 166 , 299. calvin . instit. l. 4. c. 17. n. 44. pet. martyr . l. c. l. 4. c. 10. n. 48. in 1 cor. 11. p. 55. bucer in matth. 16. p. 186. i●●t . 632. 2 inst. 632. provinc . cons. quum secund . f. 71. can. 95. 5 rep. 57. * multa impediunt promovendum , quae non de●iciunt . gloss. in c. 15. de vit. & honest. cleric . c. christiano , f. 63. de iure patron . c. pastoralis officii . gloss. in can. & malitiose . moor 26 el. 3. 3 cr. 27. can. 39. 3 cr. 341. 1 leon. 230. regino l. 1. c. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 10. baluz . ad reginon . p. 531. concil . anglic. vol. 2. f. 124. c. 10. q. 1. episcopum , regino . l. 1. c. 7. concil . braga . 2. c. 1. 10. q. 1. placait . concil . cabil . 2. c. 14. de censibus , f. 121. de officio vicarii c. quoniam v. procurari . concil . anglic. vol. 2. 140 , 200. extr. de vita & honestat . cleric . c. 14. prov. cont. f. 61. epist. ad ios. hall. concil . anglic. 2 vol. 104. f. 122. 126. can. 78. brownlow's rep. f. 37. id. f. 70. lyndw. f. 9. 6 c. 14. hob. 293. owen 87. 1 cr. 41. 789. officium curae animarum est praecipuum a● spiritualissimum dei donum . ca●etan . in act. 8. concil . anglic. vol. 2. p. 8 , 10. p. 35. p. 105. constit. prov. 152. parsons councellor , sect. 5. hob. 167. 1 rolls 237. io. de athon . in constit. othob . f. 55. 2. 35. e. 1. ● r. 72. 〈◊〉 inst. 204. ●●oo● 917. godbolt 279. rolls 813. 29. e. 3. 16. 2 hen. 4. 3. 11 hen. 6. 20. 9. e. 4. 34. constit. othob . f. 55. 2. othob . f. 55. 2. provinc . constit . f. 59. lyndw. ib. v. sit content . 10. q. 3. c. vnio . concil . tolet. 16. c. 5. 21. q. 1. c. 1. clericus . ex. de praeb . c. referente . ex. de cleric . non-resident . c. quia nonnulli . ex. de praeb . c. de multa . less . l. 2. c. 34. dub. 27. pan. c. du . lu● . 2. de elect. sylv. benef. 4. sum. angel. ben. 35. tolet summa casim . 5. ● . 82. cr. car. f. 456. c. 4. 75. holland's case . notes for div a61555-e11750 deut. 33. 10. levit. 10. 11. numb . 1. 3 , 46. ● . 15 , 39. selden's review , p. 456. hosea 4. 6. isa. 56. 11. 12. levit. 10. 8 , 9. 10. 11. levit. 10. 3. ezek. 3. 18 , 20. 33. 7. 1 pet. 5. 2 , 3. acts 20. 28. 1 thess. 5. 12. heb. 13. 17. ad probandam ecclesiam parochialem , primo est necesse quod habeat locum certis finibus constitutum , in quo degat populus illi ecclesiae deputatu● . rebuff . ad concord . de collat. sect. stat. n. 2. bed. l. 1. c. 26. c. 33. l. 2. c. 3. l. 3. c. 7. l. 4. c. 13 , 16. l. 4. c. 12. l. 5. c. 4 , 5. bed. epist. ad egbert . p. 64. egbert . can. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4. concil . anglie . 1. 293. 1. p. 248. can. 9. concil . anglic● 1. 444. p. 544 , 545. p. 540. ansclm. episi . l. 4. ep. 3. ioh. de athon : in const. othob . p. 59. extr. de iure patron . c. 30. lyndw. f. 34. 167. de vit. & honest. c. 3. gloss. c. 1. q. 2. c. 1. concil . anglic. 11. 253. lynw. f. 53. 2. 167. 72. 2. extr. ne praeter vices , &c. c. 3. lyndw. de consert . e. stat. c. rect. athon . f. 13. ext. de praeb . c. de monachis . lyndw. d● o●ficio 〈◊〉 c. qu●● thorn. c. 2 ▪ sect. 8. extr. de 〈◊〉 ordin . azor. p. 2. l. c. 19. barbosa de officio parochial . c. 1. n. 9. concil . angls 1. p. 183. angl. sacr. 1. 150. stub . vit. arch. h. huntingin angl. sacr. concil . angl. 11. 14. seld. 14. 1. 4 l●st . 259. tit. h. 1. c. ● . can. 48. can. 41. notes for div a61555-e16040 concil . angl. 1. 249. concil . angl. i. 258. egbert . dial. de eccles. instit . cum bedae epistol . ad egbert . dublin , 1664. concil . angl. 1. 600. bed. t. 7. p. 639. alcuin . de offic c. 27. epist. 5. 49. de off. c. 40 , bed. t. iv. 586. v. 583. ii. 310. viii . 930. august . in psal. 91. in psal. 32. 11. 6. de 10 chordis . euseb. praep. l. 8. c. 7. ioseph . 2. c. appion . aben-ezra in exod. kimchi ad psal. 92. menass . concil . in exod. q. 35. aug. c. faust. l. 6. c. 4. c. adimant . c. 2. 16. de genes . ad lit . c. 11. 13. epist. ad ian. 119. c. 13. greg. epist. l. 11. c. 3. de consecr . dist. 3. c. 16. conc. narbon . can. 4. concil . cabil . c. 18. aquisgran . c. 81. arelat . vi. can. 16. rhem. 2. c. 35. paris . vi. l. 3. c. 5. de officio archipresbyt . f. 29. 2. aquin. in sent. l. 3. dist. 37. qu. 1. art. 2. 2. 2. 122. 4. ● 2. q. 100. 1. bell de cultu sanct. l. 3. c. 11. covarruv . car. resol . l. 4. c. 19. azor. t. 2. c. 2. q. 2. suarez de rel. tr. 2. l. 2. c. 1. n. 15. c. 4. n. 8 , 9. waldens . t. 3. tit. 16. c. 140. ina ll. c. 3. withred . c. 10. alfred . c. 10 , 11. athelst. c. 9. edgar . c. 19. ethelred . c. 15. canut . c. 15. concil . angl. ii. 238 , 372 , 599. pupill . oculi , part . 9. c. 6. homily of the place and time of prayer . eccles. polity , l. 5. n. 70. orig. in numer . hom. 23. c. 28. hom. 9. in levit. 16. chrysost. hom. 5. in matth. 2 hom. in ioh. hom. 5. ad pop. antioch . hom. 10. in gen. de officio archipresbyt . v. sanctifices . alcuin . de offic. c. 40. wilt●em . in diptych . leod. c. 8. de cultu sanct. l. 3. c. 10. de feriis , f. 52. concil . angl. i. 247. soz. l. 7. c. 19. regest . l. 1. 24. concil . vasens . 2. c. 2. turon . 3. c. 17. arel . 6. c. 10. capitul . 1. 160. reginold . 1. 205. capit. 11. c. 5. erasm. praefat . ad eccles. sess. 24. c. 4. de reform . act. eccles. mediol . 44● , 450. palaeot . de administr . eccles. bonon . part . 2. p. 34. godeau sur les ordres , p. 458. bordenave des eglis . cathedral . p. 670. tertul. de baptis . c. 19. leo ep. 78. ambros. serm. 61. theodulph . de ordine baptism . c. 8. alcuin . de bapt. cerem . p. 1151. august . de symbol . ad catech. l. 2. c. 1. de fide & oper. c. 6. august . serm. 160. bed. l. 2. c. 1● concil . in trullo , can. 31 , 59. syn. a. & b. can. 12. duaren . de benef. l. 2. c. 7 ▪ concil . angl. i. p. 194. theod. capit. 55 , 57. l. l. canut . c. 22 , 23. l. l. edmund . cap. 4. theod. capit. c. 13. regino i , 300. capit. l. 6. c. 73 , 75. addit . 2. c. 10. gul. paris . de collat. benef. c. 6. perald . sum. vit. to. 2. de avarit . c. 11 sect. 1. cantiprat . de apibus l. 1. c. 19. n. 5. hist. universit . paris . secul . 5. p. 164. aquin. quaest. quodlibet . q. 9. art. 15. caj . ad 2. 2. q. 185. r. 5. concil . tolet. 16. c. 5. c. 10. q. 3. c. 3. concil . paris . 6. c. 49. capit. l. 5. c. 108. capit. l. 6. c. 200. l. 7. c. 245. cajet . sum. v. benef. 1. 6. in. 2. 2. q. 185. r. 5. filliuc . tr. 41. c. 7. n. 6. concil . nanet . c. 8. regino inquisit . art. 46. baluz . append . ad regin . 604 , 608 , 612. thomassin , part. 3. c. 42. n. 9. can. apost . 19. nicen. c. 16. antioch . 3. laodic . 42. calced . 10 , 20. cod. afric . c. 54. cresc . coll. tit. 17. concil . herudf , c. 5. can. edgar . 8. egbert . can. 13. capitul . l. ● . c. 175. concil . nannet . c. 8. concil . tolet. 16. c. 4. c. 10. q. 3. c. vnio . compegins de vnion . n. 1 , 8 , 10 , &c. azor. p. 2. l. 6. c. 28. flam. paris . de resign . l. 12. c. 3. n. 49. addit . 2. n. 10. notes for div a61555-e21930 baluz . ad capit. 1148 selden of tithes , p. 53. bignon . ad form. marc. p. 980. sirmond . ad capit. p. 768. lyndw. f. 44. extr. de censib . c. 1. c. 23. q. 8. c. 24. de consecr . d●st . 1. c. 9. c. 16. q. 7. c. 26. baluz . append . ad reginon . p. 622. ent. de eccles . aedific . c. ad audientium . seld. 85 , 86. f. 89. capit. 816. c. 9. capit. 1 , 84 , 141. ivo p. 3. c. 55 , 174. regino l. 1. c. 24. burch . l. 3. c. 52. c. 23. q. 8. c. 24. 25. concil . labb . t. 8. p. 1815. filesaci opus . p. 846 , &c. fragment . de majoribus pal. du chesn . t. 1. capit. l. 1. 157. regin . l. 1. 43 , 45 , 46 , 47. 1 inst. 17. b. capit. l. 7. c. 392. bignon . in marculph . l. 1. c. 21. aub. mirae . cod. donat. l. 1. c. 136. p. roverii reomaus , p. 614. de foro compet . f. 50. c. 56. q. 7. n. 32. concil . brac. 3. c. 6. de consecr . 1. c. 10. agabard . de dispens . c. 20. tertul. apolog. c. 39. cypr. ep. 34. ep. 66. ep. 64. selden of tithes , c. 5. n. 5. p. 58. spelm. con. p. 517. glanvil . l. 7. c. 5. spelm. concil . ii. p. 433. p. 453. p. 391. 2 inst. 491. warwickshire , p. 470 , &c. spelm. ii. p. 393. p. 303. p. 452. p. 410. p. 585. lyndw. f. 12. spelm. ii. p. 393. spel. gloss. c. altarage . ioh. de burgo pupill . oculi , f. 118. b. spelm. ii. 495 , 410. pupilla oculi , part. 5. c. 21. spel. concil . ● 517 , 527. mon. i. 256. ● . inst. 642. hob. r. 296. regist. f. 46. moor. f. 50. bustrod . 3. 243. 11 r. 13. hob. 298. 44. rolls r. 2. 174. poph. r. 156. law of tithes , c. 12. p. 214. 2 inst. 651. select 〈◊〉 . 16. moor 908. ● . el. 277. 〈…〉 . f. n. b. 53. b. 241. rolls 637. march 58 ▪ law of tithes ▪ 214. 4 inst. 232. 1 rolls , 637. cosin's apo● . p. 38. 2 inst. 664. 11 r. 15 , 16. rolls 1. 636. lyndw. de decimis . c. sanct c. negotiat . selden of tithes , 244. cr. car. 596. hob. 1. 11. regist. 49. rolls 1. 640. hob. 219. cr. car. 526. rolls 1. 637. iones 416. hardres 381. 2 inst. 652. rolls 1. 640. 648. yelv. 86. cr. iac. 116. law of tithes , 190. c. 3. 2 inst. 651. law of tithes c. 8. cr. car. 559. iones , 447. f. n. b. 51. rolls . 1. 651. rolls , 1. 635. rolls , r. 2. 2. hetley , 147. littleton , 3. n. 40. rolls , 1. 644. march , 56. hetley , 13. rolls , 1. 635 , 636. palmer , 527. cr. car. 264 , 339. lyndw. 101. spel. ii. 503. hardr. 188. kebl . 2. 452. 1 inst. 115. 6. 244. monast. i. 577. 646. 1002. ii. 4. 658. lynd. f. 99. f. n. b. 53. 2 inst. 651. hardres , 184. poph. 142. rolls , 1. 641 , 650. bulst . 1. 171. rolls , 1. 641. poph. 126 , 197. hardr. 184. law of tithes 200. hist. of tithes , 370. m●n . 1. 31●punc ; 417. 202. l. l. saxon. wh. p. 62. spelm. concil . 444. l. l. canut . c. 8 , 10 , 11. seld of tithes , p. 262. p. 264. p. 224. 2 r. 44. 2 inst. 641. dyer , 84. brook , 241. cr. car. 422. palmer , 220. selden , 293. lyndw. 81. b. selden , 404. not. in decret . l. 3. c. 30. n. 4. innocent . 3. epist. 2. c. 114. monast. i. 112 , 114 , 201 , 202 , 327 , 590 , 436. ii. 50 , 81. du fresn . e. appropr . monast. i. 369 , 399. ii. 58 , 208 , 656 , 881. iii. 32 , 36. extr. de praeb . c. de monachis . ext. de praeb . c. avar. ext. de praeb . c. extirp . extr. de monachis , ubi supra . ext. de supplend . neglig . prael . sicut nobis . rolls , 2. 337. pro. const. de offic. vic. c. quoniam . of tithes , p. 153. miscel parl. 183. birchington , l. 42. lyndw. f. 32. sacerdos parochialis opposed to beneficiatus . lyndw. f. 1 petr. cluniac . ep. l. 1. 21. d. 55. c. 1. c. 16. q. 1. c. 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 10 , 11. mon. i. 699. rolls , r. 2. 480. mon. i. 736. rolls , r. 2. 99. cr. 2. 518. yelv. 86. hardr. 328. cr. el. 633. bulstr. 2. 27. palmer , 219. cr. ●ac . 516. cr. eliz. 467. moor , 909. hutton , 78. owen , 74 , cr. car. 28. hutton ▪ 78. rolls , a. 2. 331. littleton , 244. hetley , 135. mon. ii. 604 2 inst. 653. rot. parl. 2 h. 4. 41. mon. ii. 511. cr. 2. 578. palm . 222. walsingh . 1325. cr. 2. 517. pal. 222. extr. de de●imis . c. 10. 2 inst. 652. popham ▪ ●56 . innocent . 3. epist. l. 1. ep. 331. coke r. 2. 47. moor , 420. cr. car. 424. cr. 2. 58. moor , 913. iones , 186 bridgm. 33. latch . 89. rolls . r. 2. 40 ▪ selden 〈◊〉 tithes , 12 ▪ lynd. f. 101. lynd. f. 97. b. c. consuc● f. 99. lynd. f. 98. lynd. f. 97. b. selden of tithes , p. 409. coke r. 2. 44. cr. 2. 47. rolls , 653. moor , 531 , 425. hob. 297. cr. el. 599. 2 r. 45. hob. 300. moor , 483. moor , 278. seld. p. 398. p. 285. select cases , 43. registr . 38. b. 2 inst. 490. bulst . 2. 238. march , 87. hob. 176. yelv. 94 , 95. 2 inst. 653. select cases , 40. 2 inst. 655. loon. 1. 151. parson's coun. part. 2. c. 20. hob. 107. rolls , 647. rolls , 649. cr. el. 276. march , 65. cr. eliz. 786. c. select cases , 45. bulst . 2. 238. hob. 40. moor , 47. 420. c. r. 2. 47. moor , 533. mob . 298. 11 r. 14. notes for div a61555-e33720 1 inst. 11. b. 115. b. 344. preface to 4 r. sir iohn davis pref. hales history and analysis of the law , ms. 1 inst. 110. b. 1 inst. 114. b. grot. de j. b. & p. l. 2. c. 4. sect. 1. bract. l. 1. c. 3. l. 2. c. 22. n. 1. l. 4. c. 17. n. 5. c. 40. littl. ten. sect. 170. glanv . prol. dr. and st. c. 7. spel. con. i. p. 153. rolls , 2. 322. bulst . 3. 176. brownl . 1. 43. keble , 3. 91. panor . in c. cum olim . moor , r. 783. 1 inst. 〈◊〉 . ventris , ii. 189. 269. godol . 61 , 65. rolls r. 2. 150. 443. de offic. archdiac . gloss. in const. oth. p. 27. ventris , ii. 269. 4 inst. 339. 3 r. 75. 〈…〉 . i. 140. 〈◊〉 . a. 969. anderson , ii. 120. 1 inst. 102. b. 3 r. 75. palmer , 501. iones , 168. quo warranto , 14. 〈…〉 sect. 645. sect. 413. selden of tithes , p. 413. ●ordenave , f. 69. 1 inst. 344. c. 12. 8. 1 inst. 11. 4 inst. 321. prooem . to 4 inst. 1 inst. 96. stat. de merton . c. 9. glanvil . l. 7. ● . 15. stat. de bigamis . c. 5. popham , 157. spel. conc● 2. 342. de eili●● presbyt . cum à jure sit inhibit . lyndw. f. 32. latch . 191. popham , 157. leon. i. 156. hugh's pars. law , c. 12. lyndw. f. 119. leon. i. 39. 6 r. 61. rolls a. ● 363. reg. 42. b. 2 inst. 361. spel. concil . ii. 329. iones , 160. latch . 234. plamer , 458. 469. vaugh. 21. 132. 327. vaugh. 327. bagshaw's arg. about the canons , p. 10. 4 inst. 323. annal. bur●on , 356. 13 car. 2. c. 12. eadmer . hist. p. 6. hoveden , p. 806. ●pel . ii. 123. ventris rep. ii. 42. gers●● de vit. spirit . lect. 4. cor. 13. cajet . sum. in verb. so●o de iust. l. 1. q. 7. art. 2. ad 2. sayr . clavis reg. l. 3. c. 〈◊〉 . n. 12. caj . ad 1. 2. q. 97. art. 3. suar. de leg. l. 4. c. 16. n. 9. roch. curt. de statut. sect. 2. n. 20 , 34. sect. 7. n. 5 , 11 , 12 , 13. soto , l. 1. q. 7. art. 2. suarez , de ll. l. 7. c. 15. 10 , 11. origen . in numer . hom. 5. clem. alex. str. l. 7. tertul. apol. c. 16. basil. de sp. sancto c. 27. 2 chron. 29. 25. bell. de r. d. l. 14. c. 18. de vit. spir. lect. 4. cor. 1. coroll . 6. cajet . sum. 6. contempt . &c. clerico● rum . can. apost . 54. laodicea , 24. in trullo , 9. carthag . 43. dist. 44. 2 , 3 , 4. aquisgr . c. 14. francf . c. 19. aquisgr . 2. c. 60. extr. de vit. & honest. cleric . c. 15. conc. west●●●n . c. 2. spelm. ii. 192. lynd. l. 3. c. 1. concil . illiber . can. 79. cicero phil. 3. ovid de a. a. l. 3. suet. in aug ▪ c. 71. hostiens . sum. d. 5. de excess . praelat . d. de aleat . l. 2. cujac . observ. l. 9. c. 28. c. de episcop . audient . caj . & prae●ept . navar. man. c. 23. n. 50 , &c. suarez de ll. l. 4. c. 18. tolet. sum●● l. 8. c. 19. n. 3. a relation of a conference held about religion at london, the third of april, 1676 by edw. stillingfleet ... and gilbert burnet, with some gentlemen of the church of rome. burnet, gilbert, 1643-1715. 1676 approx. 320 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 139 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-03 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a30411 wing b5861 estc r14666 12541241 ocm 12541241 62980 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a30411) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 62980) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 308:3) a relation of a conference held about religion at london, the third of april, 1676 by edw. stillingfleet ... and gilbert burnet, with some gentlemen of the church of rome. burnet, gilbert, 1643-1715. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [19], 58, 193 [i.e. 197], [3] p. printed and are to be sold by moses pitt ..., london : 1676. errata: p. [5]. advertisement: p. [2]-[3] at end. reproduction of original in union theological seminary library, new york. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng lord's supper -real presence. 2003-10 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-12 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-01 john latta sampled and proofread 2004-01 john latta text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion imprimatur . june 1. 1676. g. jane r. p. d. hen. epis. lond. a sac . dom . a relation of a conference , held about religion , at london , the third of april , 1676. by edw. stillingfleet d.d. and gilbert burnet , with some gentlemen of the church of rome . london , printed and are to be sold by moses pitt , at the angel against the little north-door of s. paul's church , m dc lxxvi . the contents . the preface . the relation of the conference . an addition by n. n. to what was then said . an answer to that addition . a letter demonstrating that the doctrine of the church for the first eight centuries was contrary to transubstantiation . a discourse to show how unreasonable it is to ask for express words of scripture in proving all articles of faith , and that a lust and good consequence from scripture is sufficient . a discourse to shew that it was not only possible to change the belief of the church , concerning the manner of christs presence in the sacrament ; but that it is very reasonable to conclude both that it might be done , and that it was truly done . errata . page 18. l. 3. said to to be read at the end of l. 4. p. 8. l. 11. after baptism read ethiop . p. 23. l. 20. for cites read explains . p. 26. l. 3. for sayes r. has these words . p. 32. l. 26. after the body of christ these words are left out , is after some manner his body , and the sacrament of his blood. p. 72. l. 28. for must r. to . p. 75. l. 19. for use r. prove . p. 86. l. 26. for these r. the. p. 93 l. 7. for yet r. you . p. 103. for history r. heresy . p. 135. l. 14. for remained r. appeared in the world . p. 140. l. 22. for which r. who . the rest the reader will correct as he goes through . the preface . tthere is nothing that is by a more universal agreement decried , than conferences about controversies of religion : and no wonder , for they have been generally managed with so much heat and passion , parties being more concerned for glory and victory , than truth ; and there is such foul dealing in the accounts given of them , that it is not strange to see these prejudices taken up against them . and yet it cannot be denied but if men of candor and calmness should discourse about matters of religion , without any other interest than to seek and follow truth , there could not be a more effectual and easy way found for satisfying scruples . more can be said in one hour than read in a day : besides that what is said in a discourse discretely managed , does more appositely meet with the doubtings and difficulties any body is perplexed with , than is possibly to be found in a book : and since almost all books disguise the opinions of those that differ from them , and represent their arguments as weak , and their opinions as odious ; conferences between those of different perswasions do remedy all these evils . but after all the advantages of this way , it must be confessed that for the greater part men are so engaged to their opinions by interest and other ties , that in conferences most persons are resolved before-hand to yield to no conviction , but to defend every thing : being only concerned to say so much as may darken weaker minds that are witnesses , and give them some occasion to triumph ; at least conceal any foil they may have received , by wrapping up some pittiful shift or other , in such words , and pronouncing them with such accents of assurance , and perhaps scorn , that they may seem to come off with victory . and it is no less frequent to see men after they have been so baffled , that all discerning witnesses are ashamed of them , yet being resolved to make up with impudence what is wanting in truth , as a coward is generally known to boast most , where he has least cause ; publish about what feats they have done , and tell every body they see how the cause in their mouth did triumph over their enemies : that so the praise of the defeat given may be divided between the cause and themselves : and though in modesty they may pretend to ascribe all to truth and the faith they contended for , yet in their hearts they desire the greatest part be offered to themselves . all these considerations with a great many more did appear to us , when the lady t. asked us if we would speak with her husband and some others of the church of rome , as well for clearing such scruples as the perpetual converse with those of that religion had raised in the lady ; as for satisfying her husband , of whose being willing to receive instruction she seemed confident . yet being well assured of the ladies great candor and worth , and being willing to stand up for the vindication and honour of our church , whatever might follow on it , we promised to be ready to wait on her at her house upon advertisement : without any nice treating before-hand , what we should confer about . therefore we neither asked who should be there , nor what number , nor in what method , or on what particulars our discourse should run , but went thither carrying only one friend along with us for a witness . if the discourse had been left to our managing , we resolved to have insisted chiefly on the corruptions in the worship of the roman church : to have shewed on several heads that there was good cause to reform these abuses : and that the bishops and pastors of this church , the civil authority concurring , had sufficient authority for reforming it . these being the material things in controversy , which must satisfy every person if well made out , we intended to have discoursed about them ; but being put to answer , we followed those we had to deal with . but that we may not forestal the reader in any thing that passed in the ladies chamber , which he will find in the following account , we had no sooner left her house , but we resumed among our selves all had passed , that it might be written down , what ever should follow , to be published if need were . so we agreed to meet again three days after , to compare what could be written down , with our memories . and having met , an account was read , which did so exactly contain all that was spoken , as far as we could remember , that after a few additions , we all three signed the narrative then agreed to . few days had passed when we found we had need of all that care and caution , for the matter had got wind , and was in every bodies mouth . many of our best friends know how far we were from talking of it , for till we were asked about it , we scarce opened our mouths of it to any person . but when it was said that we had been baffled and foiled , it was necessary for us to give some account of it : not that we were much concerned in what might be thought of us , but that the most excellent cause of our church and religion might not suffer by the misrepresentations of this conference . and the truth was , there was so little said by seven or eight ages was contrary to transubstantiation : which we sent to the lady on the seventeenth of april to be communicated to them . and therefore though our conference was generally talked of , and all persons desired an account of it might be published ; yet we did delay it till we should hear from them . and meeting on the twenty ninth of april with him who is marked n. n. in the account of the conference , i told him , the foolish talk was made by their party about this conference , had set so many on us , who all called to us to print the account of it , that we were resolved on it : but i desired he might any time between and trinity sunday , bring me what exceptions he or the other gentlemen had to the account we sent them , which he confessed he had seen . so i desired that by that day i might have what additions they would make either of what they had said but was forgot by us , or what they would now add upon second thoughts : but longer i told him i could not delay the publishing it . i desired also to know by that time whether they intended any answer to the account we sent them of the doctrine of the fathers about transubstantiation . he confessed he had seen that paper : but by what he then said , it seemed they did not think of any answer to it . and so i waited still expecting to hear from him . at length on the twentieth of may n. n came to me , and told me some of these gentlemen were out of town , and so he would not take on him to give any thing in writing ; yet he desired me to take notice of some particulars he mentioned , which i intreated he would write down that he might not complain of my misrepresenting what he said . this he declined to do , so i told him i would set it down the best way i could , and desired him to call again that he might see if i had written it down faithfully , which he promised to do that same afternoon , and was as good as his word , and i read to him what is subjoined to the relation of the conference , which he acknowledged was a faithful account of what he had told me . i have considered it i hope to the full , so that it gave me more occasion of canvassing the whole matter . and thus the reader will find a great deal of reason to give an entire credit to this relation , since we have proceeded in it with so much candor , that it is plain we intended not to abuse the credulity of any , but were willing to offer this account to the censure of the adverse party ; and there being nothing else excepted against it , that must needs satisfy every reasonable man that all is true that he has here offered to his perusal . and if these gentlemen or any of their friends publish different or contrary relations of this conference , without that fair and open way of procedure which we have observed towards them ; we hope the reader will be so just as to consider that our method in publishing this account has been candid and plain , and looks like men that were doing an honest thing , of which they were neither afraid nor ashamed : which cannot in reason be thought of any surreptitious account that like a work of darkness may be let fly abroad , without the name of any person to answer for it on his conscience or reputation : and that at least he will suspend his belief till a competent time be given to shew what mistake or errors any such relation may be guilty of . we do not expect the reader shall receive great instructions from the following conference , for the truth is , we met with nothing but shufling . so that he will find when ever we came to discourse closely to any head , they very dextrously went off from it to another , and so did still shift off from following any thing was suggested . but we hope every reader will be so just to us as to acknowledge it was none of our fault , that we did not canvass things more exactly , for we proposed many things of great importance to be discoursed on , but could never bring them to fix on any thing . and this did fully satisfy the lady t. when she saw we were ready to have justified our church in all things , but that they did still decline the entering into any matter of weight : so that it appeared both to her and the rest of the company , that what boastings soever they spread about as if none of us would or durst appear in a conference to vindicate our church , all were without ground ; and the lady was by the blessing of god further confirmed in the truth , in which we hope god shall continue her to her lifes end . but we hope the letter and the two discourses that follow , will give the reader a more profitable entertainment . in the letter we give many short hints , and set down some select passages of the fathers , to shew they did not believe transubstantiation . upon all which we are ready to join issue to make good every thing in that paper , from which we believe it is apparent the primitive church was wholly a stranger to transubstantiation . it was also judged necessary by some of our friends that we should to purpose and once for all , expose and discredit that unreasonable demand of shewing all the articles of our church in the express words of scripture : upon which the first discourse was written . and it being found that no answer was made to what n. n. said , to shew that it was not possible the doctrine of transubstantiation could have crept into any age , if those of that age had not had it from their fathers , and they from theirs up to the apostles dayes , this being also since our conference laid home to me by the same person , it was thought fit to give a full account how this doctrine could have been brought into the church , that so a change ●ay appear to have been not only possible , but also probable , and therefore the second discourse was written . if these discourses have not that full finishing and life which the reader would desire , he must regrate his misfortune in this , that the person who was best able to have written them , and given them all possible advantages out of that vast stock of learning and judgment he is master of , was so taken up with other work cut out for him by some of these gentlemens friends of which we shall see an excellent account very speedily , that it was not possible for him to spare so much time for writing these ; so that it fell to the others share to do it : and therefore the reader is not to expect any thing like those high strains of wit and reason which fill all that authors writings , but must give allowance to one that studies to follow him though at a great distance : therefore all can be said from him is , that what is here performed was done by his direction , and approbation , which to some degree will again encourage the reader , and so i leave him to the perusal of what follows . the relation of the conference , monday afternoon the third of april , 1676. d. s. and m. b. went to m. l. t 's . as they had been desired by l. t. to confer with some persons upon the grounds of the church of englands separating from rome , and to shew how unreasonable it was to go from our church to theirs . about half an hour after them , came in s.p.t. mr. w. and three more . there were present seven or eight ladies , three other church-men , and one or two more . when we were all set d. s. said to s.p.t. that we were come to wait on them for justifying our church ; that he was glad to see , we had gentlemen to deal with , from whom he expected fair dealing , as on the other hand he hoped they should meet with nothing from us , but what became our profession . s. p. said , they had protestants to their wives , and there were other reasons too to make them with they might turn protestants ; therefore he desired to be satisfyed in one thing . and so took out the articles of the church , and read these words of the sixth article of the holy scriptures ; [ so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby , is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith , or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation . ] then he turned to the twenty eighth article of the lords supper , and read these words ; [ and the mean whereby the body of christ is received and eaten in the supper , is faith : ] and added , he desired to know whether that was read in scripture or not , and in what place it was to be found . d. s. said , he must first explain that article of the scripture ; for this method of proceeding was already sufficiently known and exposed ; he clearly saw the snare they thought to bring him in , and the advantages they would draw from it . but it was the cause of the church he was to defend , which he hoped he was ready to seal with his blood , and was not to be given up for a trick . the meaning of the sixth article was , that nothing must be received or imposed as an article of faith , but what was either expresly contained in scripture , or to be deduced and proved from it by a clear consequence ; so that if in any article of our church which they rejected , he should either shew it in the express words of scripture , or prove it by a clear consequence , he performed all required in this article . if they would receive this , and fix upon it as the meaning of the article , which certainly it was ; then he would go on to the proof of that other article he had called in question . m. w. said , they must see the article in express scripture , or at least in some places of scripture which had been so interpreted by the church , the councils or fathers , or any one council or father . and he the rather pitched on this article , because he judged it the only article , in which all protestants , except the lutherans , were agreed . d. s. said , it had been the art of all the hereticks from the marcionites days , to call for express words of scripture . it was well known the arrians set up their rest on this , that their doctrine was not condemned by express words of scripture ; but that this was still rejected by the catholick church , and that theodoret had written a book , on purpose to prove the unreasonableness of this challenge ; therefore he desired they would not insist on that which every body must see was not fair dealing , and that they would take the sixth article entirely , and so go to see if the other article could not be proved from scripture , though it were not contained in express words . m. b. added , that all the fathers , writing against the arrians , brought their proofs of the consubstantiality of the son , from the scriptures , though it was not contained in the express words of any place . and the arrian council that rejected the words equisubstantial and consubstantial , gives that for the reason , that they were not in the scripture . and that in the council of ephesus s. cyril brought in many propositions against the nestorians , with a vast collection of places of scripture to prove them by ; and though the quotations from scripture contained not those propositions in express words ; yet the council was satisfied from them , and condemned the nestorians . therefore it was most unreasonable , and against the practice of the catholick church , to require express words of scripture , and that the article was manifestly a disjunctive , where we were to chuse whether of the two we would chuse , either one or other . s. p. t. said , or was not in the article . m. b. said , nor was a negative in a disjunctive proposition , as or was an affirmative , and both came to the same meaning . m. w. said , that s. austin charged the heretick to read what he said in the scripture . m. b. said , s. austin could not make that a constant rule , otherwise he must reject the consubstantiality which he did so zealously assert ; though he might in disputing urge an heretick with it on some other account . d. s. said , the scripture was to deliver to us the revelation of god , in matters necessary to salvation ; but it was an unreasonable thing to demand proofs for a negative in it : for if the roman church have set up many doctrines , as articles of faith , without proof from the scriptures , we had cause enough to reject these if there was no clear proofs of them from scripture ; but to require express words of scripture for a negative , was as unjust as if mahomet had said , the christians had no reason to reject him , because there was no place in scripture that called him an impostor . since then the roman church had set up the doctrine of transubstantiation , and the sacrifice of the mass , without either express scripture or good proofs from it , their church had good cause to reject these . m. w. said , the article they desired to be satisfied in was , if he understood any thing , a positive article , and not a negative . m. b. said , the positive article was , that christ was received in the holy sacrament ; but because they had ( as our church judged ) brought in the doctrine of the corporal presence without all reason , the church made that explanation , to cast out the other ; so that upon the matter it was a negative . he added , that it was also unreasonable to ask any one place to prove a doctrine by ; for the fathers in their proceedings with the arrians brought a great collection of places , which gave light to one another , and all concurred to prove the article of faith that was in controversy : so if we brought such a consent of many places of scripture as proved our doctrine , all being joined together , we perform all that the fathers thought themselves bound to do in the like case . d. s. then at great length told them , the church of rome and the church of england differed in many great and weighty points ; that we were come thither to see , as these gentlemen professed they desired , if we could offer good reason for them to turn protestants , and as the ladies professed a desire to be further established in the doctrine of the church of england ; in order to which , none could think it a proper method to pick out some words in the obscure corner of an article , and call for express scriptures for them . but the fair and fit way was to examine whether the church of england had not very good reason to separate from the communion of the church of rome ; therefore since it was for truth , in which oursouls are so deeply concerned , that we enquired , he desired they would join issue to examine either the grounds on which the church of england did separate from the church of rome , or the authority by which she did it : for if there was both good reason for it , and if those who did it , had a sufficient authority to do it , then was the church of england fully vindicated . he did appeal to all that were present , if in this offer he dealt not candidly and fairly , and if all other ways were not shufling . which he pressed with great earnestness , as that only which could satisfy all peoples consciences . m. w. and s. p. t. said , god forbid they should speak one word for the church of rome ; they understood the danger they should run by speaking to that . d. s. said , he hoped they looked on us as men of more conscience and honesty , than to make an ill use of any thing they might say for their church ; that for himself he would die rather than be guilty of so base a thing , the very thought whereof he abhorred . m. b. said , that though the law condemned the endeavouring to reconcile any to the church of rome , yet their justifying their church when put to it , especially to divines , in order to satisfaction which they professed they desired , could by no colour be made a transgression ; and that as we engaged our faith to make no ill use of what should be said , so if they doubted any of the other company , it was s. p. his house , and he might order it to be more private if he pleased . s. p. said , he was only to speak to the articles of the church of england , and desired express words for that article . upon this followed a long wrangling , the same things were said over and over again . in the end . m. w. said they had not asked where that article was read : that they doubted of it , for they knew it was in no place of scripture , in which they were the more confirmed , because none was so much as alledged . d. s. said , upon the terms in the 6. article he was ready to undertake the 28. article to prove it clearly by scripture . m. w. said , but there must be no interpretations admitted of . m. b. said , it was certain the scriptures were not given to us , as pariots are taught to speak words ; we were endued with a faculty of understanding , and we must understand somewhat by every place of scripture . now the true meaning of the words being that which god would teach us in the scriptures , which way soever that were expressed is the doctrine revealed there ; and it was to be considered that the scriptures were at first delivered to plain and simple men to be made use of by all without distinction : therefore we were to look unto them as they did ; and so s. paul wrote his epistles , which were the hardest pieces of the new testament , to all in the churches to whom he directed them . m. w. said , the epistles were written upon emergent occasions , and so were for the use of the churches to whom they were directed . d. s. said , though they were written upon emergent occasions , yet they were written by divine inspiration , and as a rule of faith , not only for those churches but for all christians . but as m. w. was a going to speak , m. c. came in , upon which we all rose up till he was set ; so being set , after some civilities , d. s. resumed a little what they were about , and told they were calling for express scriptures to prove the articles of our church by . m. c. said , if we be about scriptures , where is the judge that shall pass the sentence who expounds them aright ; otherwise the contest must be endless . d. s. said , he had proposed a matter that was indeed of weight ; therefore he would first shew , that these of the church of rome were not provided of a sufficient or fit judge of controversies . m. c. said , that was not the thing they were to speak to ; for though we destroyed the church of rome all to nought , yet except we built up our own , we did nothing : therefore he desired to hear what we had to say for our own church ; he was not to meddle with the church of rome , but to hear and be instructed if he could see reason to be of the church of england , for may be it might be somewhat in his way . d. s. said , he would not examine if it would be in his way to be of the church of england , or not , but did heartily acknowledge with great civility that he was a very fair dealer in what he had proposed , and that now he had indeed set us in the right way , and the truth was we were extream glad to get out of the wrangling we had been in before , and to come to treat of matters that were of importance . so after some civilities had passed on both sides , d. s. said , the bishops and pastors of the church of england finding a great many abuses crept into the church , particularly in the worship of god , which was chiefly insisted upon in the reformation , such as the images of the blessed trinity , the worship whereof was set up and encouraged ; the turning the devotions we ought to offer only to christ , to the blessed virgin , the angels and saints ; that the worship of god was in an unknown tongue ; that the chalice was taken from the people , against the express words of the institution ; that transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the mass were set up ; that our church had good reason to judge these to be heinous abuses , which did much endanger the salvation of souls ; therefore being the pastors of the church , and being assisted in it by the civil powers , they had both good reason and sufficient authority to reform the church from these abuses , and he left it to m. c. to chuse on which of these particulars they should discourse . m. b. said , the bishops and pastors having the charge of souls were bound to feed the flock with sound doctrine , according to the word of god. so s. paul when he charged the bishops of ephesus to feed the flock , and to guard against wolves or seducers ; he commends them to the word of gods grace which is the gospel . and in his epistles to timothy and titus wherein the rules of the pastoral charge are set down , he commands timothy , and in him all bishops and pastors , to hold fast the doctrine and form of sound words which he had delivered , and tells him , the scriptures were able to make the man of god perfect . if then the bishops and pastors of this church found it corrupted by any unsound doctrine , or idolatrous worship , they were by the law of god and the charge of souls for which they were accountable , obliged to throw out these corruptions and reform the church ; and this the rather , that the first question proposed in the consecration of a bishop , as it is in the pontifical , is , wilt thou teach these things which thou understandest to be in the scripture , to the people committed to thee , both by thy doctrine and example ? to which he answers : i will. m. c. said , we had now offered as much as would be the subject of many dayes discourse , and he had but few minutes to spare : therefore he desired to be informed what authority those bishops had to judge in matters which they found not only in this church , but in all churches round about them , should they have presumed to judge in these matters . d. s. said , it had been frequently the practice of many nations and provinces to meet in provincial synods , and reform abuses . for which he offered to prove they had both authority and president . but much more in some instances he was ready to shew of particulars that had been defined by general councils , which they only applied to their circumstances ; and this was never questioned but provincial synods might do . m. c. desired , to be first satisfied , by what authority they could cut themselves off from the obedience of the see of rome , in king henry the viii . his days . the pope then was looked on as the monarch of the christian world in spirituals , and all christendom was one church , under one head , and had been so for many ages ; so that if a province or country would cut themselves from the body of this nation ; for instance , wales that had once distinct princes , and say we acknowledge no right william the conquerour had , so that we reject the authority of those descended from him ; they might have the same plea which this our church had . for the day before that act of parliament did pass , after the 20. of henry the viii . the pope had the authority in spirituals , and they were his subjects in spirituals : therefore their declaring he had none , could not take his authority from him , no more than the long parliament had right to declare by an act , that the soveraign power was in the peoples hands , in pursuance of which they cut off the kings head . d. s. said , the first general councils , as they established the patriarchal power , so the priviledges of several churches were preserved entire to them , as in the case of cyprus ; that the british churches were not within the patriarchal jurisdiction of rome ; that afterwards the bishops of rome striking in with the interests of the princes of europe , and watching and improving all advantages , got up by degrees through many ages into that height of authority , which they managed as ill as they unjustly acquired it , and particularly in england ; where from king william the conqueror his days , as their illegal and oppressive impositions were a constant grievance to the people , so our princes and parliaments were ever put to strugle with them . but to affront their authority , thomas becket , who was a traitour to the law , must be made a saint , and a day kept for him , in which they were to pray to god for mercy through his merits . it continuing thus for several ages , in the end a vigorous prince arises , who was resolved to assert his own authority . and he looking into the oaths the bishops swore to the pope , they were all found in a praemunire by them . then did the whole nation agree to assert their own freedom , and their kings authority . and 't was considerable , that those very bishops , that in qu●en marys days did most cruelly persecute those of the church of england , and advance the interests of rome , were the most zealous assertors and defenders of what was done by king henry the viii . therefore the popes power in england being founded on●●o● just title , and being managed with so much oppression , there was both a full authority and a great deal of reason for rejecting it . and if the major generals , who had their authority from cromwell , might yet have declared for the king , who had the true title , and against the usurper ; so the bishops , though they had sworn to the pope , yet that being contrary to the allegiance they ow'd the king , ought to have asserted the kings authority , and rejected the pope's . m. b. said , it seemed m. c. founded the popes right to the authority he had in england chiefly upon prescrip said to tion . but there were two things to be that : first , that no prescription runs against a divine right . in the clearing of titles among men , prescription is in some cases a good title : but if by the laws of god the civil powers have a supream authority over their subjects , then 〈◊〉 prescription whatsoever can void this . besides , the bishops having full authority and jurisdiction , this could not be bounded or limited by any obedience the pope claimed from them . further , there can be no prescription in this case , where the usurpation has been all along contested and opposed . we were ready to prove , that in the first ages all bishops were accounted brethren , colleagues , and fellow-bishops with the bishop of rome . that afterwards , as he was declared patriarch of the west , so the other patriarchs were equal in authority to him in their several patriarchates . that britain was no part of his patriarchate , but an exempt , as cyprus was . that his power as patriarch was only for receiving appeals , or calling synods , and did not at all encroach on the jurisdiction of other bishops in their sees ; and that the bishops in his patriarchate did think they might separate from him . a famous instance of this was in the sixth century , when the question was about the tria capitula , for which the western bishops did generally stand , and pope vigilius wrote in defence of them ; but iustinian the emperour having drawn him to constantinople , he consented with the fifth council to the condemning them . upon which at his return many of the western bishops did separate from him . and as victor bishop of tunes tells us ( who lived at that time ) that pope was synodically excommunicated by the bishops of africk . it is true , in the eighth century the decretal epistles being forged his pretensions were much advanced : yet his universal jurisdiction was contested in all ages , as might be proved from the known instance of hincmar bishop of rheims , and many more . therefore how strong soever the argument from prescription may be in civil things , it is of no force here . m. c. said , now we are got into a contest of 1700. years story , but i know not when we shall get out of it . he confessed there was no prescription against a divine right , and acknowledged all bishops were alike in their order , but not in their jurisdiction ; as the bishop of oxford was a bishop as well as the archbishop of canterbury , and yet he was inferiour to him in jurisdiction : but desired to know , what was in the popes authority that was so intolerable . d. s. said , that he should only debate about the popes jurisdiction , and to his question , for one particular , that from the days of pope paschal the ii. all bishops swear obedience to the pope , was intolerable bondage . m. c. said , then will you acknowledg that before that oath was imposed the pope was to be acknowledged : adding , that let us fix a time wherein we say the pope began to usurp beyond his just authority , and he would prove by protestant writers that he had as great power before that time . m. b. said , whatever his patriarchal power was , he had none over britain . for it was plain , we had not the christian faith from the roman church , as appeared from the very story of austin the monk. s. p. t. said , did not king lucius write to the pope upon his receiving the christian faith ? m. c. said , he would wave all that , and ask , if the church of england could justifie her for saking the obedience of the bishop of rome , when all the rest of the christian world submitted to it . d. s. said , he wondred to hear him speak so , were not the greek , the armenian , the nestorian , and the abissen churches separated from the roman ? m. c. said , he wondred as much to hear him reckon the nestorians among the churches , that were condemned hereticks . d. s. said , it would be hard for him to prove them nestorians . m. c. asked why he called them so then . d. s. answered , because they were generally best known by that name . m. w. said , did not the greek church reconcile it self to the roman church at the council of florence ? d. s. said , some of their bishops were partly trepanned , partly threatned into it ; but their church disowned them and it both , and continues to do so to this day . m. w. said , many of the greek church were daily reconciled to the church of rome , and many of the other eastern bishops had sent their obedience to the pope . d. s. said , they knew there was enough to be said to these things , that these arts were now pretty well discovered : but he insisted to prove , the usurpations of rome were such as were inconsistent with the supreme civil authority● and shewed the oath in the pontifi●●le by which , for instance , if the pope command a bishop to go to rome , and his king forbid it , he must obey the pope and disobey the king. m. c. said , these things were very consistent , that the king should be supream in civils and the pope in spirituals : so that if the pope commanded a thing that were civil , the king must be obeyed and not he . m. b. said , by the words of the oath the bishops were to receive and help the popes legates , both in coming and going . now suppose the king declared it treason to receive the legate , yet in this case the bishops are sworn to obey the pope , and this was a case that fell out often . d. s. instanced the case of queen mary . m. c. said , if he comes with false mandates , he is not a legate . m. b. said , suppose , as has fallen out an hundred times , he comes with bulls , and well warranted , but the king will not suffer him to enter his dominions , here the bishops must either be traitors or perjured . m. c. said , all these things must be understood to have tacite conditions in them , though they be not expressed , and gave a simile which i have forgot . d. s. said , it was plain , paschal the second devised that oath on purpose to cut off all those reserves of their duty to their princes . and therefore the words are so full and large , that no oath of allegiance was ever conceived in more express terms . m. b. said , it was yet more plain from the words that preceed that clause about legates , that they shall be on no counsel to do the pope any injury , and shall reveal none of his secrets . by which a provision was clearly made , that if the pope did engage in any quarrel or war with any prince , the bishops were to assist the popes as their sworn subjects , and to be faithful spies and correspondents to give intelligence . as he was saying this , l. t. did whisper d. s. who presently told the company , that the ladies at whose desire we came thither , entreated we would speak to things that concerned them more , and discourse on the grounds on which the reformation proceeded ; and therefore since he had before named some of the most considerable ; he desired we might discourse about some of these . m. c. said , name any thing in the roman church that is expresly contrary to scriptures ; but bring not your expositions of scripture to prove it by , for we will not admit of these . m. b. asked if they did not acknowledge that it was only by the mediation of christ , that our sins were pardoned and eternal life given to us . m. c. answered , no question of it at all . m. b. said , then have we not good reason to depart from that church , that in an office of so great and daily use as was the absolution of penitents , after the words of absolution enjoins the following prayer to be used ( which he read out of their ritual ) [ the passion of our lord jesus christ , the merits of the blessed virgin mary and of all the saints , and whatever good thou hast done or evil thou hast suffered , be to thee for the remission of sins , the encrease of grace and the reward of eternal life ] from whence it plainly follows that their church ascribes the pardon of all sins and the eternal salvation of their penitents to the merits of the blessed virgin and the saints , as well as the passion of our blessed saviour . m. c. said , here was a very severe charge put in against their church without any reason , for they believed that our sins are pardoned and our souls are saved only by the merits of jesus christ ; but that several things may concur in several orders or wayes to produce the same effects . so although we are pardoned and saved only through christ , yet without holiness we shall never see god ; we must also suffer whatever crosses he tries us with . so that these in another sense procure the pardon of our sins and eternal salvation . thus in like manner the prayers of the blessed virgin and the saints are great helps to our obtaining these : therefore though these be all joined together in the same prayer , yet it was an unjust charge on their church to say they make them equal in their value or efficiency . m. b. said , the thing he had chiefly excepted against in that prayer was , that these things are ascribed to the merits of the blessed virgin and the saints . now he had only spoken of their prayers , and he appealed ●o all if the natural meaning of these words was not that he charged on them , and the sense the other had offered was not forced . m. c. said , by merits were understood prayers , which had force and merit with god. m. b. said , that could not be , for in another absolution , in the office of our lady , they pray for remission of sins through the merits and prayers of the blessed virgin : so that by merits must be meant somewhat else than their prayers . m. c. said , that as by our prayers on earth we help one anothers souls , so by our giving almes for one another we might do the same ; so also the saints in heaven might be helpful to us by their prayers and merits . and as soon as he had spoken this he got to his feet , and said he was in great hast and much business lay on him that day , but said to d. s. that when he pleased , he would wait on him and discourse of the other particulars at more length . d. s. assured him that when ever he pleased to appoint it , he should be ready to give him a meeting . and so he went away . then we all stood and talked to one another without any great order near half an hour , the discourse being chiefly about the nags-head fable . d. s. apealed to the publick registers , and challenged the silence of all the popish writers all queen elizabeth's reign when such a story was fresh and well known ; and if there had been any colour for it , is it possible they could keep it up , or conceal it . s. p. t. said , all the registers were forged , and that it was not possible to satisfy him in it , no more than to prove he had not four fingers on his hand : and being desired to read doctor bramhall's book about it , he said he had read it six times over , and that it did not satisfie him . m. b. asked him , how could any matter of fact that was a hundred years old be proved , if the publick registers and the instruments of publick notaries were rejected ; and this the more , that this being a matter of fact which could not be done in a corner , nor escape the knowledge of their adversaries who might have drawn great and just advantages from publishing and proving it ; yet that it was never so much as spoken of while that race was alive , is as clear an evidence as can be , that the forgery was on the other side . d. s. did clear the objection from the commission and act of parliament , that it was only for making the ordination legal in england ; since in edward the sixth's time the book of ordination was not joined in the record to the book of common-prayer , from whence bishop bonner took occasion to deny their ordination as not according to law ; and added that saunders who in queen elizabeth's time denied the validity of our ordination , never alledged any such story . but as we were talking freely of this , m. w. said , once or twice , they were satisfied about the chief design they had in that meeting , to see if there could be alledged any place of scripture to prove that article about the blessed sacrament , and said somewhat that looked like the beginning of a triumph . upon which , d. s. desired all might sit down again , that they might put that matter to an issue : so a bible was brought , and d. s. being spent with much speaking , desired . m. b. to speak to it . m. b. turned to the 6th chap. of s. iohn verse 54. and read these words , whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood , hath eternal life , and added , these words were , according to the common interpretation of their church , to be understand of the sacramental manducation . this m. w. granted , only m. b. had said , all the doctors understood these words so and m. w. said , that all had not done so , which m. b. did acknowledge , but said it was the received exposition in their church , and so framed his argument . eternal life is given to every one that receives christ in the sacrament , but by faith only we get eternal life : therefore by faith only we receive christ in the sacrament . otherwise he said , unworthy receivers must be said to have eternal life , which is a contradiction , for as such they are under condemnation ; yet the unworthy receivers have the external manducation ; therefore that manducation that gives eternal life with it , must be internal and spiritual ; and that is by faith. a person whose name i know not , but shall henceforth mark him n. n. asked what m. b. meant , by faith only . m. b. said , by faith he mean● such a believing of the gospel , as carried along with it evangelical obedience : by faith only he meant faith as opposite to sense . d. s. asked him if we received christ's body and blood by our senses . n. n. said , we did . d. s. asked which of the senses , his taste , or touch , or sight , for that seemed strange to him . n. n. said , we received christs body with our senses , as well as we did the substance of bread ; for our senses did not receive the substance of bread ; and did offer some things to illustrate this both from the aristotelian and cartesian hypothesis . d. s. said , he would not engage in that subtlety which was a digression from the main argument , but he could not avoid to think it a strange assertion to say we received christ by our senses , and yet to say he was so present there that none of our senses could possibly perceive him . but to the main argument . m. w. denied the minor , that by faith only we have eternal life . m. b. proved it thus , the sons of god have eternal life , but by faith only we become the sons of god : therefore by faith only we had eternal life . m. w. said , except he gave them both major and minor in express words of scripture , he would reject the argument . m. b. said , that if he did demonstrate that both the propositions of his argument were in the strictest construction possible equivalent to clear places of scripture , then his proofs were good ; therefore he desired to know which of the two propositions he should prove , either that the sons of god have eternal life , or that by faith only we are the sons of god. m. w. said , he would admit of no consequences , how clear soever they seemed , unless he brought him the express words of scripture , and asked if his consequences were infallible . d. s. said , if the consequence was certain , it was sufficient ; and he desired all would take notice that they would not yield to clear consequences drawn from scripture , which he thought ( and he believed all impartial people would be of his mind ) was as great an advantage to any cause , as could be desired : so we laid aside that argument , being satisfied that the article of our church , which they had called in question , was clearly proved from scripture . then n. n. insisted to speak of the corporal presence , and desired to know upon what grounds we rejected it . m. b. said , if we have no better reason to believe christ was corporally present in the sacrament , than the jews had to believe that every time they did eat their pascha , the angel was passing by their houses , and smiting the first born of the aegyptians ; then we have no reason at all ; but so it is that we have no more reason . n. n. denied this , and said we had more reason . m. b. said , all the reason we had to believe it was , because christ said , this is my body ; but moses said of the paschal festivity , this is the lords passover ; which was always repeated by the jews in that anniversary . now the lords passover was the lords passing by the israelites when he slew the first-born of aegypt . if then we will understand christs words in the strictly literal sense , we must in the same sense understand the words of moses : but if we understand the words of moses in any other sense , as the commemoration of the lords passover , then we ought to understand christs words in the same sense . the reason is clear ; for christ being to substitute this holy sacrament in room of the jewish pascha , and he using in every thing , as much as could agree with his blessed designs , forms as nea● the jewish customes as could be , there is no reason to think he did use the words , this is my body , in any other sense than the jews did this is the lords passover . n. n. said , the disparity was great . first , christ had promised before-hand he would give them his body . secondly , it was impossible the lamb could be the lords passover in the literal sense , because an action that had been past some hundred of years before could not be performed every time they did eat the lamb , but this is not so . thirdly , the jewish church never understood these words literally , but the christian church hath ever understood these words of christ literally . nor is it to be imagined that a change in such a thing was possible , for how could any such opinion have crept in , in any age , if it had not been the doctrine of the former age ? m. b. said , nothing he had alledged was of any force . for the first , christ's promise imported no more than what he performed in the sacramental institution . if then it be proved that by saying , this is my body , be only meant a commemoration , his promise must only relate to his death commemorated in the sacrament . to the second , the literal meaning of christ's words is as impossible as the literal meaning of moses's words ; for besides all the other impossibilities that accompany this corporal presence , it is certain christ gives us his body in the sacrament as it was given for us , and his blood as it was shed for us , which being done only on the cross above 1600 years ago , it is as impossible that should be literally given at every consecration , as it was that the angel should be smiting the aegyptians every paschal festivity . and here was a great mistake they went on securely in ; that the body of christ we receive in the sacrament , is the body of christ as he is now glorified in heaven : for by the words of the institution it is clear , that we receive his body as it was given for us when his blood was shed on the cross , which being impossible to be reproduced now , we only can receive christ by faith. for his third difference , that the christian church ever understood christ's words so , we would willingly submit to the decision of the church in the first 6 ages . could any thing be more express than theodoret , who arguing against the eutychians that the humanity and divinity of christ were not confounded nor did depart from their own substance , illustrates it from the eucharist in which the elements of bread and wine do not depart from their own substance . m. w. said , we must examine the doctrine of the fathers not from some occasional mention they make of the sacrament , but when they treat of it on design and with deliberation . but to theodoret he would oppose s. cyrill of jerusalem , who in his fourth mist. catechism saies expresly , though thou see it to be bread , yet believe it is the flesh and the blood of the lord jesus ; doubt it not since he had said , this is my body . and for a proof , instances christs changing the water into wine . d. s. said , he had proposed a most excellent rule for examining the doctrine of the fathers in this matter , not to canvase what they said in eloquent and pious treaties or homilies to work on peoples devotion , in which case it is natural for all persons to use high expressions ; but we are to seek the real sense of this mystery when they are dogmatically treating of it and the other mysteries of religion where reason and not eloquence takes place . if then it should appear that at the same time both a bishop of rome and constantinople , and one of the greatest bishops in africk did in asserting the mysteries of religion go downright against transubstantiation , and assert that the substance of the bread and wine did remain ; he hoped all would be satisfied the fathers did not believe as they did . m. w. desired we would then answer the words of cyrill . m. b. said , it were a very unreasonable thing to enter into a verbal dispute about the passages of the fathers , especially the books not being before us ; therefore he promised an answer in writing to the testimony of s. cyrill . but now the matter was driven to a point , and we willingly underook to prove that for eight or nine centuries after christ the fathers did not believe transubstantiation , but taught plainly the contrary : the fathers generally call the elements bread and wine after the consecration , they call them mysteries , types , figures , symbols , commemorations and signs of the body and blood of christ : they generally deliver that the wicked do not receive christ in the sacrament , which shews they do not believe transubstantiation . all this we undertook to prove by undenyable evidences within a very few days or weeks . m. w. said , he should be glad to see it . d. s. said , now we left upon that point which by the grace of god we should perform very soon ; but we had offered to satisfy them in the other grounds of the separation from the church of rome ; if they desired to be further informed we should wait on them when they pleased . so we all rose up and took leave , after we had been there about three hours . the discourse was carried on , on both sides , with great civility and calmness , without heat or clamour . this is as far as my memory after the most fixed attention when present , and careful recollection since , does suggest to me , without any biass or partiality , not having failed in any one material thing as far as my memory can serve me ; this i declare as i shall answer to god. signed as follows , gilbert burnet . april 6. 1676. this narrative was read , and i do hereby attest the truth of it . edw. stillingfleet . being present at the conference april 3. 1676. i do , according to my best memory , judge this a just and true narrative thereof . will. nailor . the addition which n. n. desired might be subjoined to the relation of the conference if it were published , but wished rather that nothing at all might be made publick that related to the conference . the substance of what n. n. desired me to take notice of was , that our eating christ's flesh and drinking his blood doth as really give everlasting life , as almsgiving , or any other good work● gives it , where the bare external action , if separated from a good intention and principle is not acceptable to god. so that we must necessarily understand these words of our saviour with this addition of worthily , that whoso eats his flesh and drinks his blood in the sacrament worthily hath everlasting life ; for , he said , he did not deny but the believing the death of christ was necessary in communicating , but it is not by faith only we receive his body and blood. for as by faith we are the sons of god , yet it is not only by faith but also by baptism that we become the sons of god ; so also christ saith , he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ; yet this doth not exclude repentance and amendment of life from being necessary to salvation : therefore the universality of the expression , whoso eats , does not exclude the necessity of eating worthily that we may have everlasting life by it . and so did conclude that since we believe we have all our faith in the holy scriptures , we must prove from some clear scriptures by arguments that consist of a major and minor that are either express words of scripture or equivalent to them , that christ was no otherwise present in the sacrament than spiritually , as he is received by faith. and added that it was impertinent to bring impossibilities either from sense or reason against this , if we brought no clear scriptures against it . to this he also added , that when d. s. asked him by which of his senses he received christ in the sacrament , he answered , that he might really receive christ's body at his mouth , though none of his senses could perceive him , as a ●ole or pill is taken in a sirrup or any other liquor , so that i really swallow it over though my senses do not tast it ; in like manner christ is received under the accidents of bread and wine , so that though our senses do not perceive it , yet he is really taken in at our mouth and goes down into our stomach . answer . having now set down the strength of n.n. his plea upon second thoughts , i shall next examine it . the stress of all lies in this , whether we must necessarily supply the words of christ with the addition of worthily : he affirms it , i deny it , for these reasons . christ in this discourse was to shew how much more excellent his doctrine was than was moses his law , and that moses gave manna from heaven to nourish their bodies , notwithstanding which they died in the wilderness : but christ was to give them food to their souls , which if they did eat they should never die , for it should give them life . where it is apparent the bread and nourishment must be such , as the life was , which being internal and spiritual , the other must be such also . and verse 47. he clearly explains how that food was received , he that believeth on me hath everlasting life . now having said before that this bread gives life , and here saying that believing gives everlasting life , it very reasonably follows that believing was the receiving this food . which is yet clearer from verse 34. where the jews having desired him evermore to give them that bread , he answers verse 35. i am the bread of life , he that comes to me shall never hunger , and he that believeth on me shall never thirst . which no man that is not strangely prepossessed , can consider , but he must see it is an answer to their question , and so in it he tells them that their coming to him and believing was the mean of receiving that bread . and here it must be considered that christ calls himself bread , and says that a man must eat thereof , which must be understood figuratively ; and if figures be admitted in some parts of that discourse , it is unjust to reject the applying the same figures to other parts of it . in fine , christ tells them this bread was his flesh which he was to give for the life of the world , which can be applied to nothing but the offering up himself on the cross. this did , as it was no wonder , startle the jews , so they murmured , and said , how can this man give us his flesh to eat ? to which christs answer is so clear , that it is indeed strange there should remain any doubting about it . he first tells them , except they eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man they had no life in them . where on the way mark , that drinking the blood is as necessary as eating the flesh ; and these words being expounded of the sacrament , cannot but discover them extreamly guilty , who do not drink the blood . for suppose the doctrine of the bloods concomitating the flesh were true ; yet even in that case they only eat the blood , but cannot be said to drink the blood . but from these words it is apparent christ must be speaking chiefly if not only of the spiritual communicating : for otherwise no man can be saved , that hath not received the sacrament . the words are formal and positive , and christ having made this a necessary condition of life , i see not how we dare promise life to any that hath never received it . and indeed it was no wonder that those fathers who understood these words of the sacrament , appointed it to be given to infants immediately after they were baptized ; for that was a necessary consequence that followed this exposition of our saviours words . and yet the church of rome will not deny , but if any die before he is adult , or if a person converted be in such circumstances that it is not possible for him to receive the sacrament , and so dies without it , he may have everlasting life : therefore they must conclude that christs flesh may be eaten by faith even without the sacrament . again in the next verse he says , whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life . these words must be understood in the same sense they had in the former verse , they being indeed the reverse of it . therefore since there is no addition of worthily necessary to the sence of the former verse , neither is it necessary in this . but it must be concluded christ is here speaking of a thing without which none can have life : and by which all have life : therefore when ever christs flesh is eaten , and his blood is drunk , which is most signally done in the sacrament , there eternal life must accompany it ; and so these words must be understood , even in relation to the sacrament , only of the spiritual communicating by faith. as when it is said a man is a reasonable creature : though this is said of the whole man , body and soul ; yet when we see that upon the dissolution of soul and body no reason or life remains in the body , we from thence positively conclude the reason is seated only in the soul ; though the body has organs that are necessary for its operations : so when it is said we eat christs flesh and drink his blood in the sacrament which gives eternal life ; there being two things in it , the bodily eating and the spiritual communicating ; though the eating of christs flesh is said to be done in the worthy receiving , which consists of these two , yet since we may clearly see the bodily receiving may be without any such effects , we must conclude that the eating of christs flesh is only done by the inward communicating : though the other , that is the bodily part , be a divine organ , and conveyance of it . and as reason is seated only in the soul , so the eating of christs flesh must be only inward and spiritual , and so the mean by which we receive christ in the supper is faith . all this is made much clearer by the words that follow , my flesh is meat indeed , and my blood is drink indeed . now christs flesh is so eaten , as it is meat ; which i suppose none will question , it being a prosecution of the same discourse . now it is not meat as taken by the body , for they cannot be so gross as to say , christs flesh is the meat of our body : therefore since his flesh is only the meat of the soul and spiritual nourishment , it is only eaten by the soul and so received by faith . christ also says , he that eateth my flesh and drinks my blood dwells in him and he in him . this is the definition of that eating and drinking he had been speaking of ; so that such as is the dwelling in him , such also must be the eating of him : the one therefore being spiritual , inward , and by faith , the other must be such also . and thus it is as plain as can be , from the words of christ , that he spake not of a carnal or corporal , but of a spiritual eating of his flesh by faith . all this is more confirmed by the key our saviour gives of his whole discourse , when the iews were offended for the hardness of his sayings , it is the spirit that quickneth ( or giveth the life he had been speaking of ) the flesh profiteth nothing , the words i speak unto you are spirit and they are life . from which it is plain he tells them to understand his words of a spiritual life and in a spiritual manner . but now i shall examine n.n. his reasons to the contrary . his chief argument is , that when eternal life is promised upon the giving of alms , or other good works , we must necessarily understand it with this proviso , that they were given with a good intention and from a good principle : therefore we must understand these words of our saviour to have some such proviso in them . all this concludes nothing . it is indeed certain when any promise is past upon an external action , such a reserve must be understood . and so s. paul tells us , if he bestowed all his goods to feed the poor and had no charity , it profited him nothing . and if it were clear our saviour were here speaking of an external action , i should acknowledge such a proviso must be understood ; but that is the thing in question , and i hope i have made it appear our saviour is speaking of an internal action , and therefore no such proviso is to be supposed . for he is speaking of that eating of his flesh , which must necessarily and certainly be worthily done , and so that objection is of no force . he must therefore prove that the eating his flesh is primarily and simply meant of the bodily eating in the sacrament ; and not only by a denomination , from a relation to it : as the whole man is called reasonable , though the reason is seated in the soul only . what he says to shew that by faith only we are not the sons of god , since by baptism also we are the sons of god , is not to the purpose : for the design of the argument , was to prove that by faith only we are the sons of god , so as to be the heirs of eternal life . now the baptism of the adult ( for our debate runs upon those of ripe years and understanding ) makes them only externally , and sacramentally the sons of god : for the inward and vital sonship follows only upon faith. and this faith must be understood of such a lively and operative faith , as includes both repentance and amendment of life . so that when our saviour says , he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved , that believing is a complex of all evangelical graces : from which it appears , that none of his reasons are of force enough to conclude that the universality of these words of christ ought to be so limited and restricted . for what remains of that which he desired might be taken notice of , that we ought to prove that christs body and blood was present in the sacrament only spiritually and not corporally by express scriptures , or by arguments whereof the major and minor were either express words of scripture , or equivalent to them : it has no force at all in it . i have in a full discourse examined all that is in the plea concerning the express words of scripture : and therefore shall say nothing upon that head , referring the reader to what he will meet with on that subject afterwards . but here i only desire the reader may consider our contest in this particular is concerning the true meaning of our saviours words , this is my body ; in which it is very absurd to ask for express words of scripture , to prove that meaning by . for if that be'setled on , as a necessary method of proof , then when other scriptures are brought to prove that to be the meaning of these words ; it may be asked how can we prove the true meaning of that place we bring to prove the meaning of this by ? and so by a progress for ever we must contend about the true meaning of every place . therefore when we enquire into the sense of any controverted place : we must judge of it by the rules of common sense and reason of religion and piety , and if a meaning be affixed to any place contrary to these , we have good reason to reject it . for we knowing all external things only by our senses , by which only the miracles & resurrection of christ could be proved , which are the means god has given us to converse with , and enjoy his whole creation ; and the evidence our senses give being such , as naturally determines our perswasions so that after them we cannot doubt ; if then a sense be offered to any place of scripture that does overthrow all this , we have sufficient reason on that very account to reject it . if also any meaning be fastened on a place of scripture that destroyes all our conceptions of things , is contrary to the most universally received maxims , subverts the notions of matter and accidents , and in a word confounds all our clearest apprehensions ; we must also reject every such gloss , since it contradicts the evidence of that which is gods image in us . if also a sense of any place of scripture be proposed that derogates from the glorious exaltation of the humane nature of our blessed saviour , we have very just reasons to reject it , even though we could bring no confirmation of our meaning from express words of scripture . therefore this dispute being chiefly about the meaning of christ's words , he that shews best reasons to prove that his sense is consonant to truth , does all that is necessary in this case . but after all this , we decline not to shew clear scriptures for the meaning our church puts on these words of christ. it was bread that christ took , blessed , brake , and gave his disciples . now the scripture calling it formally bread , destroyes transubstantiation . christ said , this is my body , which are declarative and not imperative words , such as , let there be light , or be thou whole . now all declarative words suppose that which they affirm to be already true , as is most clear ; therefore christ pronounces what the bread was become by his former blessing , which did sanctity the elements : and yet after that blessing it was still bread . again , the reason and end of a thing , is that which keeps a proportion with the means toward it ; so that christs words do this in remembrance of me , shew us that his body is here only in a vital and living commemoration and communication of his body and blood. further , christ telling us , it was his body that was given for us , and his blood shed for us , which we there receive ; it is apparent , he is to be understood present in the sacrament ; not as he is now exalted in glory , but as he was on the cross when his blood was shed for us . and in fine , if we consider that those to whom christ spake were jews , all this will be more easily understood : for it was ordinary for them to call the symbole by the name of the original it represented . so they called the cloud between the cherubims god and iehovah according to these words , o thou that dwellest between the cherubims : and all the symbolical apparitions of god to the patriarchs and the prophets were said to be the lord appearing to them . but that which is more to this purpose is , that the lamb that was the symbole and memorial of their deliverance out of aegypt , was called the lords passover . now though the passover then was only a type of our deliverance by the death of christ , yet the lamb was in proportion to the passover in aegypt , as really a representation of it as the sacrament is of the death of christ. and it is no more to be wondered that christ called the elements his body and blood , though they were not so corporally , but only mystically , and sacramentally ; than that moses called the lamb the lords passover . so that it is apparent it was common among the jews to call the symbole and type by the name of the substance and original . therefore our saviours words are to be understood in the sense and stile that was usual among these to whom he spake , it being the most certain rule of understanding any doubtful expression , to examine the ordinary stile and forms of speech of that age , people , and place , in which such phrases were used . this is signally confirmed by the account which maimonides gives us , of the sense in which eating and drinking is oft taken in the scriptures . first he saies it stands in its natural signification , for receiving bodily food : then because there are two things done in eating , the first is the destruction of that which is eaten , so that it loseth its first form ; the other is the encrease and nourishment of the substance of the person that eats : therefore he observes that eating has two other significations in the language of the scriptures . the one is destruction and desolation : so the sword is said to eat , or as we render it to devour ; so a land is said to eat its inhabitants , and so fire is said to eat or consume . the other sense it is taken in does relate to wisdom , learning , and all intellectual apprehensions , by which the form ( or soul ) of man is conserved from the perfection that is in them , as the body is preserved by food . for proof of this he cites divers places out of the old testament , as isai. 55.2 . come buy and eat , and prov. 25. 27. and prov. 24. 13. he also adds that their rabbins commonly call wisdom , eating ; and cites some of their sayings , as come and eat flesh in which there is much fat , and that when ever eating and drinking is in the book of the proverbs , it is nothing else but wisdom or the law. so also wisdom is often called water , isai. 55.1 . and he concludes that because this sense of eating occurs so often , and is so manifest and evident , as if it were the primary and most proper signification of the word , therefore hunger and thirst do also stand for a privation of wisdom and vnderstanding , as amos 8. 21. to this he also refers that of thirsting , psalm . 42. 3. and isai. 12. 3. and ionathan paraphrasing these words , ye shall draw water out of the wells of salvation , renders it , ye shall receive a new doctrine with joy from the select ones among the iust , which is further confirmed from the words of our saviour , iohn 7. 37. and from these observations of the i earnedest and most judicious among all the rabbins , we see that the iewes understood the phrases of eating and eating of flesh in this spiritual and figurative sense of receiving wisdom and instruction . so that this being an usual form of speech among them , it is no strange thing to imagin how our saviour being a iew according to the flesh , and conversing with iews did use these terms and phrases in a sense that was common to that nation . and from all these set together we are confident we have a great deal of reason , and strong and convincing authorities from the scriptures , to prove christs words , this is my body , are to be understood spiritually , mystically , and sacramentally . there remains only to be considered what weight there is in what n. n. says . he answered to d. s. that christ might be received by our senses though not perceived by any of them , as a bole is swallowed over , though our taste does not relish or perceive it . that great man is so very well furnished with reason and learning to justify all he says , that no other body needs interpose on his account . but he being now busie , it was not worth the giving him the trouble , to ask how he would reply upon so weak an answer , since its shallowness appears at the first view : for is there any comparison to be made between an object that all my senses may perceive , if i have a mind to it , that i see with mine eyes , and touch , and feel in my mouth , and if it be too big , and my throat too narrow i will feel stick there ; but only to guard against its offensive taste , i so wrap or conveigh it , that i relish nothing ungrateful in it : and the receiving christ with my senses , when yet none of them either do , or can , though applied with all possible care , discern him ? so that it appears d. s. had very good reason to say , it seemed indeed strange to him , to say , that christ was received by our senses , and yet was so present that none of our senses can perceive him : and this answer to it is but meer trifling . here follows the paper we promised , wherein an account is given of the doctrine of the church for the first eight centuries in the point of the sacrament , which is demonstrated to be contrary to transubstantiation , written in a letter to my lady t. madam , your ladiship may remember , that our meeting at your house on the third instant ended with a promise we made , of sending you such an account of the sense of the fathers for the first six ages , as might sufficiently satisfie every impartial person , that they did not believe transubstantiation . this promise we branched out in three propositions : first that the fathers did hold , that after the consecration the elements of bread and wine did remain unchanged in their substance . the second , was , that after the consecration they called the elements the types , the antitypes , the mysteries , the symboles , the signs , the figures , and the commemorations of the body and blood of christ ; which certainly will satisfie every unprejudiced person , that they did not think the bread and wine were annihilated , and that in their room , and under their accidents , the substance of the body and blood of christ was there . thirdly , we said , that by the doctrine of the fathers the unworthy receivers got not the body and the blood of christ ; from which it must necessarily follow , that the substance of his body and blood is not under the accidents of bread and wine : otherwise all these that unworthily receive them eat christs body and blood. therefore to discharge our selves of our promise , we shall now give your ladiship such an account of the doctrine of the fathers on these heads , as we hope shall convince those gentlemen , that we had a good warrant for what we said . the first proposition is , the fathers believed that after the consecration the elements were still bread and wine . the proofs whereof we shall divide into three branches : the first shall be , that after the consecration they usually called them bread and wine . secondly , that they expresly assert , that the substance of bread and wine remained . thirdly , that they believed the sacramental bread and wine did nourish our bodies . for proof of the first , we desire the following testimonies be considered : iustin martyr says , these who are called deacons , distribute the blessed bread and wine and water to such as are present , and carry it to the absents , and this nourishment is by us called the eucharist . and a little after , we do not receive these as common bread , or common drink ; for as by the word of god iesus christ our saviour being made flesh , had both flesh and blood for our salvation , so we are taught , that that food by which our blood and flesh are nourished , by its change , being blessed by the word of prayer which he gave us , is both the flesh and the blood of the incarnate jesus . thus that martyr that wrote an hundred and fifty years after christ , calls the elements bread and wi●e , and the nourishment which being changed into flesh and blood nourishes them . and saying , it is not common bread and wine , he says , that it was still so in substance ; and his illustrating it with the incarnation , in which the humane nature did not lose nor change its substance in its union with the eternal word , shews , he thought not the bread and wine lost their substance when they became the flesh and blood of christ. the next witness is irenaeus , who writing against the valentinians , that denied the ●ather of our lord jesus to be the creator of the world , and also denied the resurrection of the body ; confutes both these heresies by arguments drawn from the eucharist . to the first he says , if there be another creator than the father of our lord , then our offering creatures to him , argues him covetous of that which is not his own , and so we reproach him rather than bless him . and adds , how does it appear to any of them , that that bread over which thanks are given , is the body of his lord , and the cup of his blood , if he be not the son of the creator . and he argues against their saying , our bodies should not rise again that are fed by the body and blood of christ : for says he , that bread which is of the earth , having had the invocation of god over it , is no more common bread , but the eucharist , consisting of two things , an earthly and an heavenly ; so our bodies that receive the eucharist are no more corruptible , having the hope of the resurrection . tertullian proving against marcion , that christ was not contrary to the creator , among other proofs which he brings to shew , that christ made use of the creatures , and neither rejected water , oil , milk , or honey , he adds , neither did he reject bread , by which he represents his own body . and further says , christ calls bread his body , that from thence you may understand , that he gave the figure of his body to the bread. origen says , we eat of the loaves set before us , with thanksgiving and prayers over what is given to us , which by the prayer are become a certain holy body , that sanctifies those who use them with a sound purpose . saint cyprian says , christ calls the bread that was compounded of many grains joined together , his body , to shew the union of our people which he bore upon himself ; and calls the wine which is pressed out of many grapes and berries , his blood : he signifies our flock which is joined together in the mixture of an united multitude . and writing against those who only put water in the chalice , he says , since christ said , i am the true vine , the blood of christ is not only water but wine , neither can we see his blood by which we are redeemed and quickened in the chalice when wine is not in it , by which the blood of christ is shewed . and that whole epistle is all to the same purpose . epiphanius says , christ in the supper rose and took these things , and having given thanks said , this is my , &c. now we see it is not equal to it , nor like it , neither to his incarnate likeness , nor his invisible deity , nor the lineaments of his members , for it is round , and without feeling as to its vertue . and this he says , to shew how man may be said to be made after the image of god , though he be not like him . gregory nyssen , shewing how common things may be sanctified , as water in baptism , the stones of an altar and church dedicated to god ; he adds , so also bread in the beginning is common , but after the mystery has consecrated it , is said to be , and is the body of christ ; so the mystical oyl , so the wine before the blessing , are things of little value , but after the sanctification of the spirit , both of them work excellently . he also adds , that the priest by his blessing is separated and sanctified ; from which it appears , he no more believed the change of the substance of the bread and wine , than of the consecrated oyl , the altar , or the priest. ambrose speaking of bread , which was ashers blessing , says , this bread christ gave his apostles , that they might divide it to the people that believed , and gives it to us to day , which the priest consecrates in his words , this bread is made the food of the saints . st. chrysostome on these words , the bread which we break , it is not the communion of the body of christ ? says , what is the bread ? the body of christ. what are they made who take it ? the body of christ. from whence it appears , he thought the bread was so the body of christ , as the worthy receivers are , which is not by the change of their substance , but by the sanctification of their natures . st. jerome says , let us hear the bread which christ brake and gave his disciples , to be the body of our lord. and he says , after the typical pascha was fulfilled , christ took bread that comforts the heart of man , and went to the true sacrament of the pascha , that as melchifedeck in the figure had done offering bread and wine , so he might also represent the truth of his body and blood. where he very plainly calls the elements bread and wine , and a representation of christs body and blood. saint austin ( as he is cited by fulgentius de baptismo and divers others ) , in his exhortation to these that were newly baptized , speaking of this sacrament , says , that which you see is the bread , and the cup which your eyes witness ; but that which your faith must be instructed in , is , that the bread is the body of christ , and the cup is his blood. and then he proposes the objection , how that could be ? and answers it thus , these things are therefore called sacraments , because one thing is seen and another is understood ; what you see has a bodily appearance , but what you understand has a spiritual fruit ; and if you will understand the body of christ , hear what the apostle says to the faithful , ye are the body of christ and his members : if therefore you be the body and members of christ , your mystery is placed on the table of the lord , and you receive the mystery of the lord. and at large prosecutes this , to shew how the faithful are the body of christ , as the bread is made up of many grains ; from whence it appears , that he believed , that the consecrated elements were still bread and wine . and speaking of st. pauls breaking bread at troas , he says , being to break bread that night , as it is broken in the sacrament of the body of christ. he also says , the eucharist is our daily bread ; but let us so receive it , that not only our belly but our mind be refreshed by it . besides in a great many places st. austin calls the eucharist , the sacrament of bread and wine . and speaking of things made use of to signifie somewhat else , he adds for one , the bread that is made for this , is consumed in our receiving the sacrament . he also says , to eat bread is in the new testament the sacrifice of christians . he likewise says , both judas and peter received a part of the same bread out of the same hand of our lord. and thus from twelve witnesses that are beyond all exception , it does appear , that the fathers believed the elements to be still bread and wine after the consecration . we have not brought any proofs from the fathers that are less known or read , for then we must have swelled up this paper beyond what we intend it . one thing is so considerable , that we cannot forbear to desire it be taken notice of , and that is , that we see those great fathers and doctors of the church call the consecrated elements , without any mincing of the matter , bread and wine ; but when they call it the body and blood of christ , they often use some mollifying and less hardy expression . so st. austin says , almost all call the sacrament his body . and again says , we call that only the body blood of christ , which being taken of the fruits of the earth , and consecrated by the mystical prayer , we rightly receive for our spiritual health in the commemoration of the passion of our lord for us . and he says , after some sort the sacrament of the body of christ is his body , and the sacrament of his blood is the blood of christ. and also says , he carried himself in his own hands in some sort , when he said , this is my body . st. chrysostome says , the bread is thought worthy to be called the body of our lord. and on these words , the flesh lusteth against the spirit , among the improper acceptions of flesh , says , the scriptures use to call the mysteries by the name of flesh , and sometimes the whole church , saying , she is the body of christ. tertullian says , christ calls the bread his body , and a little after , he names the bread his body . isidore hispal , says , we call this after his command the body and blood of christ , . which being made of the fruits of the earth , is sanctified and made a sacrament . theodoret says , in the giving of the mysteries christ called the bread his body , and the mixed cup his blood. and says , he who called his natural body corn and bread , and also calls himself a vine , likewise honoured these visible symboles with the names of his body and blood. but now we go to bring our proofs for the next branch of our first proposition ; in which we assert , that the fathers believed that the very substance of the bread and wine did remain after the consecration . by which all the proofs brought in the former branch will receive a further evidence ; since by these it will appear the fathers believed the substance of the elements remained ; and thence we may well conclude , that where-ever we find mention made of bread and wine after consecration , they mean of the substance , and not of the accidents , of bread and wine . for proof of this , we sha●● only bring the testimonies of four ●a●h●rs , that lived almost within one age , and were the greatest men of the age . their authority is as generally received as their testimonies are formal and decisive ; and these are , pope gelasius , st. chrysostome , ephrem patriarch of antioch , and theodoret , whom we shall find delivering to us the doctrine of the church in their age , with great consideration upon a very weighty occasion : so that it shall appear that this was for that age the doctrine generally received both in the churches of rome and constantinople , antioch , and asi● the less . we shall begin with gelasius , who , though he lived later than some of the others , yet , because of the eminence of his see , and the authority those we deal with must needs acknowledge was in him , ought to be set first : he says , the sacraments of the body and blood of christ are a divine thing ; for which reason we become , by them , partakers of the divine nature ; and yet the substance or nature of bread and wine does not cease to be ; and the image and likeness of the body and blood of christ are indeed celebrated in the action of the mysteries : therefore it appears evidently ●nough , that we ought to think th●t of christ our lord , which we profess and celebrate , and receive in his image , that as they ( to wit , the elements ) pass into that divine substance , the holy ghost working it , their nature remaining still in its own property . so that principal mystery , whose efficiency and virtue these ( to wit , the sacraments ) represent to us , remains one entire and true christ ; those things of which he is compounded ( to wit , his two natures ) remaining in their properties . these words seem so express and decisive , that one would think the bare reading them without any further reflections , should be of force enough . but before we offer any considerations upon them , we shall set down other passages of the other fathers , and upon them altogether make such remarks as , we hope , may satisfy any that will hear reason . st. chrysostom treating of the two natures of christ against the apollinarists , who did so confound them , as to consubstantiate them , he makes use of the doctrine of the sacrament to illustrate that mystery by , in these words ; as before the bread is sanctified , we call it bread ; but when the divine grace has sanctified it by the mean of the priest , it is freed from the name of bread , and is thought worthy of the name of the lord's body , though the nature of bread remains in it : and yet it is not said there are two bodies , but one body of the son : so the divine nature being joyned to the body , both these make one son , and one person . next this patriarch of constantinople , let us hear ephrem the patriarch of antioch give his testimony , as it is preserved by photius , who says thus ; in like manner ( having before treated of the two natures united in christ ) the body of christ , which is received by the faithful , does not depart from its sensible substance , and yet remains inseparated from the intellectual grace : so baptism becoming wholly spiritual and one , it preserves its own sensible substance , and does not lose that which it was before . to these we shall add , what theodoret on the same occasion says against those , who from that place , the word was made flesh , believed , that in the incarnation the divinity of the word was changed into the humanity of the flesh. he brings in his heretick arguing about some mystical expressions of the old testament , that related to christ : at length he comes to shew , how christ called himself bread and corn ; so also in the delivering the mysteries , christ called the bread his body , and the mixed cup his blood ; and our saviour changed the names , calling his body by the name of the symbole , and the symbole by the name of his body . and when the heretick asks the reason why the names were so changed , the orthodox answers , that it was manifest to such as were initiated in divine things ; for he would have those who partake of the mysteries , not look to the nature of those things that were seen ; but by the change of the names , to believe that change that was made through grace ; for he who called his natural body corn and bread , does likewise honour the visible symboles with the name of his body and blood ; not changing the nature , but adding grace to nature : and so goes on to ask his heretick , whether he thought the holy bread was the symbole and type of his divinity , or of his body and blood ? and the other acknowledging they were the symboles of his body and blood : he concludes , that christ had a true body . the second dialogue is against the eutychians ; who believed , that after christ's assumption , his body was swallowed up by his divinity : and there the eutychian brings an argument to prove that change from the sacament ; it being granted , that the gifts before the priests prayer were bread and wine . he asks how it was to be called after the sanctification ? the or●hodox answers , the body and blood of christ ; and that he believed he received the body and blood of christ. from thence the heretick , as having got a great advantage , argues ; that as the symboles of the body and blood of our lord were one thing before the priestly invocation , and after that were changed , and are different from what they were : so the body of our lord , after the assumption , was changed into the divine substance . but the orthodox replies , that he was catched in the net be laid for others ; for the mystical symboles , after the sanctification , do not depart from their own nature ; for they continue in their former substance , figure and form , and are both visible and palpable , as they were before ; but they are understood to be that which they are made , and are believed and venerated , as being those things which they are believed to be . and from thence he bids the heretick compare the image with the original , for the type must be like the truth , and shews that christ's body retains its former form and figure , and the substance of his body , though it be now made immortal and incorruptible . thus he . and having now set down very faithfully the words of these fathers , we desire it may be considered , that all these words are used to the same effect , to prove the reality of christ's body , and the distinction of the two natures , the divine and the humane in him . for , though st. chrysostom lived before eutyches his days , yet in this point the eutychians and the apollinarists , against whom he writes , held opinions so like others , that we may well say , all these words of the fathers we have set down are to the same purpose . now , first it is evident , that if transubstantiation had been then believed , there needed no other argument to prove against the eutychians that christ had still a real body , but to have declared that his body was corporally present in the eucharist ; which they must have done , had they believed it , and not spoken so as they did ; since that alone well proved , had put an end to the whole controversy . further , they could never have argued from the visions and apparitions of christ , to prove he had still a real body ; for if it was possible the body of christ could appear under the accidents of bread and wine , it was as possible the divinity should appear under the accidents of an humane body . thirdly , they could never have argued against the eutychians , as they did , from the absurdity that followed upon such a substantial mutation of the humane nature of christ into his divinity , if they had believed this substantial conversion of the elements into christ's body , which is liable unto far greater absurdities . and we can as little doubt , but the eutychians had turned back their arguments on themselves , with these answers , if that doctrine had been then received . it is true , it would seem from the last passage of theodoret , that the eutychians did believe some such change ; but that could not be , for they denied the being of the body of christ , and so could not think any thing was changed into that which they believed was not . therefore we are to suppose him arguing from some commonly received expressions , which the father explains . in fine , the design of those ●athers being to prove , that the two natures might be united without the change of either of their substances in the person of christ , it had been inexcusable folly in them , to have argued from the sacramental mysteries being united to the body and blood of christ , if they had not believed they retained their former substance ; for had they believed transubstantiation , what a goodly argument had it been , to have said , because after the consecration the accidents of bread and wine remain , therefore the substance of the humanity remained still , though united to the divine nature in christ. did ever man in his wits argue in this fashion ? certainly , these four bishops , whereof three were patriarchs , and one of these a pope , deserved to have been hissed out of the world , as persons that understood nor what it was to draw a consequence , if they had argued so as they did and believed transubstantiation . but if you allow them to believe ( as certainly they did ) that in the sacrament the real substances of bread and wine remained , though after the sanctification , by the operation of the holy ghost , they were the body and blood of christ , and were to be called so ; then this is a most excellent illustration of the mystery of the incarnation , in which the humane nature retains its proper and true substance , though after the union with the divinity , christ be called god , even as he was man , by vertue of his union with the eternal word . and this shews how unreasonable it is to pretend , that because substance and nature are some●imes used even for accidental qualities , they should be therefore understood so in the cited places ; for if you take them in that sense , you destroy the force of the argument , which from being a very strong one , will by this means become a most ridiculous sophism . yet we are indeed beholding to those that have taken much pains to shew , that substance and nature stand often for accidental qualities ; for though that cannot be applied to the former places , yet it helps us with an excellent answer to many of those passages with which they triumph not a little . having so far considered these four fathers , we shall only add to them the definition of the seventh general council at constantinople , ann . 754. christ appointed us to offer the image of his body , to wit , the substance of the bread. this council is indeed of no authority with these we deal with : but we do not bring it as a decree of a council , but as a testimony , that so great a number of bishops did in the eighth century believe ; that the substance of the bread did remain in the eucharist , and that it was only the image of christ's body : and if in this definition they spake not more consonantly to the doctrine of the former ages , than their enemies at nice did , let what has been set down , and shall be yet adduced , declare . and now we advance to the third branch of our first assertion , that the fathers believed that the consecrated elements did nourish our bodies ; and the proofs of this will also give a further evidence to our former position ; that the substance of the elements does , remain : and it is a demonstration that these fathers , who thought the sacrament nourished our bodies , could not believe a transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of christ. for the proof of this branch we desire the following testimonies be considered . first , iustin martyr , as was already cited , not only calls the eucharist our nourishment , but formally calls it that food by which our flesh and blood through its transmutation into them are nourished . secondly , irenaeus proving the resurrection of the body by this argument , that our bodies are fed by the body and blood of christ , and that therefore they shall rise again ; he hath these words , he confirmed that cup , which is a creature , to be his blood , by which he increases our blood ; and the bread , which is a creature , to be his body , by which he encreases our body : and when the mixed cup and the bread , receive the word of god , it becomes the eucharist of the body and blood of christ , by which the substance of our flesh is encreased and subsists . how then do they deny the flesh to be capable of the gift of god , which is eternal life , that is nourished by the body and blood of christ , and is made his member . we hope it will be observed , that as these words are express and formal ; so the design on which he uses them will admit of none of those distinctions they commonly rely on . tertullian says , the flesh is fed with the body and blood of christ. saint austin , after he had called the eucharist our daily bread , he exhorts us so to receive it , that not only our bellies , but our minds might be refreshed by it . isidore of sevil says , the substance of the visible bread nourishes the outward man ; or , as bertram cites his words , all that we receive externally in the sacrament of the body and blood of christ , is proper to refresh the body . next , let us see what the 16 th council of toledo says in anno. 633. condemning those that did not offer in the eucharist entire loaves , but only round crafts ; they did appoint one entire loaf carefully prepared to be set on the altar , that it might be sanctified by the priestly benediction , and order , that what remained after communion , should be either put in some bag , or , if it was needful , to eat it up , that it might not oppress the belly of him that took it with the burden of an heavy surcharge ; and that it might not go to the digestion , but that it might feed his soul with spiritual nourishment . from which words , one of two consequences will necessarily follow ; either that the consecrated elements do really nourish the body , which we intend to prove from them ; or that the body of christ is not in the elements , but as they are sacramentally used , which we acknowledg many of the fathers believed . but the last words we cited of the spiritual nourishment , shew those fathers did not think so ; and if they did , we suppose those we deal with will see , that to believe christ's body is only in the elements when used , will clearly leave the charge of idolatry on that church in their processions , and other adorations of the host. but none is so express as origen , who , on these words , ' t is not that which enters within a man which defiles a man , says , if every thing that enters by the mouth , goes into the belly , and is cast into the draught ; then the food that is sanctified by the word of god , and by prayer , goes also to the belly , as to what is material in it , and from thence to the draught ; but by the prayer that was made over it , it is useful in proportion to our faith , and is the mean that the understanding is clear-sighted and attentive to that which is profitable ; and it is not the matter of bread , but the word pronounced over it , which profits him that does not eat it in a way unworthy of our lord. this doctrine of the sacraments being so digested that some parts of it turned to excrement , was likewise taught by divers latin writers in the 9 th age , as rabanus maurus arch-bishop of mentz , and heribald bishop of auxerre . divers of the greek writers did also hold it , whom for a reproach their adversaries called stercoranists . it is true , other greek fathers were not of origen's opinion , but believed that the eucharist did entirely turn into the substance of our bodies . so cyril of ierusalem says , that the bread of the eucharist does not go into the belly , nor is cast into the draught , but is distributed thorough the whole substance of the communicant , for the good of body and soul. the homily of the eucharist in a dedication , that is in st. chrysostom's works , says , do not think that this is bread , and that this is wine ; for they pass not to the draught , as other victuals do : and comparing it to wax put to the fire , of which no ashes remain ; he adds , so think that the mysteries are consumed with the substance of our bodies . john damascene is of the same mind , who says , that the body and the blood of christ passes into the consistence of our souls and bodies , without being consumed , corrupted , or passing into the draught , god forbid , but passing into our substance for our conservation thus it will appear , that though those last-cited-fathers did not believe as origen did , that any part of the eucharist went to the draught ; yet they thought it was turned into the substance of our bodies , from which we may well conclude , they thought the substance of bread and wine remained in the eucharist after the consecration , and that it nourished our bodies . and thus we hope we have sufficiently proved our first proposition in all its three branches . so leaving it , we go on to the second proposition , which is ; that the fathers call the consecrated elements the figures , the signs , the symboles , the types , and antitypes , the commemoration , representation , the mysteries , and the sacraments of the body and blood of christ. tertullian proving against marcion , that christ had a real body , he brings some figures that were fulfilled in christ , and says , he made the bread which he took and gave his disciples to be his body , saying , this is my body , that is , the figure of my body ; but it had not been a figure if his body had not been true , for an empty thing , such as a phantasm , cannot have a figure . now had tertullian , and the church in his time , believed transubstantiation , it had been much more pertinent for him to have argued , here is corporally present christ's body , therefore he had a true body , than to say , here is a figure of his body , therefore he had a true body ; such an escape as this is not incident to a man of common sense , if he had believed transubsubstantiation . and the same father , in two other places before cited , says christ gave the figure of his body to the bread , and that he represented his own body by the bread. st. austin says , he commended and gave to his disciples , the figure of his body and blood. the same expressions are also in bede , alcuine , and druthmar , that lived in the eighth and ninth centuries . but what st. austin says elsewhere , is very full in this matter , where treating of the rules by which we are to judg what expressions in scripture are figurative , and what not , he gives this for one rule , if any place seem to command a crime or horrid action , it is figurative ; and to instance it , cites these words , except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man , you have no life in you , which ( says he ) seems to command some crime , or horrid action , therefore it is a figure , commanding us to communicate in the passion of our lord , and sweetly and profitably to lay up in our memory , that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us . which words are so express and full , that whatever those we deal with may think of them , we are sure we cannot devise how any one could have delivered our doctrine more formally . parallel to these are origen's words , who calls the understanding the words of our saviour , of eating his flesh and drinking his blood according to the letter , a letter that kills . the same st. austin calls the eucharist , a sign of christ's body , in his book against adimantus , who studied to prove that the author of the old and new testament was not the same god ; and among other arguments , he uses this , that blood in the old testament is called the life or soul , contrary to the new testament : to which st. austin answers , that it was so called , not that it was truly the soul or life , but the sign of it ; and to shew , that the sign does sometimes bear the name of that whereof it is a sign , he says , our lord did not doubt to say , this is my body , when he was giving the sign of his body . where , if he had not believed the eucharist was substantially different from his body , it had been the most impertinent illustration that ever was , and had proved just against him , that the sign must be one and the same with that which is signified by it . for the sacrament being called the type , the antitype , the symbole and mystery of christs body and blood ; the ancient liturgies , and greek fathers , use these phrases so frequently , that since it is not so much as denied , we judg we need not laboriously prove it . therefore we pass over this , believing it will be granted ; for if it be denied , we undertake to prove them to have been used not only on some occasions , but to have been the constant stile of the church . now that types , antitypes , symboles , and mysteries , are distinct from that which they shadow forth , and mystically hold out , we believe can be as little disputed . in this sense all the figures of the law are called types of christ by the fathers , and both the baptismal water and the chrism are called symboles and mysteries . and though there was not that occasion for the fathers to discourse on baptism so oft , which every body received but once , and was administred ordinarily but on a few days of the year , as they had to speak of the eucharist , which was daily consecrated ; so that it cannot be imagined , there should be near such a number of places about the one as about the other ; yet we fear not to undertake to prove , there be many places among the ancients that do as fully express a change of the baptismal water as of the eucharistical elements . from whence it may appear , that their great zeal to prepare persons to a due value of these holy actions , and that they might not look on them as a vulgar ablution , or an ordinary repast , carried them to many large and high expressions , which cannot bear a literal meaning . and since they with whom we deal are sain to fly to metaphors and allegories for for cleaning of what the i athers say of baptism , it is a most unreasonable thing to complain of us for using such expositions of what they say about the eucharist . but that we may not leave this without some proof , we shall set down the words of facundus , who says , the sacrament of adoption , that is baptism , may be called adoption , as the sacrament of his body and blood , which is in the consecrated bread and cup , is called his body and blood ; not that the bread is properly his body , or the cup properly his blood , but because they contain in them the mystery of his body and blood ; and hence it was that our lord called the bread that was blessed , and the cup which he gave his disciples , his body and blood. therefore as the believers in christ , when they receive the sacrament of his body and blood , are rightly said to have received his body and blood ; so christ , when he received the sacrament of the adoption of sons , may be rightly said to have received the adoption of sons . and we leave every one to gather from these words , if the cited father could believe transubstantiation , and if he did not think that baptism was as truly the adoption of the sons of god , as the eucharist was his body and blood , which these of rome acknowledge is only to be meant in a moral sense . that the fathers called this sacrament the memorial and representation of the death of christ , and of his body that was broken , and his blood that was shed , we suppose will be as little denied , for no man that ever looked into any of their treatises of the eucharist , can doubt of it . st. austin says , that sacraments must have some similitude of these things of which they be the sacraments , otherwise they could not be sacraments . so he says , the sacrament of the body of christ is after some manner his blood. so the sacrament of faith ( that is baptism ) is faith. but more expresly speaking of the eucharist as a sacrifice of praise ; he says , the flesh and blood of this sacrifice was promised before the coming of christ by the sacrifices of the types of it : in the passion of christ ; it was done in the truth it self : and after his ascent is celebrated by the sacrament of the remembrance of it . but he explains this more fully on the 98 th psalm ; where he having read , ver . 5. worship his footstool ; and seeking for its true meaning , expounds it of christ's body , who was flesh of this earth , and gives his flesh to be eaten by us for our salvation , which , since none eats , except he have first adored it ; he makes this the footstool which we worship without any sin , and do sin if we do not worship it . so far the church of rome triumphs with this place . but let us see what follows , where we shall find that which will certainly abate their joy ; he goes on and tells us , not to dwell on the flesh , lest we be not quickned by the spirit ; and shews how they that heard our lord's words were scandalized at them as hard words ; for they understood them , says he , foolishly , and carnally , and thought he was to have cut off some parcels of his body to be given them : but they were hard , not our lord 's saying ; for had they been meek , and not hard , they should have said within themselves , he says not this without a cause , but because there is some sacrament hid there ; for had they come to him with his disciples , and asked him , he had instructed them : for he said it is the spirit that quickens , the flesh profiteth nothing : the words that i have spoken to you are spirit and life . and adds , understand spiritually that which i have said ; for it is not this body which you 〈◊〉 , that you are to eat ; or to drink this 〈◊〉 which they are to shed , who shall 〈◊〉 me : but i have recommended a sacrament to you , which being spiritually understood , shall quicken you ; and though it be necessary that it be celebrated visibly , yet it must be understood invisibly . from which it is as plain as can be , that st. austin believed that in the eucharist we do not eat the natural flesh , and drink the natural blood of christ ; but that we do it only in a sacrament , and spiritually , and invisibly . but the force of all this will appear yet clearer , if we consider that they speak of the sacrament as a memorial that exhibited christ to us in his absence : for though it naturally followes , that whatsoever is commemorated must needs be absent ; yet this will be yet more evident , if we find the fathers made such reflections on it . so gaudentius says , this is , the hereditary gift of his new teststament , which that night he was betrayed to be crucified , he left as the pledg of his presence : this is the provision for our journey with which we are fed in this way of our life , and nourished till we go to him out of this world ; for he would have his benefits remain with us : he would have our souls to be always sanctified by his precious blood , and by the image of his own passion . primasius compares the sacrament to a pledg , which one , when he is dying , leaves to any whom he loved . many other places may be brought , to shew how the fathers speak of memorials and representations , as opposite to the truth and presence of that which is represented . and thus we doubt not but we have brought proofs , which , in the judgment of all that are unprejudiced , must demonstrate the truth of this our second proposition , which we leave , and go on to the third , which was ; that by the doctrine of the fathers , the unworthy receivers did not receive christ's body and blood in the sacrament . for this our first proof is taken from origen , who after he had spoken of the sacraments being eaten , and passing to the belly , adds , these things we have said of the typical and symbolical body ; but many things may be said of the word that was made flesh , and the true food , whom whosoever eats , he shall live for ever ; whom no wicked person can eat : for if it were possible that any who continues wicked , should eat the word that was made flesh , since he is the word , and the living bread , it had never been written ; whoso eats this bread , shall live for ever . where he makes a manifest difference between the typical and symbolical body received in the sacrament , and the incarnate word , of which no wicked person can partake . and he also says , they that are good eat the living bread that came down from heaven ; and the wicked eat dead bread , which is death . zeno , bishop of verona , that , as is believed , lived near origen's time , says , ( as he is cited by ratherius bishop of verona ) there is cause to fear , that be in whom the devil dwells , does not eat the flesh of our lord , nor drink his blood , though he seems to communicate with the faithful ; since our lord hath said , he that eats my flesh , and drinks my blood , dwells in me , and i in him . st. jerom on the 66 th of isa. says , they that are not holy in body and spirit , do neither eat the flesh of jesus , nor drink his blood ; of which he said , he that eats my flesh , and drinks my blood , hath eternal life . and on the 8 th chap. of hos. he says , they eat not his flesh , whose flesh is the food of them that believe . to the same purpose he writes in his comments on the 22 th of jeremy , and on the 10 th of zech. st. austin says , he that does not abide in christ , and in whom christ does not abide , certainly does not spiritually eat his flesh , nor drink his blood , though he may visibly and carnally break in his teeth the sacrament of the body and blood of christ. but he rather eats and drinks the sacrament of so great a matter to his judgment . and speaking of those , who by their uncleanness become the members of an harlot ; he says , neither are they to be said to eat the body of christ , because they are not his members . and besides , he adds , he that says , whoso eats my flesh , and drinks my blood , abides in me , and i in him ; shews what it is not only in a sacrament , but truly to eat the body of christ , and drink his blood. to this we shall add , that so oft cited passage ; those did eat the bread that was the lord ; the other ( he means judas ) the bread of the lord against the lord. by which he clearly insinuates , he did believe the unworthy receivers did not receive the lord with the bread : and that this hath been the cons●ant belief of the greek-church to this day , shall be proved , if it be thought necessary for clearing this matter . and thus far we have studied to make good what we undertook to prove : but if we had enlarged on every particular , we must have said a great deal more ; to shew from many undeniable evidences , that the fathers were strangers to this new mystery . it is clear from their writings , that they thought christ was only spiritually present , that we did eat his flesh , and drink his blood only by faith , and not by our bodily senses ; and that the words of eating his flesh , and drinking his blood , were to be understood spiritually . it is no less clear , that they considered christ present only as he was on the cross , and not as he is now in the glory of the father : and from hence it was , that they came to order their eucharistical forms so , as that the eucharist might represent the whole history of christ from his incarnation to his assumption . besides , they always speak of christ as absent from us , according to his flesh and human nature , and only present in his divinity and by his spirit ; which they could not have said , if they had thought him every day present on their altars in his flesh and human nature ; for then he were more on earth than he is in heaven , since in heaven he is circumscribed within one place . but according to this doctrine he must be always in above a million of places upon earth , so that it were very strange to say he were absent , if they believed him thus present . but to give yet further evidences of the fathers not believing this doctrine , let us but reflect a little on the consequences that necessarily follow it : which be , 1. that a body may be , by the divine power , in more places at once . 2. that a body may be in a place without extension or quantity ; so a body of such dimensions as our blessed lord's body can be in so small a room as a thin wafer ; and not only so , but that the whole body should be entirely in every crumb and point of that wafer . 3. that a body can be made or produced in a place that had a real being before , and yet is not brought thither , but produced there . 4. that the accidents of any substance , such as colour , smell , taste , and figure , can remain without any body or substance in which they subsist . 5. that our senses may deceive us in their clearest and most evident representations . 6. great doubts there are what becomes of the body of christ after it is received ; or , if it should come to be corrupted , or to be snatched by a mouse , or eat by any vermine . all these are the natural and necessary effects of this doctrine , and are not only to be perceived by a contemplative and searching understanding , but are such as stare every body full in the face : and hence it is , that since this was submitted to in the western church , the whole doctrine of philosophy has been altered , and new maxims and definitions were found out , to accustom the youth while raw and easy to any impression , to receive these as principles , by which their minds being full of those first prejudices , might find no difficulty to believe this . now it is certain , had the fathers believed this , they who took a great deal of pains to resolve all the other mysteries of our faith , and were so far from being short or defective in it , that they rather over-do it ; and that not only about the mysteries of the trinity and incarnation , but about original sin , the derivation of our souls , the operation of the grace of god in our hearts , and the resurrection of our bodies , should yet have been so constantly silent in those mysteries , though they ought rather to have been cleared than the other . because in the other heads the difficulties were more speculative and abstracted , and so scruples were only incident to men of more curious and diligent enquiries . but here it is otherwise , where the matter being an object of the senses , every mans senses must have raised in him all or most of those scruples : and yet the fathers neither in their philosophical treatises , nor in their theological writings , ever attempt the unridling those difficulties . but all this is only a negative , and yet we do appeal to any one that has diligently read the fathers , st. austin in particular ; if he can perswade himself , that when all other mysteries and the consequences from them were explained with so great care and even curiosity , these only were things of so easy a digestion , that about them there should have been no scruple at all made . but it is yet clearer , when we find the fathers not only silent , but upon other occasions delivering maxims and principles so directly contrary to these consequences , without any reserved exceptions or provisions for the strange mysteries of transubstantiation : they tell us plainly , creatures are limited to one place , and so argued against the heathens believing their inferior deities were in the several statues consecrated to them : from this they prove the divinity of the holy ghost , that he did work in many places at once , and so could not be a creature , which can only be in one place . nay , they do positively teach us , that christ can be no more on earth , since his body is in heaven , and is but in one place . they also do tell us , that that which hath no bounds nor figure , and cannot be touched nor seen , cannot be a body , and that all bodies are extended in some place , and that bodies cannot exist after the manner of spirits . they also tell us in all their reasonings against the eternity of matter , that nothing could be produced that had a being before it was produced . they also teach us very formally , that none of the qualities of a body could subsist , except the body it self did also subsist . and for the testimonies of our senses , they appeal to them on all occasions as infallible ; and tell us , that it tended to reverse the whole state of our life , the order of nature , and to blind the providence of god ; to say , he has given the knowledg and enjoyment of all his works to liars and deceivers ; if our senses be false . then we must doubt of our faith ; if the testimony of the eyes , hands and ears were of a nature capable to be deceived . and in their contests with the marcionites and others about the truth of christ's body , they appeal always to the testimony of the senses as infallible : nay , even treating of the sacrament , they say , it was bread as their eyes witnessed , and truly wine that christ did consecrate for the memory of his blood ; telling , that in this very particular we ought not to doubt the testimony of our senses . but to make this whole matter yet plainer ; it is certain , that had the church in the first ages believed this doctrine , the heathens and jews who charged them with every thing they could pos " ms = " sibly invent , had not passed over this , against which all the powers of reason , and the authorities of sense , do rise up . they charge them for believing a god , that was born , a god of flesh , that was crucified and buried . they laughed at their belief of a iudgment to come , of endless flames , of an heavenly paradise , and the resurrection of the flesh. the first apologists for christianity , iustin , tertullian , origen , arnobi●s , and cyril of alexandria , give us a full account of those blasphemies against our most holy faith ; and the last hath given us what iulian objected in his own words , who having apostatized from the faith in which he was initiated , and was a reader in the church , must have been well acquainted with , and instructed in their doctrine and sacraments . he then who laughed at every thing , and in particular at the ablution and sanctification in baptism , as conceiving it a thing impossible that water should cleanse and wash a soul. yet neither he , nor celsus , nor any other ever charged on the christians any absurdities from their belief of transubstantiation . this is , it is true , a negative argument ; yet when we consider the malice of those ingenious enemies of our faith , and their care to expose all the doctrines and customs of christians , and yet find them in no place charge the strange consequences of this doctrine on them ; we must from thence conclude , there was no such doctrine then received : for if it had been , they , at least iulian , must have known it ; and if they knew it , can we think they should not have made great noise about it . we know some think their charging the christians with the eating of humane flesh , and thye●tean suppers , related to the sacrament ; but that cannot be , for when the fathers answer that charge , they tell them to their teeth , it was a plain lye : and do not offer to explain it with any relation to the eucharist , which they must have done if they had known it was founded on their doctrine of receiving christs body and blood in the sacrament . but the truth is , those horrid calumnies were charged on the christians from the execrable and abominable practi●es of the gnosticks , who called themselves christians ; and the enemies of the faith , either believing these were the practices of all christians , or being desirous to have others think so , did accuse the whole body of christians as guilty of these abominations . so that it appears , those calumnies were not at all taken up from the eucharist , and there being nothing else that is so much as said to have any relation to the eucharist , charged on the christians , we may well conclude from hence , that this doctrine was not received then in the church . but another negative argument is , that we find heresies rising up in all ages against all the other mysteries of our faith , and some downright denying them , others explaining them very strangely ; and it is indeed very natural to an unmortified and corrupt mind , to reject all divine revelation , more particularly that which either choakes his common notions , or the deductions of appearing reasonings ; but most of all , all men are apt to be startled , when they are told , they must believe against the clearest evidences of sense , for men were never so meek and tame , as easily to yeild to such things . how comes it then , that for the first seven ages there were no heresies nor hereticks about this ? we are ready to prove , that from the eighth and ninth centuries , in which this doctrine began to appear , there has been in every age great opposition made to all the advances for setting it up , and yet these were but dark and unlearned ages , in which implicite obedience , and a blind subjection to what was generally proposed , was much in credit . in those ages , the civil powers being ready to serve the rage of church-men against any who should oppose it , it was not safe for any to appear against it . and yet it cannot be denied , but from the days of the second council of nice , which made a great step towards transubstantiation , till the fourth council of l●teran , there was great opposition made to it by the most eminent persons in the latin church ; and how great a part of christendome has departed from the obedience of the church of rome in every age since that time , and upon that account , is well enough known . now , is it to be imagined , that there should have been such an opposition to it these nine hundred years last past , and yet that it should have been received the former eight hundred years with no opposition , and that it should not have cost the church the trouble of one general council to decree it , or of one treatise of a father to establish it , and answer those objections that naturally arise from our reasons and senses against it . but in the end there are many things which have risen out of this doctrine as its natural consequences , which had it been sooner taught and received , must have been apprehended sooner , and those are so many clear presumptions of the novelty of this doctrine . the elevation , adoration , processions , the doctrine of concomitance , with a vast superfaetation of rites and rubricks about this sacrament are lately sprung up . the age of them is well known , and they have risen in the latin church out of this doctrine , which had it been sooner received , we may reasonably enough think must have been likewise ancienter . now for all these things , as the primitive church knew them not , so on the other hand , the great simplicity of their forms , as we find them in justin martyr , and cyril of ierusalem , in the apostolical constitutions , and the pretended denis the arcopagite , are far from that pomp which the latter ages that believed this doctrine brought in the sacraments being given in both kinds , being put in the hands of the faithful , being given to the children for many ages , being sent by boys or common persons to such as were dying , the eating up what remained , ( which in some places were burnt , in other places were consumed by children , or by the clergy ) their making cataplasms of it , their mixing the consecrated chalice with ink to sign the excommunication of hereticks . these , with a great many more , are such convictions to one that has carefully compared the ancient forms , with the rubricks and rites of the church of rome , since this doctrine was set up , that it is as discernable as any thing can be , that the present belief of the church of rome is different from the primitive doctrine . and thus far we have set down the reasons that perswade us that transubstantiation was not the belief of the first seven or eight centuries of the church . if there be any part of what we have asserted , questioned , we have very formal and full proofs ready to shew for them ; though we thought it not fit to enter into the particular proofs of any thing , but what we undertook to make out when we waited on your ladyship . now there remains but one thing to be done , which we also promised ; and that was to clear the words of st. cyril of jerusalem : we acknowledg they were truly cited : but for clearing of them , we shall neither alledg any thing to the lessening the authority of that father , though we find but a slender character given of him by epiphanius and others : nor shall we say any thing to lessen the authority of these catechisms , though much might be said . but it is plain , st. cyril's design in these catechisms , was only to posses his neophites with a just and deep sense of these holy symboles . but even in his 4 th catechism he tells them , not to consider it as meer bread and wine , for it is the body and blood of christ. by which it appears he thought it was bread still , though not meer bread. and he gives us else-where a very formal account in what sense he thought it was christ's body and blood ; which he also insinuates in this 4 th cathechism : for in his first mist. catechism , when he exhorts his young christians to avoid all that belonged to the heathenish idolatry , he tells , that on the solemnities of their idols they had flesh and bread , which by the invocation of the devils were defiled , as the bread and wine of the eucharist before the holy invocation of the blessed trinity was bare bread and wine ; but the invocation being made , the bread becomes the body of christ. in like manner , says he , those victuals of the pomp of satan , which of their own nature are common or bare victuals , by the invocation of the devils become prophane . from this illustration , which he borrowed from iustin martyr his second apology , it appears , that he thought the consecration of the eucharist was of a like sort or manner with the profanation of the idolatrous feasts ; so that as the substance of the one remained still unchanged , so also according to him must the substance of the other remain . or , if this will not satisfy them , let us see to what else he compares this change of the elements by the consecration : in his third mist. catechism , treating of the consecrated oil , he says ; as the bread of the eucharist after the invocation of the holy ghost is no more common bread , but the body of christ ; so this holy ointment is no more bare ointment , nor , as some may say , common ; but it is a gift of christ , and the presence of the holy ghost , and becomes energetical of his divinity . and from these places let it be gathered what can be drawn from st. cyril's testimony . and thus we have performed likewise what we promised , and have given a clear account of st. cyril's meaning from himself ; from whose own words , and from these things which he compares with the sanctification of the elements in the eucharist , it appears he could not think of transubstantiation ; otherwise he had neither compared it with the idol-feasts , nor the consecrated oil , in neither of which there can be supposed any transubstantiation . having thus acquitted our selves of our engagement before your ladiship , we shall conclude this paper with our most earnest and hearty prayers to the father of lights , that he may of his great mercy redeem his whole christian church from all idolatry ; that he may open the eyes of those , who being carnal look only at carnal things , and do not rightly consider the excellent beauty of this our most holy faith , which is pure , simple , and spiritual : and that he may confirm all those whom he has called to the knowledg of the truth ; so that neither the pleasures of sin , nor the snares of this world , nor the fear of the cross , tempt them to make shipwrack of the faith and a good conscience . and that god may pour out abundance of his grace on your ladiship , to make you still continue in the love and obedience of the truth , is the earnest prayer of , madam , london , apr. 15. 1676. your ladiship 's most humble servants , edward stillingfleet , gilbert burnet . a discourse , to shew how unreasonable it is , to ask for express words of scripture in proving all articles of faith : and that a just and good consequence from scripture is sufficient . it will seem a very needless labour to all considering persons , to go about the exposing and baffling so unreasonable and ill-grounded a pretence , that whatever is not read in scripture , is not to be held an article of faith. for in making good this assertion , they must either fasten their proofs on some other ground , or on the words of our article ; which are these , holy scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation : so that whatsoever is not read therein , nor may be proved thereby , is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith , or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation . now it is such an affront to every mans eyes and understanding to infer from these words , that all our articles must be read in scripture , that we are confident every man will cry shame on any that will pretend to fasten on our church any such obligation from them . if these unlucky words , nor may be proved thereby , could be but dashed out , it were a won cause . but we desire to know what they think can be meant by these words ? or what else can they signifie , but that there may be articles of faith , which though they be not read in scripture , yet are proved by it . there be some propositions so equivalent to others , that they are but the same thing said in several words ; and these , though not read in scripture , yet are contained in it , since wheresoever the one is read , the other must necessarily be understood . other propositions there are , which are a necessary result either from two places of scripture , which joined together yeild a third , as a necessary issue ; according to that eternal rule of reason and natural logick , that wherever two things agree in any third , they must also agree among themselves . there be also other propositions that arise out of one single place of scripture by a natural deduction ; as if jesus christ be proved from any place of scripture the creator of the world , or that he is to be worshipped with the same adoration that is due to the great god , then it necessarily follows , that he is the great god ; because he does the works , and receives the worship of the great god. so it is plain , that our church by these words , nor may be proved thereby , has so declared her self in this point , that it is either very great want of consideration , or shameless impudence , to draw any such thing from our articles . but we being informed , that by this little art , as shuffling and bare so ever as it must appear to a just discerner , many have been disordered , and some prevailed on ; we shall so open and expose it , that we hope it shall appear so poor and trifling that every body must be ashamed of it . it hath already shewed it self in france and germany , and the novelty of it took with many , till it came to be canvassed ; and then it was found so weak , that it was universally cried down and hissed off the stage . but now that such decried wares will go off no-where , those that deal in them , try if they can vent them in this nation . it might be imagined , that of all persons in the world they should be the furthest from pressing us to reject all articles of faith that are not read in scripture ; since whenever that is received as a maxim , the infallibility of their church , the authority of tradition , the supremacy of rome , the worship of saints , with a great many more must be cast out . it is unreasonable enough for those who have cursed and excommunicated us , because we reject these doctrines , which are not so much as pretended to be read in scripture ; to impose on us the reading all our articles in these holy writings . but it is impudent to hear persons speak thus , who have against the express and formal words of scripture , set up the making and worshipping of images ; and these not only of saints , ( though that be bad enough ) , but of the blessed trinity , the praying in an unknown tongue , and the taking the chalice from the people . certainly this plea in such mens mouths is not to be reconciled to the most common rules of decency and discretion . what shall we then conclude of men that would impose rules on us , that neither themselves submit to , nor are we obliged to receive by any doctrine or article of our church . but to give this their plea its full strength and advantage , that upon a fair hearing all may justly conclude its unreasonableness , we shall first set down all can be said for it . in the principles of protestants the scriptures are the rule by which all controversies must be judged ; now they having no certain way to direct them in the exposition of them , neither tradition , nor the definition of the curch : either they must pretend they are infallible in their deductions , or we have no reason to make any account of them , as being fallible and vncertain ; and so they can never secure us from error , nor be a just ground to found our faith of any proposition so proved upon : therefore no proposition thus proved , can be acknowledged an article of faith. this is the bredth and length of their plea , which we shall now examine . and first , if there be any strength in this plea , it will conclude against our submitting to the express words of scripture as forcibly : since all words , how formal soever , are capable of several expositions . either they are to be understood literally or figuratively ; either they are to be understood positively , or interrogatively : with a great many other varieties , of which all expressions are capable . so that if the former argument have any force , since every place is capable of several meanings , except we be infallibly sure which is the true meaning , we ought by the same parity of reason to make no account of the most express and formal words of scripture ; from which it is apparent , that what noise soever these men make of express words of scripture , yet if they be true to their own argument , they will as little submit to these as to deductions from scripture : since they have the same reason to question the true meaning of a place , that they have to reject an inference and deduction from it . and this alone may serve to satisfy every body that this is a trick , under which there lies no fair dealing at all . but to answer the argument to all mens satisfaction , we must consider the nature of the soul , which is a reasonable being ; whose chief faculty is to discern the connexion of things , and to draw out such inferences as flow from that connexion . now , though we are liable to great abuses both in our judgments and inferences ; yet if we apply these faculties with due care , we must certainly acquiesce in the result of such reasonings : otherwise this being god's image in us , and the standard by which we are to try things , god has given us a false standard ; which when we have with all possible care managed , yet we are still exposed to fallacies and errors . this must needs reflect on the veracity of that god that has made us of such a nature , that we can never be reasonably assured of any thing . therefore it must be acknowledged , that when our reasons are well prepared according to those eternal rules of purity and vertue , by which we are fitted to consider of divine matters ; and when we carefully weigh things , we must have some certain means to be assured of what appears to us . and though we be not infallible , so that it is still possible for us by precipitation , or undue preparation , to be abused into mistakes ; yet we may be well assured that such connexions and inferences as appear to us certain , are infallibly true . if this be not acknowledged , then all our obligation to believe any thing in religion will vanish . for that there is a god , that he made all things , and is to be acknowledged , and obeyed by his creatures ; that our souls shall outlive their union with our bodies , and be capable of rewards and punishments in another state ; that inspiration is a thing possible ; that such or such actions were above the power of nature , and were really performed . in a word , all the maxims on which the belief , either of natural religion , or revealed , is founded , are such as we can have no certainty about them , and by consequence are not obliged to yield to them ; if our faculty of reasoning in its clear deductions is not a sufficient warrant for a sure belief . but to examin a little more home their beloved principle , that their church cannot err , must they not prove this from the divine goodness and veracity , from some passages of scripture , from miracles and other extraordinary things they pretend do accompany their church ? now in yielding assent to this doctrine upon these proofs , the mind must be led by many arguments , through a great many deductions and inferences . therefore we are either certain of these deductions : or we are not . if we are certain , this must either be founded on the authority of the church expounding them , or on the strength of the argu " ms = " ments . now we being to examin this authority , not having yet submitted to it ; this cannot determine our belief till we see good cause for it . but in the discerning this good cause of believing the church infallible , they must say that an uncontrollable evidence of reason is ground enough to fix our faith on , or there can be no certain ground to believe the church infallible . so that it is apparent we must either receive with a firm perswasion what our souls present to us as uncontrollably true ; or else we have no reason to believe there is a god , or to be christians , or to be , as they would have us , romanists . and if it be acknowledged there is cause in some cases for us to be determined by the clear evidence of reason in its judgments and inferences ; then we have this truth gained , that our reasons are capable of making true and certain inferences , and that we have good cause to be determined in our belief by these ; and therefore inferences from scripture ought to direct our belief : nor can any thing be pretended against this , but what must at the same time overthrow all knowledg and faith , and turn us sceptical to every thing . we desire it be in the next place considered what is the end and use of speech and writing , which is to make known our thoughts to others ; those being artificial signs for conveying them to the understanding of others . now every man that speaks pertinently , as he designs to be understood , so he chooses such expressions and arguments as are most proper to make himself understood by those he speaks to ; and the clearer he speaks , he speaks so much the better : and every one that wraps up his meaning in obscure words , he either does not distinctly apprehend that about which he discourses , or does not design that those to whom he speaks should understand him , meaning only to amuse them . if likewise he say any thing from which some absurd inference will easily be apprehended , he gives all that hear him a sufficient ground of prejudice against what he says . for he must expect that as his hearers senses receive his words or characters , so necessarily some figure or notion must be at the same time imprinted on their imagination , or presented to their reason ; this being the end for which he speaks , and the more genuinely that his words express his meaning , the more certainly and clearly they to whom he directs them apprehend it . it must also be acknowledged , that all hearers must necessarily pass judgments on what they hear , if they do think it of that importance as to examine it . and this they must do by that natural faculty of making judgments and deductions , the certainty whereof we have proved to be the foundation of all faith and knowledge . now the chief rule of making true judgments , is , to see what consequences certainly follow on what is laid before us : if these be found absurd or impossible , we must reject that from which they follow as such . further , because no man says every thing that can be thought or said to any point , but only such things as may be the seeds of further enquiry and knowledg in their minds to whom he speaks ; when any thing of great importance is spoken , all men do naturally consider what inferences arise out of what is said by a necessary connexion : and if these deductions be made with due care , they are of the same force , and must be as true as that was from which they are drawn . these being some of the laws of converse , which every man of common sense must know to be true , can any man think , that when god was revealing by inspired men his counsels to mankind , in matters that concerned their eternal happiness , he would do it in any other way than any honest man speaks to another , that is , plainly and distinctly ? there were particular reasons why prophetical visions must needs be obscure ; but when christ appeared on earth , though many things were not to be fully opened till he had triumphed over death and the powers of darkness : yet his design being to bring men to god , what he spoke in order to that , we must think he intended that they to whom he spake it might understand it , otherwise why should he have spoken it to them ? and if he did intend they should understand him , then he must have used such expressions as were most proper for conveying this to their understandings ; and yet they were of the meaner sort , and of very ordinary capacities , to whom he addressed his discourses . if then such as they were , might have understood him ; how should it come about that now there should be such a wondrous mysteriousness in the words of christ and his apostles ? ( for the same reason by which it is proved that christ designed to be understood , and spake suitably to that design , will conclude as strongly that the discourses of the apostles in matters that concern our salvation , are also intelligible . ) we have a perfect understanding of the greek tongue ; and , though some phrases are not so plain to us which alter every age , and some other passages that relate to some customs , opinions or forms , of which we have no perfect account left us , are hard to be understood : yet what is of general and universal concern , may be as well understood now as it was then ; for sense is sense still . so that it must be acknowledged , that men may still understand all that god will have us believe and do in order to salvation . and therefore if we apply and use our faculties aright , joyning with an unprejudiced desire and search for truth , earnest prayers that god by his grace may so open our understandings , and present divine truths to them , that we may believe and follow them : then both from the nature of our own souls , and from the design and end of revelation , we may be well assured that it is not only very possible , but also very easy for us to find out truth . we know the pompous objection against this , is , how comes it then that there are so many errors and divisions among christians ? especially those that pretend the greatest acquaintance with scriptures : to which the answer is so obvious and plain , that we wonder any body should be wrought on by so fallacious an argument . does not the gospel offer grace to all men to lead holy lives , following the commandments of god ? and is not grace able to build them up , and make them perfect in every good word and work ? and yet how does sin and vice abound in the world ? if then the abounding of error proves the gospel does not offer certain ways to preserve us from it , then the abounding of sin will also prove there are no certain ways in the gospel to avoid it . therefore as the sins mankind generally live in , leave no imputation on the gospel ; so neither do the many heresies and schisms conclude that the gospel offers no certain ways of attaining the knowledg of all necessary truth . holiness is every whit as necessary to see the face of god as knowledg is , and of the two is the more necessary ; since low degrees of knowledg , with an high measure of holiness , are infinitely preferable to high degrees of knowledg with a low measure of holiness . if then every man have a sufficient help given him to be holy , why may we not much rather conclude he has a sufficient help to be knowing in such things as are necessary to direct his belief and life , which is a less thing ? and how should it be an imputation on religion , that there should not be an infallible way to end all controversies , when there is no infallible way to subdue the corrupt lusts and passions of men , since the one is more opposite to the design and life of religion than the other ? in sum , there is nothing more sure than that the scriptures offer us as certain ways of attaining the knowledg of what is necessary to salvation , as of doing the will of god. but as the depravation of our natures makes us neglect the helps towards an holy life ; so this and our other corruptions , lusts and interests , make us either not to discern divine truth , or not embrace it . so that error and sin are the twins of the same parents . but as every man that improves his natural powers , and implores and makes use of the supplies of the divine grace , shall be enabled to serve god acceptably ; so that though he fail in many things , yet he continuing to the end in an habit and course of well doing , his sins shall be forgiven , and himself shall be saved : so upon the same grounds we are assured , that every one that applies his rational faculties to the search of divine truth , and also begs the illumination of the divine spirit , shall attain such knowledg as is necessary for his eternal salvation : and if he be involved in any errors , they shall not be laid to his charge . and from these we hope it will appear , that every man may attain all necessary knowledg , if he be not wanting to himself . now when a man attains this knowledg , he acquires it , and must use it as a rational being , and so must make judgments upon it , and draw consequences from it ; in which he has the same reason to be assured , that he has to know the true meaning of scripture ; and therefore as he has very good reason to reject any meaning of a place of scripture , from which by a necessary consequence great absurdities and impossibilities must follow : so also he is to gather such inferences as flow from a necessary connexion with the true meaning of any place of scripture . to instance this in the argument we insisted on , to prove the mean by which christ is received in the sacrament , is faith ; from these words , whoso eats my flesh , and drinks my blood , hath eternal life . if these words have relation to the sacrament , which the roman church declares is the true meaning of them ; there cannot be a clearer demonstration in the world. and indeed they are necessitated to stand to that exposition ; for if they will have the words , this is my body , to be understood literally , much more must they assert the phrases of eating his flesh , and drinking his blood , must be literal : for if we can drive them to allow a figurative and spiritual meaning of these words , it is a shameless thing for them to deny such a meaning of the words , this is my body : they then expounding these words of st. iohn of the sacrament , there cannot be imagined a closser contexture than this which follows . the eating christ's flesh , and drinking his blood , is the receiving him in the sacrament ; therefore everyone that receives him in the sacrament must have eternal life . now all that is done in the sacrament , is either the external receiving the elements , symboles , or , as they phrase it , the accidents of bread and wine , and under these the body of christ ; or the internal and spiritual communicating by faith. if then christ received in the sacrament gives eternal life , it must be in one of these ways , either as he is received externally , or as he is received internally , or both ; for there is not a fourth : therefore if it be not the one at all , it must be the other only . now it is undeniable , that it is not the external eating that gives eternal life . for st. paul tells us of some that eat and drink unworthily , that are guilty of the body and blood of the lord , and eat and drink judgment against themselves . therefore it is only the internal receiving of christ by faith , that gives eternal life ; from which another necessary inference directs us also to conclude , that since all that eat his flesh , and drink his blood , have eternal life : and since it is only by the internal communicating that we have eternal life , therefore these words of eating his flesh , and drinking his blood , can only be understood of internal communicating ; therefore they must be spiritually understood . but all this while the reader may be justly weary of so much time and pains spent to prove a thing which carries its own evidence so with it , that it seems one of the first principles and foundations of all reasoning ; for no proposition can appear to us to be true , but we must also assent to every other deduction that is drawn out of it by a certain inference . if then we can certainly know the true meaning of any place of scripture , we may and ought to draw all such conclusions as follow it with a clear and just consequence ; and if we clearly apprehend the consequence of any proposition , we can no more doubt the truth of the consequence , than of the proposition from which it sprung : for if i see the air full of a clea● day-light , i must certainly conclude the sun is risen ; and i have the same assurance about the one that i have about the other . there is more than enough said already for discovering the vanity and groundlesness of this method of arguing : but to set the thing beyond all dispute , let us consider the use which we find our saviour and the apostles making of the old testament , and see how far it favours us , and condemns this appeal to the formal and express words of scriptures . but before we advance further , we must remove a prejudice against any thing may be drawn from such presidents , these being persons so filled with god and divine knowledg , as appeared by their miracles and other wonderful gifts , that gave so full an authority to all they said , and of their being infallible , both in their expositions and reasonings , that we whose understandings are darkned and disordered , ought not to pretend to argue as they did . but for clearing this , it is to be observed , that when any person divinely assisted , having sufficiently proved his inspiration , declares any thing in the name of god , we are bound to submit to it ; or if such a person , by that same authority , offers any exposition of scripture , he is to be believed without further dispute . but when an inspired person argues with any that does not acknowledg his inspiration , but is enquiring into it , not being yet satisfied about it ; then he speaks no more as an inspired person : in which case the argument offered is to be examined by the force that is in it , and not by the authority of him that uses it . for his authority being the thing questioned , if he offers an argument from any thing already agreed to ; and if the argument be not good , it is so far from being the better by the authority of him that useth it ; that it rather gives just ground to lessen or suspect his authority , that understands a consequence so ill , as to use a bad argument to use it by . this being premised . when our saviour was to prove against the sadducees the truth of the resurrection from the scriptures , he cites out of the law that god was the god of abraham , isaac , and jacob ; since then god is not god of the dead , but of the living : therefore abraham , isaac and jacob did live unto god. from which he proved the souls having a being distinct from the body , and living after its separation from the body , which was the principal point in controversy . now if these new maxims be of any force , so that we must only submit to the express words of scripture , without proving any thing by consequence ; then certainly our saviour performed nothing in that argument : for the sadducees might have told him , they appealed to the express words of scripture . but alas ! they understood not these new-found arts , but submitting to the evident force of that consequence , were put to silence , and the multitudes were astonished at his doctrine . now it is unreasonable to imagine that the great authority of our saviour , and his many miracles , made them silent ; for they coming to try him , and to take advantage from every thing he said , if it were possible to lessen his esteem and authority , would never have acquiesced in any argument because he used it , if it had not strength in it self ; for an ill argument is an ill argumont , use it whoso will. for ins●ance , if i see a man pretending that he sits in an infallible chair , and proving what he delivers by the most impertinent allegations of scripture possible , as if he attempts to prove the pope must be the head of all powers civil and spiritual from the first words of genesis ; * where it being said , in the beginning , and not in the beginnings , in the plural , ( from which he concludes there must be but one beginning and head of all power , ( to wit ) the pope . ) i am so far from being put to silence with this , that i am only astonished how any man of common sense , though he pretended not to infallibility , could fall into such errors : for an ill argument , when its fallacy is so apparent , must needs heap contempt on him that uses it . having found our saviour's way of arguing to be so contrary to this new method these gentlemen would impose on us ; let us see how the apostles drew their proofs for matters in controversy from scriptures : the two great points they had most occasion to argue upon , were , iesus christ's being the true messiah , and the freedom of the gentiles from any obligation to the observance of the mosaical law. now let us see how they proceeded in both these . for the first ; in the first sermon after the effusion of the holy ghost , st. peter proves the truth of christ's resurrection from these words of david , thou wilt not leave my soul in hell , nor suffer thine holy one to see corruption . now he shews that these words could not be meant of david , who was dead and buried ; therefore being a prophet , he spake of the resurrection of christ. if here were not consequences and deductions , let every one judg . now these being spoken to those who did not then believe in christ , there was either sufficient force in that argument to convince the jews , otherwise these that spake them were very much both to be blamed , and despised , for offering to prove a matter of such importance by a consequence . but this being a degree of blasphemy against the holy ghost , we must acknowledg there was strength in their argument ; and therefore articles of faith , whereof this was the fundamental , may be proved from scripture by a consequence . we might add to this all the other prophecies in the old testament , from which we find the apostles arguing to prove this foundation of their faith , which every one may see do not contain in so many words that which was proved by them . but these being so obvious , we choose only to name this , all the rest being of a like nature with it . the next controversy debated in that time was the obligation of the mosaical law. the apostles by the inspiration of the holy ghost made a formal decision in this matter , yet there being great opposition made to that , st. paul sets himself to prove it at full length , in his epistle to the galatians , where , besides other arguments , he brings these two from the old testament ; one was , that abraham was justified by faith before the giving the law ; for which he cites these words , abraham believed god , and it was counted to him for righteousness : from which , by a very just consequence he infers , that as abraham was blessed , so all that believe are blessed with him ; and that the law of moses , that was 430 years after , could not disannul it , or make the promise of none effect ; therefore we might now be justified by faith without the law , as well as he was . another place he cites , is , the just shall live by faith , and he subsumes , the law was not of faith ; from which the conclusion naturally follows : therefore the just lives not by the law. he must be very blind that sees not a succession of many consequences in that epistle of st. paul's ; all which had been utterly impertinent , if this new method had any ground for its pretension , and they might at one dash have overthrown all that he had said . but men had not then arrived at such devices as must at once overturn all the sense and reason of mankind . we hope what we premised will be remembred , to shew that the apostles being infallibly directed by the holy ghost , will not at all prove , that though this way of arguing might have passed with them , yet it must not be allowed us : for their being infallibly directed , proves their arguments and way of proceeding was rational and convincing , otherwise they had not pitched on it . and the persons to whom these arguments were offered not acquiescing in their authority , their reasonings must have been good , otherwise they had exposed themselves and their cause to the just scorn of their enemies . having therefore evinced that both our saviour and his apostles did prove by consequences drawn from scripture , the greatest and most important articles of faith ; we judg that we may with very great assurance follow their example . but this whole matter will receive a further confirmation : if we find it was the method of the church of god in all ages to found her decisions of the most important controversies on consequences from scriptures . there were very few hereticks that had face and brow enough to set up against express words of scripture ; for such as did so , rejected these books that were so directly opposite to their errors ; as the maniche●s did the gospel of st. matthew . but if we examine the method either of councils in condemning hereticks , or of the fathers writing against them , we shall always find them proceeding upon deductions and consequences from scripture , as a sufficient ground to go upon . let the epistle both of the council of antioch to samosatenus , and denis of alexandria's letter to him be considered ; and it shall be found how they drew their definitions out of deductions from scripture . so also alexander patriarch of alexandria in his epistle , in which he condemned aerius , proceeds upon deductions from scripture ; and when the council of nice came to judg of the whole matter , if we give credit to ge●●sius , they canvassed many places of scripture , that they might come to a decision ; and that whole dispute , as he represents it , was all about interences and deductions from scripture . it is true , f. maimbourg in his romantick history of arrianism would perswade us , that in that counsel the orthodox , and chiefly the great saints of the council were for adhering closely to what they had received by tradition , without attempting to give new expositions of scripture , to interpret it any other way than as they had learned from these fathers , that had been taught them by the apostles . but the arrians , who could not find among these that which they intended to establish , maintained on the contrary , that we must not confine our selves to that which hath been held by antiqui●y , since none could be sure about that . therefore they thought that one must search the truth of the doctrine only in the scriptures , which they could turn to their own meaning by their false subtitles . and to make this formal account pass easily with his reader , he vouches on the margin , sozom. cap. 16. when i first read this , it amazed me to find a thing of so great consequence not so much as observed by the writers of controversies ; but turning to sozomen , i found in him these words , speaking of the dispute about arrius his opinions , the disputation being , as is usual , carried out into different enquiries ; some were of opinion that nothing should be innovated beyond the faith that was originally delivered ; and these were chiefly those whom the simplicity of their manners had brought to divine faith without nice curiosity . others did strongly or earnestly contend that it was not fit to follow the ancienter opinions without a strict trial of them . now in these words we find not a word either of orthodox or arrian ; so of which side either one or other were , we are left to conjecture . that jesuite has been sufficiently exposed by the writers of the port-royal , for his foul dealing on other occasions ; and we shall have great cause to mistruth him in all his accounts , if it be found that he was quite mistaken in this ; and that the party which he calls the orthodox were really some holy , good men ; but simple , ignorant , and ●asily abused : and that the other party which he calls the arrian was the orthodox , and more judicious , who readily forseeing the inconvenience which the simplicity of others would have involved them in , did vehemently oppose it ; and pressed the testimonies of the fathers might not be blindly followed . for proof of this , we need but consider that they anathematized these , who say that the son was the work of the father , as [a] athanasius tells us , which were the very words of denis of alexandria , of whom the arrians [b] boasted much , and cited these words from him ; and both [c] athanasius and [d] hilary acknowledg that those bishops that condemned s●●nos●tenus , did also reject the consubstantial , and st. b●sil [e] says , denis sometimes denied , sometimes acknowledged the consubstantial . yet i shall not be so easy as petavius and others of the roman church are in this matter ; who acknowledg that most of the fathers before the council of nice said many things that did not agree with the rule of the orthodox ●aith ; but am fully perswaded , that before that council , the church did believe that the son was truly god , and of the same divine substance with the father : yet on the other hand it cannot be denied , but there are many expressions in their writings which they had not so well considered ; and thence it is that st. basil f observes how denis in his opposition to sabellius had gone too far on the other hand . therefore there was a necessity to make such a symbole as might cut off all equivocal and ambiguous forms of speech . so we have very good reason to conclude it was the arrian party , that studied under the pretence of not innovating , to engage many of the holy , but simpler bishops , to be against any new words or symboles , that so they might still lurk undiscovered . upon what grounds the council of nice made their decree and symbole , we have no certain account , since their acts are lost . but the best conjecture we can make , is from s. athanasius , who , as he was a great assertor of the faith in that council , so also he gives us a large account of its creed , in a particular treatise , g in which he jus●ifies their symbole at great length out of the scriptures , and tell us very formally they used the word consubstantial , that the wickedness and craft of the arrians might be discovered , and proves by many consequences from scriptures , that the words were well chosen ; and sets up his rest on his arguments from the scriptures , though all his proofs are but consequences drawn out of them . it is true , when he has done that , he also adds , that the fathers at nice did not begin the use of these words , but had them from those that went before them ; and cites some passages from theognistus , denis of alexandria , denis of rome , and origen . but no body can imagin this was a full proof of the tradition of the faith. these were but a few later writers , nor could he have submitted the decision of the whole controversy to two of these , denis of alexandria and origen , ( for the other two , their works are lost ) in whose writings there were divers passages that favoured the arrians , and in which they boasted much . therefore athanasius only cites these passages to shew the words of these symbole were not first coined by the council of nice . but neither in that treatise , nor in any other of his works , do i ever find that either the council of nice , or he who was the great champion for their faith , did study to prove the consubstantiality to have been the constant tradition of the church : but in all his treatises he at full length proves it from scripture . so from the definition of the council of nice , and athanasius his writings , it appears the church of that age thought that consequences clearly proved from scripture were a sufficient ground to build an article of ●aith on . with this i desire it be also considered , that the next great controversy , that was carried on chiefly by s. cyril against the nestorians , was likewise all managed by consequences from scripture , as will appear to any that reads s. cyril's writings , inserted in the acts of the council of ephesus , chiefly his treatise to the queens ; and when he brought testimonies from the fathers against nesto●ius , which were read in the council , h they are all taken out of fathers that lived after the council of nice , except only s. cyprian , and peter of alexandria . if then we may collect from s. cyril's writings the sense of that council , as we did from s. athanasius that of the council of nice ; we must conclude that their decrees were founded on consequences drawn from scripture ; nor were they so solicitous to prove a continued succession of the tradition . in like manner , when the council of cha●edon condemned eutyches , pope leo's epistle to ●lavian was read , and all assented to it : so that upon the matter , his epistle became the decree of the council , and that whole epistle from beginning to end , is one entire series of consequences proved from scripture and reason : i and to the end of that epistle are added in the acts of that council testimonies from the fathers , that had lived after the days of the council of nice . k theodoret and gelasius l also , who wrote against the eutychians , do through their whole writings pursue them with consequences drawn from scripture and reason , and in the end set down testimonies from fathers : and to instance only one more , when st. austin wrote against the pelagians , how many consequences he draws from scripture , every one that has read him must needs know . in the end let it be also observed , that all these fathers when they argue from places of scripture , they never attempt to prove that those scriptures had been expounded in that sense they urge them in by the councils or fathers who had gone before them ; but argue from the sense which they prove they ought to be understood in . i do not say all their consequences or expositions were wel-grounded ; but all that has been hitherto set down , will prove that they thought arguments drawn from scripture when the consequences are clear , were of sufficient authority and force to end all controversies . and thus it may appear that it is unreasonable , and contrary to the practice both of the ancient councils and fathers , to reject proofs drawn from places of scripture , though they contain not in so many words that which is intended to be proved by them . but all the answer they can offer to this , is , that those fathers and councils had another authority to draw consequences from scripture , because the extraordinary presence of god was among them , and because of the tradition of the faith they builded their decrees on , than we can pretend to , who do not so much as say we are so immediately directed , or that we found our faith upon the successive tradition of the several ages of the church . to this i answer ; first , it is visible , that if there be any strength in this , it will conclude as well against our using express words of scripture , since the most express words are capable of several expositions . therefore it is plain , they use no fair dealing in this appeal to the formal words of scripture , since the argument they press it by , do invalidate the most express testimonies as well as deductions . let it be further considered , that before the councils had made their decrees , when heresies were broached , the fathers wrote against them , confuting them by arguments made up of scripture-consequences ; so that before the church had decreed , they thought private persons might confute heresies by such consequences . nor did these fathers place the strength of their arguments on tradition , as will appear to any that reads but what s. cyril wrote against nestorius before the council of ephesus , and pope leo against eutyches , before the council of chalcedon , where all their reasonings are founded on scripture . it is true , they add some testimonies of ●athers to prove they did not innovate any thing in the doctrine of the church : but it is plain , these they brought only as a confirmation of their arguments , and not as the chief strength of their cause ; for as they do not drive up the tradition to the apostles days , setting only down some later testimonies ; so they make no inferences from them , but barely set them down . by which it is evident , all the use they made of these , was only to shew that the ●aith of the age that preceded them , was conform to the proofs they brought from scriptures ; but did not at all found the strength of their arguments from scripture , upon the sense of the fathers that went before them . and if the council of nice had passed the decree of adding the consubstantials to the creed , upon evidence brought from tradition chiefly , can it be imagined that s. athanasius , who knew well on what grounds they went , having born so great a share in their consultations and debates , when he in a formal treatise justifies that addition , should draw his chief arguments from scripture and natural reason ; and that only towards the end , he should 〈◊〉 us of four writers , from whom he brings passages to prove this was no new or unheard-of thing . in the end , when the council had passed their decree , does the method of their dispute alter ? let any read athanasius , hil●ry , or st. austin writing against the arrians : they continue still to ply them with arguments made up of consequences from scripture ; and their chief argument was clearly a consequenco from scripture , that since christ was by the confession of the arrians truly god , then he must be of the same substance , otherwise there must be more substances , and so more gods , which was against scripture . now , if this be not a consequence from scripture , let every body judg . it was on this they chiefly insisted , and waved the authority of the council of nice , which they mention very seldom , or when they do speak of it , it is to prove that its decrees were according to scripture . ●or proof of this , let us hear what st. austin says [m] writing against maximinus an arrian●ishop ●ishop , proving the consubstantiality of the son : this is that consubstan●ial which was established by the catholick fathers in the coun●il of nice , against the arrians ; by the authority of truth , and the truth of authority , which heretical impiety studied to overthrow under the heretical emperor constantius , because of the newness of t●e words , which were not so well understood , as should have been : since the ancient faith had brought them forth ; but many were abused by the fraud of a few . and a little after he adds , but now neither should i bring the council of nice , nor yet the council of arimini thereby to prejudg in this matter ; neither am i bound by the authority of the latter , nor you by the authority of the former . let one cause and reason contest and strive with the other from the authorities of the scriptures , which are witnesses common to both , and not proper to either of us . if this be not our plea , as formally as can be , let every reader judg ; from all which we conclude , that our method of proving articles of faith by consequences drawn from scripture , is the same that the catholick church in all the best ages made use of : and therefore it is unreasonable to deny it to us . but all that hath been said will appear yet with fuller and more demonstrative evidence , if we find , that this very pretence of appealing to formal words of scriptures , was on several occasions taken up by divers hereticks , but was always rejected by the fathers as absurd and unreasonable . the first time we find this plea in any bodies mouth , is upon the question , whether it was lawful for christians to go to the theaters , or other publick spectacles , which the fathers set themselves mightily against , as that which would corrupt the minds of the people , and lead them to heathenish idolatry . but others that loved those diverting fights , pleaded for them upon this ground , as tertullian * tells us in these words ; the faith of some being either simpler or more scrupulous , calls for an authority from scripture , for the discharge of these sights ; and they became uncertain about it , because such abstinence is no-where denounced to the servants of god , neither by a clear signification , nor by name ; as , thou shalt not kill , nor worship an idol : but he proves it from the first verse of the psalms ; for though that seems to belong to the jews , yet ( says he ) the scripture is always to be divided broad , where that discipline is to be guarded according to the sense of whatever is present to us . and this agrees with that maxim he has elsewhere , that the words of scripture are to be understood , not only by their sound , but by their sense ; and are not only to be heard with our ears , but with our minds . in the next place , the arrians designed to shroud themselves under general expressions ; and had found glosses for all passages of scripture . so that when the council of nice made all these ineffectual , by putting the word consubstantial into the creed ; then did they in all their councils , and in all disputes , set up this plea , that they would submit to every thing was in scripture , but not to any additions to scripture . a large account of this we have from athanasins , * who gives us many of their creeds . in that proposed at arimini , these words were added to the symbole , for the word substance , because it was simply set down by the fathers , and is not understood by the people , but breeds scandal , since the scriptures have it not , therefore we have thought fit it be left out , and that there be no more mention made of substance concerning god , since the scriptures no-where speak of the substance of the father and the son. he also tells us , that at sirmium they added words to the same purpose to their symbole , rejecting the words of substance or consubstantial , because nothing is written of them in the scriptures , and they transcend the knowledg and understanding of men . thus we see how exactly the plea of the arrians agrees with what is now offered to be imposed on us . but let us next see what the father says to this : he first turns it back on the arrians , and shews how far they were from following that rule which they imposed on others . and if we have not as good reason to answer those so , who now take up the same plea , let every one judg . but then the father answers , it was no matter though one used forms of speech that were not in scripture , if he had still a sound or pious understanding ; as on the contrary a heretical person , though he uses forms out of scripture , he will not be the less suspected , if his understanding be corrupted ; and at full length applies that to the question of the consubstantiality . to the same purpose , st. hilary setting down the arguments of the arrians against the consubstantiality , the third objection is , that it was added by the council of ni●● , but ought not to be received , because it is no-where written . but he answers , it was a foolish thing to be afraid of a word , when the thing e●pressed by the word has no difficulty . we find likewise in the conference st. austin had with maximinus , the arrian bishop * , i● the very beginning the arrian tells him , that he must hearken to what he brought out of the scriptures , which were common to them all ; but for words that were not in scripture , they were in no case received by them . and afterwards he says * , we receive with a full veneration every thing that is brought out of the holy scriptures , for the scriptures are not in our dominion ●hat they may be mended by us . and a little after adds , p●a●h is not gathered out of arguments , but is proved by sure testimonies , therefore he seeks a testimony of the h●ly ghost's being god. but to that st. austin makes answer , that from the things that we read , we must understand the things that we read not . and giving an account of another conference * he had with count pascentius that was an arrian , he tells , that the arrian did most earnestly press that the word consubstantial might be shewed in scripture , repeating this frequently , and canvassing about it invidiously . to whom st. austin answers , nothing could be more conten●ious than to strive about a word when the thing was certain , and asks him where the word unbegotten ( which the arrians used ) was in scripture . and since it was no-where in scripture , he from thence concludes , there might be a very good account given why a word that was not in scripture might be well used . and by how many consequences he proves the consubstantiality we cannot number , except that whole epistle were set down . and again , in that which is called an epistle * , but is an account of another conference between that same person and st. austin , the arri●n desired the consubstantiality might be accursed , because it was no-where to be found written in the scriptures ; and adds , that it was a grievous trampling on the authority of the scripture to set down that which the scripture had not said ; for if any thing be set down without authority from the divine volumes , it is proved to be void ; against which st. austin argues at great length , to prove that it necessarily follows from other places o● scripture . in the conference between photinus , sabellus , arrius , and athanasius , first published by cassander * , as a work of vigilius , but believed to be the work of gel●sius an african ; where we have a very full account of the pleas of these several parties . arrius challenges the council of nice for having corrupted the faith with the addition of new words , and complains of the consubstantial , and says , the apostles , their disciples , and all their successors downward , that had lived in the confession of christ to that ●ime , were ignorant of that word : and on this he insists with great vehemency , urging it over and over again , pressing athanasius either to read it properly set down in scripture , or to cast it out of his confession ; against which athanasius replies , and shews him how many things they acknowledged against the other hereticks which were not written ; shew me these things , ( says he ) not from conjectures or probabilities , or things that do neighbour on reason , not from things that provoke us to understand them so , nor from the piety of faith , perswading such a profession ; but shew it written in the pure and naked property of words , that the father is unbegotten , or impassible . and then he tells arrius , that when he went about to prove this , he should not say , the reason of faith required this , piety teaches it , the consequence from scripture forces me to this profession . i will not allow you , says he , to obtrude these things on me● because you reject me when i bring you such like things , for the profession of the consubstantial . in the end he says , either permit me to prove the consubstantial by consequences , or if you will not , you must deny all those things which you your self grant . and after athanasius had urged this further , probus , that sate judg in the debate , said , neither one nor other could shew all that they believed properly and specially in scripture : therefore he desired they would trifle no longer in such a childish contest , but prove either the one or the other by a just consequence from scripture . in the macedonian controversy against the divinity of the holy ghost , we find this was also their plea ; a hint of it was already mentioned in the conference betwixt maximi●us the arrian bishop , and s. austin , which wehave more fully in st. gregory nazianzen , * who proving the divinity of the holy ghost , meets with that objection of the macedonians , that it was in no place of scripture , to which he answers , some things seemed to be said in scripture that truly are not , as when god is said to sleep ; some things truly are , but are no-where said , as the fathers being unbegotten , which they themselves believed , and concludes that these things are drawn from these things out of which they are gathered , though they be not mentioned in scripture . therefore he upbraids those for serving the letter , and joyning themselves to the wisdom of the jews , and that leaving things , they followed syllables : and shews how valid a good consequence is : as if a man , says he , speaks of a living creature that is reasonable , but mortal ; i conclude it must be a man : do i for that seem to rave ? not at all ; for these words are not more truly his that says them , than his that did make the saying of them necessary : so he infers , that he might without fear believe such things as he either found or gathered from the scriptures , though they either were not at all , or not clearly in the scriptures . we find also in a dialogue between an orthodox and a macedonian , that is in athanasius's works , but believed to be written by maximus , after he had proved by a great many arguments that the attributes of the divine nature , such as the omniscience and omnipresence were ascribed to the holy ghost . in end the macedonian flies to this known refuge , that it was no-where written that he was god , and so challenges him for saying that which was not in scripture . but the orthodox answers , that in the scriptures the divine nature was ascribed to the holy ghost , and since the name follows the nature , he concludes , if the holy ghost did subsist in himself , did sanctifie , and was increated , he must be god whether the other would or not . then he asks , where it was written , that the son was like the father in his essence ? the heretick answers , that the fathers had declared the son consubstantial as to his essence . but the orthodox replies ( which we desire may be well considered ) , were they moved to that from the sense of the scripture , or was it of their own authority or arrogance that they said any thing that was not written . the other confesses it was from the sense of the scripture , that they were moved to it ; from this the orthodox infers , that the sense of the scripture teaches us that an uncreated spirit that is of god , and quickens and sanctifies , is a divine spirit , and from thence he concludes , he is god. thus we see clearly , how exactly the macedonians and these gentlemen agree , and what arguments the fathers furnish us with against them . the nestorian history followed this tract , and we find nestorius both in his letters * to cyril of alexandria , to pope celestin , and in these writings of his that were read in the council of ephesus * , gives that always for his reason of denying the blessed virgin to have been the mother of god , because the scriptures did no-where mention it , but call her always the mother of christ , and yet that general council condemned him for all that ; and his friend john patriarch of antioch earnestly pressed him by his letters not to reject but to use that word , since the sense of it was good , and it agreed with the scriptures ; and it was generally used by many of the fathers , and had never been rejected by any one . this was also eutyches his last refuge * , when he was called to appear before the council at constantinople , he pretended sickness , and that he would never stir out of his monastery ; but being often cited , he said to those that were sent to him , in what scripture were the two natures of christ to be found ? to which they replied , in what scripture was the consubstantial to be found : thus turnning his plea back on himself , as the orthodox had done before on the arrians . eutyches also when he made his appearance , he ended his defence with this , that he had not found that ( to wit , of the two natures ) plainly in the scripture , and that all the fathers had not said it . but for all that , he was condemned by that council which was afterwards ratified by the universal council of chalcedon . yet after this repeated condemnation the eutychians laid not down this plea , but continued still to appeal to the express words of scripture ; which made theodoret write two discourses to shew the unreasonableness of that pretence , they are published in athanasius his works , b among these sermons against hereticks : but most of these are theodoret's , as appears clearly from photius● his account of theodoret's works ; the very titles of them lead us to gather his opinion of this plea : the 12 th discourse , which by photius's account is the 16 th , has this title , to those that say we ought to receive the expression , and not look to the things signified by them , as transcending all men . the 19 th , or according to photius , c the 23 th , is , to those who say we ought to believe simply as they say , and not consider what is convenient or inconvenient . if i should set down all that is pertinent to this purpose , i must set down the whole discourses ; but i shall gather out of them such things as are most proper . he first complains of those who studied to subvert all humane things and would not suffer men to be any longer reasonable , that would receive the words of the sacred writings without consideration , or good direction , not minding the pious scope for which they are written . for if ( as they would have us ) we do not consider what they mark out to us , but simply receive their words , then all that the prophets and apostles have written will prove of no use to those that hear them , for then they will hear with their ears , but not understand with their hearts ; nor consider the consequence of the things that are said , according to the curse in isaias . — and after he had applied this to those who misunderstood that place , the word was made flesh , he adds , shall i hear a saying , and shall i not enquire into its proper meaning , where then is the proper consequence of what is said , or the profit of the hearer ? would they have men changed into the nature of bruits ? if they must only receive the sound of words with their ears , but no fruit in their soul from the ●nderstanding of them . contrariwise did st. paul tell us , they who are perfect have their senses exercised to discern good and evil ; but how can any discern aright if he do not apprehend the meaning of what is said ? and such he compares to beasts , and makes them worse than the clean beasts , who chew the cud ; and , as a man is to consider what meats are set before him , so he must not snatch words strip'd of their meaning , but must carefully consider what is suitable to god , and profitable to us , what is the force of truth , what agrees with the law , or answers to nature ; he must consider the genuineness of faith , the firmness of hope , the sincerity of love , what is liable to no reproach what is beyond envy , and wor●●y of favour ; all which things concur ●word ? pious meditations . and concludes thus , the sum of all is , he that receives any words , and does not consider the meaning of them , how can he understand those that seem to contradict others ? where shall be find a fit answer ? how shall be satisfy those that interrogate him , or defend that which is written ? these passages are out of the first discourse , what follows is out of the second . in the beginning he says , though the devil has invented many grievous doctrines , yet he doubts if any former age brought forth any thing like that then broached . former heres●s had their own proper errors ; but this that was now invented renewed all others , and exceeded all others . which , says he , receives simply what is said , but does not enquire what is convenient , or inconvenient : but shall i believe without judgment , and not enquire what is possible , convenient , decent , acceptable to god , answerable to nature , agreeable to truth , or is a consequence from the scope , or suitable to the mystery , or to piety ; or what outward reward , or inward fruit accompanies it ; or must i reckon on none of these things . but the cause of all our adversaries errors , is , that with their ears they hear words , but have no understanding of them in their hearts ; for all of them ( and names diverse ) 〈◊〉 a trial , that they be not convinced , and at length shews what absurdities must follow on such a method . instancing those places about which the contest was with the arrians , such as these words of christ , the father is greater than i. and shews what apparent contradictions there are , if we do not consider the true sense of places of scripture that seem contradictory , which must be reconciled by finding their true meaning ; and concludes , so we shall either perswade , or overcome our adversary ; so we shall shew that the holy scripture is consonant to its self ; so we shall justly publish the glory of the mystery , and shall treasure up such a full assurance as we ought to have in our souls ; we shall neither believe without the word , nor speak without faith. now i challenge every reader , to consider if any thing can be devised that more formally , and more nervously-overthrows all the pretences brought for this appeal to the express words of scripture . and here i stop ; for though i could carry it further , and shew that other hereticks shrowded themselves under the same pretext : yet i think all impartial readers will be satisfied , when they find this was an artifice of the first four grand heresies ; condemned by the first four general councils . and from all has been said , it is apparent how oft this very pretence has been bafled by universal councils and fathers . yet i cannot leave this with the reader , without desiring him to take notice of a few particulars that deserve to be considered . the first is , that which these gentlemen would impose on us has been the plea of the greatest hereticks have been in the church . those therefore who take up these weapons of hereticks , which have been so oft blunted and broken in their hands ; by the most universal councils , and the most learned fathers of the catholick church , till at length they were laid aside by all men , as unfit for any service , till in this age some jesuits took them up in defence of an often bafled cause , do very unreasonably pretend to the spirit or doctrine of catholicks , since they tread a path so oft beaten by all hereticks , and abhorred by all the orthodox . secondly , we find the fathers always begin their answering this pretence of hereticks , by shewing them how many things they themselves believed , that were no-where written in scripture . and this i believe was all the ground m. w. had for telling us in our conference that st. austin bade the heretick read what he said . i am confident that gentleman is a man of candour and honour , and so am assured he would not have been guilty of such a fallacy , as to have cited this for such a purpose , if he had not taken it on trust from second hands . but he who first made use of it , if he have no other authority of st. austin's , which i much doubt , cannot be an honest man ; who , because st. austin to shew the arrians how unjust it was to ask words for every thing they believed , urges them with this , that they could not read all that they believed themselves , would from that conclude , st. austin thought every article of faith must be read in so many words in scripture . this is such a piece of ingenuity as the jesuits used in the contest about st. austin's doctrine concerning the efficacy of grace : when they cited as formal passages out of st. austin , some of the objections of the semipelagians , which he sets down , and afterwards answers , which they brought without his answers , as his words , to shew he was of their side . but to return to our purpose ; from this method of the fathers we are taught to turn this appeal to express words , back on those who make use of it against us ; and to ask them where do they read their purgatory , sacrifice of the mass , tran●u●●slantiation , the pope's supremacy , with a great many more things in the express words of scripture . thirdly , we see the peremptory answer the fathers agree in , is , that we must understand the scriptures , and draw just consequences from them , and not stand on words or phrases ; but consider things : and from these we are furnished with an excellent answer to every thing of this nature they can bring against us . it is in those great saints , athanasius , hilary , gregory nazianzen , austin , and theodoret , that they will find out answer as , fully and formally , as need be ; and to them we refer our selves . but , fourthly , to improve this beyond the particular occasion that engaged us to all this enquiry , we desire it be considered then when such an objection was made , which those of the church of rome judg is strong to prove ; we must rely on somewhat else than scripture , either on the authority of the church , or on the certainty of tradition . the first councils and fathers had no such apprehension . all considering men , chiefly when they are arguing a nice point , speak upon some hypothesis or opinion with which they are prepossessed , and must certainly discourse consequently to it . to instance it in this particular ; if an objection be made against the drawing consequences from scripture , since all men may be mistaken ; and therefore they ought not to trust their own reasonings . a papist must necessarily upon his hypothesis say , it is true , any man may err , but the whole church , either when assembled in a council with the holy ghost in the midst of them , or when they convey down from the apostles through age to age the tradition of the exposition of the scriptures cannot err , for god will be with them to the end of the world. a protestant must on the other hand , according to his principles , argue , that since man has a reasonable soul in him ; he must be supposed endued with a faculty of making inferences : and when any consequence is apparent to our understandings , we ought and must believe it as much as we do that from which the consequence is drawn . therefore we must not only read , but study to understand the true meaning of scripture : and we have so much the more reason to be assured of what appears to us to be the true sense of the scriptures , if we find the church of god in the purest times , and the fathers believing as we believe . if we should hear two persons that were unknown to us , argue either of these two ways , we must conclude the one is a papist , the other a protestant , as to this particular . now i desire the reader may compare what has been cited from the fathers upon this subject : and see if what they write upon it does not exactly agree with our hypothesis and principles . whence we may very justly draw another conclusion that will go much further than this particular we now examine ; that in seeking out the decision of all controversies , the fathers went by the same rules we go by , to wit , the clear sense of scriptures , as it must appear to every considering mans understanding , backed with the opinion of the fathers that went before them . and thus far have i followed this objection ; and have , as i hope , to every readers satisfaction made it out , that there can be nothing more unreasonable , more contrary to the articles and doctrine of our church , to the nature of the soul of man , to the use and ●nd of words and discourse , to the practice of christ and his apostles , to the constant sense of the primitive church , and that upon full and often renewed contest with hereticks upon this very head : then to impose on us an obligation to read all the articles of our church in the express words of scripture . so that i am confident this will appear to every considering person , the most trifling and pitiful objection that can be offered by men of common sense and reason . and therefore it is hoped , that all persons who take any care of their souls , will examine things more narrowly than to suffer such tricks to pass upon them , or to be shaken by such objections . and if all the scruple these gentlemen have , why they do not joyn in communion with the church of e●gl●nd , lies in this ; we expect they shall find it so entirely satisfied , and removed out of the way , that they shall think of returning back to that church where they had their baptism and christian education , and which is still ready to receive them with open arms , and to restore such as have been over-reached into error and heresy , with the spirit of meekness . to which i pray god of his great mercy dispose both them and all others , who upon these or such like scruples have deserted the purest church upon earth ; and have turned over to a most impure and corrupt society . and let all men say amen . a discourse to shew that it was not only possible to change the belief of the church concerning the manner of christ's presence in the sacrament ; but that it is very reasonable to conclude , both that it might be done , and that it was truly changed . there is only one particular of any importance , that was mentioned in the conference , to which we forgot to make any answer at all , which was spoken by n.n. to this purpose ; how was it possible , or to be imagined that the church of god could ever have received such a doctrine as the belief of transubstantiation , if every age had not received it , and been instructed in it by their fathers , and the age that went before it ? this by a pure forgetfulness was not answered ; and one of these gentlemen took notice of it to me , meeting with me since that time , and desired me to consider what a friend of n. n. has lately printed on this subject , in a letter concerning transubstantiation , directed to a person of honour : in which , a great many pretended impossibilities of any such innovation of the doctrine are reckoned up ; to shew it a thing both inconceivable and unpracticable , to get the faith of the church changed in a thing of this nature . this same plea has been managed with all the advantages possible , both of wit , eloquence , and learning , by mr. arnaud of the sorbon ; but had been so exposed and baffled by mr. claud , who , as he equals the other in learning , eloquence , and wit , so having much the better of him in the cause and truth he vindicates , has so foiled the other in this plea , that he seeing no other way to preserve that high reputation which his other writings , and the whole course of his life had so justly acquired him ; has gone off from the main argument on which they begun , and betaken himself to a long and unprofitable enquiry into the belief of the greek church , since her schisme from the latine church . the contest has been oft renewed , and all the ingenious and learned persons of both sides , have looked on with great expectations . every one must confess , m. arnaud has said all can be said in such a cause ; yet it seems he finds himself often pinched , by the bitter ( i had almost said scurrilous ) reproaches he casts on mr. claud , which is very unbecoming the education and other noble qualities of that great man , whom for his book of frequent communion , i shall ever honour . and it is a thing much to be lamented , that he was taken off from these more useful labours , wherein he was engaged so much to the bettering this age , both in discovering the horrid corruption of the jesuits and other casuists , not only in their speculations about casuistical divinity , but in their hearing confessions , and giving easie absolutions , upon trifling penances , and granting absolutions before the penance was performed , and in representing to us the true spirit of holiness and devotion was in the primitive church . but on the other hand , as mr. claud leaves nothing unsaid in a method fully answerable to the excellence of that truth he defends ; so he answers these reproaches in a way worthy of himself , or rather of christ and the gospel . if those excellent writings were in english , i should need to say nothing to a point that has been so canvassed ; but till some oblige this nation by translating them , i shall say so much on this head , as i hope shall be sufficient to convince every body of the emptiness , weakness and folly of this plea. and first of all , in a matter of fact concerning a change made in the belief of the church , the only certain method of enquiry , is , to consider the doctrine of the church in former ages ; and to compare that with what is now received ; and if we see a difference between these , we are sure there has been a change ; though we are not able to shew by what steps it was made ; nay , though we could not so much as make it appear probable that such a change could be made . to instance this in a plain case , of the change of the english language since the dayes of william the conqueror ; that there has no such swarm of foreigners broke in upon this island , as might change our language : one may then argue thus ; every one speaks the language he heard his parents , his nurses , and others about him speak , when he was a child ; and this he continues to speak all his life , and his children speak as they heard him speak : upon which , a man of wit and phancy might say a great many things , to shew it impossible any such change should ever have been made , as that we now should speak so as not to understand what was said five or six hundred years ago . yet if i find chaucer , or any much ancienter book , so written , that i can hardly make a shift to understand it , from thence , without any further reasoning how this could be brought about , i naturally must conclude our language is altered . and if any man should be so impertinent , as to argue , that could not be ; for children speak as their nurses and parents taught them , i could hardly answer him in patience ; but must tell him it is altered , without more ado . if a child were amused with such pretended impossibilities , i would tell him , that strangers coming among us , and our travelling to parts beyond the seas , made us acquainted with other languages ; and englishmen finding in other tongues , some words and phrases , which they judged more proper than any they had , being also fond of new words , there was an insensible change made in every age , which after five or six ages , is more discernable : just so , if i find most of all the fathers either delivering their opinions clearly in this matter , against the doctrine of the roman church , or saying things utterly inconsistent with it , i am sure there has been a change made ; though i could not shew either the whole progress of it , or so much as a probable account how it could be done . if men were as machines or necessary agents , a certain account might be given of all the events in all ages ; but there are such strange labyrints in the minds of men , that none can trace them by any rational computation of what is likely . there is also such a diversity between men and men , between ages and ages , that he should make very false accounts , that from the tempers and dispositions of men in this age , should conclude what were possible or impossible many years ago . in this age , in which printing gives notice of all things so easily and speedily , and by the laying of stages for the quick and cheap conveying pacquets , and the publishing mercuries , gazettes , and iournals , and the education of almost all persons to read and write letters , and the curiosity by which all people are whetted to enquire into every thing ; the state of mankind is quite altered from what it was before , when few could read or write , but clergy-men ; so that they must be the notaries of all courts ; who continue from that , to be called clerks to this day ; and that some crimes , otherwise capital , were not punished with death , if the guilty person could but read . when people were so ignorant of what was doing about them , when neither printing , nor stages for pacquets , were in being , at least in europe , and when men were fast asleep in their business , without amusing themselves what was doing about them in the world ; it is the most unjust and unreasonable thing in nature , to imagine , that such things as are now next to impossible , were not then not only possible , but easie . so that all such calculations of impossibilities from the state and temper of this age , when applied to the ages before ours , is the most fallacious way of reckoning that can be . for instance , how improbable , or next to impossible , is this following story , that the bishops of the imperial city of the roman empire , whose first true worth , together with the greatness of that city , which was the head and metropolis of the roman empire , got them much esteem and credit in the world , should from small and low beginnings , have crept up to such a height of power , that they were looked on as the head of all power both civil and spiritual ; and that as they overthrew all other ecclesiastical jurisdiction , the bishops of that see engrossing it to themselves : so they were masters of almost all the crowns of europe , and could change governments , raise up , and assist new pretenders , call up by the preachings of some poor beggarly friars , vast armies , without pay , and send them whither they pleased : that they could draw in all the treasure and riches of europe to themselves ; that they brought princes to lie thus at their feet , to suffer all the clergy , who had a great interest in their dominions , by the vast endowments of churches and abbeys , beside the power they had in all families and consciences , to be the sworn subjects of these bishops , and to be exempted from appearing in secular courts , how criminal soever they were ? that all this should be thus brought about without the expence of any vast treasure , or the prevailing force of a conquering army , meerly by a few tricks , that were artificially managed , of the belief of purgatory , the power of absolving , and granting indulgences , and the opinion of their being s. peter's successors , and christ's vicars on earth . and that all this while when on these false colours of impostures in religion , those designs were carried on , the popes were men of the most lewd and flagitious lives possible ; and those who served them in their designs , were become the scandal and scorn of christendom ; and yet in all these attempts , they prevailed for above seven or eight ages . now if any man will go about to prove this impossible , and that princes were alwayes jealous of their authority and their lives , people alwayes loved their money and quiet , bishops alwayes loved their jurisdiction , and all men when they see designs carried on with colours of religion , by men , who in the most publick and notorious instances shew they have none at all , do suspect a cheat , and are not to be wheedled . therefore all this must be but a fable and a forgery , to make the popes and their clergyodious . will not all men laugh at such a person , that against the faith of all history , and the authority of all records , will deny a thing that was set up over all europe for many ages ? if then all this change in a matter that was temporal , against which the secular interests of all men did oppose themselves , was yet successful , and prevailed ; how can any man think it unreasonable , that a speculative opinion might have been brought into the church , by such arts , and so many degrees , that the traces of the change should be lost ? we find there have been many other changes in sacred things , which will seem no less strange and incredible ; but that we are assured whatsoever really has been , may be : and if things full as unaccountable have been brought about , it is absurd to deny that other things might not have run the same fate . it is known that all people are more uneasie to changes in things that are visible , and known to every body , than in things that are speculative , & abstracted , and known and considered but by a few : they are likewise more unwilling to part with things they are in possession of , and reckon their rights , than to suffer new opinions to be brought in among them ; and let their religion swell by additions . for it is undoubted that it is much more easie to imagine how a new opinion should be introduced , than how an ancient practice and right should be taken away . if then it be apparent , that there have been great changes made in the most visible and sensible parts of religious worship , by taking away some of the most ancient customs and rights of the people , over the whole western church , then it cannot be thought incredible , that a new speculative opinion might have by degrees been brought in . this i shall instance in a few particulars . the receiving the chalice in the sacrament , was an ancient constant custom to which all the people had been long used ; and one may very reasonably on this hypothesis , argue , that could not be ; for would the people especially in dark ages , have suffered the cup of the blood of christ to be taken from them , if they had not known that it had been taken from their fathers . upon which it is easie to conceive how many speculative impossibilities an ingenious man may devise ; and yet we know they were got to part with it by degrees ; first , the bread was given dipt in the cup , for an age or two ; and then the people judged they had both together : this step being made , it was easie afterwards to give them the bread undipt , and so the chalice was taken away quite from the laity , without any great opposition , except what was made in bohemia . next to this , let us consider how naturally all men are apt to be fond of their children , and not to suffer any thing to be denied them , by which they conceive they are advantaged : upon which one may reckon , once we are sure it was the universally received custom , for many ages , over the whole latine church , that all children had the eucharist given them immediately after they were baptized . and the rubrick of the roman missal ordered , they should not be suffered to suck after they were baptized , before they had the eucharist given them , except in cases of necessity . this order is believed to be a work of the eleventh century ; so lately was this thought necessary in the roman church . all men know how careful most parents , even such as have not much religion themselves , are , that nothing be wanting about their children ; and it was thought simply necessary to salvation that all persons had the eucharist . how many imaginary difficulties may one imagine might have obstructed the changing this custom ? one would expect to hear of tumults and stirs , and an universal conspiracy of all men to save this right of their children ? yet hugo de sancto victore tells us , how it was wearing out in his time ; and we find not the least opposition made to the taking it away . a third thing , to which it is not easie to apprehend how the vulgar should have consented , was , the denying them that right of nature and nations , that overy body should worship god in a known tongue . in this island , the saxons had the liturgy in their vulgar tongue ; and so it was also overall the world : and from this might not one very justly reckon up many high improbabilities to demonstrate the setting up the worship in an unknown tongue , could never be brought about , and yet we know it was done . in end , i shall name only one other particular , which seems very hard to be got changed , which yet we are sure was changed ; this was , the popular elections of the bishops and clergy , which , as is past dispute , were once in the hands of the people ; and yet they were got to part with them , and that at a time when church-preferments were raised very high in all secular advantages ; so that it may seem strange , they should then have been wrought upon to let go a thing , which all men are naturally inclined to desire an interest in ; and so much the more , if the dignity or riches of the function be very considerable ; and yet though we meet in church-history many accounts of tumults that were in those elections , while they were in the peoples hands ; yet i remember of no tumults made to keep them , when they were taken out of their hands . and now i leave it to every readers conscience , if he is not perswaded by all the conjectures he can make of mankind , that it is more hard to conceive , how these things , that have been named , of which the people had clear possession , were struck out , than that a speculative opinion , how absurd soever , was brought in , especially in such ages as these were , in which it was done . this leads me to the next thing , which is , to make some reflexions on those ages , in which this doctrine crept into the church . as long as the miraculous effusion of the holy ghost continued in the church , the simplicity of those that preached the gospel , was no small confirmation of that authority that accompanied them ; so that it was more for the honour of the gospel , that there were no great scholars or disputants to promote it : but when that ceased , it was necessary the christian religion should be advanced by such rational means as are suitable to the soul of man : if it had begun only upon such a foundation , men would not have given it a hearing ; but the miracles which were at first wrought , having sufficiently allarm'd the world , so that by them were inclined to hearken to it : then it was to be tried by those rules of truth and goodness , which lie engraven on all mens souls . and therefore it was necessary , those who defended it , should both understand it well , and likewise know all the secrets of heathenism , and of the greek philosophy . a knowledge in these being thus necessary , god raised up among the philosophers divers great persons , such as justin , clement , origen , and many others , whose minds being enlightned with the knowledge of the gospel , as well as endued with all other humane learning , they were great supports to the christian religion . afterwards many heresies being broached about the mysteries of the faith , chiefly those that relate to the son of god , and his incarnation , upon which followed long contests : for managing these , a full understanding of scripture was also necessary ; and that set all persons mightily to the study of the scriptures . but it is not to be denied , great corruptions did quickly break in , when the persecutions were over ; and the church abounded in peace and plenty ; not but that the doctrine was preserved pure long after that : there were also many shining lights , and great fathers , in that and in the following age ; yet from the fathers of these two ages , and from the great disorders were in some of their councils , as in the case of athanasiaus , and the second ephesin council , we may clearly see how much they were degenerating from the primitive purity . many contests were about the precedency of their sees , great ambition and contention appeared in their synods , which made nazianzen hate and shun them , expecting no good from them . these and such like things brought very heavy judgments and plagues on the church , and the whole roman empire , in the fifth century : for vast swarms of armies out of germany and the northern nations brake in upon the western empire , and by a long succession of new invaders all was sackt and ruined . the goths were followed by the vandals , the alains , the gepides , the franks , the sweves , the huns , and in the end the lombards . those nations were for the greatest part arrians , but all were barbarous and rude ; and their hatred of the faith , joyned to the barbarity of their tempers , set them with a strange fury on destroying the most sacred things . and to that we owe the loss of most of the primitive writings , and of all the authentical records of the first persecutions ; scarce any thing remaining , but what eusebius had before gathered together out of a former destruction was made of such things under diocletian . nor did the glory of the eastern empire long survive the western , that fell before these invaders : but in europe , by the impression of the bulgars ; and in asia , by the conquests made , first by the saracens , then by the turks , their greatness was soon broken ; though it lasted longer under that oppressed condition , than the other had done . thus was both the greek and the latine church brought under sad oppression and much misery . and every body knows , that the natural effect that state of life brings over the greatest minds , when there is no hope of getting from under it , is to take them off from study and learning ; and indeed to subdue their spirits as well as their bodies . and so it proved , for after that , an ignorance and dulness did to that degree overspread all europe , that it is scarce to be expressed . i do not deny , but there might be some few instances of considerable men , giving an allowance for the time they lived in . for the laity , they were bred up to think of nothing but to handle their arms , very few could so much as read ; and the clergy were not much better , read they could , but in many that was all ; a corrupt latin they understood , which continued to be the vulgar tongue in italy a great while after : they had heard of greek and hebrew , but understood them as little , as we do the mexican or peruvian tongue . they had scarce any knowledge of the greek fathers , a few very ill translations of some of them was all they had . the latin fathers were read by some of the more learned , but for any distinct understanding of scriptures , or the natures of things , god knows they had it not . i design a short discourse , and therefore shall not stay to make this out , which every body that has but looked a little on the writings of these ages , knows to be true . another effect of their ignorance was , that they were easily imposed on by supposititious writings , that went under the names of the fathers , but were none of theirs . gelasius threw out a great many that were breaking out in his time , but the trade was prosperous , and went on to that height , that it cost the criticks of these two last ages much pains to distinguish true from forged , and the genuine from what was interpolated . and indeed the popes were much beholden to the forgery of the decretal epistles , in which work a great many epistles were published by isidore in the eighth century , as the epistles of the popes of the first four centuries after christ : by which they were represented as giving orders , and making definitions over the whole church in a full form , and with the stile of an absolute authority . these were rejected by many , but mightily supported by all the flatterers of the court of rome ; so that they were in the end after some contest generally received , and held presidents to the succeeding popes , who wrote very skilfully after that copy . many other forgeries were also much cherished , which i shall instance only in one other particular , that relates to what is now in my eye . a sermon of arnold of bonneval ( which is now proved clearly to be his ) was published in st. cyprian's works as his sermon of the supper of our lord , though this arnold lived about nine hundred years after him . now such a sermon being generally read as st. cyprian's , no wonder it gave that doctrine of transubstantiation great credit . these writings are now discovered to be such forgeries , that all considering men of their own church are ashamed of them , and disown them . so do baronius and bellarmin the decretals ; and sirmondus , launnoy , and many more , reject other forgeries . yet here is a high pitch of impudence that most of all their writers of controversie are guilty of , to cite these very writings ( which are now universally agreed to be spurious ) still under those great names , which forgery gave them . as the author of that letter about transubstantiation , cites a passage from st. cyprian's sermon de coena domini , though it is agreed to by sixtus senensis , possevin , bellarmin , raynaud , and labbe , to be none of his ; and the publishers of the office of the sacrament , in the table at the end of it , acknowledge it was written by arnold of bonneval , a friend of st. bernard's . after these authorities it is indeed strange , that such sophisticated stuff should be over and over again offered to us . and it was no wonder , such forgeries were generally received , when that church gave them such authority , as to take many lessons out of the most spurious legends and put them in their breviary . of all these dark ages , the tenth was certainly the midnight of the church : we have scarce any writer for that whole age , so that it is generally called the iron age , an age of darkness and wickedness ; and therefore a very fit time for superstition and errour to work in . and thence we may well infer , that in ages that were so exceeding ignorant , and in which men scarce thought of religion , it was no hard thing to get any errour received and established . but this is not all . these were also ages of great licentiousness and disorder ; for though the barbarous nations were afterwards converted to the orthodox faith , ( though by the way it were easie to shew these conversions had nothing like the first conversion of the world to christianity in them ) yet their barbarity remained with them , and the churchmen became so corrupt and vicious , that they could not have a face to reprove them for those vices , of which themselves were scandalously guilty . from the sixth century downward what a race of men have the popes been ? chiefly in the ninth and tenth century . and indeed any religion that remained in the world had so retired into cloysters and monasteries , that very little of it remained . these houses were seminaries of some devotion , while they were poor and busied at work , according to their first foundation ; but when they were well endowed , and became rich , they grew a scandal to all christendom . all the primitive discipline was laid down , children were put into the highest preferments of the church , and simony over-run the church . these are matters of fact , that cannot be so much as questioned , nor should i , if put to prove them , seek authorities for them any where else than in baronius ; who , for all his design to serve the interest of that church , yet could not prevaricate so far , as to conceal things that are so openly and uncontestedly true . now from the darkness and corruption of these ages , i presume to offer some things to the readers consideration . first , ignorance alwayes inclines people to be very easie to trust those , in whom they have confidence ; for being either unwilling to trouble themselves with painful and sollicitous enquiries , or unable to make them , they take things on trust , without any care to search into them . but this general maxim must needs be much more certain , when subjection to the church , and the belief of every thing established , was made a very substantial part of religion , or rather that alone which might compense all other defects . secondly , ignorance naturally inclines people to superstition , to be soon wrought on , and easily amused , to be full of fears , and easie to submit to any thing that may any way overcome these fears . a right sense of god and divine matters , makes one have such a taste of religion , that he is not at all subject to this distemper , or rather monster , begotten by the unnatural commixture of some fear of god and love of sin , both being disordered by much ignorance ; hence sprang most of the idolatrous rites of heathenism , and all people so tempered are fit for the like humour to work upon . thirdly , the interests of church-men , led them mightily to study the setting this opinion on foot . this alone set them as high , as mortal men could be , and made them appear a most sacred sort of a creature . all the wonders of the prophets and apostles were but sorry matters to it : what was moses calling for manna from heaven and water from the rock ? elija's bringing sometimes fire and sometimes rain from heaven ? what were the apostles raising the dead , giving sight to the blind , and feet to the lame ? to the annihilating the substance of bread and wine , and bringing in their stead , not some other common matter , but the flesh and blood of the ever-blessed jesus . he who could do this , no wonder he were reverenced , enriched , secure from all danger , exempt from all civil jurisdiction , and cherished with all imaginable respect and kindness . so that it is no strange thing , that churchmen were much inclined to favour an opinion , that favoured their interests so much . fourthly , the churchmen of these ages were very likely to be easily drawn to any thing , which might so much advance their designs ; that were grown very high , especially from the days of pope gregory the great . they were struggling with the civil powers for dominion , and pursued that for many years , and spared neither labour nor the lives of men to attain it . and it is not to be thought , but men who did prodigally throw away many thousands in a quarrel , would without very nice disputing , cherish any opinion that might contribute toward that end . and as this was of great use to them , so they very much needed both it , and all such like shifts ; for they had none of that sublime sanctity , nor high learning , or lofty eloquence , which former churchmen had , and by which they had acquired great esteem in the world. now the churchmen in these days , having a great mind to preserve or rather to encrease that esteem ; but wanting those qualities which on a reasonable account might have acquired it , or preserved it , must needs think of somewhat else to do it by ; and so found out many arts for it , such as the belief of purgatory , the priestly absolution upon confession , together with the reserved cases , indulgences , and the popes power of taking souls out of purgatory . and if it be not full as unreasonable , to think the pope should be believed vested with a power of pardoning sin , and redeeming from purgatory , as that transubstantiation should have been received , let any man judge . fifthly , there was such a vast number of agents and emissaries sent from rome , to all the parts of europe , to carry on their designs , that we can hardly think it possible any thing could have withstood them . in such ages , by giving some terrible name to any thing , it was presently disgraced with the vulgar ; a clear instance of this was the fate of the married clergy . gregory the seventh , who as cardinal benno ( who knew him ) represents him , was one of the worst men that ever was born , and first set on foot the popes pretensions to the civil authority , and the power of deposing princes , and putting others in their places ; did prosecute the married clergy with great vehemency . this he could not do on any pious or chaste account , being so vile a man as he was : but being resolved to bring all princes to depend on him , there was no way so like to attain that , as to have all the clergy absolutely subject to him : this could not be hoped for , while they were married , and that the princes and several states of europe had such a pawn of their fidelity , as their wives and children ; therefore because the persons of the clergy were accounted sacred , and liable to no punishment , that there might be nothing so nearly related to them , wherein they might be punished , as their wives and children , he drave this furiously on ; and to give them some ill favoured name , called them nicolaitans , which are represented in the revelation so vile and odious . this was the most unjust thing in the world : they might have called them pharisees or sadducees as well , for all the ancient writers tell us , that nicolas having a beautiful wife was jealous , and the apostles challenging him of it , he said , he was so far from it , that he was willing to make her common , and thence some set up the community of wives , and were from him called the nicolaitans . but because women and marriage were in the case , and it was a hateful word , this was the name by which the married clergy were every where made so odious ; and though it was much the interest of princes to have had the marriage of the clergy to be left free , yet the popes were too hard for them in it . thus were the agents of rome able to prevail in every thing they set themselves to . so the opposers of this doctrine were called by the hateful names of stercoranists and panites . sixthly , when all religion was placed in externals , and splendid rites and ceremonies came to be generally looked on as the whole business of religion , peoples minds were by that much disposed to receive anything , that might introduce external pomp and grandeur into their churches ; being willing to make up in an outward appearance of worshipping the person of christ , what was wanting in their obedience to his gospel . and now i appeal to any honest man , if upon the suppositions i have laid down , it be at all an unaccountable thing , that a great company of ignorant and debauched clergymen , should set themselves to cherish and advance a belief , which would redeem them from all the infamy their other vices were ready to bring upon them ; and they resolving on it , if it was hard for them , especially in a course of some ages , to get an ignorant , credulous , superstitious , and corrupt multitude , to receive it without much noise or adoe . i believe no man will deny , but upon these suppositions the thing was very like to succeed . now that all these suppositions are true ( to wit ) that both clergy and laity in those ages , chiefly in the ninth , tenth , and eleventh centuries , were ignorant , and vicious to the height ; is a thing so generally known , and so universally confessed by all their own historians , that i hardly think any man will have brow enough to deny it . but there are many other things , which will also shew how possible , nay feasible such a change may be . first , this having never been condemned by a formal decision in any former age , it was more easie to get it brought in ; for no council or father could condemn or write against any errour , but that which was maintained or abetted by some man , or company of men , in or before their time . since then this had not been broached in the former ages , the promoters of it had this advantage , that no former decision had been made against them ; for none ever thought of condemning any heresie before it had a being . secondly , this errour did in the outward found agree with the words of the institution , and the forms used in the former liturgies , in which the elements were said to be changed into the true and undefiled body of christ. a doctrine then that seemed to establish nothing contrary to the ancient liturgies , might easily have been received , in an age , in which the outward sound and appearance was all they looked to . thirdly , the passage from the believing any thing in general , with an indistinct and confused apprehension , to any particular way of explaining it , is not at all hard to be conceived , especially in an age , that likes every thing the better , the more mysterious it seem . in the preceding ages , it was in general received , that christ was in the sacrament , and that by the consecration the elements were changed into his body and blood. and although many of the fathers did very formally explain in what sense christ was present , and the elements were changed , yet there having been no occasion given to the church , to make any formal decision about the manner of it , every one thought he was left at liberty to explain it as he pleased . and we may very reasonably suppose , that many did not explain it at all , especially in these ages , in which there was scarce any preaching or instructing the people . by this means the people did believe christ was in the sacrament , and that the elements were changed into his body and blood , without troubling themselves to examin how it was , whether spiritually or corporally . things being brought to this , in these ages , by the carelesness of the clergy , the people were by that , sufficiently disposed to believe any particular manner of that presence , or change , their pastors might offer to them . fourthly , there being no visible change made in any part of the worship ; when this doctrine was first brought in , it was easie to innovate , in these ages , in which people looked only at things that were visible and sensible : had they brought in the adoration , processions , or other consequences of this doctrine along with it , it was like to have made more noise ; for people are apt to be startled when they see any notable change in their worship : but this belief was first infufed in the people , and berengarius was condemned . the council of lateran had also made the decree about it , before ever there were any of these signal alterations attempted . and after that was done , then did honorius decree the adoration ; and urban the fourth , upon some pretended visions of eve julian , and isabella , did appoint the feast of the body of christ , called now generally , the feast of god , or corpus christi feast ; which was confirmed by pope clement the fifth , in the council of vienna ; and ever since that time they have been endeavouring by all the devices possible ; to encrease the devotion of the people to the hoft . so that mr. arnaud in many places acknowledges they are most gross idolaters if their doctrine be not true , which i desire may be well considered , since it is the opinion of one of the most considering and wisest , and most learned persons of that communion , who has , his whole life set his thoughts chiefly to the examining of this sacrament , and knows as well as any man alive , what is the real sense of the worshippers in that church . but to return to that i am about , it is very unreasonable to think that the people in those dark ages , did concern themselves in the speculative opinions were among divines , so that the vulgar could not busie themselves about it , but when this opinion was decreed , and generally received and infused in the laity , for almost one age together , then we need not wonder to see notable alterations following upon it , in their worship , without any opposition or contest ; for it was very reasonable such consequences should have followed such a doctrine . but that before that time there was no adoration of the elements , is a thing so clear , that it is impudence to deny it ; there was no prostration of the body , or kneeling to be made , either on lords dayes , or all the time between easter and pentecost , by the twentieth canon of the council of nice . none of the ancient liturgies do so much as mention it ; but the contrary is plainly insinuated by s. cyril of ierusalem . none of that great number of writers about divine offices , that lived in the seventh , eighth , ninth and tenth centuries , published by hittorpius , so much as mention it : though they be very particular in giving us an account of the most inconsiderable parts of the divine offices , and of all the circumstances of them , honorius when he first decreed it , does not alledge presidents for it ; but commands the priests to tell the people to do it ; whereas , if it had been appointed before , he must rather have commanded the priests to have told the people of their sacrilegious contempt of the body of christ , notwithstanding the former laws and practice of the church : but it is apparent his way of enjoyning it , is in the style of one that commands a new thing , and not that sets on the execution of what was formerly used : yet this was more warily appointed by honorius , who enjoyned only an inclination of the head to the sacrament ; but it was set up bare faced by his successor gregory the ninth , who appointed ( as the historians tell us , though it be not among his decretals ) a bell to be rung , to give notice at the consecration and elevation , that all who heard it , might kneel , and joyn their hands in adoring the host. so that any passages of the fathers that speak of adoration or veneration to the sacrament , must either be understood of the inward adoration the communicant offers up to god the father , and his blessed son , in the commemoration of so great a mystery of love , as appeared in his death , then represented and remembred . or these words are to be taken in a large sense , and so we find , they usually called the gospels , their bishops , baptism , the pascha , and almost all other sacred things , venerable . and thus from many particulars it is apparent , that the bringing in the doctrine of transubstantiation is no unaccountable thing . but i shall pursue this yet further , for the readers full satisfaction , and shew the steps by which this doctrine was introduced . we find in the church of corinth the receiving the sacrament was looked on , but as a common entertainment , and was gone about without great care or devotion , which s. paul charges severely on them ; and tells them what heavy judgments had already fallen on them , for such abuses , and that heavier ones might be yet looked for , since they were guilty of the body and blood of the lord , by their unworthy receiving . upon this the whole christian church was set to consider , in very good earnest , how to prepare themselves aright for so holy an action ; and the receiving the sacrament , as it was the greatest symbole of the love of christians , so it was the end of all penitence , that was enjoyned for publick or private sins , but chiefly for apostacy , or the denying the faith , and complying with idolatry in the times of persecution . therefore the fathers considering both the words of the institution , and s. paul's epistle to the corinthians , did study mightily to awaken all to great preparation and devotion , when they received the sacrament . for all the primitive devotion about the sacrament , was only in order to the receiving it ; and that modern worship of the church of rome , of going to hear mass without receiving , was a thing so little understood by them , that as none were suffered to be present in the action of the mysteries , but those who were qualified to receive ; so if any such had gone out of the church without participating , they were to be separated from the communion of the church , as the authors of disorder in it . upon this subject the fathers employed all their eloquence ; and no wonder , if we consider that it is such a commemoration of the death of christ as does really communicate to the worthy receiver his crucified body , and his blood that was shed ( mark , not his glorified body , as it is now in heaven ) which is the fountain and channel of all other blessings , but is only given to such ; as being prepared according to the rules of the gospel , sincerely believe all the mysteries of faith , and live suitably to their belief . both the advantages of worthy receiving , and the danger of unworthy receiving being so great , it was necessary for them to make use of all the faculties they had , either for awakening reverence and fear , that the contemptible elements of bread and wine , might not bring a cheapness and disesteem upon these holy mysteries , or for perswading their communicants to all serious and due preparation , upon so great an occasion . this being then allowed , it were no strange thing , though in their sermons , or other devout treatises , they should run out to meditations that need to be mollified with that allowance that must be given to all panegyricks or perswasives : where many things are always said , that if right understood , have nothing in them to startle any body , but if every phrase be examined grammatically , there would be many things found in all such discourses , that would look very hideously . is it not ordinary in all the festivities of the church , as s. austin observed on this very occasion , to say , this day christ was born , or died , or rose again in 〈◊〉 and yet that must not be taken literally . beside , when we hear or read any expressions that sound high or big , we are to consider the ordinary stile of him that uses these expressions ; for if upon all other occasions he be apt to rise high in his figures , we may the less wonder at some excesses of his stile . if then such an orator as s. chrysostome was , who expatiates on all subjects , in all the delighting varieties of a fertile phancy , should on so great a subject , display all the beauties of that ●avishing art in which he was so great a master , what wonder is it . therefore great allowances must be made in such a case . further , we must also consider the tempers of those to whom any discourse is addressed . many things must be said in another manner to work on novices , or weak persons , than were fit or needful for men of riper and stronger understandings . he would take very ill measures , that would judge of the future state , by these discourses in which the sense of that is infused in younger or weaker capacities ; therefore though in some catechismes that were calculated for the understandings of children and novices , such as s. cyril's , there be some high expressions used , it is no strange thing ; for naturally all men on such occasions , use the highest and biggest words they can invent . but we ought also to consider , what persons have chiefly in their eye , when they speak to any point : for all men , especially when their fancies are inflamed with much fervor , are apt to look only to one thing at once ; and if a visible danger appear of one side , and none at all on the other , then it is natural for every one to exceed on that side , where there is no danger . so that the hazard of a contempt of the sacrament being much and justly in their eye , and they having no cause to apprehend any danger on the other side , of excessive adoring or magnifying it : no wonder , if in some of their discourses , an immoderate use of the counterpoise , had inclined them to say many things of the sacrament , that require a fair and candid interpretation . yet after all this , they say no more , but that in the sacrament they did truly and really communicate on the body and blood of christ ; which we also receive and believe . and in many other treatises , when they are in colder blood , examining things , they use such expressions and expositions of this , as no way favour the belief of transubstantiation ; of which we have given some account in a former paper . but though that were not so formally done , and their writings were full of passages that needed great allowances , it were no more than what the fathers that wrote against the arrians , confess the fathers before the council of nice , were guilty of ; who writing against sabellius , with too much vehemence , did run to the opposite extream . so many of s. cyril's passages against nestorius , were thought to favour eutychianism . so also theodoret , and two others , writing against the eutychians , did run to such excesses , as drew upon them the condemnation of the fifth general council . the first time we find any contestor canvassing about the sacrament , was in the controversie about images , in the eighth century , that the council of constantinople , in the condemning of images , declared , there was no other image of christ to be received , but the blessed sacrament ; in which , the substance of bread and wine was the image of the body and blood of christ ; making a difference between that which is christs body by nature , and the sacrament , which is his body by institution . now it is to be considered , that , whatever may be pretended of the violence of the greek emperors over-ruling that council in the matter of condemning images ; yet there having been no contest at all about the sacrament , we cannot in reason think they would have brought it into the dispute , if they had not known these two things were the received doctrine of the church : the one , that in the sacrament , the substance of bread and wine did remain ; the other , that the sacrament was the image or figure of christ ; and from thence they acknowledged , all images were not to be rejected , but denied any other images besides that in the sacrament . now the second council of nice , being resolved to quarrel with them as much as was possible , doe not at all condemn them for that which is the chief testimony for us ( to wit ) that the sacrament was still the substance of bread and wine ; and damascene , the zealous defender of images , clearly insinuates his believing the substance of bread and wine remained , and did nourish our bodies . let it be therefore considered , that when that council of nice was in all the bitterness imaginable canvassing every word of the council of constantinople , they never once blame them for saying , the substance of bread and wine was in the sacrament . it is true , they condemned them for saying the sacrament was the image of christ , denying that any of the fathers had called it so ; alledging that the symboles were called antitypes by the fathers , only before the consecration , and not after ; in which they followed damascene , who had fallen in the same errour before them . but this is so manifest a mistake in matter of fact , that it gives a just reason for rejecting the authority of that council , were there no more to be said against it : for this was either very gross ignorance , or effronted impudence , since in above twenty fathers that were before them , the sacrament is called the figure and antitype of christ's body ; and at the same time , that damascene , who was then looked on as the great light of the east , did condemn the calling the sacrament , the figure of christ's body . the venerable bede , that was looked on as the great light of the west , did according to the stile of the primitive church , and in s. austin's words , call it , the figure of christ's body . i shall not trace the other forgeries and follies of that pretended general council , because i know a full account of them is expected from a better pen ; only in this particular i must desire the reader to take notice , that the council of constantinople did not innovate any thing in the doctrine about the sacrament ; and did use it as an argument in the other controversie concerning images , without any design at all about the eucharist . but on the other hand , the second council of nice did innovate and reject a form of speech , which had been universally received in the church , before their time ; and being engaged with all possible spight against the council of constantinople , resolved to contradict every thing they had said , as much as could be : so that in this we ought to look on the council of constantinople , as delivering what was truly the tradition of the church , and on the second council of nice , as corrupting it . about thirty years after that council , paschase radbert abbot of corbie , wrote about the sacrament , and did formally assert the corporal presence , in the ninth century . the greatest patrons of this doctrine , such as bellarmine and sirmondus , both jesuites , confess , he was the first that did fully and to purpose explain the verity of christ's body and blood in the eucharist . and paschase himself , in his letter to his friend frudegard , regrates that he was so slow in believing and assenting to his doctrine ; and does also acknowledge , that by his book he had moved many to the understanding of that mystery ; and it is apparent by that letter , that not only frudegard , but others were scandalized at his book , for he writes , i have spoken of these things more fully , and more expresly , because i understand that some challenge me , that in the book i have published of the sacraments of christ , i have ascribed either more or some other thing than is consonant to truth , to the words of our lord. of all the writers of that age , or near it , only one ( and his name we know not , the book being anonymous ) was of paschase's opinion . but we find all the great men of that age were of another mind , and did clearly assert , that in the sacrament , the substance of bread and wine remained , and did nourish our bodies as other meats do . these were rabanus maur●s , archbishop of mentz , amalarius , archbishop of treves , or as others say , metz , heribald , bishop of auxerre , bertram , iohn scot erigena , walafridus strabo , florus and christian druthmar . and three of these set themselves on purpose to refute paschase . the anonymous writer that defends him , sayes , that raban did dispute at length against him in an epistle to abbot egilon , for saying it was that body that was born of the virgin , and was crucified , and raised again , that was daily offered for the life of the world. that is also condemned by raban in his penitential , cap. 33. who refers his reader to that epistle to abbot egilon . and for bertram , he was commanded by charles the bald , then emperor , to write upon that matter , which in the beginning of his book he promises to do , not trusting to his own wit , but following the steps of the holy fathers . it is also apparent by his book , that there were at that time different perswasions about the body of christ in the sacrament ; some believing it was there without any figure ; others saying , it was there in a figure and mystery . upon which he apprehended , there must needs follow a great schism . and let any read paschase's book , and after that bertram's , and if he have either honesty , or at least , shame remaining in him , he must see it was in all points the very same controversie that was canvassed then between them , and is now debated between the church of rome and us . now that raban and bertram were two of the greatest and most learned men of that age , cannot be denied : raban passes without contest amongst the first men of the age ; and for bertram , we need neither cite what trithemius sayes of him , nor what the disciples of s. austin , in the port-royal , have said to magnifie him , when they make use of him to establish the doctrine of the efficacy of grace . it is a sufficient evidence of the esteem he was in , that he was made choice of by the bishop of france , to defend the latine church against the greeks ; and upon two very important controversies that were moved in that age ; the one being about predestination and grace , the other , that which we have now before us , he , though a private monk , raised to no dignity , was commanded by the emperor to write of both these ; which no man can imagine had been done , if he had not been a man much famed and esteemed ; and way in which he writes , is solid and worthy of the reputation he had acquired : he proves both from the words of institution , and from s. paul , that the sacrament was still bread and wine . he proves from s. austin , that these were mysteries and figures of christ's body and blood. and indeed considering that age , he was an extraordinary writer . the third that did write against paschase , was iohn scot , otherwise called erigena , who was likewise commanded to write about the sacrament , by that same emperor . he was undoubtedly the most learned and ingenious man of that age , as all our english historians tell us ; chiefly william of malmsbury : he was in great esteem both with the emperor , and our great king alfred . he was accounted a saint and a martyr ; his memory was celebrated by an anniversary on the tenth of november . he was also very learned in the greek , and other oriental tongu●s , which was a rare thing in that age. this erigena did formally refute paschase's opinion & assert ours . it is true , his book is now lost , being 200 years after burned by the c. of vercel ; but though the church of lyons does treat him very severely in their book against him , and fastens many strange opinions upon him , in which there are good grounds to think they did him wrong ; yet they no where chalenge him for what he wrote about the sacrament ; which shews they did not condemn him for that ; though they speak of him with great animosity , because he had written against predestination and grace efficacious of it self , which they defended . it seems most probable that it was from his writings , that the homily read at easter by the saxons here in england , does so formally contradict the doctrine of transubstantiation . and now let the reader judge , if it be not clear that paschase did innovate the doctrine of the church in this point , but was vigorously opposed by all the great men of that age. for the following age , all historians agree , it was an age of most prodigious ignorance and debauchery , and that amongst all sorts of people , none being more signally vicious than the clergy ; and of all the clergy , none so much as the popes , who were such a succession of monsters , that baronius cannot forbear making the saddest exclamations possible concerning their cruelties , debaucheries , and other vices : so that , then , if at any time , we may conclude all were asleep , and no wonder if the tares paschase had sown , did grow up ; and yet of the very few writings of the age that remain , the far greater number seem to favour the doctrine of bertram . but till berengarius his time , we hear nothing of any contest about the eucharist . so here were two hundred years spent in an absolute ignorance and forgetfulness of all divine things . about the middle of the 11th . cent. bruno bishop of angiers , and berengarius , who was born in towrs , but was arch-deacon and treasurer of the church of angiers , did openly teach , that christ was in the sacrament only in a figure . we hear little more of bruno ; but berengarius is spoken of by many historians , as a man of great learning and piety , and that when he was cited to the council at rome , before nicolaus the second , none could resist him ; that he had an excellent faculty of speaking , and was a man of great gravity ; that he was held a saint by many : he did abound in charity , humility , and good works , and was so chast , that he would not look at a beautiful woman . and hildebert bishop of mans , whom s. bernard commends highly , made such an epitaph on him , that notwithstanding all the abatements we must make for poetry , yet no man could write so of an ordinary person . this berengarius wrote against the corporal presence , calling it a stupidity of paschase's and lanfrank's , who denied that the substance of bread and wine remained after consecration . he had many followers , as sigebert tells us : and william of malmesbury and matthew paris tell us his doctrine had overspred all france . it were too long to shew with what impudent corrupting of antiquity those who wrote against him , did stuff up their books . divers councils were held against him , and he through fear , did frequently waver ; for when other arguments proved too weak to convince him , then the faggot , which is the sure and beloved argument of that church , prevailed on his fears ; so that he burnt his own book , and signed the condemnation of his own opinion at rome ; this he did , as lanfranke upbraids him , not for love of the truth , but for fear of death : which shewes he had not that love of the truth , and constancy of mind he ought to have had . but it is no prejudice against the doctrine he taught , that he was a man not only subject to , but overcome by so great a temptation ; for the fear of death is natural to all men . and thus we see , that in the ninth century our doctrine was taught by the greatest writers of that time , so that it was then generally received , and not at all condemned either by pope or council . but in the eleventh century , upon its being defended , it was condemned . can there be therefore any thing more plain , than that there was a change made , and that what in the one age was taught by a grea number of writers , without any censure upon it , was in another age anathematized ? is there not then here a clear change ? and what has been done , was certainly possible , from whence we conclude with all the justice and reason in the world , that a change was not only possible , but was indeed made . and yet the many repeated condemnations of berengarius , shew , his doctrine was too deeply rooted in the minds of that age , to be very easily suppressed ; for to the end of the eleventh century , the popes continued to condemn his opinions , even after his death . in the beginning of the twelfth century , honorius of autun , who was a considerable man in that age , did clearly assert the doctrine of the sacraments nourishing our bodies , and is acknowledged by thomas waldensis , to have been a follower of berengarius his heresie . and about the eighteenth year of that age , that doctrine was embraced by great numbers in the south of france , who were from their several teachers called petrobrusians , henricians , waldenses , and from the countrey , where their numbers were greatest , albigenses ; whose confession , dated the year 1120 , bears , that the eating of the sacramental bread , was the eating of iesus christ in a figure ; jesus christ having said , as oft as ye do this , do it in remembrance of me . it were needless to engage in any long account of these people ; the writers of those times have studied to represent them in as hateful and odious characters , as it was possible for them to devise ; and we have very little remaining that they wrote . yet as the false witnesses that were suborned to lay heavy things to our blessed saviour's charge , could not agree among themselves ; so for all the spite with which these writers prosecute those poor innocents , there are such noble characters given , even by these enemies , of their piety , their simplicity , their patience , constancy , and other virtues ; that as the apologists for christianity , do justly glory in the testimonies pliny , lucian , tacitus , iosephus , and other declared enemies give ; so any that would study to redeem the memory of those multitudes , from the black aspersions of their foul-mouthed enemies , would find many passages among them to glory much in , on their behalf , which are much more to be considered than those virulent calumnies with which they labour to blot their memories : but neither the death of peter de bruis , who was burnt , nor all the following cruelties , that were as terrible as could be invented by all the fury of the court of rome , managed by the inquisitions of the dominicans , whose souls were then as black as their garments , could bear down or extinguish that light of the truth , in which what was wanting in learning , wit , or order , was fully made up in the simplicity of their manners , and the constancy of their sufferings . and it were easie to shew , that the two great things they were most persecuted for , were their refusing subjection to the see of rome , and their not believing the doctrine of the corporal presence ; nor were they confined to one corner of france only , but spred almost all europe over . in that age steven bishop in edue● is the first i ever find cited to have used the word transubstantiation , who expressly sayes , that the oblation of bread and wine is transubstantiated into the body and blood of christ : some place him in the beginning , some in the middle of that age ; for there were two bishops of that see , both of the same name ; the one , anno 1112. the other , 1160. and which of the two it was , is not certain ; but the master of the sentences was not so positive , and would not determine , whether christ was present formally , substantially , or some other way . but in the beginning of the thirteenth century , one amalric ; or almaric , who was in great esteem for learning , did deny transubstantiation , saying , that the body of christ was no more in the consecrated bread , than in any other bread , or any other thing ; for which he was condemned in the fourth council of lateran , and his body , which was buried in paris , was taken up and burnt ; and then was it decreed , that the body and blood of christ were truly contained under the kinds ( or species ) of bread and wine , the bread being transubstantiated into the body , and the wine into the blood. all the while this doctrine was carried on , it was managed with all the ways possible , that might justly create a prejudice against them who set it forward ; for besides many ridiculous lying wonders , that were forged to make it more easily believed by a credulous and superstitious multitude , the church of rome did discover a cruelty and blood-thirstiness which no pen is able to set out to the full . what burnings and tortures , and what croiss●des as against infidels and mahumetans , did they set on against those poor innocent companies , whom they with an enraged , wolvish and barbarous bloodiness studied to destroy ? this was clearly contrary to the laws of humanity , the rules of the gospel , and the gentleness of christ : how then could such companies of wolves pretend to be the followers of the lamb. in the primitive church , the bishops that had prosecuted the priscillanists before the emperor maximus , to the taking away their lives were cast out of the communion of the church ; but now did these that still pretended to be christ's vicars , shew themselves in antichrist's colours , dipt in blood . if then any of that church that live among us , plead for pity , and the not executing the laws , and if they blame the severity of the statutes against themselves , let them do as becomes honest men , and without disguise , disown and condemn those barbarities , and them that were the promoters and pursuers of them ; for those practices have justly filled the world with fears and jealousies of them , that how meekly soever they may now whine under the pretended oppression of the laws , they would no sooner get into power , but that old leaven not being yet purged out of their hearts , they would again betake themselves to fire and faggot , as the unanswerable arguments of their church : and so they are only against persecution , because they are not able to persecute ; but were they the men that had the power , it would be again a catholick doctrine and practice : but when they frankly and candidly condemn those practices and principles , they will have somewhat to plead , which will in reason prevail more than all their little arts can do to procure them favour . it was this same council of lateran , that established both cruelty , persecution and rebellion into a law , appointing , that all princes should exterminate all hereticks ( this is the mercy of that church which all may look for , if ever their power be equal to their malice ) and did decree , that if any temporal lord being admonished by the church , did neglect to purge his lands , he should be first excommunicated , and if he continued a year in his contempt & contumacy , notice was to be given of it to the pope , who from that time forth should declare his vassals absolved from the fidelity they owed him , and expose his lands to be invaded by catholicks , who might possess them without any contradiction , having exterminated the hereticks out of them , and so preserve them in the purity of the faith. this decree was made on the account of raimond count of tholouse , who favoured the albigenses , that were his subjects ; and being a peer of france according to the first constitution under hugo capet king of france , was such a prince in his own dominions , as the princes of germany now are . he was indeed the king of france his vassal ; but it is clear from the history of that time , that the king of france would not interpose in that business . yet the popes in this same council of lateran , did by the advice of the council , give to simon montfort ( who was general of the croissade , that the pope sent against that prince ) all the l●nds that were taken from the count of tholouse . so that there was an invasion both of the count of tholouse , and of the king of france his rights . for if that prince had done any thing amiss , he was only accountable to the king , and the other peers of france . this decree of the council is published by dom. luc. dachery ; so that it is plain , that the pope got here a council ●o set up rebellion by authori●y , against the express rules of the gospel , this almost their whole church accounts a general council , a few only among us excepted , who know not how to approve themselves good subjects , if they own that a general council , which does so formally establish treasonable and seditious principles . for if it be true , that a general council making a definition in an article of faith , is to be followed and submitted to by all men , the same arguments will prove that in any controverted practical opinion , we ought not to trust our own reasons , but submit to the definition of the church ; for if in this question a private person shall rest on his own understanding of the scriptures , and reject this decree , why may he not as well in other things assume the same freedom . it is true , the words of the decree seem only to relate to temporal lords , that were under soveraign princes , such as the count of tholouse , and therefore crowned heads need fear nothing from it : but though the decree runs chiefly against such , yet there are two clauses in it that go further , one is in these words , saving alwayes the right of the principal lord , provided he make no obstacle about it , nor cast in any impediment . whence it plainly follows , that if the soveraign , such as the king of france , in the case of tholouse , did make any obstacle , he forfeited his right . the other clause is in these words , the same law being nevertheless observed about those who have no principal lords . in which are clearly included all those soveraigns , who depend and hold their crowns immediately from god. now it is apparent , the design of these words so couched , was once to bring all soveraigns under that lash , before they were aware of it ; for had they named emperors and kings , they might reasonably have expected great opposition from them ; but insinuating it so covertly , it would pass the more easily : yet it is plain , nothing else can be meant , or was intended by it ; so that it is clear , that the fourth council of lateran , as it established transubstantiation , so did also decree both persecution and rebellion : therefore the reader may easily judge , what account is to be made of that council , and what security any state can have of those who adhere to it . our saviour when he states the opposition between the children of god , and the children of the devil , he gives this for the character of the latter , that they did the works of their father ; and these he mentions are lying and murdering : we have seen sufficient evidence of the murdering spirit which acted in that church , when this doctrine was set up . but to compleat that black character , let us but look over to the council of constance , which decreed that bold violation of the command of christ , drink ye all of it ; by taking the chalice from the laity : and there we find perfidy , which is the basest and worst kind of lying , also established by law : for it was decreed by them , that all safe conducts notwithstanding , or by what bonds soever any prince had engaged himself , the council was no way prejudiced , and that the iudge competent might enquire into their errors ; and proceed otherwise duly against them , and punish them according to iustice , if they stubbornly refuse to retract their errours , although trusting to their safe conduct , they had come to the place of iudgment , and had not come without it ; and declare , that whoever had promised any such thing to them , having done what in him lay , was under no further obligation . upon which , sigismund broke his faith to iohn hus and ierome of prague , and they were burnt . so that their church , having in general councils decreed both perfidy and cruelty , it is easie to infer by what spirit they are acted , and whose works they did . if then they did the works of the devil , who was a liar and murderer from the beginning , they cannot be looked on as the children of god , but as the children of the devil . if this seem too severe , it is nothing but what the force of truth draws from me , being the furthest in the world from that uncharitable temper of aggravating things beyond what is just ; but the truth must be heard , and the lamb of god could call the scribes and pharisees , a generation of vipers and children of the devil . therefore if a church be so notoriously guilty of the most infamous violation of all the laws of humanity , and the security which a publick faith must needs give , none is to be blamed for laying open and exposing such a society to the just censure of all impartial persons , that so every one may see what a hazard his soul runs by engaging in the communion of a church that is so foully guilty : for these were not personal failings , but were the decrees of an authority which must be acknowledged by them infallible , if they be true to their own principles . so that if they receive these as general councils , i know not how they can clear all that communion from being involved in the guilt of what they decreed . thus far we hope it hath been made evident enough , that there are no impossibilities in such a change of the doctrine of the church about this sacrament , as they imagine . and that all these are but the effects of wit and fancy , and vanish into nothing when closely canvassed . i have not dwelt so long on every step of the history i have vouched , as was necessary , designing to be as short as was possible , and because these things have been at full length set down by others , and particularly in that great and learned work of albertin a french minister concerning this sacrament ; in which the doctrines of the primitive church and the steps of the change that was made , are so laid open , that no man has yet so much as attempted the answering him : and those matters of fact are so uncontestedly true , that there can be little debate about them , but what may be very soon cleared , and i am ready to make all good to a tittle when any shall put me to it . it being apparent then , that the church of rome has usurped an undue and unjust authority over the other states and nations of christendom , and has made use of this dominion to introduce many great corruptions both in the faith , the worship , and government of the church ; nothing remains but to say a little to justify this churches reforming these abuses . and , first , i suppose it will be granted that a national church may judge a doctrine to be heretical , when its opposition to the scripture , reason , and the primitive doctrine is apparent : for in that case the bishops and pastors being to feed and instruct the church , they must do it according to their consciences , otherwise how can they discharge the trust , god and the church commit to their charge ? and thus all the ancient hereticks , such as samosatenus , arrius , pelagius , and a great many more were first condemned in provincial councils . secondly , if such heresies be spread in places round about , the bishops of every church ought to do what they can to get others concur with them in the condemning them ; but if they cannot prevail , they ought nevertheless to purge themselves and their own church , for none can be bound to be damned for company . the pastors of every church owe a charity to their neighbour churches , but a debt to their own , which the stubborness of others canot excuse them from . and so those bishops in the primitive church , that were environed with arrians , did reform their own churches when they were placed in any sees that had been corrupted by arrianism . thirdly , no time can give prescription against truth , and therefore had any errour been ever so antiently received in any church , yet the pastors of that church finding it contrary to truth ought to reform it : the more antient or inveterate any errour is , it needs the more to be looked to . so those nations that were long bred up in arrianism , had good reason to reform from that errour . so the church of rome will ackowledge that the greek church , or our church ought to forsake their present doctrines , though they have been long received . fourthly , no later definitions of councils or fathers ought to derogate from the ancienter decrees of councils or opinions of the fathers ; otherwise the arrians had reason to have justified their submitting to the councils of sirmium , arimini , and millan , and rejecting that of nice : therefore we ought in the first place to consider the decrees and opinions of the most primitive antiquity . fifthly , no succession of bishops how clear so ever in its descent from the apostles , can secure a church from errour . which the church of rome must acknowledge , since they can neither deny the succession of the greek church , nor of the church of england . sixthly , if any church continues so hardned in their errours that they break communion with another church for reforming , the guilt of this breach must lie at their door who are both in the errour , and first reject the other , and refuse to reform or communicate with other churches . upon every one of these particulars ( and they all set together compleat the plea for the church of england ) i am willing to joyn issue , and shew they are not only true in themselves , but must be also acknowledged by the principles of the church of rome : so that if the grounds of controversy , on which our reformation did proceed , were good and justifiable , it is most unreasonable to say our church had not good right and authority to make it . it can be made appear that for above two hundred years before the reformation , there were general complaints among all sorts of pesons , both tho subtle schoolmen and devout contemplatives , both ecclesiasticks and laicks did complain of the corruptions of the church , and called aloud for a reformation both of faith and manners : even the council of pisa a little before luthers days , did decree , there should be a reformation both of faith and manners , and that both of the head and members . but all these complaints turned to nothing , abuses grew daily , the interests of the nephews and other corrupt intrigues of the court of rome always obstructing good motions and cherishing ill customs , for they brought the more grist to their mill. when a reformation was first called for in germany , instead of complying with so just a desire , all that the court of rome thought on , was how to suppress these complaints , and destroy those who made them . in end , when great commotions were like to follow , by the vast multitudes of those who concurred in this desire of reforming , a council was called , after the popes had frequently prejudged in the matter , and pope leo had with great frankness condemned most of luthers opinions . from that council no good could reasonably be expected , for the popes had already engaged so deep in the quarrel , that there was no retreating , and they ordered the matter so , that nothing could be done but what they had a mind to : all the bishops were at their consecration their sworn vassals : nothing could be brought into the council without the legates had proposed it . and when any good motions were made by the bishops of spain or germany , they had so many poor italian bishops kept there on the popes charges , that they were always masters of the vote : for before they would hold a session about any thing , they had so canvassed it in the congregations , that nothing was so much as put to the hazard . all these things appear even from cardinal pallavicini's history of that council . while this council was sitting , and some years before , many of this church were convinced of these corruptions , and that they could not with a good conscience joyn any longer in a worship so corrupted ; yet they were satisfied to know the truth themselves and to instruct others privately in it , but formed no separated church ; waiting for what issue god in his providence might bring about . but with what violence and cruelty their enemies , who were generally those of the clergy , pursued them , is well enough known : nor shall i repeat any thing of it , lest it might be thought an invidious aggravating of things that are past . but at length , by the death of king henry the eighth , the government fell in the hands of persons well affected to the reformation . it is not material what their true motives were , for jehu did a good work when he destroyed the idolatry of baal , though neither his motives nor method of doing it are justifiable : nor is it to the purpose to examine , how those bishops that reformed could have complied before with the corruptions of the roman church and received orders from them . meletius , and felix , were placed by the arrians , the one at antioch in the room of eustathius , the other at rome , in liberius his room , who were both banished for the faith : and yet both these were afterwards great defenders of the truth ; and felix was a martyr for it , against these very hereticks with whom they complied in the beginning . so whatever mixture of carnal ends might be in any of the secular men , or what allay of humane infirmity and fear might have been in any of the ecclesiasticks ; that can be no prejudice to the cause : for men are always men , and the power of god does often appear most eminently when there is least cause to admire the instruments he makes use of . but in that juncture of affairs the bishops and clergy of this church seeing great and manifest corruptions in it , and it being apparent that the church of rome would consent to no reformation to any good purpose , were obliged to reform , and having the authority of king and parliament concurring , they had betrayed their consciences and the charge of souls for which they stood engaged , and were to answer at the great day , if they had dallied longer , and not warned the people of their danger , and made use of the inclinations of the civil powers for carrying on so good a work . and it is the lasting glory of the reformation , that when they saw the heir of the crown was inflexibly united to the church of rome , they proceeded not to extream courses against her ; for what a few wrought on by the ambition of the duke of northumberland were got to do , was neither the deed of the nation , nor of the church , since the representatives of neither concurred in it . but the nation did receive the righteous heir : and then was our church crowned with the highest glory it could have desired , many of the bishops who had been most active in the reformation sealing it with their blood , and in death giving such evident proofs of holy and christian constancy , that they may be justly matched with the most glorious martyrs of the primitive church . then did both these churches appear in their true colours , that of rome weltring in the blood of the saints and insatiately drinking it up : and our church bearing the cross of christ and following his example . but when we were for some years thus tried in the fire , then did god again bless us with the protection of the rightful and lawful magistrate . then did our church do as the primitive church had done under theodosius , when she got out from a long and cruel persecution of the arrians under those enraged emperours constantius and valens . they reformed the church from the arrian doctrine , but would not imitate them in their persecuting spirit . and when others had too deep resentments of the ill usage they had met with under the arrian tyranny , nazianzen and the other holy bishops of that time did mitigate their animosities : so that the churches were only taken from the arrians , but no storms were raised against them . so in the beginning of queen elizabeths reign , it cannot be denied that those of that church were long suffered to live at quiet among us with little or no disturbance , save that the churches were taken out of their hands . nor were even those who had bathed themselves in so much blood made examples , so entirely did they retain the meekness and lenity of the christian spirit . and if after many years quiet , those of that religion when they met with no trouble from the government , did notwithstanding enter into so many plots and conspiracies against the queens person and the established government , was it any wonder that severe laws were made against them , and those emissaries who under a pretence of coming in a mission , were sent as spies and agents among us to fill all with blood and confusion ? whom had they blame for all this but themselves ? or was this any thing but what would have been certainly done in the gentlest and mildest government upon earth ? for the law of self-preservation is engraven on all mens natures , and so no wonder every state and government sees to its own security against those who seek its ruine and destruction : and it had been no wonder if upon such provocations there had been some severities used which in themselves were unjustifiable : for few take reparation in an exact equality to the damage and injury they have received . but since that time they have had very little cause to complain of any hard treatment ; and if they have met with any , they may still thank the officious insolent deportment of some of their own church , that have given just cause of jealousie and fear . but i shall pursue this discourse no farther , hoping enough is already said upon the head that engaged me to it , to make it appear , that it was possible the doctrine of the church should be changed in this matter , and that it was truly changed . from which i may be well allowed to subsume , that our church discovering that this change was made , had very good reason and a sufficient authority to reform this corruption , and restore the primitive doctrine again . and now being to leave my reader , i shall only desire him to consider a little of how great importance his eternal concerns are , and that he has no reason to look for endless happiness , if he does not serve god in a way suitable to his will. for what hopes soever there may be for one who lives and dies in some unknown error , yet there are no hopes for those that either neglect or despise the truth , and that out of humour or any other carnal account give themselves up to errours , and willingly embrace them . certainly god sent not his son in the world , nor gave him to so cruel a death , for nothing . if he hath revealed his counsels with so much solemnity , his designs in that must be great and worthy of god : the true ends of religion must be the purifying our souls , the conforming us to the divine nature , the uniting us to one another in the most tender bonds of love , truth , justice and goodness , the raising our minds to a heavenly and contemplative temper , and our living as pilgrims and strangers on this earth , ever waiting and longing for our change . now we dare appeal all men to shew any thing in our religion or worship , that obstructs any of these ends ; on the contrary the sum and total of our doctrine is , the conforming our selves to christ and his apostles , both in faith and life , so that it can scarce be devised what should make any body that hath any sense of religion , or regard to his soul , forsake our communion , where he finds nothing that is not highly suitable to the nature and ends of religion ; and turn over to a church that is founded on and cemented in carnal interests : the grand design of all their attempts being to subject all to the papal tyranny , which must needs appear visibly to every one whose eyes are opened . for attaining which end they have set up such a vast company of additions to the simplicity of the faith and the purity of the christian worship , that it is a great work even to know them . is it not then a strange choice ? to leave a church that worships god so as all understand what they do and can say amen ; to go to a church where the worship is not understood , so that he who officiats is a barbarian to them : a church which worships god in a spiritual & unexceptionable manner ; to go to a church that is scandalously ( to raise this charge no higher ) full of images and pictures , and that of the blessed trinity , before which prostrations and adorations are daily made : a church that directs her devotions to god , and his son jesus christ ; to go to a church that without any good warrant not only invocates saints and angels , but also in the very same form of words , which they offer up to god and jesus christ , which is a thing at least full of scandal , since these words must be strangely wrested from their natural meaning , otherwise they are high blasphemies : a church that commemorates christs death in the sacrament , and truly communicates in his body and blood , with all holy reverence and due preparation● to go to a church that spends all her devotion in an outward adoring the sacrament , without communicating with any due care , but resting in the priestly absolution allows it upon a single attrition : a church that administers all the sacraments christ appointed , and as he appointed them ; to go to a church that hath added many to those he appointed , and hath maimed that he gave for a pledge of his presence when he left this earth . in a word , that leaves a church that submits to all that christ and his apostles taught , and in a secondary order to all delivered to us by the primitive church ; to go to a church that hath set up an authority that pretends to be equal to these sacred oracles , and has manifestly cancelled most of the primitive constitutions . but it is not enough to remain in the communion of our church ; for if we do not walk conform to that holy faith taught in it , we disgrace it . let all therefore that have zeal for our church , express it chiefly in studying to purify their hearts and lives , so as becomes christians , and reformed christians , and then others that behold us , will be ashamed when they see such real confutations of the calumnies of our adversaries , which would soon be turned back on them with a just 〈◊〉 if there were not too many adv●ntages given by our divisions , and other disorders . but nothing that is personal ought to be charged on our church : and who●ver object any such things , of all persons in the world , they are the most inexcusable , who being so highly guilty themselves , have yet such undaunted brows , as to charge those things on us , which if they be practised by any among us , yet are disallowed ; but among them have had all encouragement and authority possible from the corruptions both of their popes , and casuists . but here i break off , praying god he may at length open the eyes of all christendom that they may see and love the truth , and walk according to it . amen . finis . books sold by moses pitt at the angel in s. paul's church-yard . there is newly published two recantation sermons ( preached at the french-church in the savoy ) by two converted romanists , mr. de la motte , late preacher of the order of the carmelites ; and mr. de luzanzy , licentiate in divinity ; wherein the corrupt doctrines of the church of rome are laid open and confuted . both printed in french and english. also two other sermons , one preached before the king at white hall , jan. 30. 1676. by henry bagshaw , d. d. the other before the lord mayor dec. 19. 1675. by john cook 4o. theses theologicae variis temporibus in academia sedanensi editae & ad disputandum propolitae . authore ludovico le blanc verbi divini ministro & theologiae prosessore . in qua exponitur sententia doctorum ecclesiae romanae , & protestantium . fol. pr. 20 s. a sober answer to the most material thing● in a discourse called naked truth . 4º pr. 6 d. mystery of iniquity unva●led in a discourse , wherein is held forth the opposition of the doctrine , worship , and practices of the roman church , to the nature , designs , and characters of the christian faith , by gilbert burnet . 8o. price 1 s. a collection of popish miracles wrought by popish saints , both during their lives and after their death , collected out of their own authors . 8º price 1 s. art of speaking by the authors of ars cogitandi now in the press . 8o. history of the late revolution of the empire of the great mogol , with a description of the country . 8o. price 7 s. history of the conquest of china by the tartars . 8º price 4 s. poetical histories , being a collection of all the stories necessary for a perfect understanding of the greek and latine poets and other antient authors . 8º price 3 s. 6 d. a voyage to taffaletta . 8º price 18 d catalogus librorum in regionibus transmarinis nuper editorum . fol. notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a30411-e4880 more nevochim par. 1. c. 30. notes for div a30411-e6070 apolog. 2. lib. 4 . adv . her c. 34. lib. 1. adv . marc. c. 14. lib. 3. adv . marc. c. 19. lib. 8. cont . celsum . epist. 76. epist. 63. in anchorat . in orat. de bap. christ. lib. de bened . patriarc . cap. 9. homil. 24. in epist. ad cor. epist. ad hedib . comment . s. ma●●● . 6. epist. 86. serm. 9. de divers lib. 3. de trinit . c. 10. lib. 17. de civ . dei. lib. cont. donat. c. 6. serm. 53 : de verb. dom. lib. 3. de trinit . c. 4. epist. 23. ad bonifac. serm. 2. in psal. 33. epist. ad c●●sar . comm. in epist. ad galat. c. 5. lib. 4. cont . marc. c. 40 . lib. 4. cont . marc. c. 40. orig. lib. 6. c. 9. orig. lib. 6 , c. 9. dialog . 1. dialog . 1. in lib. de duab . nat . christ : epist. ad caefar . monach . cod. 229. dialog . 1 lib. 5. adv . heret . c. 2. lib. de resurr c. 8. serm. 9. d● divers . comment . in matth. c. 15. mystic . catech . 5. tom. 5. lib. 4. de orth. fide c. 14. lib. 4. cont . marc. c. 40. com. in psal. 3. lib. 2. de doct. chr. c. 16. homil. 7. in lev. lib. cons. adiman● . manich . c. 12. defens . conc. chal● ced . lib. 9. epist. 23. ad bonifac. l. 20. cont . faust. manich . c. 21. tract . in exod. comm. in 1 epist. ad cor. comment . in mat. c. 15. hom. 3. in mat. tom. 2. spir. dach . tractat. 26. in joan. lib. 21 d● civ . d● c. 25. tractat. 54. in joan. notes for div a30411-e11120 * boniface the eighth , extrav . lib. 1. cap 1. de majoritate & obedientia . after he had studied to prove that the temporal and material sword , as well as the spiritual , was in the power of st. peter , from these word ; behold two swords , & our saviour's answer , it is enough . in the end he c●ncludes , whosoever therefore resists this power thus ordained of god , resists the ordinance of god ; except with manichee he make two beginnings , which we define to be false and heretical : for moses testifies , that not in the beginnings , but in the beginning god created the heaven and the earth . therefore we declare , say , define and pronounce , that it is of necessity to salvation to every humane creature to be subject to the pope of rome : and it is plain this subjection must be that he had been pleading thorough that whole decretal , which is the subjection of the temporal sword to the spiritual . hist. de l. arrian , l. 1. [a] de decret . synod . nicen. [b] athan. epist. de sententia dian. alex. [c] de synod . aron . [d] hi● lib. de synod [e] epist. 41 f epist. 41. g lib. 〈◊〉 decret . co●cil . nicen. h act. conc. ep● ; action . 1● . i act. conc. chalced. action . 1 k the●d . in di●l . l gelas. de dua● . naturis . [m] lib. 3. cont. max. 19. * lib. de spect. c. 3. lib. adv. gnost . c. 7. * de synod . arim. & s●lenc . de synod . adv . arrian . * lib. 1. con. max. arr. ep. 〈◊〉 . * lib. 3. c. 3. * epist. 74. * epist. 78. * oper. cass. * orat. 37. * act. syn. eph. * action . 1. * act , 6. sy● constantin . in act. 2. chalcedon b 〈◊〉 2. 〈…〉 . c 〈◊〉 . cod. 46. notes for div a30411-e15660 ord. rom. in pascha . greg. nazian , orat. i. ap●ll . & 20. orat. chrisoft . l. ● . de sacer . 6. 10. greg. decret . lib. 3. 〈◊〉 42. cap. 10. clement . lib. 3. tit . 16. auc●or ad n. 1240. ●rantz . sex . ●b . 8. cap. 10. 9 apost . can. and 2 can. antioch . de ●id . orth .. lib. 4. cap. 14. bed. in psal. 3. & mark 14. lib. 2. de g●●● , reg. sigebert ; platma , antonin . sabellicus , chron. mont. cassin . sigonius , vignier , guitmond , and chiefly william of malmesburg edit . antwerp . 1608. de sacram. al●ar . c. 13. li● . 4. dis● . 11. anno 1215. cap. ● . cap. 3. tom. 7. spic . and tom. 11. of the count. print . anno 1672 , p. 233. sess. 19. the council of trent examin'd and disprov'd by catholick tradition in the main points in controversie between us and the church of rome with a particular account of the times and occasions of introducing them : part 1 : to which a preface is prefixed concerning the true sense of the council of trent and the notion of transubstantiation. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1688 approx. 415 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 100 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61532 wing s5569 estc r4970 12898747 ocm 12898747 95209 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61532) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 95209) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 728:24) the council of trent examin'd and disprov'd by catholick tradition in the main points in controversie between us and the church of rome with a particular account of the times and occasions of introducing them : part 1 : to which a preface is prefixed concerning the true sense of the council of trent and the notion of transubstantiation. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. the second edition corrected; with an appendix in answer to some late passages of j.w. of the society of jesus, concerning the prohibiting of scripture in vulgar languages. [2], xxiii, [5], 163 p. printed for h. mortlock ..., london : 1688. includes bibliographical references. advertisement: p. [148]. reproduction of original in duke university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng catholic church -controversial literature. council of trent (1545-1563) transubstantiation. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2004-04 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the council of trent examin'd and disprov'd by catholick tradition . in the main points in controversie between us and the church of rome ; with a particular account of the times and occasions of introducing them ; part i. to which a preface is prefixed concerning the true sense of the council of trent and the notion of transubstantiation . the second edition corrected . with an appendix in answer to some late passages of j. w. of the society of jesus , concerning the prohibiting of scripture in vulgar languages . london , printed for h. mortlock at the phoenix in s. pauls church-yard , 1688. the preface . there is it seems a train in controversies , as well as in thoughts ; one thing still giving a start to another ; conferences produce letters ; letters , books ; and one discourse gives occasion for another . for this follows the former as a necessary pursuit of the same argument against tradition . i. s. in his last letter , had vouched the authority of the council of trent proceeding upon tradition , and he instanced in three points , transubstantiation , sacramental confession and extreme unction . the examination of this i thought fit to reserve for a discourse by it self ; wherein , instead of confining my self to those three particulars , i intend to go through the most material points there established , and to prove from the most authentick testimonies , that there was no true catholick tradition for any of them . and if i can make good what i have undertaken , i shall make the council of trent it self the great instance against the infallibility of tradition . this is a new undertaking ; which the impetuousness of our adversaries setting up tradition for the ground of their faith , hath brought me to . but besides the shewing that really they have not tradition on their side ; i have endeavoured to trace the several steps and to set down the times and occasions of introducing those points which have caused that unhappy breach in the christian world , whose sad effects we daily see and lament , but have little hopes to see remied , till these new points be discarded and scripture interpreted by truely catholick tradition , be made the standard of christian communion . i do not pretend , that all these points came in at one time or in the same manner ; for some errours and corruptions came in far more early ; some had the favour of the church of rome in a higher degree ; some were more generally received in the practice of the church in later times , than others ; and some were merely school points before the council of trent , but as far as the thomists and scotists could be made to agree there against the reformers , these passed for articles of faith. for , this was one of the great arts of that council to draw up their decrees in such terms , as should leave room enough for eternal wranglings among themselves , provided they agreed in doing the business effectually against the hereticks , as they are pleased to call them . i therefore forbear to urge these as points of faith , which have been freely debated among themselves since the council of trent , without any censure . we have enough in the plain decrees and canons of that council , without medling with any school-points . and so i cannot be charged with misrepresenting . the great debate of late hath been about the true exposition of the points there defined ; and for my part , i am content to yield to any just and reasonable methods of giving the true sense of them . and such i conceive these to be , i. where the council of trent makes use of words in a strict and limited sense , there it is unreasonable to understand them in a large and improper sense . as for instance , sess. 6. c. 26. it decrees that justified persons do verè promerere ; truely merit eternal life ; and can. 32. there is an anathema against him who denies true merit in the good works of justified persons , both as to increase of grace and eternal life . there is no one conversant in ancient writers , but knows that there was a large and improper sense of the word merit ; but how is it impossible to apply that sense , where such care is taken , that it may be understood in a strict and limited sense ? if the council had left the word in its general sense , there might have been reason to have given the fairest interpretation to it ; but when it is certainly known , that there had been a difference of opinions in the church of rome about true and proper merit , and that which was not ( however it were called , ) and the council declares for the former , no man of understanding can believe that onely the improper sense was meant by it . as in the point of the eucharist when the council declares that the words of christ , this is my body , are truely and properly to be understood ; would it not be thought strange for any one to say , that the council notwithstanding might mean that christ's words may be figuratively understood ? and we must take the true notion of merit not from any large expressions of the ancients , but from the conditions of true and proper merit among themselves . but of this at large afterwards . so as to the notion of sacraments ; every one knows how largely that word was taken in ancient writers ; but it would be absurd to understand the council of trent in that sense , when sess. 6. can. 1. de sacramentis , it denounces an anathema not merely against him that denies seven sacraments ; but against him that doth not hold every one of them to be truely and properly a sacrament . and in the creed of pius iv. one article is , that there are seven true and proper sacraments how vain a thing then were it for any to expound the sacraments in a large and improper sense ? ii. where the council of trent hath not declared it self , but it is fully done in the catechism made by its appointment , we ought to look on that , as the true sense of the council . as in the case of the sacraments ; the council never declares what it means by true and proper sacraments ; but the catechism makes large and full amends for this defect . for after it hath mention'd the use of the word in profane and sacred writers , it sets down the sense of it according to their divines for a sensible sign which conveys the grace which it signifies . and after a large explication of the nature of signs , it gives this description of a true and proper sacrament , that it is a sensible thing , which by divine institution not only hath the force of signifying but of causing grace . and to shew the authority of this catechism for explicating the doctrine of the sacraments we need only to look into sess. 24. c. 7. de reform . where it is required that the people be instructed in the sacraments according to ●it . it is supposed that the catechism was appointed to be made in the 18th ses●ion at the instigation of carolus borromaeus , ( since canonized ) but it was not finished while the council sate , and therefore sess. 25. it was refer'd to the judgment and authority of the pope . i confess therefore it hath not a conciliar authority stamped upon it , but it hath a sort of transfused infallibility , as far as they could convey it ; and as much as a council hath , when it borrows it from the popes confirmation . it was near two tears hammering at trent , viz. from 26. of feb. 1562. to decemb. 1563. when the council rose ; afterwards , it was preparing at rome three years longer , and then presented to the pope to be approved , and published by his authority , after it had been carefully review'd by cardinal sirlet , borromeo , and others ; and hath since been universally received in the roman church ; so that we can have no more authentick exposition of the sense of the council of trent , than what is contained in that cat●chism . iii. where the council of trent declares a thing in general to be lawfull and due , but doth not express the manner of it , that is to be understood from the generally receiv'd and allowed practices at that time . for , otherwise the council must be charged with great unfaithfulness in not setting down and correcting publick and notorious abuses , when it mention'd the things themselves and some abuses about them . as in the 25th session , concerning purgatory , invocation of saints , worship of images and relicks , it goes no farther than that the sound doctrine be taught , that saints are to be invocated , images and relicks to be worship'd ; but never defines what that sound doctrine is , what bounds are to be set in the worship of saints , images and relicks , which it is unlawfull to exceed . so that in this case , we have no other way to judge of the meaning of the council , but by comparing the publick and allow'd practices of the church with the general decrees of the council . and we have this farther reason for it , that we are told by the latest expositors of it , that the sense of the church in speculative points , is to be taken from publick practices . for , thus one of them expresses himself , moreover , even her speculative doctrines are so mixed with practical ceremonies , which represent them to the vulgar , and instruct even the meanest capacities in the abstrusest doctrines , that it seems ever impossible to make an alteration in her doctrine without abrogating her ceremonies , or changing her constant practices . iv. where the decrees of the council , are not sufficiently clear , there we must take in the canons to make the sense more plain . this rule i take from the council it self , which in the 6th session , just before the canons saith , that those are added , that all may know not only what they are to hold and follow , but what they are to shun and avoid . as in the famous instance of transubstantiation ; suppose , that the words of the decree do not determine expresly the modus ; yet it is impossible for any one to doubt of it who looks into the canon , which denounces an anathema against him , not only that denies transubstantiation , but that asserts the substance of bread and wine to remain after consecration . therefore he that asserts transubstantiation according to the council of trent , must hold it in such a manner , as thereby to understand that the substance of bread and wine doth not remain . otherwise he is under an anathema by the express canon of the council . therefore it is so far from being a fatal oversight , ( as a late author expresses it , ) to say that the council of trent hath determin'd the modus of the real presence , that no man who is not resolved to oversee it can be of another opinion . and herein the divines of the church of rome do agree with us , viz. that the particular modus is not only determin'd by the council , but that it is a matter of faith to all persons of the communion of that church . as not only appears from the 2d canon , but from the very decree it self , sess. 13. ch . 4. the holy synod declares , that by consecration of the bread and wine , there is a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of christ , and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood , which conversion is fitly and properly by the holy catholick church called transubstantiation . in which words the council doth plainly express the modus of the real presence to be , not by a presence of christ's body together with the substance of the bread , as the lutherans held , but by a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body , &c. and since there were different manners of understanding this real presence , if the council did not espouse one so , as to reject the other as heretical ; then it is impossible to make the lutheran doctrine to be declared to be heretical , i. e , unless the council did determine the modus of the real presence . for , if it did not , then notwithstanding the decrees and canons of the council of trent , persons are at liberty to believe either transubstantiation or consubstantiation , which i think no roman catholick will allow . but. it is said , that the meaning of the decree is , that the real presence is not to be understood after a natural , but a sacramental manner ; but doth it not plainly tell us , how that sacramental manner is to be understood , viz. by a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the whole substance of the body , &c. and if other ways be possible , and all others be rejected , then this particular modus must be determin'd . i grant , that the council doth not say , there is an annihilation of the elements ; and i know no necessity of using that term , for that which is supposed to be turned into another thing cannot properly be said to be annihilated ( which is the reducing it to nothing ) but the council doth assert a total conversion of one substance into another , and where that is , that substance must wholly cease to be what it was ; and so , there can be no substance of the elements remaining after consecration . for , as aquinas observes , quod convertitur in aliquid factâ conversione non manet . if then the substance of the elements doth not remain after consecration , by virtue of this total conversion , then the council of trent by its decree hath plainly determin'd the modus of the real presence , so as to exclude any such manner , as doth suppose , the substance to remain , whether it be by impanation or consubstantiation , or any other way . what if rupertus thought the bread might become the real body of christ by an union of the word to it ? all that can be infer'd is , that the modus was not then so determin'd , as to oblige all persons to hold it . but what is this to the council of trent ? can any one hold the substance to remain , and not to remain at the same time ? for , he that holds with rupertus must allow the substance to remain ; he that believes a total conversion must deny it . and he that can believe both these at once , may believe what he pleases . but the council only declares the sacramental presence to be after an ineffable manner . i say , it determines it to be by a total conversion of one substance into another ; which may well be said to be ineffable , since what cannot be understood can never be expressed . our dispute is not about the use of the word , transubstantiation , for i think it proper enough to express the sense of the council of trent ; but as the word consubstantial did exclude all other modes how christ might be the son of god , and determin'd the faith of the church to that manne● ; so doth the sense of transubstantiation , as determin'd by the council of trent , limit the manner of the real presence , to such a conversion of the substance of the elements into the substance of christ's body and blood , as doth imply no substance to remain after consecration . it is to no purpose to tell us , the council uses only the word species and not accidents ; for whatever they are called , the council denounces its anathema against those who hold the substance to remain after consecration ; and denies the total conversion of the substance of the bread and wine into the substance of the body and bloud of christ. if the substance be not there , the modus is to purpose determin'd . and whatever remains , call it what you will , it is not the substance ; and that is sufficient to shew , that the council of trent hath clearly determin'd the modus of the real presence . v. we must distinguish the school points left undetermin'd by the council of trent , from those which are made articles of faith. we never pretend , that it left no school-disputes about the points there determin'd ; but we say it went too far in making some school-points to be points of faith , when it had been more for the peace of christendom to have left them to the schools still . thus in the point of transubstantiation , the elder school-men tell us , there were different ways of explaining the real presence ; and that those , which supposed the substance to remain , were more agreeable to reason and scripture than the other ; and some were of opinion , that the modus was no matter of faith then . but after the point of the real presence came to be warmly contested in the time of berengarius , it rose by degrees higher and higher , till at last the particular modus came to be determin'd with an anathema by the council of trent . when berengarius , a. d. 1059. was forced to recant by nicolaus 2d , with the assistance of 113. bishops ; no more was required of him , than to hold that the bread and wine after consecration ; are not only the sacrament , but the true body and bloud of christ , and that it is sensibly handled and broke by the priests hands , and eaten by the communicants . here is no denying the substance of bread to remain ; and joh. parisiensis observes , that the words cannot be defended but by an assumption of the bread ; for , saith he , if the body of christ be truely and sensibly handled and eaten , this cannot be understood of christ's glorious body in heaven , but it must be of the bread really made the body of christ after consecration . the sense which the canonists put upon the words of this recantation is absurd , viz. that they are to be understood of the species ; for berengarius his opinion related to the substance of christ's body which he denied to be in the sacrament . and what would it have signified for him to have said that christ was sensibly broken and eaten under the species of bread and wine ? i. e. that his body was not sensibly broken and eaten but the species were . it had signified something , if he had said , there was no substance of bread and wine left but only the species . but all the design of this recantation was to make him assert the sacrament to be made the true and real body of christ in as strong a manner , as the pope and his brethren could think of . and although the canonists think , if strictly taken , it implies greater heresie than that of berengarius ; yet by their favour , this form was only thought fit to be put into the canon-law , as the standard of the faith of the roman church then ; and the following abjuration of berengarius was only kept in the register of gregory the seventh's epistles . for about twenty years after by order of gregory vii . berengarius was brought to another abjuration , but by no means after the same form with the former . for by this he was required to declare , that the bread and wine are substantially converted into the true and proper flesh and bloud of christ , and after censecration are the true body of christ born of the virgin and sacrificed upon the cross , and that sits at the right hand of the father ; and the true bloud of christ which was shed out of his side , not only as a sacramental sign , but in propriety of nature and reality of substance . this was indeed a pretty bold assertion of the substantial presence . and so much the bolder , if the commentary on s. matthew be hildebrand's . for there he saith , the manner of the conversion is uncertain . but as far as i can judge , by substantial conversion he did not then mean , as the council of trent doth , a total conversion of one substance into another , so as that nothing of the former substance remains ; but that there was a change by consecration not by making the body of christ of the substance of the bread , but by its passing into that body of christ which was born of the virgin. for , upon comparing the two forms , there we shall find lies the main difference . pope nicolaus went no farther than to the true body of christ ; which it might be as well by assumption , as conversion ; gregory vii . went farther and thought it necessary to add that the change was into the substance of that body which was born of the virgin , &c. and so this second form excludes a true body merely by assumption , and asserts the change to be into the substance of christ's body in heaven ; but it doth not determine , that nothing of the substance of the elements doth remain . for when he puts that kind of substantial conversion which leaves nothing but the accidents , and the body of christ to be under them , which belonged to the substance of the elements ; he declares this matter to be uncertain . which shews , that however a change was owned into the substance of christ's body , yet such a total conversion , as is determined by the council of trent , was not then made an article of faith. but from this supposition made by hildebrand it appears , that the dectrine of substance and accidents was then well known ; and therefore the introducing aristotle's philosophy from the arabians afterwards could make no alteration in this matter . for the words of hildebrand are as plain as to the difference of substance and accidents , as of any of the school-men ; and that the accidents of the bread and wine might be separated from the substance of them ; but this was not then made a matter of faith ; as it was afterwards . but the case was remarkably alter'd , after the lateran council under innocent iii. for transubstantiation being admitted there among the articles of faith ; and so entred in the canon-law in the very beginning of the decretals ; this did not merely become a school-term , but by the inquisitors of that time , it was accounted heresie to deny it . it may be sufficiently proved by the school-men and canonists , that a difference of opinions , as to the modus did still continue , ( but that belongs to a more proper place ) and joh. parisiensis declares ( p. 103 ) that the lateran council in his opinion did not make transubstantiation a point of faith ; or at least that substance was not to be taken for the matter , but the suppositum ; but the inquisitors went more briskly to work and made it downright ●●●●esie to assert , that the substance of the elements did remain after consecration . of this , we have full evidence in the register of courtney arch-bishop of canterbury , ( which is no invisible manuscript . ) for there we read f. 25. that he called a select convecation of bishops , divines and canonists , may 17. a. d. 1382. to declare some propositions to be heretical , and s●me to be erroneous and contrary to the determination of the church . among the first , these two are set down in the first place , 1. that the material substance of the bread and wine doth remain in the sacrament of the altar after consecration . 2. that the accidents do not remain without their subject in that sacrament after consecration . after this the arch-bishop sent forth his mandate to all his suffragans not only to prohibit the preaching of that doctrine , but to inquire after those who did it . and june 12. robert rygge chancellour of oxford and thomas brightwall appeared before him and were examined upon these propositions ; which they declared to be heretical : who thereupon required the publication of them as such in the university ; and the proceeding against those who were suspected to favour them . the ground the arch-bishop went upon , was , that these had been already condemned by the church , and therefore ex abundanti , they declared them to be so condemned ; as appears by the monition given to robert rygge himself as too much suspected to favour the contrary doctrine ; as well as nicholas hereford , philip reppyndon d. d. and john ashton b. d. against these the arch-bishop proceeded as inquisitor haereticae pravitatis per totam suam provinciam , as it is in the record ; who appearing desired a copy of the several propositions , and then they were required to give in their judgment upon them . ashton refused , but the other promised , which they performed soon after ; and to these two propositions , their answers were , to the first that as far as it was contrary to the decretal , firmiter credimus , it was heresie . to the second that as far as it was contrary to the decretal , cum marthoe , it was heresie . these answers were judged insufficient , because they did not declare what that sense was and the arch-bishop put this question to them , whether the same numerical material bread which before consecration was set upon the altar , did remain in its proper substance and nature after consecration , but they would give no other answer at that time . but afterwards reppyndon abjured , and was made bishop of lincoln . from hence it appears , that it was then thought that the modus was so far determin'd by the lateran council , that the contrary doctrine was declared not merely erroneous in faith , but heretical . in the first convocation held by th. arundel arch-bishop of canterbury a. d. 1396 , a complaint was brought , that several divines and others of the university of oxford held some heretical and erroneous opinions ; the first whereof was , that the substance of bread doth remain after confecration ; and doth not cease to be bread ; which is there affirmed to be heresie , speaking of material bread. the second , that the court of rome in the can. ego berengarius , had determined that the sacrament of the eucharist is naturally true bread. it is very hard to say , how this came to be then accounted heretical doctrine , when no less a man than durandus in the same age affirms , that the canonists grant that the opinion of the ceasing of the substance was grounded on the can. firmiter credimus , i. e. on the lateran council ; but that of the remaining of the substance on that , ego , berengarius . but however it passed for heretical , or at least very erroneous doctrine here ; but the main heresie was to hold , that the substance remained . for a. d. 1400. ( as appears by the register p. 2. f. 179. ) william sawtre alias chatris a parochial priest in london , was summoned before the same arch-bishop in convocation upon an information of heresie ; and one of the main articles against him was that he held the substance of the bread to remain in the sacrament of the altar after consecration ; and that it doth not cease to be bread. sawtre answered , that he believed , that after consecration the bread did remain with the body of christ ; but it doth not cease to be simply bread , but it remains holy and true the bread of life and body of christ. the arch bishop examined him chiefly upon this article ; and because he did not answer home to the point , he was condemned for a heretick , and was the first who was burned for heresie in england . and yet his answer was , that he could not understand the matter ; then the arch-bishop asked him , if he would stand to the churches determination ; he said , he would so far as it was not contrary to the will of god. upon which he was declared an heretick and delivered over to the secular power . in the same convocation john purvey made an abjuration of heresie , and the first he renounced was that after consecration in the sacrament of the altar , there neither is , nor can be an accident without a subject , and that the same substance and nature of bread remained which was before . in the examination of william thorp by thomas arundel , arch-bishop of canterbury a. d. 1407. ( which is not in the register being defective , but the account is preserved from his own copy ) the arch-bishop declared , that the church had now determined , that there abideth no substance of bread after consecration in the sacrament of the altar . and that if he believed otherwise he did not believe as the church believed . thorp quoted s. augustin and fulgentius to prove that the substance remained ; and the very mass on christmas day . the arch-bishop still pressed him with the churches determination . thorp said this was a school-nicety whether accidents could be without a subject ; no , said the arch-bishop , it is the faith of the church i go upon . thorp replyed , it was not so for a thousand years after christ. in the examination of the lord cobham a. d. 1412. by the same arch-bishop we find that he owned the real presence of christ's body as firmly as his accusers ; but he was condemned for heresie , because he held the substance of bread to remain . for the arch-bishop declared this to be the sense of the church ; that after consecration , remaineth no material bread or wine which were before , they being turned into christ's very body and bloud . the original words of the arch-bishop as they are in the register , are these . the faith and the determination of holy church touching the blestfull sacrament of the auter is this , that after the sacramental words ben said by a prest in his masse , the material bred that was before is turned into christ's veray body . and the material wyn that was before is turned into christ veray blode , and so there leweth in the auter , no material brede ne material wyn the wich wer ther byfore the saying of the sacramental words . and the bishops afterwards stood up and said ; it is manifest heresie to say that it is bread after the sacramental words be spoken ; because it was against the determination of holy church . but to make all sure , not many years after , may 4th . a. d. 1415. the council of constance session 8. declared the two propositions before mentioned to be heretical ; viz. to hold that the substance doth remain after consecration , and that the accidents do not remain without a subject . let any impartial reader now judge , whether it be any fatal oversight to assert , that the modus of the real presence was determin'd by the council of trent , when there were so many leading determinations to it , which were generally owned and received in the church of rome . but there were other disputes remaining in the schools relating to this matter ; which we do not pretend were ever determin'd by the council of trent . as , ( 1. ) whether the words of consecration are to be understood in a speculative or practical sense ? for , the scotists say , in the former sense , they do by no means prove transubstantiation ; since it may be truly said this is my body , though the substance of bread do remain ; and that they are to be understood in a practical sense , i. e. for converting the bread into the body , is not to be deduced ex vi verborum , from the mere force of the words , but from the sense of the church which hath so understood them . which in plain terms is to say , it cannot be proved from scripture , but from the sense of the church ; and so scotus doth acknowledge , but then he adds , that we are to judge this to be the sense of scripture , because the church hath declared it . which he doth not think was done before the council of lateran . so that , this council must be believed to have had as infallible a spirit in giving this sense of scripture as there was in the writing of it ; since it is not drawn from the words , but added to them . on the other side , the thomists insist on the force of the words themselves ; for , if , say they , from the words be infer'd that there is a real presence of the substance of christ's body , then it follows thence , that there is no substance of the bread remaining ; for a substance cannot be where it was not before , but it must either change its place , or another must be turned into it ; as fire in a house must either be brought thither , or some other thing must be turned into fire ; but , say they , the body of christ cannot be brought from heaven thither , for then it must leave the place it had there ; and must pass through all the bodies between ; and it is impossible for the same body to be locally present in several places ; and therefore the body of christ cannot otherwise be really and substantially present , but by the conversion of the substance of the bread into it . ( 2. ) in what manner the body of christ is made to be present in the sacrament ? the scotists say , it is impossible to conceive it otherwise than by bringing it from the place where it already is ; the thomists say that is impossible , since that body must be divided from it self by so many other bodies interposing . the former is said to be an adductive conversion , the latter a productive ; but then here lies another difficulty , how there can be a productive conversion of a thing already in being . but my business is not to give an account of these school-disputes ; but to shew how different they were from the point of tranfubslantiation ; and that both these disputing parties did agree that the modus of the real presence was defined to be by changing the substance of the elements into the body and blood of christ ; but they still warmly disputed about the modus of that modus ; viz. how a body already in being could be present in so many places without leaving that place where it was already . and no man who hath ever look'd into these school disputes can ever imagine that they disputed about the truth of the doctrine of transubstantiation , but only about the manner of explaining it . wherein they do effectually overthrow each others notions without being able to establish their own ; as the elector of cologn truly observed of their debates about this matter in the council of trent . vi. where the sense of words hath been changed by the introducing new doctrine , there the words ought to be understood according to the doctrine at that time received . of this we have two remarkable instances in the council of trent ; the first is about indulgences , which that council in its last session never went about to define ; but made use of the old word , and so declares both scripture and antiquity for the use of them . but there had been a mighty change in the doctrine about them , since the word was used in the christian church . no doubt there was a power in the church to relax canonical penances in extraordinary cases ; but what could that signifie when the canonical discipline was laid aside , and a new method of dealing with penitents was taken up , and another trade driven with respect to purgatory pains ? for here was a new thing carried on under an old name . and that hath been the great artifice of the roman church ; where it hath evidently gone off from the old doctrines , yet to retain the old names , that the unwary might still think , the things were the same , because the names were . as in the present case , we deny not the use of indulgences in the primitive church ; as the word was used for relaxations of the canonical discipline ; but we utterly deny it as to the pains of purgatory . and that this was the sense then receiv'd in the church of rome , appears from the papal constitutions of bon face the 8th , clemens the 6th , and leo the 10th . but of these more hereafter . the other instance is in the word species used by the council of trent , sess. 13. can. 2. where an anathema is denounced against him that denies the conversion of the whole substance of the elements into the body and blood of christ , the species of bread and wine only remaining . now a controversie hath been started in the church of rome , what is to be understood by species , whether real accidents or only appearances . some of the church of rome who have had a tast of the new philosophy , reject any real accidents , and yet declare transubstantiation to be a matter of faith , and go about to explain the notion of it in another manner . among these one emanuel maignan , a professor of divinity at tholouse , hath at large undertaken this matter . the method he takes is this . ( 1. ) he grants , that nothing remains of the bread after consecration , but that whereby it was an object of sense ; because that which is really the being of one thing cannot be the being of another . and he confesses that the modus as to the not being of the substance after consecration , is determin'd by the councils of constance and trent . ( 2. ) he asserts , that real accidents , supposing them separable from the substance , are not that whereby the elements are made the objects of sense ; because they do not make the conjunction between the object and the faculty . ( 3. ) since he denies , that accidents have any real being distinct from the substance they are in , he grants , that it is as much a matter of faith , that there are no real accidents after consecration , as that there is no real substance ; and he brings the authorities of the councils of lateran , florence and trent to prove it . ( 4. ) as the substance did by divine concourse so act upon the senses before , as to make it be an object of sense ; so after consecration , god by his immediate act makes the same appearances , although the substance be gone . and this , he saith , is the effect of this miraculous conversion , which is concealed from our senses , by god's immediate causing the very same appearances , which came before from the substance . which appearances , he saith , are the species mention'd by the council of trent ; and other elder councils and fathers . against this new hypothesis , a famous jesuit , theophilus raynaudus , opposed himself with great vehemency ; and urged these arguments against it . ( 1. ) that it overthrows the very nature of a sacrament , leaving no external visible sign ; but a perpetual illusion of the senses , in such a manner , that the error of one cannot be corrected by another . ( 2. ) that it overthrows the design of the sacrament , which is to be true and proper food . my flesh is meat indeed , &c. john 6. which , he saith , is to be understood of the sacrament , as well as of the body of christ , and therefore cannot agree with an imaginary appearance . ( 3. ) it is not consistent with the accidents which befall the sacramental species , as to be trod under foot , to be cast into indecent places , to be devoured by brutes , to be putrified , &c. if the body of christ withdraws , there must be something beyond mere appearances . ( 4. ) he makes this doctrine to be heretical , because the council of constance condemned it as an heretical proposition , to affirm , that in the eucharist accidents do not remain without their subject ; and because the council of trent uses the word species in the sense then generally received , and so it signified the same with accidents . which , saith he , farther appears , because the council speaks of the species remaining ; but if there be no real accidents , the species doth not remain in the object ; but a new appearance is produced . and it seems most reasonable to interpret the language of the council according to the general sense wherein the words were understood at that time . vii . what things were disputed and opposed by some in the council , without being censured for it , although they were afterwards decreed by a major party , yet cannot be said to have been there received by a catholick tradition . because matters of faith which have been universally received in the church , can never be supposed to be contested in a council without censure ; but if it appears that there were heats and warm debates among the parties in the council it self , and both think they speak the sense of the catholick church ; then we must either allow that there was then no known catholick tradition about those matters , or that the divines of the church of rome assembled in council did not understand what it was . and what happens to be decreed by a majority , can never be concluded from thence to have been the tradition before , because there was a different sense of others concerning it . and since in a division , a single person may make a majority , it will be very hard to believe , that he carries infallibility and catholick tradition along with him . but i think it reasonable in the enquiry after catholick tradition to take notice of the different opinions in the council ; and among the school-men before it ; and not only to observe , what was the sense of the roman church , but of the eastern churches too ; and where the matter requires it , to go through the several ages of the church up to the apostolical times ; that i may effectually prove , that in the main points in controversie between us , which are established by the council of trent , there cannot be produced any catholick and apostolical tradition for them . the contents . some postulata about catholick tradition , page 1. i. point examined about traditions being a rule of faith equal with scriptures , 2. the sense of the council of trent concerning it , 3. no. catholick tradition for it shew'd from the differences about it in the council , 4. from the divines of the roman church for some ages before the council , 5. the testimonies of the canon law against it , 17. of the ancient offices of the roman church , 20. of the fathers , 21. the first step of traditions being set up as a rule by the second council of nice , 26. not receiv'd as a rule of faith till after the council of lateran under innocent iii. 27. the occasion of it set down from new points of faith there determin'd , 28. never established for a rule till the council of trent , 29. ii. about the canon of scripture defined by the council of trent , 30. the sense of the council , ibid. the difference there about it , 31. a constant tradition against it in the eastern church . 33. no catholick tradition for it in the western church , 35. the several steps as to the alteration of the canon set down , 38. the different meaning of apocryphal writings , 40. iii. about the free use of the scripture in the vulgar language prohibited by the council of trent , 43. the sense of the council , ibid. no catholick tradition about this proved from the writers of the roman church , 44. the general consent of the catholick church against it proved from the ancient translations into valgar languages , 46. the first occasion of the scriptures being in an unknown language , 52. the first prohibition by gregory vii . 56. continued by the inquisition after innocent iii. 58. iv. about the merit of good works , 59. the sense of true merit cleared from the divines of the church of rome , ibid. no catholick tradition for it proved from ancient offices , 61. from provincial councils and eminent divines in several ages before the council of trent , 63. the several steps how the doctrine of merit came in , 68. v. of the number of sacraments , 74. an appeal to tradition for 500. years for seven sacraments examin'd and disprov'd , 75. as to chrism , 77. as to drders , 80. as to penance , 85. as to extreme-unction , 92. as to patrimony , 97. the sense of the greek church about the seven sacraments , 102. the sense of other eastern churches , 110. when the number of seven sacraments came first in , 112. the particular occasions of them , 116. vi. of auricular confession , 117. no catholick tradition confessed by their own writers , 118. > the several steps and occasions of introducing it , at large set down , 127. the difference between the ancient discipline and modern confession , 128. of voluntary confession , 133. of the penitentiaries office , 135. publick discipline not taken away at constantinople when the penitentiary was removed , 136. proved from s. chrysostom , 140. publick penance for publick sins , 142. private confession came in upon the decay of the ancient discipline , 144. the council of trent examined and disproved , &c. there are two things designed by me in this treatise , 1. to shew that there is no such thing as universal tradition for the main points in controversie between us and the church of rome , as they are determined by the council of trent . 2. to give an account by what steps and degrees , and on what occasion those doctrines and practices came into the church . but before i come to particulars , i shall lay down some reasonable postulata . 1. that a catholick tradition must be universally received among the sound members of the catholick church . 2. that the force of tradition lies in the certainty of conveyance of matters of faith from the apostolical times . for no new doctrines being pretended to , there can be no matter of faith in any age of the church , but what was so in the precedent and so up to the apostles times . 3. that it is impossible to suppose the divines of the catholick church to be ignorant , what was in their own time received for catholick tradition . for , if it be so hard for others to mistake it , it will be much more so for those whose business is to enquire into , and to deliver matters of faith. these things premised , i now enter upon the points themselves ; and i begin with , i. traditions being a rule of faith equal with scriptures . this is declared by the council of trent , as the groundwork of their proceedings . the words are sess. 4. that the council receives traditions both as to faith and manners , either delivered by christ himself with his own mouth , or dictated by the holy ghost , and preserved in the catholick church by a continual succession with equal piety of affection and reverence as the proofs of holy scripture . where the council first supposes there are such traditions from christ and the holy ghost distinct from scripture which relate to faith ; and then it declares equal respect and veneration due to them . no one questions but the word of christ and dictates of the holy ghost deserve equal respect , howsoever conveyed to us ; but the point is , whether there was a catholick tradition before this time for an unwritten word , as a foundation of faith , together with the written word . 1. it is therefore impertinent here to talk of a tradition before the written word ; for our debate is concerning both being joined together to make a perfect rule of faith : and yet this is one of the common pleas on behalf of tradition . 2. it is likewise impertinent to talk of that tradition whereby we do receive the written word . for the council first supposes the written word to be received and embraced as the word of god , before it mentions the unwritten word ; and therefore , it cannot be understood concerning that tradition whereby we receive the scriptures . and the council affirms , that the truth of the gospel is contained partly in books that are written , and partly in unwritten traditions . by the truth of the gospel they cannot mean the scriptures being the word of god , but that the word was contained partly in scripture and partly in tradition ; and it is therefore impertinent to urge the tradition for scripture to prove tradition to be part of the rule of faith , as it is here owned by the council of trent . 3. the council doth not here speak of a traditionary sense of scripture , but of a distinct rule of faith from the scripture . for of that it speaks afterwards in the decree about the use of the scripture ; where it saith , no man ought to interpret scripture against the sense of the church to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and meaning of scripture , nor against the unanimous consent of the fathers . whereby it is evident , the council is not to be understood of any consequences drawn out of scripture concerning things not expresly contained in it ; but it clearly means an unwritten word distinct from the written , and not contained in it , which , together with that , makes up a complete rule of faith. this being the true sense of the council , i now shew that there was no catholick tradition for it . which i shall prove by these steps : 1. from the proceedings of the council it self . 2. from the testimony of the divines of that church before the council for several centuries . 3. from the canon law received and allowed in the church of rome . 4. from the ancient offices used in that church . 5. from the testimony of the fathers . 1. from the proceedings of the council about this matter . by the postulata it appears , that the catholick tradition is such as must be known by the sound members of the church , and especially of the divines in it . but it appears by the most allowed histories of that council , this rule of faith was not so received there . for cardinal pallavicini tells us that it was warmly debated and canvassed even by the bishops themselves . the bishop of fano ( bertanus ) urged against it , that god had not given equal firmness to tradition as he had done to scripture , since several traditions had failed . but the bishop of bitonto ( mussus ) opposed him and said , though all truths were not to be equally regarded , yet every word of god ought , and traditions as well as scripture were the word of god , and the first principles of faith ; and the greater part of the council followed him . it seems then there was a division in the council about it ; but how could that be if there were a catholick tradition about this rule of faith ? could the bishops of the catholick church , when assembled in council to determine matters of faith , be no better agreed about the rule of faith ; and yet must we believe there was at that time a known catholick tradition about it , and that it was impossible they should err about such a tradition ? nay farther , the same authour tells us , that although this bishop had gained the greatest part of the council to him , yet his own heart misgave him , and in the next congregation himself proposed , that instead of equal it might be put a like veneration ; and yet we must believe there was a catholick tradition for an equal veneration to scripture and tradition . but the bishop of chioza , ( naclantus ) he saith , inveighed more bitterly against this equality , and in the face of the council charged the doctrine with impiety ; and he would not allow any divine inspiration to tradition , but that they were to be considered onely as laws of the church . it 's true , he saith he professed to consent to the decree afterwards , but withall he tells us , that he was brought under the inquisition not long after , upon suspicion of heresie ; which shews they were not well satisfied with his submission . we are extremely beholden to cardinal pallavicini for his information in these matters , which are past over too jejunely by f. paul. 2. i proceed to the testimony of the divines of the roman church before the council of trent . it is observed by some of them , that when the fathers appealed to the tradition of the church in any controverted point of faith , they made their appeal to those who wrote before the controversie was started ; as s. augustin did against the pelagians , &c. this is a reasonable method of proceeding , in case tradition be a rule of faith : and therefore must be so even in this point , whether tradition be such a rule or not . for the divines who wrote before could not be ignorant of the rule of faith they received among themselves . gabriel biel lived in the latter end of the 15th century , and he affirms , that the scripture alone teaches all things necessary to salvation ; and he instances in the things to be done and to be avoided , to be loved and to be despised , to be believed and to be hoped for . and again , that the will of god is to be understood by the scriptures , and by them alone we know the whole will of god. if the whole will of god were to be known by the scripture , how could part of it be preserved in an unwritten tradition ? and if this were then part of the rule of faith , how could such a man , who was professour of divinity at tubing be ignorant of it ? i know he saith he took the main of his book from the lectures of eggelingus , in the cathedral church at mentz ; but this adds greater strength to the argument , since it appears hereby that this doctrine was not confined to the schools , but openly delivered in one of the most famous churches of germany . cajetan died not above 12 years before the council , who agrees with this doctrine of biel or eggelingus ( and he was accounted the oracle of his time for divinity ) for he affirms that the scripture gives such a perfection to a man of god ( or one that devoutly serves him ) that thereby he is accomplished for every good work ; how can this be , if there be another rule of faith quite distinct from the written word ? bellarmin indeed grants , that all things which are simply necessary to the salvation of all , are plainly contained in scripture , by which he yields , that the scripture alone is the rule of faith as to necessary points ; and he calls the scripture the certain and stable rule of faith , yea the most certain and most secure rule . if there be then any other , it must be less certain and about points not necessary to salvation ; i. e. it must be a rule where there is no need of a rule . for if mens salvation be sufficiently provided for , by the written rule ; and the divine revelation , be in order to mens salvation , what need any other revelation to the church , besides what is written ? he asserts farther , that nothing is de fide , but what god hath revealed to the prophets and apostles , or is deduced from thence . this he brings to prove that whatsoever was received as a matter of faith in the church , which is not found in scripture must have come from an apostolical tradition . but if it be necessary to salvation , according to his own concession it must be written ; and if it be not , how comes it to be received as a matter of faith ? unless it be first proved , that it is necessary to salvation to receive an unwritten rule of faith , as well as a written ? for , either it must be necessary on its own account , and then he saith it must be written ; and if not , then it can be no otherwise necessary than because it is to be believed on the account of a rule , which makes it necessary . and consequently that rule must be first proved to be a necessary article of faith : which bellarmin hath no where done ; but onely sets down rules about knowing true apostolical traditions from others in matters of faith , wherein he wisely supposes that which he was to prove . and the true occasion of setting up this new rule of faith is intimated by bellarmin himself in his first rule of judging true apostolical traditions . which is , when the church believes any thing as a doctrine of faith which is not in scripture , then saith he , we must judge it to be an apostolical tradition . why so ? otherwise the church must have erred in taking that for a matter of faith which was not . and this is the great secret about this new rule of faith ; they saw plainly several things were imposed on the faith of christians , which could not be proved from scripture ; and they must not yield they had once mistaken , and therefore this new , additional less certain rule for unnecessary points must be advanced , although they wanted tradition among themselves to prove tradition a rule of faith , which i shall now farther make appear from their own school divines before the council of trent . we are to observe among them what those are which they strictly call theological truths , and by them we shall judge , what they made the rule of faith. for , they do not make a bare revelation to any person a sufficient ground for faith ; but they say * the revelation must be publick , and designed for the general benefit of the church ; and so aquinas determines † that our faith rests onely upon the revelations made to the prophets and apostles ; and theological truths are such as are immediately deduced from the principles of faith , i. e. from publick divine revelations owned and received by the church . the modern school men , ‖ who follow the council of trent make theological truths to be deduced from the unwritten as well as the written word ; or else they would not speak consonantly to their own doctrine . and therefore if those before them deduce theological truths onely from the written word , then it will follow that they did not hold the unwritten word to be a rule of faith. marsilius ab inghen was first professor of divinity of heidelberg ( at the latter end of the 15th century saith bellarmin , but trithemius saith the 14th ) and he determines , that a theological proposition is that which is positively asserted in scripture or deduced from thence by good consequence ; and that a theological truth strictly taken is the truth of an article of faith , or something expressed in the bible , or deduced from thence . he mentions apostolical traditions afterwards , and joins them with ecclesiastical histories and martyrologies . so far was he from supposing them to be part of the rule of faith. in the beginning of the 15th century lived petrus de alliaco , one as famous for his skill in divinity , as for his dignity in the church , he saith , that theological discourse is founded on scripture , and a theological proof must be drawn from thence ; that theological principles are the truths contained in the canon of scripture ; and conclusions are such as are drawn out of what is contained in scripture . so that he not onely makes the scripture the foundation of faith , but of all sorts of true reasoning about it . he knew nothing of cardinal palavicini's two first principles of faith. to the same purpose speaks gregorius ariminensis , about the middle of the 14th century he saith , all theological discourse is grounded on scripture and the consequences from it ; which he not onely proves from testimony , but ex communi omnium conceptione , from the general consent of christians . for , saith he , all are agreed that then a thing is proved theologically , when it is proved from the words of scripture . so that here we have plain tradition , against traditions being a distinct rule of faith , and this delivered by the general of an order in the church of rome . he affirms that the principles of theology , are no other than the truths contained in the canon of scripture ; and that the resolution of all theological discourse is into them ; and that there can be no theological conclusion , but what is drawn from scripture . in the former part of that century lived darandus , he gives a threesold sense of theology . 1. for a habit whereby we assent to those things which are contained in scripture , as they are there delivered . 2. for a habit whereby those things are ●efended and declared which are delivered in scripture . 3. for a habit of those things which are deduced out of articles of faith ; and so it is all one with the holy scripture . and in another place he affirms , that all truth is contained in the holy scripture at large ; but for the people's conveniency the necessary points are summed up in the apostles creed . in his preface before his book on the sentences he highly commends the scriptures for their dignity , their usefulness , their certainty , their depth ; and after all concludes , that in matters of faith men ought to speak agreeably to the scriptures ; and whosoever doth not , breaks the rule of the scriptures , which he calls the measure of our faith. what tradition did appear then for another rule of faith in the 14th century ? but before i proceed higher i shall shew the consent of others with these school divines in the three last centuries before the council of trent . in the middle of the 15th lived nicholaus panormitanus , one of mighty reputation for his skill in the canon law. in the ch. significâsti prima . 1. de electione , debating the authority of pope and council , he saith , if the pope hath better reason his authority is greater than the councils ; and if any private person in matters of faith hath better reason out of scripture than the pope , his saying is to be preferred above the pope's . which words do plainly shew , that the scripture was then looked on as the onely rule of faith ; or else no man's grounding himself on scripture could make his doctrine to be preferred before the pope's ; who might alledge tradition against him , and if that were an equal rule of faith , the doctrine of one rule could not be preferred before the other . at the same time lived tostatus the famous bishop of avila , one of infinite industry and great judgment , and therefore could not be mistaken in the rule of faith. in his preface on genesis he saith , that there must be a rule for our understandings to be regulated by , and that rule must be most certain ; that divine faith is the most certain ; and that is contained in scripture , and therefore we must regulate our understandings thereby . and this he makes to be the measure of truth and falshood . if he knew any other rule of faith besides the scriptures , he would have mentioned it in this place ; and not have directed men onely to them , as the exact measure of truth and falshood . in the beginning of this century thomas walden ( confessor to our henry 5th , saith trithemius , ) disputed sharply against wickliff ; but he durst not set up the churches authority or tradition equal with the scriptures . for when he mentions tradition after scriptures , he utterly disclaims any such thought as that of equality between them ; but he desires a due distance may be kept between canonical scripture and ecclesiastical authority or tradition . in the first place he saith , we ought to believe the holy scriptures ; then the definitions and customs of the catholick church ; but he more fully explains himself in another place , where he plainly asserts , that nothing else is to be received by such faith as the scripture and christ's symbolical church ; but for all other authorities , the lowest degree is that of catholick tradition , the next of the bishops , especially of the apostolical churches , and the roman in the first place ; and above all these he places that of a general council ; but when he hath so done , he saith , all these authorities are to be regarded but as the instructions of elders , and admonitions of fathers . so that the chief opposers of wickliff had not yet found out this new rule of faith. much about the same time lived joh. gerson , whom cardinal zabarella declared , in the council of constance , to be the greatest divine of his time , and therefore could not be ignorant of the true rule of faith. he agrees with panormitan in this , that if a man be well skilled in scriptures , his doctrine deserves more to be regarded than the pope's declaration ; for , saith he , the gospel is more to be believed than the pope , and if such a one teaches a doctrine to be contained in scripture , which the pope either knows not or mistakes , it is plain whose judgment is to be preferred . nay , he goes farther , that if in a general council he finds the majority incline to that part which is contrary to scripture , he is bound to oppose it , and he instances in hilary . and he shews , that since the canon of scripture received by the church , no authority of the church is to be equalled to it . he allows a judgment of discretion in private persons , and a certainty of the literal sense of scripture attainable thereby . he makes the scripture the onely standing infallible rule of faith for the whole church to the end of the world . and whatever doctrine is not agreeable thereto , is to be rejected either as heretical , suspicious , or impertinent to religion . if the council of trent had gone by this rule , we had never heard of the creed of pius iv. in the beginning of the 14th century lived nicolaus de lyra , who parallels the scriptures in matters of faith with first-principles in sciences ; for as other truths are tried in them by their reduction to first-principles , so in matters of faith by their reduction to canonical scriptures , which are of divine revelation , which is impossible to be false . if he had known any other principles which would have made faith impossible to be false , he would never have spoken thus of scripture alone . but to return to the school divines . about the same time lived joh. duns scotus , the head of a school , famous for subtilty ; he affirms , that the holy scripture doth sufficiently contain all matters necessary to salvation ; because by it we know what we are to believe , hope for , and practise . and after he hath enlarged upon them , he concludes in these words , patet quod scriptura sacra sufficienter continet doctrinam necessariam viatori . if this be understood onely of points simply necessary , then however it proves , that all such things necessary to salvation are therein contained ; and no man is bound to enquire after unnecessary points . how then can it be necessary to embrace another rule of faith , when all things necessary to salvation are sufficiently contained in scripture ? but thomas aquinas is more express in this matter ; for he saith , that those things which depend on the will of god , and are above any desert of ours , can be known no otherways by us , than as they are delivered in scriptures by the will of god , which is made known to us . this is so remarkable a passage , that suarez could not let it escape without corrupting it ; for instead of scripture he makes him to speak of divine revelation in general , viz. under scripture he comprehends all ; that is , under the written word he means the unwritten . if he had meant so , he was able to have expressed his own mind more plainly ; and cajetan apprehended no such meaning in his words , but this is a matter of so great consequence , that i shall prove from other passages in him , that he asserted the same doctrine , viz. that the scripture was the onely rule of faith. 1. he makes no proofs of matters of faith to be sufficient but such as are deduced from scripture ; and all other arguments from authority to be onely probable ; nay although such persons had particular revelations . how can this be consistent with another rule of faith distinct from scripture ? for if he had owned any such , he must have deduced necessary arguments from thence , as well as from canonical scriptures . but if all other authorities be onely probable , then they cannot make any thing necessary to be believed . 2. he affirms , that to those who receive the scriptures we are to prove nothing but by the scriptures , as matter of faith. for by authorities he means nothing but the scriptures ; as appears by the former place , and by what follows , where he mentions the canon of scripture expresly . 3. he asserts that the articles of the creed are all contained in scripture , and are drawn out of scripture , and put together by the church onely for the ease of the people . from hence it nenessarily follows that the reason of believing the articles of the creed , is to be taken from the written word and not from any unwritten tradition . for else he needed not to have been so carefull to shew , that they were all taken out of scripture . 4. he distinguisheth the matters of faith in scripture , some to be believed for themselves , which he calls prima credibilia ; these he saith every one is bound explicitly to believe ; but for other things he is bound onely implicitly , or in a preparation of mind , to believe whatever is contained in scripture ; and then onely is he bound to believe explicitly when it is made clear to him to be contained in the doctrine of faith. which words must imply the scripture to be the onely rule of faith ; for otherwise implicit faith , must relate to whatever is proved to be an unwritten word . from all this it appears that aquinas knew nothing of a traditional rule of faith ; although he lived after the lateran council a. d. 1215. being born about nine years after it . and bonaventure , who died the same year with him , affirms , that nothing was to besaid , ( about matters of faith ) but what is made clear out of the holy scriptures . not long after them lived henricus gandavensis ; and he delivers these things which are very material to our purpose . 1. that the reason why we believe the guides of the church since the apostles , who work no miracles , is , because they preach nothing but what they have left in their most certain writings , which are delivered down to us pure and uncorrupt by an universal consent of all that succeeded to our times . where we see he makes the scriptures to be the onely certain rule , and that we are to judge of all other doctrines by them . 2. that truth is more certainly preserved in scripture than in the church ; because that is fixed and immutable , and men are variable , so that multitudes of them may depart from the faith , either through errour or malice ; but the true church will always remain in some righteous persons . how then can tradition be a rule of faith equal with scriptures , which depends upon the testimony of persons who are so very fallible ? i might carry this way of testimony on higher still , as when richardus de s. victore saith , in the thirteenth century , that every truth is suspected by him , which is not confirmed by holy scripture ; but in stead of that i shall now proceed to the canon law , as having more authority than particular testimonies . 3. as to the canon law collected by gratian , i do not insist upon its confirmation by eugenius , but upon its universal reception in the church of rome . and from thence i shall evidently prove that tradition was not allowed to be a rule of faith equal with the scriptures . dist. 9. c. 3 , 4 , 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10. the authority and infallibility of the holy scripture is asserted above all other writings whatsoever ; for all other writings are to be examined , and men are to judge of them as they see cause . now bellarmin tells us , that the unwritten word is so called , not that it always continues unwritten , but that it was so by the first authour of it . so that the unwritten word doth not depend on mere oral tradition , according to him , but it may be found in the writers of the church ; but the canon law expresly excludes all other writings , let them contain what they will , from being admitted to any competition with canonical scripture ; and therefore according to that , no part of the rule of faith was contained in any other than canonical scriptures . dist. 37. c. relatum , a man is supposed to have an entire and firm rule of faith in the scriptures . caus. 8. q. 1. c. nec sufficere , the scriptures are said to be the onely rule both of faith and life . and the gloss on the canon law there owns the scripture to be the rule for matters of faith ; but very pleasantly applies it to the clergy , and thinks images enough for the laity . caus. 24. q. 1. c. non afferentes . the scriptures are acknowledged to be the true balance ; and that we are not so much to weigh what we find there , as to own what we find there already weighed . which must imply the scripture alone to be that measure we are to trust to . dist. 8. c. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9. it is there said , that custome must yield to truth and reason , when that is discovered , and that for this reason , because christ said , i am truth and not custome . now , if tradition be an infallible rule of faith , custome ought always to be presumed to have truth and reason of its side . for , if we can once suppose a custome to prevail in the church against truth and reason , it is impossible that tradition should be infallible ; for what is that but ancient custome ? caus. 11. q. 3. c. 101. si is qui proeest . if any one commands what god hath forbidden , or forbids what god hath commanded , he is to be accursed of all that love god. and if he requires any thing besides the will of god , or what god hath evidently required in scripture , he is to be looked on as a false witness of god , and a sacrilegious person . how can this be , if there be another infallible way of conveying the will of god besides the scriptures ? caus. 24. q. 3. c. 30. c. quid autem . in matters of doubt it is said that men are to fly to the written word for satisfaction , and that it is folly not to doe it . it is true , mens own fancies are opposed to scripture , but against mens fancies no other rule is mentioned but that of the written word . joh. 22. extravag . c. quia quorundam . tit. 14. makes his appeal to scripture in the controversie then on foot about use and property ; dicunt nobis ubi legunt , &c. and he shews that if it were a matter of faith , it must be contained in scripture , either expresly or by reduction ; otherwise the scripture would be no certain rule ; and by consequence , the articles of faith which are proved by scripture , would be rendred doubtfull and uncertain . the glosser there saith , whence comes this consequence ? and refers to another place ; where he makes it out thus ; that faith can onely be proved by the scripture , and therefore if the authority of that be destroy'd , faith would be taken away . the roman editors for an antidote refer to cardinal turrecremata , who doth indeed speak of catholick truths , which are not to be found in the canon of scripture ; and he quotes a passage in the canon law for it under the name of alex. 3. c. cum marthoe extrav . de celebr . missae . but in truth it is innoc. 3. decretal . l. 3. tit. 41. and yet this will not prove what he aims at ; for the question was about the authour of the words added in the eucharist to those of christ's institution ; and he pleads that many of christ's words and actions are omitted by the evangelists , which the apostles afterwards set down ; and he instances in saint paul , as to those words of christ , it is more blessed to give than to receive ; and elsewhere . but what is all this to catholick truths not being contained in scripture either in words or by consequence ? the cardinal was here very much to seek , when he had nothing but such a testimony as this to produce in so weighty and so new a doctrine . the best argument he produces is , a horrible blunder of gratian's , where s. augustin seems to reckon the decretal epistles equal with the scriptures , dist. 19. c. in canonicis ; which the roman correctors were ashamed of , and consess that s. augustin speaks onely of canonical epistles in scripture . so hard must they strain , who among christians would set up any other rule equal with the written word . 4. i proceed to prove this from the ancient offices of the roman church . in the office produced by morinus out of the vatican ms. which he saith was very ancient ; the bishop before his consecration was asked , if he would accommodate all his prudence , to the best of his skill , to the sense of holy scripture ? resp. yes , i will with all my heart consent , and obey it in all things . inter. wilt thou teach the people by word and example , the things which thou learnest out of holy scriptures ? resp. i will. and then immediately follows the examen about manners . in another old office of s. victor's , there are the same questions in the same manner . and so in another of the church of rouen lately produced by mabillon , which he saith was about william the conquerour's time , there is not a word about traditions ; which crept into the ordo romanus , and from thence hath been continued in the roman pontificals . but it is observable , that the ordo romanus owns that the examen was originally taken out of the gallican offices , ( although it does not appear in those imperfect ones lately published at rome by th●masius ) and therefore we may justly suspect that the additional questions about traditions were the roman interpolations , after it came to be used in that pontifical . and the first office in morinus was the true ancient gallican office. but if tradition had been then owned as a rule of faith , it ought no more to have been omitted in the ancient offices than in the modern . and the ancient writers about ecclesiastical offices speak very agreeably to the most ancient offices about this matter . amalarius saith the gospel is the fountain of wisedom ; and that the preachers ought to prove the evangelical truth out of the sacred books . isidore , that we ought to think nothing ( as to matters of faith ) but what is contained in the two testaments . rabanus maurus , that the knowledge of the scriptures is the foundation and perfection of prudence , that truth and wisedom are to be tried by them ; and the perfect instruction of life is contained in them . our venerable bede agrees with them , when he saith , that the true teachers take out of the scriptures of the old and new testament that which they preach : and therefore have their minds imploy'd in finding out the true meaning of them . 5. i now come to the fathers ; wherein i am in great measure prevented by a late discourse , wherein it is at large shewed that the fathers made use of no other rule but the scriptures for deciding controversies ; therefore i shall take another method , which is to shew that those who do speak most advantageously of tradition , did not intend to set up another rule of faith distinct from scripture . and here i shall pass over all those testimonies of fathers which speak either of tradition before the canon of scripture , or to those who did not receive it , or of the tradition of scripture it self , or of some rites and customs of the church , as wholly impertinent . and when these are cut off , there remain scarce any to be considered , besides that of vincentius lerinensis , and one testimony of s. basil. i begin with vincentius lerinensis , who by some is thought so great a favourer of tradition ; but he saith not a word of it as a rule of faith distinct from scripture ; for he asserts the canon of scripture to be sufficient of it self for all things . how can that be , if tradition be a rule of faith distinct from it ? he makes indeed catholick tradition the best interpreter of scripture ; and we have no reason to decline it in the points in dispute between us , if vincentius his rules be follow'd . 1. if antiquity , universality and consent be joyned . 2. if the difference be observed between old errours and new ones . for , saith he , when they had length of time , truth is more easily concealed , by those who are concerned to suppress it . and in those cases we have no other way to deal with them , but by scripture and ancient councils . and this is the rule we profess to hold to . but to suppose any one part of the church to assume to it self the title of catholick , and then to determine what is to be held for catholick tradition by all members of the catholick church , is a thing in it self unreasonable , and leaves that part under an impossibility of being reclaimed . for in case the corrupt part be judge , we may be sure no corruptions will be ever owned . vincentius grants that arianism had once extremely the advantage in point of universality , and had many councils of its side ; if now the prevailing party be to judge of catholick tradition , and all are bound to submit to its decrees without farther examination , as the authour of the guide in controversies saith upon these rules of vincentius ; then i say all men were then bound to declare themselves arians . for if the guides of the present church are to be trusted and relied upon for the doctrine of the apostolical church downwards ; how was it possible for any members of the church then to oppose arianism , and to reform the church after its prevalency ? to say it was condemned by a former council , doth by no means clear the difficulty ; for the present guides must be trusted , whether they were rightly condemned or not ; and nothing can be more certain , than that they would be sure to condemn those who condemned them . but vincentius saith , every true lover of christ preferred the ancient faith before the novel betraying of it ; but then he must chuse this ancient faith against the judgment of the present guides of the church . and therefore that , according to vincentius , can be no infallible rule of faith. but whether the present universality dissents from antiquity , whose judgment should be sooner taken than its own ? saith the same authour , this had been an excellent argument in the mouth of ursacius or valens at the council of ariminum ; and i do not see what answer the guide in controversies could have made . but both are parties , and is not the councils judgment to be taken rather than a few opposers ? so that , for all that i can find by these principles , arianism having the greater number , had hard luck not to be established as the catholick faith. but if in that case , particular persons were to judge between the new and the old faith , then the same reason will still hold , unless the guides of the church have obtained a new patent of infallibility since that time . the great question among us , is , where the true ancient faith is ; and how we may come to find it out ? we are willing to follow the ancient rules in this matter . the scripture is allowed to be an infallible rule on all hands ; and i am proving that tradition was not allowed in the ancient church as distinct from it . but the present question is , how far tradition is to be allowed in giving the sense of scripture between us . vincentius saith , we ought to follow it when there is antiquity , universality and consent : this we are willing to be tryed by . but here comes another question , who is to be judge of these ? the present guides of the catholick church ? to what purpose then are all those rules ? will they condemn themselves ? or , as the guide admirably saith , if the present universality be its own judge , when can we think it will witness its departure from the true faith ? and if it will not , what a case is the church in , under such a pretended universality ? the utmost use i can suppose then , vincentius his rules can be of to us now , is in that case which he puts when corruptions and errours have had time to take root and fasten themselves ; and that is , by an appeal to scripture and ancient councils . but because of the charge of innovation upon us , we are content to be tried by his second rule . by the consent of the fathers of greatest reputation , who are agreed on all hands to have lived and died in the communion of the catholick church : and what they delivered freely , constantly and unanimously , let that be taken for the undoubted and certain rule in judging between us . but if the present guides must come in to be judges here again , then all our labour is lost , and vincentius his rules signifie just nothing , the testimony of s. basil is by mr. white magnified above the rest , and that out of his book de spiritu sancto above all others , to prove that the certainty of faith depends on tradition ; and not merely on scripture . the force of it is said to lye in this , that the practice of the church , in saying , with the holy spirit , though not found in scripture is to determine the sense of the article of faith about the divinity of the holy ghost . but to clear this place , we are to observe , 1. that s. basil doth not insist on tradition for the proof of the article of faith , for he expresly disowns it in that book ; it is not enough , saith he , that we have it by tradition from our fathers ; for our fathers had it from the will of god in scripture , as appears by those testimonies i have set down already , which they took for their foundations . nothing can be plainer than that s. basil made scripture alone the foundation of faith as to this point . and no one upon all occasions speaks more expresly than he doth as to the sufficiency of scripture for a rule of faith ; and he was too great , and too wise a man to contradict himself . 2. that there were different forms of speech used in the church concerning the holy ghost , some taken out of scripture , and others received by tradition from the fathers . when he proves the divinity of the holy ghost he appeals to scripture , and declares , that he would neither think nor speak otherwise than he found there . but it was objected that the form s. basil used was not found in scripture ; he answers , that the equivalent is there found ; and that there were some things received by tradition , which had the same force towards piety . and if we take away all unwritten customs , we shall doe wrong to the gospel , and leave a bare name to the publick preaching . and from thence he insists on some traditionary rites , as the sign of the cross , praying towards the east , &c. his business is to shew that to the greater solemnity of christian worship several customs were observed in the church , which are not to be found in scripture . and if other ancient customs were received which are not commanded in scripture , he sees no reason that they should find such fault with this . and this is the whole force of s. basil's reasoning , which can never be stretched to the setting up tradition as a rule of faith distinct from scripture . having thus shewed that there was no catholick tradition for this new rule of faith , i am now to give an account how it came into the church . the first step that was made towards it , was by the second council of nice . for , although the emperour in the synodical epistle proposed to them the true ancient mehod of judging in councils , by the books of scripture placed on a throne in the middle of the council ; yet they found , they could by no means doe their business that way , and therefore as bellarmin observes , they set up tradition in the 6th and 7th sessions , and pronounced anathema's against those who rejected unwritten traditions . but although there were then almost as little pretence for tradition as scripture in the matter of images ; yet there having been a practice among them , to set up and to worship images , ( which richerius thinks came first into the church from the reverence shewed to the emperours statues ) they thought this the securest way to advance that , which they could never defend by scripture . but this prevailed very little in the western church , as is well known by the rejection of that synod ; however pope hadrian joined with them , and produced a wretched tradition about sylvester and constantine to justifie their proceedings ; as appears by the acts of that council . and from the time that images were received at rome , the force of tradition was magnified ; and by degrees it came to be made use of to justifie other practices , for which they had nothing else to plead . hitherto tradition was made use of for matters of practice , and the scripture was generally received as the rule of faith ; but some of the schoolmen found it impossible to defend some doctrines held in the church of rome by mere scripture , and therefore they were forced to call in the help of tradition . the most remarkable of these was scotus , who although in his prologue he asserted , as is said already , that the scripture did sufficiently contain all things necessary to salvation ; yet when he came to particular points , he found scripture alone would never doe their business . and especially as to the sacraments of the church , about which he saw the church of rome then held many things which could never be proved from thence . and this was the true occasion of traditions being taken in for a partial rule . for after the council of lateran had declared several things to be of faith , which were in no former creeds , as scotus confesses , and they were bound to defend them as points of faith , the men of wit and subtilty , such as scotus was , were very hard put to it , to find out ways to prove those to have been old points of faith , which they knew to be very new . then they betook themselves to two things , which would serve for a colour to blind the common people ; and those were , 1. that it was true , these things were not in scripture ; but christ said to his disciples , i have many things to say unto you , &c. and among those many things they were to believe these new doctrines to be some . 2. when this would not serve , then they told them , though these doctrines were not explicitly in scripture , yet they were implicitly there ; and the church had authority to fetch them out of those dark places , and to set them in a better light . and thus scotus helped himself out in that dark point of transubstantiation . first he attempts to make it out by tradition , but finding that would not doe the business effectually , he runs to the authority of the church , especially in the business of sacraments , and we are to suppose , saith he , that the church doth expound the scripture with the same spirit which indited them . this was a brave supposition indeed , but he offers no proof of it . if we allow scotus to have been the introducer of tradition , as to some points of faith , yet i have made it appear , that his doctrine was not received in the schools . but after the council of constance had declared several propositions to be heretical , which could not be condemned by scripture , there was found a necessity of holding , that there were catholick truths not contained in scripture . the first proposition there condemned was , that the substance of bread and wine remain in the sacrament of the altar : the second , that the accidents do not remain without their subject : now how could such as these be condemned by scripture ? but although onely some were said to be heretical , yet all were said to be against catholick truth . but where is this catholick truth to be found ? cardinal cusanus thought of a current sense of scripture , according to the churches occasions ; so that though the churches practice should be directly contrary , yet the scripture was to be understood as the church practised . this was a very plain and effectual way , if it had not been too gross ; and therefore it was thought much better by cardinal turrecremata , to found catholick verities on unwritten tradition , as well as on scripture . after this , leo x. in his famous bull against luther , exurge domine , made a farther step ; for 22 proposition condemned therein , is that it is certain that it is not in the power of the church or pope to appoint new articles of faith. it seems then the pope or church have a power to constitute new articles of faith ; and then neither scripture nor tradition can be the certain rule of faith , but the present church or pope . this had put an end to the business , if it would have taken ; but the world being wiser , and the errours and corruptions complained of not being to be defended 〈◊〉 scripture , tradition was pitched upon as a secure way ; and accordingly several attempts were made towards the setting of it up , by some provincial councils before that of trent . so in the council of sens , 1527. can. 53. it is declared to be a pernicious errour to receive nothing but what is deduced from scripture , because christ delivered many things to his apostles which were never written . but not one thing is alledged as a matter of faith so conveyed ; but onely some rites about sacraments and prayer ; and yet he is declared a heretick as well as schismatick , who rejects them . indeed the apostles creed is mentioned , but not as to the articles contained in it , but as to the authours of it . but what is there in all this that makes a man guilty of heresie ? jod . clicthoveus , a doctor of paris , the next year wrote an explication and defence of this council , but he mistakes the point ; for he runs upon it as if it were , whether all things to be believed and observed in the church , were to be expresly set down in scripture ? whereas a just consequence out of it is sufficient . and the greatest strength of what he saith to the purpose , is , that the other opinion was condemned in the council of constance . and from no better a tradition than this did the council of trent declare the unwritten word to be a rule of faith equal with the scriptures . ii. about the canon of scripture , defined by the council of trent . this is declared by the council of trent , sess. 4. and therein the books of tobias , judith , wisedom of solomon , ecclesiasticus , maccabees and baruch are received for canonical , with the twenty two books in the hebrew canon , and an anathema is denounced against those who do not . and presently it adds , that hereby the world might see what authorities the council proceeded on for con●●rming matters of faith as well as reforming manners . now to shew that there was no catholick tradition for the ground of this decree , we are to observe , 1. that these canonical books are not so called in a large sense for such as have been used or read in the church ; but in the strict sense for such as are a good foundation to build matters of faith upon . 2. that these books were not so received by all even in the council of trent . for what is received by virtue of a catholick tradition , must be universally received by the members of it . but that so it was not appears by the account given by both the historians . f. paul saith , that in the congregation there were two different opinions of those who were for a particular catalogue ; one was to distinguish the books into three parts , the other to make all the books of equal authority ; and that this latter was carried by the greater number . now if this were a catholick tradition , how was it possible for the fathers of the council to divide about it ? and cardinal pallavicini himself saith , that bertanus and seripandus propounded the putting the books into several classes , some to be read for piety , and others to confirm doctrines of faith ; and that cardinal seripando wrote a most learned book to that purpose . what! against a catholick tradition ? it seems , he was far from believing it to be so . and he confesses , that when they came to the anathema , the legats and twenty fathers were for it ; madrucci and fourteen were against it , because some catholicks were of another opinion . then certainly , they knew no catholick tradition for it . among these cardinal cajetan is mention'd , who was , saith pallavicini , severely rebuked for it by melchior canus ; but what is that to the tradition of the church ? canus doth indeed appeal to the council of carthage , innocentius i. and the council of florence ; but this doth not make up a catholick tradition against cajetan ; who declares that he follows s. jerom , who cast those books out of the canon with respect to faith. and he answers the arguments brought on the other side , by this distinction , that they are canonical for edification , but not for faith. if therefore canus would have confuted cajetan he ought to have proved that they were owned for canonical in the latter sense . cajetan in his epistle to clemens vii . before the historical books , owns the great obligation of the church to s. jerom for distinguishing canonical and apocryphal books ; and saith , that he hath freed it from the reproach of the jews , who said the christians made canonical books of the old testament which they knew nothing of . and this was an argument of great consequence ; but canus takes no notice of it , and it fully answers his objection , that men could not know what books were truly canonical , viz. such as were of divine inspiration , and so received by the jews . catharinus saith , in answer to cajetan , that the jews had one canon , and the church another . but how comes the canon to be received as of divine inspiration which was not so received among the jews ? this were to resolve all into the churches inspiration and not into tradition . bellarmin grants , that the church can by no means make a book canonical which is not so , but onely declare what is canonical , and that , not at pleasure ; but from ancient testimonies , from similitude of style with books uncontroverted , and the general sense and taste of christian people . now the case here relates to books not first written to christians , but among the jews , from whom we receive the oracles of god committed to them . and if the jews never believed these books to contain the oracles of god in them , how can the christian church embrace them for such , unless it assumes a power to make , and not merely to declare canonical books ? for he grants we have no testimony of the jews for them . but catharinus himself cannot deny that s. jerom saith , that although the church reads those books , yet it doth not receive them for canonical scriptures . and he makes a pitisull answer to it . for he confesses , that the church taken for the body of the faithfull did not receive them ; but as taken for the governours it did . but others grant that they did receive them no more than the people ; and as to the other , the cause of tradition is plainly given us . and in truth he resolves all at last into the opinion of the popes innocentius , gelasius and eugenius 4. but we are obliged to him for letting us know the secret of so much zeal for these apocryphal books , viz. that they are of great force against the hereticks , for purgatory is no where so expresly mention'd as in the maccabees . if it had not been for this , s. jerom and cajetan might have escaped censure , and the jewish canon had been sufficient . but to shew , that there hath been no catholick tradition about the tridentine canon , i shall prove these two things : 1. that there hath been a constant tradition against it in the eastern church . 2. that there never was a constant tradition for it in the western church . 1. that there hath been a constant tradition against it in the eastern church , which received the jewish canon , without the books declared canonical by the council of trent . we have very early evidence of this in the testimony of melito , bishop of sardis , who lived not long after the middle of the 2d . century , and made it his business to enquire into this matter , and he delivers but 22 books of the old testament . the same is done by origen in the next , who took infinite pains , as eusebius saith , in searching after the copies of the old testament . and these testimonies are preserved by eusebius in the following century : and himself declares , that there was no sacred book among the jews from the time of zorobabel ; which cuts off the books canonized by the council of trent . in the same age we have the testimonies of athanasius , st. cyril of jerusalem , epiphanius , s. basil , s. gregory nazianzene , amphilochius and s. chrysostom : it is not to be imagined that a tradition should be better attested in one age than this was , by so considerable men in different churches , who give in the testimony of all those churches they belonged to . and yet besides these we have in that age a concurrent testimony of a council of bishops at laodicea , from several provinces of asia ; and which is yet more , this canon of theirs was received into the code of the catholick church ; and so owned by the council of chalcedon , which by its first canon gives authority to it . and justinian allows the force of laws to the canons which were either made or confirmed by the four general councils . but it is the point of tradition i am upon ; and there●ore justinian's novel may at least be a s●rong evidence of that in the 6th century : in the 7th , leontius gives his own testimony , and that of theodorus . in the 8th , damascen expresly owns the hebrew canon of 22 books , and excludes by name some of the books made canonical at trent . in the 9th we have the test●mony of nicephorus , patriarch of constantinople , if he be the authour of the laterculus , at the end of his chr●nography ; but if he be not , he must be an authour of that age , being translated by anastasius bibliothecarius . in the 12th . balsamon and zonaras refer to the council of laodicea , and the greek fathers . in the 14th . nicephorus calisthus reckons but 22 books of the old testament . and in this age , we have the clear testimony of metrophanes , ( afterwards patriarch of alexandria ) who saith , there are but 22 canonical books of the old testament ; but the rest , i. e. tobit , judith , wisedom , ecclesiasticus , baruch and machabees are usefull , and therefore not wholly to be rejected , but the church never received them for canonical and authentical , as appears by many testimonies , as , among others , of gregory the divine , amphilochius and damascen : and therefore we never prove matters of faith out of them . 2. let us now compare this tradition with that of the western church for the new canon of trent . it cannot be denied , that innocentius i. and gelasius did enlarge the canon , and took in the apocryphal books ( unless we call in question the writings under their names ; ) but granting them genuine , i shall shew that there is no comparison between this tradition and that of the eastern church , and therefore there could be no possible reason for the council of trent to make a decree for this tradition , and to anathematize all who did not submit to it . for , 1. this tradition was not universally received at that time . innocentius his epistle is supposed to be written a. d. 405. was the western church agreed before or after about this matter ? this epistle was written to eruperius , a gallican bishop , ( to whom st. jerom dedicated his commentaries on zechariah , ) but now it unluckily falls out , that the tradition of the gallican church was contrary to this ; as appears by s. hilary , ( who could not be ignorant of it , being a famous bishop of that church ) and he tells us , there were but 22 canonical books of the old testament . i confess he saith , some were for adding tobit and judith , but it is very observable that he saith , that the other account is most agreeable to ancient tradition , which is a mighty argument against innocentius , who brings no tradition to justifie his canon . when st. augustin produced a place out of the book of wisedom , the divines of marseilles rejected it ; because the book was not canonical : therefore in that time innocent's canon was by no means received in the gallican church ; for by it this book was made canonical . but s. jerom , who had as much learning as pope innocent , vehemently opposed this new canon more than once or ten times ; and not onely speaks of the jewish canon , but of the canon of the church . the church , saith he , reads the books of tobit , judith and machabees , but the church doth not receive them among canonical scriptures . what church doth he mean ? not the synagogue certainly . pope innocent saith , those books are to be received into the canon ; s. jerom saith , the church doth not receive them , but that they are to be cast out ; where is the certainty of tradition to be found ? if innocent were in the right , s. jerom was foully mistaken , and in plain terms belied the church . but how is this consistent with the saintship of st. jerom ? or with common discretion if the church did receive those books for canonical ? for every one could have disproved him . and it required no great judgment or deep learning to know what books were received , and what not . if s. jerom were so mistaken ( which it is very hard to believe ) how came ruffinus not to observe his errours and opposition to the church ? nay , how came ruffinus himself to fall into the very same prodigious mistake ? for he not onely rejects the controverted books out of the canon , but saith , he follow'd the ancient tradition therein . what account can be given of this matter ? if innocent's tradition were right , these men were under a gross delusion ; and yet they were learned and knowing persons , and more than ordinarily conversant in the doctrines and traditions of the church . 2. this opinion was not received as a tradition of the church afterwards . for , if it had been , how could gregory i. reject the book of machabees out of the canon , when two of his predecessours took it in ? it is somewhat hard , to suppose one pope to contradict two of his predecessours about the canon of scripture ; yet i see not how to avoid it ; nor how it is consistent with the constancy of tradition , much less with the pretence to infallibility . he did not merely doubt , as canus would have it thought , but he plainly excludes them out of the canon . catharinus thinks he follow'd s. jerom. what then ? doth this exclude his contradicting his predecessours ? or was s. jerom's judgment above the pope's ? but it was not s. gregory alone who contradicted the former popes canon ; for it was not received either in italy , spain , france , germany or england ; and yet no doubt it was a very catholick tradition . not in italy ; for there cassiodore , a learned and devout man in the next century to them , gives an account of the canon of scripture , and he takes not any notice either of innocent or gelasius . he first sets down the order of scripture according to s. jerom ; and then according to s. augustin ; and in the last place , according to the old translation and the lxx . and where himself speaks of the apocryphal books before , he follows s. jerom 's opinion , that they were written rather for manners than dactrine . he confesses there was a difference about the canon ; but he goes about to excuse it . but what need that if there were a catholick tradition then in the church concerning it , and that inforced by two popes ? but it may yet seem stranger , that even in italy , one canonized for a saint by clemens vii . should follow s. jerom's opinion in this matter , viz. s. antoninus , bishop of florence . who speaking of ecclestasticus received into the canon of the two popes , he saith , it is onely received by the church to be read , and is not authentick to prove any thing in matters of faith. he that writes notes upon him , saith , that he follows s. jerom , and must be understood of the eastern church ; for the western church always receiv'd these books into the canon . but he speaks not one word of the eastern church ; and by the church he could understand nothing but what he accounted the catholick church . canus allows antoninus to have rejected these books ; but he thinks the matter not so clear , but then they might doubt concerning it . then there was no such evidence of tradition to convince men . but antoninus hath preserved the judgment of a greater man concerning these books even thomas aquinas , who in 2. 2 dae . he saith , denied these books to have such authority as to prove any matter of faith by them : which is directly contrary to the council of trent . if this passage be not now to be found in him , we know whom to blame for it . if antoninus saw it there , we hope his word may be taken for it . in spain , we have for the hebrew canon the testimonies of paulus burgensis , tostatus , and cardinal ximines . in france , of victorinus , agobardus , radulphus flaviacensis , petrus cluniacensis , hugo de s. victore , and richard de s. victore , lyra and others . in germany , of rabanus maurus , strabus , rupertus , hermannus contractus and others . in england , of bede , alcvin , sarisburiensis , ockam , waldensis and others . whom i barely mention , because their testimonies are at large in bishop cosins his scholastical history of the canon of scripture , and no man hath yet had the hardiness to undertake that book . these i think are sufficient to shew there was no catholick tradition for the decree of the council of trent about the canon of scripture . i now proceed to shew on what pretences and colours it came in , and by what degrees and steps it advanced . 1. the first step was , the esteem which some of the fathers expressed of these books in quoting of passages out of them . we do not deny that the fathers did frequently cite them : even those who expresly rejected them from being canonical , and not as ordinary books , but as such as were usefull to the church , wherein many wise sayings and good actions are recorded . but the many quotations the fathers do make out of them is the onely plausible pretence which those of the church of rome have to defend the putting them into the canon , as appears by bellarmin and others . the book of tobit , they tell us , is mentioned by s. cyprian , s. ambrose , st. basil , and st. augustin . of judith by st. jerom who mentions a tradition that it was allowed in the council of nice ; but certainly s. jerom never believed it , when he declares it to be apocryphal , and not sufficient to prove any matter of faith. the book of wisedom by s. cyprian , s. cyril and s. augustin . ecclesiasticus by clemens alexandrinus , s. cyprian , epiphanius , s. ambrose and s. augustin . the machabees by tertullian , cyprian , clemens alexandrinus , origen , eusebius , s. ambrose , s. augustin . but all these testimonies onely prove that they thought something in those books worth alledging , but not that they judged the books themselves canonical . and better arguments from their citations might be brought for the books of the sibylls than for any of these . we are not then to judge of their opinion of canonical books by bare citations , but by their declared judgments about them . 2. the next step was , when they came to be read in churches ; but about this there was no certain rule . for the councils of laodicea and carthage differed chiefly upon this point . the former decreed , that none but canonical scripture should be read under the name of holy writings ; and sets down the names of the canonical books then to be read , ( and so leaves out the apocalypse . ) the latter from their being read , inferr'd their being canonical ; for it agrees with the other , that none but canonical should be read , and because these were read , it reckons them up with the canonical books ; for so the canon concludes , we have received from our fathers that these books are to be read in churches . but the council of carthage was not peremptory in this matter ; but desired it might be referred to boniface and other bishops beyond the seas : which shews that here was no decree absolutely made , nor any certainty of tradition ; for then to what purpose should they send to other churches to advise about it ? 3. when they came to be distinguished from apocryphal writings . whence those who do not consider the reason of it , conclude them to have been canonical . but sometimes apocryphal signified such books as were not in the canon of faith , as in the authours before mentioned ; sometimes such books which were not allowed to be used among christians . this distinction we have in ruffinus , who saith there are three sorts of books ; canonical , as the 22 of the old testament ; ecclesiastical , of which sort he reckons wisedom , ecclesiasticus , tobit , judith and machabees , and these he saith were permitted to be read in churches , but no argument could be brought out of them for matter of faith , apocryphal are such which by no means were permitted to be read . and thus innocentius his words may well be understood : for he concludes with saying , that other writings were not onely to be rejected , but to be condemned . and so his meaning is to distinguish them from such counterfeit divine writings as were then abroad . for these were not to be wholly rejected , and in that large sense he admits them into the canon , taking ecclesiastical writings which were read in churches into that number . and in this sense s. augustin used the word apocryphal , when the book of enoch is so called by him , and such other counterfeit writings under the names of the prophets and apostles ; but elsewhere he distinguishes between the canonical books of salomon , and those which bear his name ; which he saith the more learned know not to be his , but the western church had of old owned their authority . but in the case of the book of enoch , he appeals to the canon , which was kept in the jewish temple ; and so falls in with s. jerom ; and he confesses it is hard to justifie the authority of those which are not in the hebrew canon . of the machabees he saith , it is distinguished from the writings called canonical ; but it is received by the church as such . what! to confirm matters of faith ? no. but for the glorious sufferings therein recorded ; and elsewhere he saith , it is usefull , if it be soberly read . s. augustin knew very well that all books were not received alike ; and that many were received in some parts of the western church from the old translation out of the lxx , which were not received in the eastern ; and therefore in his books of christian doctrine he gives rules in judging of canonical books ; to follow the authority of the greatest number of catholick churches , especially the apostolical ; and that those which were received by all , should be preferred before those which were onely received by some . but he very well knew , that the hebrew canon was universally received , and that the controverted books were not ; and therefore , according to his rule , these could never be of equal authority with the other . 4. when the roman church declared that it received the controverted books into the canon . this is said to have been done by gelasius , with his synod of lxx bishops , ( and yet it is hard to understand how gregory so soon after should contradict it . ) the title of it in the old ms. produced by chiffletius , and by him attributed to hormisdas , is , the order of the old testament which the holy catholick roman church receives and honours is this . but whether by gelasius , or hormisdas , i cannot understand , why such a decree as this should not be put into the old roman code of canons , if it had been then made . that there was such a one appears by the copies of it in the vatican , mentioned by the roman correctors of gratian , and by mention of it by the canon si romanorum , dist. 19. and de libellis , dist. 20. and by the latter we understand what canons of councils and decrees of popes are in it , among whom are both gelasius and hormisdas . this they agree to be the same with that published by wendelstin at mentz , 1525. the epistle of innocentius to exuperius with the canon is there published ; but not the other ; and so is the canon of the council of carthage ; but that of laodicea is cut off ; and so they are in that published by dionysius exiguus and quesnell , ( justellus his ancient copy was imperfect there , ) but both these canons being in the roman code , are an argument to me , that the controverted books were received by the roman church at that time ; but in such a manner , that s. jerom's prologues still stood in the vulgar latin bible , with the commentaries of lyra , and additions of burgensis , which were stiff for the hebrew canon ; and s. jerom's authority prevailed more than the pope's , as appears fully by what hath been already produced . 5. to advance the authority of these books one step higher , eugenius iv. declared them to be part of the canon in the instruction given to the armenians . which the roman writers pretend to have been done in the council of florence : but naclantus bishop of chioza , in the council of trent , as pallavicini saith , denied that any such decree was made by the council of florence ; because the last session of it ended 1439. and that decree was signed feb. 4. 1441. to this the legat replied , that this was a mistake occasioned by abraham cretensis , who published the latin version of it , onely till the greeks departure ; but the council continued three years longer , as appeared by the extracts of augustinus patricius , since published in the tomes of the councils . but he never mentions the canon of scripture ; however , because cervinus affirms that he saw the original signed by the pope and cardinals , we have no reason to dispute it . but then it appears how very little it signified , when antoninus the bishop of florence opposed it , and cardinal ximenes and cardinal cajetan slighted it , and all who embraced the council of basil looked on eugenius his decree as void ; and after all , that very decree onely joins the apocryphal books in the same canon , as the council of carthage had done ; but it was reserved as the peculiar honour of the council of trent to declare that matters of faith might be proved out of them , as well as out of any canonical scriptures . iii. about the free use of the scripture in the vulgar language , prohibited by the council of trent . to understand the sense of the council of trent in this matter , we must consider ; 1. that it declares the vulgar latin to be authentick ; i. e. that no man under any pretence shall dare to presume to reject it . suppose the pretence be that it differs from the original ; no matter for that , he must not reject that which the council hath declared authentick , i. e. among the latin editions . but suppose a man finds other latin translations truer in some parts , because they agree more with the original text , may he therein reject the vulgar latin ? by no means , if he thinks himself bound to adhere to the council of trent . but the council supposes it to agree with the original . and we must believe the council therein . this is indeed the meaning of the council as far as i can judge . but what catholick tradition was there for this ? tes for a thousand years after gregory 's time . but this is not antiquity enough to found a catholick tradition upon . if there were no more than a thousand from gregory , there were six hundred past before him ; so that there must be a more ancient tradition in the church , wherein this version was not authentick ; and how came it then to be authentick by virtue of tradition ? here then tradition must be given up ; and the council of trent must have some other ground to go upon . for i think the traditionary men will not maintain the vulgar latin to have been always authentick . 2. that it referred the making the index of prohibited books to the pope ; and in the 4th rule of that index , all persons are forbidden the use of the scripture in the vulgar tongue , without a particular licence , and whosoever presumes to doe it without a faculty , unless he first gives up his bible , he is not to receive absolution . my business is now to enquire what catholick tradition the pope and council went upon in this prohibition . but as to the testimony of fathers , i am prevented by some late discourses on this subject . in stead thereof therefore i shall , 1. shew from their own writers , that there could be no catholick tradition for such a prohibition . 2. prove the general consent of the catholick church from publick acts , as to the free use of the scripture . thomas aquinas grants that the scripture was proposed to all , and in such a manner that the most rude might understand it . therefore there was no prohibition of such persons reading it . cajetan there uses two arguments for the scriptures using metaphors and similitudes . 1. because god provides for all . 2. because the scripture is tendred to all . and the common people are not capable of understanding spiritual things without such helps . if the scripture were intended for all , how comes a prohibition of the use of it ? sixtus senensis grants , that in former times the scripture was translated into the vulgar languages , and the people did commonly reade it , to their great benefit . then a prohibition of it must alter the churches practical tradition . alphonsus à castro yields to erasmus , that the scriptures were of old translated into the vulgar tongues , and that the fathers , such as s. chrysostom , and s. jerom , persuaded people to the reading them . but the case is altered now , when such mischief comes by the reading the scriptures . and yet the tradition of the church continues the same , and is impossible to be changed . azorius puts the case fairly ; he grants that the scriptures were at first written and published in the common language ; that s. chrysostom admits all to reade the scriptures ; and that the people did so then ; but they do not now . but he saith , the people then understood greek and latin , and now they do not . if it were their own language they might well understand it ; but why should not the scripture now be in a language they may understand ? for greek and latin did not make the common people one jot wiser or better ; and yet this man calls it a heresie now to say , the scriptures ought to be translated into vulgar languages . how much is the faith of the church changed ? 2. i am now to prove the general consent of the catholick church in this matter from publick acts , i. e. that all parts of it have agreed in translations of scripture into vulgar languages without any such prohibition . if there had been any such thing in the primitive church , it would have held against the latin translation it self . for i hope none will say it was the original , however authentick it be made by the council of trent . how then came the originals to be turned into the common language ? ( as i suppose latin will be allow'd to have been the common language of the roman empire . ) there is no objection can now be made against any modern translations , but would have held against the first latin version . who the authour of it was is utterly unknown ; and both s. augustin and s. jerom say , there was a great variety among the old translations , and every one translated as he thought fit . so that there was no restraint laid upon translating into the common language . and unless latin were an infallible guide to those that understood it , the people were as liable to be deceived in it , as either in english or french. but it was not onely thus in the roman empire , but whereever a people were converted to christianity in all thè elder times , the scripture was turned into their language . the ecclesiastical historians mention the conversion of the goths , and upon that , the translation of the bible into their language by ulphilas their bishop . walafridus strabo adds to this , that besides the bible , they had all publick offices of religion performed in their own language . how soon the churches in persia were planted , it is impossible for us now to know ; but in the ms. ecclesiastical history of abulpharagius ( in the hands of dr. loftus ) it is said , that a disciple of thaddaeus preached the gospel in persia , assyria and the parts thereabouts ; and that by another disciple of his 360 churches were settled there in his time ; and that he came to seleucia , the metropolis of the persians , and there established a church , where he continued fifteen years . and from him there was a succession of the patriarchs of seleucia , which continues still in the east ; for upon destruction thereof by almansor , they removed first to bagdad , and after that to mozal over against ninive , where their residence hath been since ; and this patriarch had universal jurisdiction over the eastern churches as far as the east indies , as appears by morinus his books of ordinations in the east , and the proceedings with the christians of st. thomas in the very end of the last century . but we are certain from the greek historians , that in constantine's time the christians in persia were so numerous that he wrote to the king of persia on their behalf . eusebius saith that constantine was informed , that the churches were much increased there , and great multitudes were brought into christ's flock ; and constantine himself in his letter to sapores saith , the christians flourished in the best parts of persia ; and he hoped they might continue so to doe . but after constantine's death a terrible persecution befell them , wherein sozomen saith , the names of 16000 martyrs were preserved , besides an innumerable multitude of unknown persons . the sharpest part of the persecution fell upon the bishops and presbyters ; especially in adiabene , which was almost wholly christian , which ammianus marcellinus saith was the same with assyria , wherein were ninive , ecbatane , arbela , gaugamela , babylon ( or seleucia ) and ctesiphon , of which sozomen saith , symeon was then archbishop . and he names above twenty bishops who suffered besides , and one mareabdes a chorepiscopus , with 250 of his clergy . after the time of sapores several sharp persecutions fell upon those churches in the times of vararanes and isdigerdes , of which the greek historians take notice , and one of them , saith theodoret , lasted thirty years . this i mention to shew what mean thoughts those have of the catholick church who consine it to the roman communion . theodoret and s. chrysostom both affirm that the persians had the scriptures then in their own language ; and sozomen saith , that symeon archbishop of seleucia , and ctesiphon before his own martyrdom , incouraged the rest to suffer out of the holy scriptures . which supposes them well acquainted with the language of it , and it is not very likely they should be either with the hebrew , greek or latin ; but the other testimonies make it clear that it was in their own tongue . the anonymous writer of s. chrysostom's life affirms , that while he staid in armenia , he caused the new testament to be translated into the armenian tongue for the benefit of those churches . and this tradition is allow'd by several learned men in the church of rome . but the armenians themselves say , the whole bible was translated into the armenian language by moses grammaticus , david and mampraeus , three learned men of their own , in the time of their patriarch isaac , about s. chrysostom 's time . theodoret , in the place already cited , mentions the armenian translation , as a thing well known ; and he was near enough to understand the truth of it . jacobus de vitriaco , a roman cardinal , saith , that the armenians in his time had the scriptures read to them in their own language . the syriack version for the use of those in the eastern parts who understood not hebrew or greek , is allowed by all learned men to have been very ancient . i mean the old simple version out of the originals , and not that out of the lxx . of the old testament . as to the new , the tradition of the eastern people is , that it was done either in the apostles times or very near them . abraham ecchellensis shews , from the syriack writers , that the compleat translation of the bible was made in the time of abgarus , king of edessa , by the means of thaddaeus and the other apostles ; and as to the time of thaddaeus , gregorius malatiensis confirms it . postellus quotes an ancient tradition ( which my adversaries ought to regard ) that s. mark himself translated not only his own gospel , but all the books of the ne● testament into the vulgar syriack . it is sufficient to my purpose , to shew that there was such an ancient translation ; which is owned by s. chrysostom , s. ambrose , s. augustin , diodorus and theodoret : which makes me wonder at cardinal bellarmin's affirming with so much confidence , that none of the fathers speak of the syriack version , when theodoret alone mentions it so often in his commentaries . although the greeks in egypt might very well understand the greek of the old and new testament , ( especially if that which is called the lxx . were done by the alexandrian jews , as some imagine ) yet those who knew no other than the old egyptian language could not make use of it . and therefore a coptick translation was made for them ; which kircher thinks to have been 1300 years old . and he withal observes , that their ancient liturgies were in the coptick language . that it might not be susp●cted that kircher imposed upon the world , he gives a particular account of the books he had seen in the vatican library and elsewhere in the coptick tongue . the pentateuch in three tomes , distinguished into paragraphs by lines . the four gospels by themselves . s. paul's epistles and three canonical epistles with the acts in another volume . the apocalypse by it self ; and the psalter . the liturgy of s. mark with other daily prayers . the liturgy of s. gregory , with the prayers of s. cyril in the coptick language ; and a liturgy of s. basil , with gregory and cyril , with several other rituals , missals and prayers , all in the same tongue . all these , he saith , are in the vatican library . and in that of the maronites college , he saith , is an old coptick martyrology about 1300 years standing , by which he finds , that the chief imployment of the old egyptian monks was to translate the bible out of hebrew , chaldee and greek into the coptick tongue . morinus saith , that in the oratorian lbrary at paris , they had the coptick gospels brought from constantinople by monsr . de sancy . petrus à valle , a nobleman of rome , and a great traveller , saith he had several parts of scripture in the coptick language ; which were turned into arabick , when the old coptick grew into disuse . petraeus had in the eastern parts a coptick psalter , with an arabick version , which he designed to publish . the congregation de propaganda fide at rome had several coptick mss. sent to them out of egypt , among the rest the coptick book of ordination transloatd and printed by kircher ; and since reprinted by morinus . seguier the late chancellour of france had in his library , the consecration of a patriarch in coptick and arabick , and several translations of the bible , and prayers in both languages . the aethiopick translation bears date with the conversion of the nation , according to their own tradition , which some make to be in the apostolical times , and others in the time of constantine ; and their publick offices are performed in their own tongue . the chancellour seguier had not only many parts of the bible , but prayers and offices in the aethiopick tongue . i shall add but one thing more to this purpose , which is taken from the want of antiquity in the arabick versions ; which is confessed by the learned criticks on all sides . and even this tends to prove my design . for when the saracen empire prevailed , the people grew more acquainted with the arabick than with the ancient syriack or coptick ; and therefore the scripture was then translated into arabick ; ( as vasaeus saith it was done in spain after the moors came thither by a bishop of sevil ) and this was the true reason why the arabick versions have no greater antiquity . for gabriel sionita observes that the arabick is become the most vulgar language in the eastern parts . and because it was so in syria as well as egypt , therefore there are different arabick versions ; the one called codex antiochenus , and the other alexandrinus . thus i have proved that there was a catholick tradition directly contrary to that established by order of the council of trent . and now i proceed to give an account of the methods and steps by which this decree came to its ripeness . 1. the first step was the declension and corruption of the latin tongue in the western church . it is observed by polybius , that from the time of the first league between the romans and carthaginians , the latin tongue was so much changed even in rome it self that very few could understand the words of it . and festus in latine loqui saith , that the language was so alter'd , that scarce any part of it remained entire . scaliger thinks these words were added to festus by paulus diaconus ; which seems much more probable , since he lived in the time of charlemagn . at which time we may easily suppose the latin tongue to have been very much corrupted by the writers , and not so easie to be understood any where by the common people in sudden discourse , as it had been before . which appears evident by the latin sermons made to the people in the several provinces in the roman empire ; as in africa by s. augustin and fulgentius ; in italy by petrus chrysologus , laurentius novariensis , gaudentius brixiensis , ennodius ticinensis : in spain by isidore , ildephonsus and others : in gaul by caesarius , eucherius , eligius , and several others , whose latin sermons to the people are still extant . in the council of tours , in the time of charlemagn , particular care is taken that the homilies should be translated by their bishops either into the rustick roman or the german , that the people might the easier understand them . these homilies were either those which charlemagn caused to be taken out of the fathers , and applied to the several lessons through the year , as sigebert observes , or of their own composing ; however they were to be turned by the bishops either into rustick roman , or german , as served best to the capacities of the people . for the franks then either retained the original german , or used the rustick roman ; but this latter so much prevailed over the other , that in the solemn oaths between lewis and charles upon parting the dominions of france and germany , set down in nithardus , the rustick roman was become the vulgar language of france , and these were but the grandchildren of charlemagn . marquardus freherus thinks that onely the princes and great men retained the german , but the generality then spake the rustick roman ; as appears by the oath of the people ; which begins thus . si lod●igs sacrament que son fradre carlo jurat conservat , & carlus meo serdra de suo part non los tanit , si jo returnar non licit pois , ne io , ne neuls cui eo returnar nil pois , in nulla adjudha contra lodwig nun li iver . by which we may see what a mixture of latin there was in the vulgar language then used by the franks , and how easie it was for the people then to understand the publick offices being constant ; but the sermons not being so , there was greater necessity to turn them into that corruptor rustick roman , which was thoroughly understood by them . in spain the latin was less corrupted before the gothick and arabick or moorish words were taken into it . lucius mariness saith , that had it not been for the mixture of those words , the spaniards had spoken as good latin as the romans did in the time of tully : and he saith , that to his time he had seen epistles written in spanish , wherein all the nouns and verbs were good latin. in italy the affinity of the vulgar prevailing language and the latin continued so great , that the difference seemed for some hundred years , no more than of the learned and common greek , or of the english and scotch ; and so no necessity was then apprehended of translating the correct tongue into a corrupt dialect of it . but where there was a plain difference of language there was some care even then taken , that the people might understand what they heard , as appears by these things : 1. alcuinus gives an account why one day was called sabbatum in 12 lectionibus , when there were but six lessons , and he saith , it was because they were read both in greek and latin , they not understanding each others languages . not because the greek was a holy tongue , but quia aderant graeci , quibus ignota er at lingua latina ; which shews that the church then thought it a reasonable cause to have the scripture in such a language , which might be understood by the people . the same reason is given by amalarius . 2. in the german churches there were ancient translations of scripture into their own language . b. rhenanus attributes a translation of the gospels to waldo bishop of freising , assoon as the franks received christianity , and he saith , it was the immortal honours of the franks , to have the scripture so soon translated into their own language ; which , saith he , is of late opposed by some divines : so little did he know of an universal tradition against it . goldastus mentions the translation in rhime by ottfridus wissenburgensis , published by achilles gassarus , the psalter of notkerus , rudolphus ab eems his paraphrase of the old testament . andreas du chesn hath published a preface before an old saxon book , wherein it is said , that ludovicus pius did take care that all the people should read the scripture in their own tongue , and gave it in charge to a saxon to translate both old and new testament into the german language ; which , saith he , was performed very elegantly . 3. in the saxon churches here , it was not to be expected that the scripture should be translated , till there were persons learned both in the saxon and the other languages . bede , in his epistle to egbert , puts him upon instructing the common people in their own language , especially in the creed and lord's prayer ; and to further so good a work , bede himself translated the gospel of st. john into the saxon tongue , as cuthbert saith in the epistle about his death , in the life of bede , before his saxon history . it appears by the old canons of churches , and the epistles of aelfric , saith mr. lisle , that there was an old saxon canon for the priest to say unto the people the sense of the gospel in english ; and aelfric saith of himself , that he had translated the pentateuch , and some of the historical books . the new testament was translated by several hands ; and an ancient saxon translation hath been lately published with the gothick gospels . and there were old saxon glosses upon the gospels ; of aldred , farmen and owen . the last work of k. alfred was the translating the psalter ; and if the ms. history of ely deserves credit , he translated both the old and new testament . 4. it is not denied either by bellarmin or baronius , that the slavonians in the 9th century had a permission upon their conversion to christianity , to enjoy the bible , and to have publick offices performed in their own language . but they tell us , it was because they were then children in the faith , and to be indulged ; ( but methinks children were the most in danger to be seduced ; ) or there were not priests enough to officiate in latin at first : but this was no reason then given , as appears by the pope's own letter published by baronius , wherein he gives god thanks for the invention of letters among them by constantine a philosopher ; and he expresly saith , that god had not confined his honour to three languages , but all people and languages were to praise him ; and he saith , god himself in scripture had so commanded ; and he quotes st. paul's words for it . one would wonder those great men should no better consider the popes own reasons ; but give others for him , which he never thought of . it is true , he adds , that he would have the gospel read first in latin , and then in salvonian , and if they pleased he would have the mass said in latin ; but the slavonians continued their custom , and the pope was willing enough to let them enjoy it , for his own convenience as well as theirs . for there was a secret in this matter , which is not fully understood . aventinus , saith , that methodius invented their i etters , and translated the scriptures into the slavonian tongue , and persuaded the people to reject the latin service ; but this i see no ground for . but the truth of the matter was , the slavonians were converted by the means of methodius and cyril , ( otherwise called constantine ) two greek bishops , and the christian religion was settled among them by their means , and they translated the scriptures and offices of worship into their own language . the pope had not forgotten the business of the bulgarians , and he could not tell but this might end in subjection to another patriarchal see ; and therefore he en●eavours to get methodius and cyril to rome , and having gained them , he sends a sweetning letter to the prince , and makes the concession before mentioned . for he could not but remember how very lately the greeks had gained the bulgarians from him ; and lest the slavonians should follow them , he was content to let them have what they desired , and had already established among themselves , without his permission . all this appears from the account of this matter given by constantinus porphyrogenetus , compared with diocleas his regnum slavorum , and lucius his dalmatian history . it is sufficient for my purpose , that diocleas owns that constantine ( to whom andreas dandalus , d. of venice , in his m s history cited by lucius , saith , the pope gave the name of cyril ) did translate the bible into the slavonian tongue , for the benefit of the people , and the publick offices out of greek , according to their custom . and the chancellour seguier had in his library both the new testament and l●turgies in the slavonian language , and in cyril's character ; and many of the greek fathers commentaries on scripture in that tongue , but not one of the latin. 2. the next step was , when gregory 7. prohibited the translation of the latin offices in the slavonian tongue . and this he did to the king of bohemia himself , after a peremptory manner ; but he saith , it was the request of the nobility , that they might have divine offices in the slavonian tongue , which he could by no means yield to . what was the matter ? how comes the case to be so much altered from what it was in his predecessor's time ? the true reason was , the bohemian churches were then brought into greater subjection to the roman see , after the consecration of dithmarus saxo to be their archbishop ; and now they must own their subjection , as the roman provinces were wont to do , by receiving the language . but as his predecessour had found scripture for it , for gregory pretends he had found reason against it , viz. the scripture was obscure , and apt to be misunderstood and despised . what! more than in the time of methodius and cyril ? if they pleaded primitive practice , he plainly answers , that the church is grown wiser , and hath corrected many things that were then allowed . this is indeed to the purpose ; and therefore by the authority of s. peter , he forbids him to suffer any such thing , and charges him to oppose it with all his might . but after all , it is entred in the canon law de officio jud. ord. l. 1. tit. 31. c. quoniam . as a decree of innocent 3. in the lateran council , that where there were people of different languages , the bishop was to provide persons fit to officiate in those several languages . why so ? if there were a prohibition of using any but the latin tongue . but this was for the greeks , and theirs was an holy tongue . that is not said ; nor if it were would it signifie any thing ; for doth any imaginary holiness of the tongue sanctifie ignorant devotion ? but the canon supposes them to have the same faith. then the meaning is , that no man must examin his religion by the scripture , but if he rseolves beforehand to believe as the church believes , then he may have the scriptures or prayers in what language he pleases . but even this is not permitted in the roman church . for , 3. after the inquisition was set up by the authority of innocent 3. in the lateran council , no lay persons were permitted to have the books of the old and new testament , but the psalter , or breviary , or hours , they might have ; but by no means in the vulgar language . this is called by d'achery and labbe the council of tholouse , but in truth it was nothing else but an order of the inquisition , as will appear to any one that reads it . and the inquisition ought to have the honour of it , both in france and spain . which prohibition hath been so gratefull to some divines of the church of rome , that cochlaeus calls it pious , just , reasonable , wholsom and necessary ; andradius thinks the taking of it away would be destructive to faith ; ledesma saith , the true catholicks do not desire it , and bad ought not to be gratified with it . petrus sutor , a carthusian doctour , calls the translating scripture into the vulgar languages , a rash , useless and dangerous thing ; and he gives the true reason of it , viz. that the people will be apt to murmur when they see things required as from the apostles , which they cannot find a word of in scripture . and when all is said on this subject that can be , by men of more art , this is the plainest and honestest reason for such a prohibition ; but i hope i have made it appear it is not built on any catholick tradition . iv. of the merit of good works . the council of trent sess. 6. c. 16. declares , that the good works of justified persons do truly deserve eternal life ; and can. 3● . an anathema is denounced against him that denies them to be meritorious , or that a justified person by them doth not truly merit increase of grace , and happiness , and eternal life . the council hath not thought fit to declare what it means by truly meriting ; but certainly it must be opposed to an improper kind of meriting , and what that is we must learn from the divines of the church of rome . 1. some say , that some of the fathers speak of an improper kind of merit , which is no more than the due means for the attaining of happiness as the end. so vega confesses they often use the word merit , where there is no reason for merit , either by way of congruity or condignity . therefore , where there is true merit there must be a proper reason for it . and the council of trent being designed to condemn some prevailing opinions at that time , among those they called hereticks , this assertion of true merit must be levelled against some doctrine of theirs ; but they held good works to be necessary as means to an end , and therefore this could not be the meaning of the council . suarez saith , the words of the council ought to be specially observed , which are , that there is nothing wanting in the good works of justified persons , ut vere promeruisse censeantur ; and therefore no metaphorical or improper , but that which by the sense of the church of rome was accounted true merit in opposition to what was said by those accounted hereticks must be understood thereby . 2. others say , that a meer congruity arising from the promise and favour of god in rewarding the acts of his grace in justified persons cannot be the proper merit intended by the council . and that for these reasons . 1. suarez observes that although the council avoids the terms ex condigno , yet because it still uses the words vere mereri , it implies something more than mere congruity ; and because it speaks of meriting the increase of grace , and not the first grace ; now a congruity is allowed for the first grace , which it excludes by mentioning the increase . and withal , it brings places to prove that the giving the reward must be a retribution of justice , and if so , the merit must be more than that of congruity . 2. because god's promise doth not give any intrinsick value to the nature of the act ; no more than his threatning doth increase the nature of guilt . if the king of persia had promised a province to him that gave him a draught of water , the act it self had been no more meritorious ; but it only shewed the munificence of the prince ; no more do god's promises of eternal life add any merit to the acts of grace , but onely set forth the infinite bounty of the promiser . 3. in the conference at ratisbon ( the year this decree passed ) by the emperour's order the protestant party did yield , that by virtue of god's promise the reward of eternal life was due to justified persons ; as a father promising a great reward to his son for his pains in studying , makes it become due to him , although there be no proportion between them . and if no more were meant by merit of congruity , than that it was very agreeable to the divine nature to reward the acts of his own grace with an infinite reward , they would yield this too . 4. cardinal pallavicini gives us the plain and true meaning of the council , viz. that a merit de congruo was allowed for works before justification ; but for works after , they all agreed , he saith , that there was a merit de condigno in them both for increase of grace and eternal glory . by merit de condigno is meant such an intrinsick value in the nature of the act as makes the reward in justice to be due to it . some call one of these , meritum secundum quid ; which is the same with de congruo ; which really deserves no reward , but receives it onely from the liberality of the giver ; and this hath not truly , say they , the notion of merit ; but that which makes the reward due is simple and true merit , when it doth not come merely from the kindness of the giver , but from respect to the worthiness of the action and the doer , and this is de condigno . let us now see what catholick tradition there was for this doctrine , and whether this were taught them by their fathers in a continued succession down from the apostles times . but that there was a change as to the sense of the church in this matter , i shall prove in the first place from an office which was allow'd in the church before , and forbidden after . it was an office with respect to dying persons , wherein are these questions . q. dost thou believe that thou shalt come to heaven , not by thy own merits , but by the virtue and merit of christ 's passion ? a. i do believe it . q. dost thou believe that christ died for our salvation , and that none can be saved by their own merits , or any other way but by the merits of his passion ? a. i do believe it . now when the indices expurgatorii were made in pursuance to the order of the council of trent , this passage was no longer endured . for , in the roman index the ordo baptizandi , wherein this question was , is forbidden till it were corrected . but the spanish indices explain the mystery ; that of cardinal quiroga saith expresly , those questions and answers must be blotted out ; and the like we find in the index of soto major and san●oval . what now is the reason , that such questions and answers were no longer permitted , if the churches tradition continued still the same ? was not this a way to know the tradition of the church by the offices used in it ? this was no private office then first used , but although the prohibition mentions one impression at venice ( as though there had been no more ) i have one before me , printed by gryphius at venice two years before that ; and long before with the praeceptorium of lyra , a. d. 1495. where the question to the dying person is in these words , si credit se merito passionis christi & non propriis ad gloriam pervenire ? et respondeat , credo . and the same questions and answers i have in a sacerdotale romanum printed by nicolinus at venice 1585. cardinal hosius says that he had seen these questions and answers in the sacerdotale romanum and in the hortulus animae ; and that they were believed to be first prescribed by anselm , archbishop of canterbury . on what account now , come these things to be prohibited and expunged , if the churches doctrine and tradition about this matter , be still the very same ? no doubt it was believed that the council of trent had now so far declared the sense of the church another way , that such questions and a●s●●rs were no longer to be endured . but before the council of trent the canons of colen against hermannus their bishop , when he published his reformation , declare , that god's giving eternal life up on good works is ex gratuita dignatione suae clementiae , from the favour which god vouchsafes to them . which to my apprehension is inconsistent with the notion of true merit in the works themselves ; for if there be any condignity in them , it cannot be mere grace and favour in god to reward them . the same canons in their enchiridion some years before , when they joyned with their bishop , call it stupidity to think that good works are rewarded with eternal life for any dignity in the works themselves . and if there be no dignity in them , there can be no true merit ; as the council of trent determines with an anathema . pope adrian vi. gives such an account of the merit of our works , that he could never imagine any condignity in them to eternal life . for , saith he , our merits are a broken reed , which pierce the hand of him that leans upon them ; they are a menstruous cloth , and our best actions mixt with impurities ; and when we have done all that we can , we are unprofitable servants . petrus de alliaco cardinal of cambray attributes no other effect to good works than of causa sine qua non ; and saith that the reward is not to be attributed to any virtue in them , but to the will of the giver . which i think overthrows any true merit . gabriel biel attributes the merit of good works not to any intrinsecal goodness in them , but to god's acceptation . which is in words to assert merit , and in truth to deny it ; for , how can there be true merit in the works , if all their value depends upon divine acceptance ? thomas walden charges wickliff with asserting the doctrine of merit and incouraging men to trust in their own righteousness , and he quotes scripture and fathers against it ; and he blames the use of the term of merit either ex congruo or ex condigno : which he saith was an invention of some late schoolmen , and was contrary to the ancient doctrine of the church . as he proves , not only from scripture and fathers , but from the ancient offices too : as in the canon of the mass , non aestimator meriti , seá veni● quaesumus largitor , &c. fer. 4. pass . ut qui de meritorum qualitate diffidimus , non judicium tuum sed miseric●rdiam cons●quamur . dom. 2. adv. ubi nulla suppetunt sufsragia meritorum , tuae nobis indulgentiae succurre praesidtis . how comes the doctrine condemned in wickliff to be established in the council of trent ? for he was blamed for asserting true merit , and the council asserts it with an anathema to those that deny it . and yet we must believe the very same tradition to have been in the church all this while . vega saith , that walden speaks against merits without grace ; but any one that reads him will find it otherwise , for he produces those passages out of the fathers against merits which do suppose divine grace , as it were easie to shew ; but friar walden thought the notion of merit inconsistent with the power and influence of divine grace necessary to our best actions . god , saith he , doth not regard merit either as to congruity or condignity , but his own grace , and will , and mercy . marsilius de ingen who lived before walden reckons up three opinions about merit ; the first of those who denied it , and of this , saith he , durandus seems to be , and one job . de everbaco . the second of those who said that our works have no merit of themselves , but as informed by d●●ine grace , and from the assistance of the holy ghost , so they do t●uly merit eternal life , and of this opinion he saith was thomas de argentina . the third was , of those who granted that true merit doth imply an equality , but then they distinguish equality , as to quantity and as to proportion , and in this latter sense they asserted an equality . and of this opinion he saith was petrus de tarantasia . but he delivers his own judgment in these conclusions . 1. that our works either considered in themselves or with divine grace are not meritorious of eternal life ex condigno , which he proves both from scripture and reason , viz. because 1. no man can make god a debtor to him ; for the more grace he hath the more he is a debtor to god. ana 2. he cannot merit of another by what he receives from him . and 3. no man can pay what he owes to god , and therefore can never merit at his hands . 4. no man can merit here so much grace as to keep him from falling away from grace ; much less then eternal life . 2. these works may be said to be meritorious of eternal life ex condigno by divine acceptation originally proceeding from the merit of christ's passion , because that makes them worthy . but this is christ's merit and not the true merit of our works . 3. works done by grace do merit eternal life de congruo from god's liberal disposition , whereby he hath appointed so to reward them . it beeing agreeable to him to give glory to them that love him . but this is an improper kind of merit , and can by no means support the tradition of true merit . durandus utterly denies any true merit of man towards god ; he doth not deny it in a large improper sense for such a condignity in our actions as god hath appointed in order to a reward ; which is by the grace of god in us ; but as it is taken for a free action to which a reward is in justice due ; because whatever we doe is more owing to the grace of god than to our selves ; but to make a debtor to us , we must not only pay an equivalent to what we owe , but we must go beyond it ; but to god and our parents we can never pay an equivalent , much less exceed it . and we can never merit by what god gives us , because the gift lays a greater obligation upon us . and he saith , the holding the contrary is temerarious and blasphemous . the two grounds of holding merit were , the supposing a proportion between grace and glory , and an equality between divine grace and glory in vertue , grace being as the seed of glory ; and to both these he answers . to the first , that the giving a reward upon merit is no part of distributive , but commutative justice , because it respects the relation of one thing to another , and not the mere quality of the person . to the second , that the value of an act is not considered with respect to the first mover , but to the immediate agent : and as to grace being the seed of glory , it is but a metaphorical expression , and nothing can be drawn from it . so that durandus concludes true merit with respect to god to be temerarious , blasphemous and impossible . ockam declares , that after all our good works god may without injustice deny eternal life to them who do them ; because god can be debtor to none ; and therefore whatever he doth to us , it is out of mere grace . and that there can be nothing meritorious in any act of ours , but from the grace of god freely accepting it . and therefore he must deny any true merit . gregorius ariminensis saith , that no act of ours though coming from grace to never so great a degree , is meritorious with god ex condigno of any reward either temporal or eternal ; because every such act is a gift of god ; and if it were at all meritorious , yet not as to eternal life , because there is no equivalency between them , and therefore it cannot in justice be due to it ; and consequently if god gives it , he must do it freely . but , saith he , god is said to be just , when he gives bona pro bonis , and merciful , when he gives bona pro malis ; not but that he is merciful in both , but because his mercy appears more in the latter ; and in the other , it seems like justice in a general sense from the conformity of the merit and the reward ; but in this particular retribution it is mere mercy . scotus affirms , that all the meritoriousness of our acts depends on divine acceptation in order to a reward ; and if it did depend on the intrinsick worth of the acts , god could not in justice deny the reward ; which is false ; and therefore it wholly depends on the good will and favour of god. bellarmin is aware of this , and he confesses this to be the opinion of scotus and of other old schoolmen . but how then do they hold the doctrine and tradition of true merit ? he holds that good works are properly and truly good . so do we , and yet deny merit . but he grants , that he denies that they bear any proportion to eternal life , and therefore they cannot be truly meritorious of it . bellarmin himself asserts that without the divine promise good works have a proportion to eternal life , and this he saw was necessary to defend the doctrine of the council of trent ; but then he adds , that there is no obligation on god's part to reward in such a manner without a promise . now here are two hard points , 1. to make it appear that there is such a meritoriousness in good works without a divine promise . 2. that if there were so , there is no obligation on god to reward such acts in point of justice . the former is so much harder to do from what he had proved before , c. 14. viz. that they are not meritorious without a promise ; and here he proves that they have no proportion to the reward , from scripture , fathers and reason ; because there is no obligation on god to do it , either from commutative or distributive justice ; and because we are god's servants . these are good arguments against himself for how can such acts then become meritorious without a promise ? if there be no proportion or equality on man's part , no justice on god's part to reward , how can they possibly be meritorious ? but this is too deep for me to comprehend . my business is tradition , and i have evidently proved that there was no tradition even in the church of rome for the true merit defined by the council of trent . it were easie to carry this point higher , by she wing that the fathers knew nothing of this doctrine , but that hath been done by many already , and it is needless in so plain a case . but i am now to give an account by what steps and occasions this doctrine came to be established . 1. from the common use of the word merit with the fathers and others , in another sense than it signified at first . the original signification of it is wages paid in consideration of service ; and from thence souldiers were said merere ( as budaeus observes , and thence came the word merces ) who truly deserved their pay by their labour and hazard ; but by degrees it came to signifie no more than merely to attain a thing ; which is sometimes used by good authors ; but in the declension of the latin tongue no sense of this word was more common than this , especially among ecclesiastical writers . who frequently used it in a sense wherein it was impossible to understand it in its original signification ; and it cannot imply so much as digne consequi , as in the instance brought by cassander ; when st. cyprian renders those words of st. paul , misericordiam merui , which we render , i obtained mercy ; but the council of trent allows there could be no true merit here . and st. augustin saith of those who murdered the son of god , illi veniam meruerunt qui christum occiderunt . and so the vulgar latin often uses it , gen. 4. 13. major est iniquitas mea quam ut veniam merear . jos. 11. 20. & non mererentur ullam clementiam . and in that sense it hath been used in the hymns and other offices of the church , as in that expression , o felix culpa quae talem ac tantum meruit habere redemptorem ! where it cannot be denied that the word is used in an improper sense . 2. when the school divines set themselves to explain the mysteries of theology , this plain and easie , but improper sense of merit , would not go down with som of them ; but they endeavoured to make out the notion of merit with respect to god , in its proper and original sense . the last considerable writer before the scholastick age , was st. bernard , and he pretended not to find out any such proportion between the best works and eternal life , that god should be bound in justice to bestow it as a recompence for them ; and the reason he gives is plain and strong , because those things men pretend to merit by , are themselves the gifts of god's grace , and so by them they are more bound to god , than god to them ; but besides , what are all mens merits to eternal glory ? st. bernard doth not speak of merits without grace , but with the supposition of it ; and bellarmin wisely left out the latter part , that he might seem to answer the former . hugo de sancto victore lived in the same age , who first shewed the way to school divinity , and upon the same place which st. bernard speaks of , non sunt condig nae , &c. he puts the question , how any temporal acts can merit that which is eternal ? and he denies any condignity , because there is more in the reward than there was in the merit ; but then he adds , that there may be a threefold comparison of things ; either as to themselves , as a horse for a horse , money for money ; or according to equity , either in punishments or rewards ; or by pact or agreement , as when a good summ is promised for a little work ; and this , saith he , god hath made known to mankind as to future rewards and punishments . which plainly shews , he understood nothing of the proportion between acts of grace , and an eternal happiness ; but resolved all into the favour and mercy of god. peter lombard , called the master of the sentences , saith , nothing of any condignity or proportion in our works to the reward ; but , he saith , they are themselves god 's gifts , and that the reward it self is from the grace of god , and quotes the noted saying of st. augustin , cum coronat deus merita nostra , nihil aliud coronat quam dona sua . but still this is nothing but grace and favour in god , first in enabling us to do good works , and then in rewarding them . bandinus wrote a book of the sentences much about the time p. lombard did , with so much agreement of method and expressions , that it is not known which took from the other . genebrard hath produced this passage out of him , debet , inciviliter de deo dicitur , quia nihil omnino nobis debet , nisi ex promisso . if it be so rude to say god owes any thing to his creatures but by promise , he could not imagine any condignity in good works , to which a reward is due in justice . and genebrard thinks he had reason to deny , that god can be made a debtor to us by any of our works . robertus pullus , who wrote another book of the sentences about the same time , mentioning that place , non sunt condignae , &c. he saith , because our works are not sufficient , being small and temporal , god by his mercy makes it up ; which not onely shews that god doth reward beyond our merit , but that there is no proportion between the best works and eternal glory . but by the time of gulielmus antissiodorensis , there were two parties in the church about this point ; some , he saith , denied any merit of eternal life , ex condigno , and others asserted it ; and after laying down the arguments on both sides , he concludes for the affirmative ; but in answer to the place , non sunt condignae , &c. he saith they are not ad proportionaliter merendum , but they are ad simpliciter merendum ; so that still he denied any proportion , though he held simple merit . but thomas aquinas coming after him , denies that there can be any simple merit with respect to god , because that cannot be where there is so great inequality ; and so there can be no equal justice between them , but ac●ording to a proportion ; which he afterwards explains , viz. as to the substance and freedom of our good works there is onely a congruity ; but as they proceed from divine grace , so they are meritorious of eternal life , ex condigno . this doctrine had some followers in the schools , but not many in comparison of those who opposed it , as appears by what is said already . richardus de mediavilla , though a franciscan , follows herein the doctrine of aquinas , and asserts , that by acts of free will , informed by grace , a man may merit eternal life , ex condigno , and he adds somewhat more , potest certissime ; and he uses the same answers to the objections which the other did . and nich. de orbellis follows richardus , so that aquinas his doctrine had prevailed beyond his own school . but it was as vehemently opposed by others of that fraternity , among whom cardinal hosius mentions stephanus brulifer , who maintained , that no act of grace , how good soever , was worthy of eternal life . paulus burgensis , though he is said to have been converted from being a jew , by reading aquinas , yet utterly dissented from him in this matter : for he saith , that no man can by the ordinary assistance of grace merit eternal life ex condigno , and therefore the mercy of god is most seen in heaven . however the reputation of aquinas might gain upon some , yet this was very far then from being a catholick tradition . but no council ever interposed its authority in this matter , till the council of trent , which resolved to carry the points in difference to the height , and to establish every thing that was questioned . nothing had been more easie than to have given satisfaction in this matter , considering what pighius and contarenus , and even genebrard , had yielded in it ; but there the rule was , that every thing that was disputed , must be determined first , and then defended . and so it hath happened with this decree , which , lest we should think the matter capable of softening , hath been since asserted in the highest manner . bellarmin asserts good works of themselves , and not merely by compact , to be meritorious of eternal life , so that in them there is a certain proportion and equality to eternal life . costerus saith , that in works of grace , there is an equality between the work and the reward . suarez , that they have an intrinsecal dignity , whereby they become worthy of eternal life . vasquez , that there is an equality of dignity between good works and eternal life , without which a promise could not make true merit . the rhemists say , that good works are truly and properly meritorious , and justly worthy of everlasting life ; and that thereupon heaven is the just due , and just stipend , crown or recompence , which god by his justice oweth to the persons so doing by his grace . and again , that good works are meritorious , and the very cause of salvation . so far that god should be unjust , if he rendred not heaven for the same . phil. gamachaeus , a late professour of divinity in the sorbon , speaks it roundly , that the council of trent did plainly mean to establish merit ex condigno , and that all catholicks are agreed in it . the last defender of the council of trent within these few years , saith , that there is an intrinsecal condignity in good works , whereby they bear a proportion commensurate with the glory of heaven . and without such doctrine as this , he doth not think the council of trent can be defended in this matter . if after all it be said , that this is a mere subtilty concerning the proportion an act of grace bears to the state of glory ; i answer , the more to blame they , who have made and imposed it as a matter of faith , as the council of trent hath done with an anathema , and that without any pretence from catholick tradition . but what made the council of trent so much concerned for a scholastick subtilty ? there was a deep mystery lay in this , they were wise enough to frame the decree so , as to avoid offence , and to make it appear plausible , but it was enough to the people to understand that the merit of good works was allowed , and they were to believe the priests , both as to the good works they were to do , and as to the putting them into a state of grace , to make them capable of meriting . and this was the true reason of the anathema , against those who should deny the true merit of good works . v. of the number of sacraments . the council of trent pronounces an anathema in these words , if any one saith that the sacraments of the new law were not all appointed by jesus christ our lord , or that they were more or fewer than seven , viz. baptism , confirmation , eucharist , penance , extreme unction , orders and matrimony , or that any one of these is not truly and properly a sacrament , let him be anathema . but what is it to be truly and properly a sacrament ? it had been very reasonable to have defined a sacrament first truly and properly , before such an anathema passed . but that defect may be said to be supplied by the roman catechism , published by authority of the council ; and there we are told , that a sacrament is a sensible thing , which by divine institution hath a power of causing as well as signifying holiness and righteousness . so that to a true and proper sacrament two things are necessary : 1. that it be of divine institution . 2. that it confer grace on those who partake of it . and by these we must examin the catholick tradition about the number of sacraments . bellarmin saith , that all their divines , and the whole church for 500 years , viz. from the time of the master of the sentences , have agreed in the number of the seven sacraments . here we see is a bold appeal to tradition for 500 years ; but although , if it were proved , it cannot be sufficient to prove an apostolical tradition ; for the fathers might for a thousand years have held the contrary ; and i do not think one clear testimony can be produced out of antiquity for that number of sacraments , truly so called ; yet i shall at present wholly wave the debate of the former times , and confine my self to bellarmin's 500 years ; and i hope to make it appear there was no universal tradition for it within his own time . for alexander hales ( who wrote , saith possevin , his summ of divinity by order of innocent iv. and it was approved by alexander iv. with seventy divines , ) affirms , there were but four proper sacraments ; now if this were the catholick tradition then , that there were seven proper sacraments , how could this doctrine pass , and be so highly approved ? he saith farther , that christ himself only appointed two , viz. baptism and the lord's supper ; and for the rest , he saith , it may be presumed the apostles did appoint them by christ's direction , or by divine i●spiration . but how can that be , when he saith , the form even of those he calls proper sacraments , was either appointed by our lord or by the church ? how can such sacraments be of divine institution , whose very form is appointed by the church ? he puts the question himself , why christ appointed the form only of two sacraments , when all the grace of the sacraments comes from him ? he answers , because these are the principal sacraments which unite the whole man in the body of the church by faith and charity . but yet this doth not clear the difficulty , how those can be proper sacraments , whose form is not of divine institution ; as he grants in the sacrament of penance and orders , the form is of the churches appointment . and this will not only reach to this gre●t school divine , but to as many others as hold it in the churches power to appoint or alter the matter and form of some of those they call sacraments . for , however they may use the name , they can never agree with the council of trent in the nature of the seven sacraments , which supposes them to be of divine institution , as to matter and form. and so the divines of the church of rome have agreed since the council of trent . bellarmin hath a chapter on purpose to shew , that the matter and form of sacraments are so certain and determinate , that nothing can be changed in them ; and this determination must be by god himself . which , he saith , is most certain among them ; and he proves it by a substantial reason , viz. because the sacraments are the causes of grace ; and no one can give grace but god , and therefore none else can appoint the essentials of sacraments but he , and therefore he calls it sacrilege to change even the matter of sacraments . suarez asserts , that both the matter and form of sacraments are determined by christ's institution , and as they are determined by him , they are necessary to the making of sacraments . and this ( he saith ) absolutely speaking , is de pide , or an article of faith. and he proves it from the manner of christ's instituting baptism and the eucharist , and he urges the same reason , because christ only can conf●r grace by the sacraments , and therefore he must appoint the matter and form of them . cardinal lugo affirms , that christ hath appointed both matter and form of the sacraments , which he proves from the council of trent . he thinks christ might have grant●d a commission to his church to appoint sacraments , which he would make efficacious , but he reither believes that he hath done it , or that it was fitting to be done . petr●s à sancto joseph saith , that although the council of trent doth not expresly affirm the sacraments to be immediately instituted by christ ; yet it is to be so understood . and although the church may appoint sacramentalia , i. e. rites about the sacraments ; yet christ himself must appoint the sacraments themselves ; and he concludes , that no creature can have authority to make sacraments conferring grace ; and therefore he declares that christ did appoint the forms of all the sacraments himself , although we do not read them in scripture . if now it appears that some even of the church of rome before the council of trent , did think it in the churches power to appoint or alter the matter and form of some of those they called sacraments , then it will evidently follow they had not the same tradition about the seven sacraments which is there deliver'd . of chrism . the council of trent declares the matter of confirmation to be chrism , viz. a composition made of o●l of olive and balsam ; the one to signifie the clearness of conscience , the other the odour of a good fame , saith the council of florence . but where was this chrism appointed by christ ? marsilius saith from petrus aureolus , that there was a controversie between the divines and ca●●●ists about this matter ; and the latter affirmed that chris●● was not appointed by christ , but ast●●wards by th● church ; and that the pope could dispense with it ; which he could not do if it were of christ's insti●●●ion . petrus aureolus was himself a great man in the church of rome ; and after he had mentioned this difference , and named one brocardus ( or bernardus ) with other canonists for it ; he doth not affirm the contrary to be a catholick tradition ; but himself asserts the chrism not to be necessary to the sacrament of confirmation ; which he must have done if he had believed it of divine institution . gregory de valentia on the occasion of this opinion of the canonists , that confirmation might be without chrism , saith two notable things . 1. that they were guilty of heresie therein : for which he quotes dominicus soto . 2. that he thinks there were no canonists left of that mind . if not , the change was greater ; since it is certain they were of that opinion before . for guido brianson attests , that there was a difference between the divines and canonists about this matter ; for bernard the glosser and others held , that chrism was not necessary to it , because it was neither appointed by christ nor his apostles , but in some ancient councils . guil. antissiodorensis long before mentions the opinion of those who said that chrism was appointed by the church after the apostles times ; and that they confirmed only by imposition of hands ; but he doth not condemn it ; only he thinks it better to hold that the apostles used chrism , although we never read that they did it . but he doth not lay that opinion only on the canonists ; for there were divines of great note of the same . for , bonaventure saith , that the apostles made use neither of their matter nor form in their confirmation ; and his resolution is , that they were appointed by the governors of the church afterwards ; as his master alexander of hale had said besore him , who attributes the institution of both to a council of meaux . cardinal de vitriaco saith , that confirmation by imposition of hands was srom the apostles ; but by chrism from the church ; for we do not read that the apostles used it . thomas aquinas confesses there were different opinions about the institution of this sacrament ; some held that it was not instituted by christ nor his apostles , but afterwards in a certain council . but he never blames these for contradicting catholick tradition although he dislikes their opinion . cajetan on aquinas saith , that chrism with balsam was appointed by the church after the primitive times ; and yet now , this must be believed to be essential to this sacrament ; and by conink it seems to be heretical to deny it . for he affirms , that it seems to be an article of faith that confirmation must be with chrism , and no catholick , he saith , now denies it . which shews , that he believed the sense of the church not to have been always the same about it . but others speak out , as gregory de valentia , suarez , filliucius and tanner , who say absolutely , it is now a matter of faith to hold chrism to be essential to confirmation ; and that it is now not onely erroneous but heretical to deny it . their testimonies are at large produced by petrus aurelius , or the famous abbat of s. cyran . and even he grants it to be heresie since the council of trent ; but he yields that alensis , bonaventure and de vitri●co all held that opinion , which was made heresie by it . from whence it follows , that there hath been a change in the doctrine of the roman church about confirmation by chrism . for if it be heresie now to assert that which was denied without any reproach before , the tradition cannot be said to continue the same . thus we have seen there was no certain tradition for the matter of this sacrament , and as little is there for the form of it . which is , consigno te signo crucis , & confirmo te chrismate salutis in nomine patris , &c. but sirmondus produces another form out of s. ambrose , deus pater omnipotens , qui te regeneravit ex aqua & spirit● sancto , concessitque tibi peccata tua , ipse te ungat in vitam aeternam . and from thence concludes the present form not to be ancient ; and he confesses that both matter and form of this sacrament are changed . which was an ingenuous confession ; but his adversary takes this advantage from it ; that then the sacrament it self must ●e changed , if both matter and form were ; and then the church must be a very unfaithful keeper of tradition ; which i think is unanswerable . suarez proposes the objection fairly both as to the matter and form of this sacrament , that we read nothing of them in scripture , and tradition is very various about them ; but his answer is very insufficient , viz. that though it be not in scripture , yet they have them by tradition from the apostles ; now that is the very thing which sirmondus disproves , and shew that the church of rome is clearly gone off from tradition here both as to matter and form. of orders . i proceed to the sacrament of orders . it it impossible for those of the church of rome to prove this a true and proper sacrament , on their own grounds . for , they assert that such a one must have matter and form appointed by christ ; but that which they account the matter and form of orders were neither of them of christ's institution . the council of florence , they say , hath declared both ; the matter is that , by the delivery whereof the order is confer'd , as that of priesthood by the delivery of the chalice with the wine , and the paten with the bread ; and the form is , accipe potestatem offerendi sacrificium in ecclesia pro vivis & mortuis . now if neither of these be owned by themselves to have been appointed by christ , then it necessarily follows , that they cannot hold this to be a true and proper sacrament . imposition of hands they grant was used by the apostles , and still continued in the christian church ; and bellarmin confesses that nothing else can be proved by scripture to be the external symbol in this sacrament . and others are forced to say , that christ hath not determined the matter and form of this sacrament particularly , but hath left a latitude in it for the church to determin it . which in my opinion is clear giving up the cause , as to this sacrament . it is observed by arcudius , that the council of trent doth not declare the particular matter and form of this sacrament , but only in general , that it is performed by words and external signs , sess. 23. c. 3. from whence he infers , that the outward sign was left to the churches determination ; and he saith , that christ did particularly appoint the matter and form of some sacraments , as of baptism , and the lord's supper , and extreme unction , but not of others ; and therefore in the sacrament of orders , he saith , christ determined no more but that it should be conveyed by some visible sign ; and so it may be either by the delivering the vessels , or by the imposition of hands , or both . but we are to consider that the council of florence was received by the council of trent ; and that it is impossible to reconcile this doctrin with the general definition of a sacrament by the roman catechism , viz. that it is a sensible thing which by the institution of christ hath a power of causing as well as signifying grace ; which implies that the external sign which conveys grace must be appointed by the authour of the sacrament it self ; or else the church must have power to annex divine grace to its own appointments . but here lies the main difficulty , the church of rome hath altered both matter and form of this sacrament from the primitive institution ; and yet it dares not disallow the ordinations made without them , as is notorious in the case of the greek church ; and therefore they have been forced to allow this latitude as to the matter and form of this sacrament ; although such an allowance doth really overthrow its being a true and proper sacrament on their own grounds . yet this doctrine hath very much prevailed of late among their chief writers . cardinal lugo confesses , that of old priesthood was conferred by imposition of hands with suitable words ; and he saw it himself so done at rome , without delivering the vessels by catholick greek bishops . he saith farther , that the fathers and councils are so plain for the conferring priesthood by imposition of hands , that no one can deny it ; but yet he must justifie the roman church in assuming new matter and form , which he doth by asserting that christ left the church at liberty as to them . nicol. ysambertus debates the point at large , and his resolution of it is , that christ determined only the general matter , but the particular sign was left to the church ; and he proves by induction that the church hath appointed the external sign in this sacrament , and as to the order of priesthood he proves that imposition of hands was of old an essential part of it , but now it is only accidental . franciscus hallier confesses the matter of this sacrament to have been different in different times . in the apostles times and many ages after , hardly any other can be found but imposition of hands , as he proves from scripture and fathers . he carries his proofs down as low as the synod of aken in the time of ludovicus pius , and the council of m●aux , a. d. 845. but afterwards he saith , that by the council of florence and the common opinion of their divines , the delivery of the vessels is the essential matter of this sacrament . here we find a plain change in the matter of a sacrament owned after the continuance of above 800 years ; and yet we must believe the tradition of this church to have been always the same . which is impossible by the confession of their own writer . he cannot tell just the time when the change was made , but he concludes it was before the time of the vetus ordo romanus , which mentions the vessels . petrus a sancto joseph saith , that by christ's institution there is a latitude allowed in the matter of orders ; but he shews not where ; but he thinks , of it self it consists in the delivery of the vessels , but by the pope's permission imposition of hands may be sufficient . which is a doctrin which hath neither scripture , reason nor tradition for it . joh. morinus shews that there are five opinions in the church of rome about the matter of this sacrament . the first and most common is that it consists in the delivery of the vessels . the second , that imposition of hands together with that makes up the matter . the third , that they convey two different powers . the fourth , that unction with imposition of hands is the matter . the fifth , that imposition of hands alone is it ; and this , saith he , the whole church , greek and latin , ever owned ; but he saith , he can bring two demonstrations against the first , i. e. against the general sense of the now roman church . 1. from the practice of the greek church , which never used it . 2. from the old rituals of the latin church , which do not mention them ; and he names some above 800 years old ; and in none of them he finds either the matter or form of this sacrament , as it is now practised in the church of rome ; nor in isidore , alcuinus , amalarius , rabanus maurus , valafridus strabo , although they wrote purposely about these things . he thinks it was first received into the publick offices in the tenth age. afterwards he saith , he wonders how it came about that any should place the essential matter of ordination only in delivery of the vessels , and exclude the imposition of hands , which alone is mentioned by scripture and fathers . and again he saith , it strikes him with astonishment that there should be such an alteration , both as to matter and form. and at last he saith , christ hath determined no particular matter and form in this sacrament . but still the difficulty returns , how this can be a true and proper sacrament , whose matter and form depend on divine institution , when they confess there was no divine institution for the matter and form in orders ? bellarmin ( as is proved before ) hath a chapter on purpose to prove that the matter and form of sacraments are so determin'd , that it is not lawful to add , diminish or alter them ; and he charges it on luther as a part of his heresie , that no certain form of words was required to sacraments : and he makes it no less than sacrilege to change the matter of them . so that all such who hold the matter and form in orders to be mutable , must either charge the church of rome with sacrilege , or deny orders to be a true and proper sacrament . of the sacrament of penance . the next new sacrament is that of penance . they are agreed , that matter and form are both necessary to a true and proper sacrament . the matter is the external or sensible sign ; and what is that in this new sacrament ? there are two things necessary to the matter of a sacrament : 1. that it be an external and sensible sign ; which s. augustin calls an element in that known expression , accedat verbum ad elementum , & fit sacramentum ; which bellarmin would have understood only of baptism there spoken of ; but s. augustin's meaning goes farther , as appears by his following discourse , and immediately he calls a sacrament verbum visibile ; and therefore cannot be applied to words as they are heard , for so they have nothing of a sacramental sign in them . how then can contrition make up any part of the matter of a sacrament , when it is not external ? how can confession , when it is no visible sign , nor any permanent thing as an element must be ? how can satisfaction be any part of the sacrament , which may be done when the effect of the sacrament is over in absolution ? 2. there must be a resemblance between the sign and the thing signified . which st. augustin is so peremptory in , that he denies there can be any sacrament where there is no resemblance . and from hence , he saith , the signs take the name of the thing signified ; as after a certain manner the sacrament of the body of christ is the body of christ. and this was looked on as so necessary , that hugo de sancto victore and peter lombard both put it into the definition of a sacrament , as suarez confesses , viz. that it is the visible appearance of invisible grace , which bears the similitude , and is the cause of it . but this is left out of the definition in the roman catechism , and suarez thinks it not necessary , for the same reason ; because it is very hard to understand the similitude between words spoken in confession , and the grace supposed to be given by absolution , any more than in the words of abrenunciation , and the grace of baptism . how can the act of the penitent signifie the grace conveyed in absolution ? for there is no effect of the sacrament till absolution , by their own confession ; and therefore the acts of the penitent being antecedent to it , and of a different nature from it , can have no such resemblance with it , as to signifie or represent it . however the councils of florence and trent have declared , that the acts of the penitent , viz. contrition , confession and satisfaction , are as the matter in the sacrament . quasi materia : what is this quasi materia ? why not , are the matter ? is not true matter necessary to a true sacrament ? if there be none true here , then this can be but quasi sacramentum , as it were a sacrament , and not truly and properly so . but if it be true matter , why is it not so declared ? but common sense hindred them , and not the difference between the matter here and in other sacraments . for in the definition of sacraments they were to regard the truth , and not the kind of matter . they are not solid and permanent matter , saith bellarmin ; not matter externally applied , saith soto ; not any substance but humane acts , saith vasquez ; but none of these clear the point . for still if it be true matter of a sacrament , why was it not so declared ? why such a term of diminution added , as all men must understand it , who compare it with the expressions about the other sacraments ? but they knew very well there was a considerable party in the church of rome , who denied the acts of the penitent to be the matter or parts of this sacrament . the council of colen ( but little before the council of trent ) excludes the acts of the penitent from any share in this sacrament : which bellarmin denies not , but blames gropperus , the supposed author of the enchiridion . but gropperus was thought fit to be a cardinal as well as bellarmin ; and certainly knew the tradition of the church if there had been any such in this matter . the council of florence , it is plain , he thought not to be a sufficient declarer of it . no more did joh. major , who after it denied this sacrament to consist of matter and form , or that the acts of the penitent were the parts of it . so did gabriel biel , who refutes the contrary opinion , and saith contrition can be no part , because it is no sensible sign ; and satisfaction may be done after it . so that he cuts off two parts in three of the matter of this pretended sacrament . guido brianson , who lived after the council of florence supposes no certain tradition in the church about this matter ; but he sets down both opinions with their reasons , and prefers that which excludes the acts of the penitent from being parts of the sacrament ; although the florentine council had declared the contrary . durandus rejects two parts in three of those declared by the two councils , and for the same reasons mentioned by biel. ockam absolutely denies all three to be parts of the sacrament . and so did scotus before him ; whose words are remarkable , de poenitentiae sacramento dico , quod illa tria nullo modo sunt partes ejus , viz. these three are by no means any part of the sacrament of penance ; and yet the council of trent not only declares that they are so , but denounces an anathema against him that denies them to be required , as the matter of the sacrament of penance . and let any one by this judge what catholick tradition it proceeded upon ; when some of the greatest divines in the church of rome were of another opinion . as to the form of this sacrament the council of trent denounces an anathema against thesewho affirm absolution to be only declarative of the remission of sins : and yet i shall prove that this was the more current doctrin , even in the church of rome , up to the master of the sentences . gabriel biel saith , the ancient doctors did commonly follow it ; but it was supposed by scotus , because it seemed to take off from the efficacy of absolution , and consequently make it no sacrament , which is a cause of grace . but after he hath set down scotus his arguments , he saith , that opinion were very desirable , if it had any foundation in scripture or fathers . and to his arguments he answers , that true contrition obtains pardon with god , before sacerdotal absolution , but not with the church ; and that contrition supposes a desire of absolution ; which will never hold to make absolution to confer the grace of remission , if the sin be really forgiven before . for what is the desire of the penitent to the force of the sacrament administred by the priest ? and he saith , they all grant , that by true and sufficient contrition the sin is forgiven without the sacrament in act , i. e. the actual receiving absolution . so that here was an universal tradition as to the power of contrition , but in the other they had different opinions . marsilius saith , that god forgives sin upon contrition authoritatively ; the priests absolution is ministerial in the court of conscience , and before the church . and those sins which god ●irst absolves from principally and authentically , the priest afterwards absolves from in right of the church , as its minister . tostatus saith , that the priests absolution follows god's . ockam , that the priests then bind and loose , when they shew men to be bound or loosed ; and for this he relies on the master of the sentences . thomas de argentina , that the power of the keys doth extend to the remission of the fault which was done before by contrition ; but it tends to the increase of grace in the person . gulielmus antissiodore , that contrition takes away the guilt and punishment of sin , as to god and conscience , but not as to the church , for a man is still bound to undergo the penance which the church enjoyns him . bonaventure , that absolution presupposes grace ; for no priest would absolve any one whom he did not presume god had absolved before . alexander hales , that where god doth not begin in absolution , the priest cannot make it up . but the master of the sentences himself most fully handles this point ; and shews from the fathers , that god alone can remit sin both as to the fault and the punishment due to it . and the power of the keys , he saith , is like the priests judgment about leprosie in the levitical law , god healed the person , and the priest declared him healed . or as our saviour first raised lazarus , then gave him to his disciples to be loosed . he is loosed before god , but not in the face of the church but by the priests judgment . another way , he saith , priests bind by enjoyning penance , and they loose by remitting it , or readmitting persons to communion upon performing it . this doctrin of peter lombard's is none of those in quibus magister nontenetur ; for we see he had followers of great name , almost to the council of trent . but it happened , that both th. aquinas and scotus agreed in opposing this doctrin ; and the franciscans and dominicans bearing greatest sway in the debates of the council of trent , what they agreed in , passed for catholick tradition . and vasquez is in the right when he saith , this doctrin was condemned by the council of trent ; and so was scotus , when he said , that it did derogate from the sacrament of penance ; for in truth it makes it but a nominal sacrament , since it hath no power of conferring grace ; which the council of trent makes necessary to a true and proper sacrament . the main point in this debate is , whether true contrition be required to absolution or not ? which scotus saw well enough and argues accordingly . for none of them deny , that where there is true contrition , there is immediately an absolution before god ; and if this be required before the priests absolution , he can have no more to do , but to pronounce or declare him absolved . but if something less than contrition do qualifie a man for absolution , and by that grace be conveyed , then the power of absolution hath a great and real effect ; for it puts a man into a state of grace which he had not been in without it . and from hence came the opinion , that attrition with absolution was sufficient ; and they do not understand the council of trent's doctrin of the sacrament of penance , who deny it , as will appear to any one that reads the 4th chapter of the sacrament of penance , and compares it with the 7 , and 8 canons about sacraments in general . it is true that contrition is there said to have the first place in the acts of the penitent ; but observe what follows : true contrition reconciles a man to god , before he receives this sacrament . what hath the priest then to do , but to declare him reconciled ? but it saith not without the desire of it . suppose not , yet the thing is done upon the desire , & therefore the priests power can be no more than declarative . and that such a desire is so necessary as without contrition avails not , is more than the council hath proved , and it is barely supposed , to maintain the necessity of going to the priest for absolution ; and so it will be no more than a precept of the church , and not a condition of remission in the sacrament of penance . but afterwards , it declares that imperfect contrition or attrition doth dispose a man for the grace of god in this sacrament ; and by the general canons , the sacraments do confer grace where men are disposed . so that the council of trent did rightly comprehend the force of the power of absolution , which it gave to the priest in the sacrament of penance . but what catholick tradition could there be for the doctrin of the council of trent in thismatter , when hadrian 6. so little before it declares , it was a great difficulty among the doctors , whether the keys of priesthood did extend to the remission of the fault ? and for the negative he produces pet. lombard , alex. alens . and bonaventure ; and saith , that opinion is probable , because the priests power of binding and loosing is equal ; and as they cannot bind where god doth not , for they cannot retain the sins of a true penitent ; so neither can they loose where god doth not , i. e. where there is not true contrition . but because he saith others held the contrary opinion , and had probability on their side too , therefore he would determine nothing . notwithstanding this , in a few years after , the council of trent finds no difficulty , no probability in the other opinion ; but determines as boldly , as if there had been an universal tradition their way ; whereas the contrary cannot be denied by any that are conversant in the doctrin of their schools . but it was the mighty privilege of the council of trent , to make the doctrins of thomas and scotus , when they agreed , to be articles of faith ; and to denounce anathema's against opposers , although they reached to some of the greatest divines of their own church , within bellarmin's compass of 500 years . of extreme unction . we are now to examin another pretended sacrament , viz. of extreme unction . the council of trent declares this to be a true and proper sacrament , and denounces an anathema against him that denies it to be instituted by christ , and published by st. james ; or that it confers grace and remission of sins ; or that affirms it was appointed for bodily cures . it farther declares from the place of st. james interpreted by tradition , that the matter is oil consecrated by the bishop ; the form , that which is now used , per istam unctionem , &c. the effect , the grace of the holy ghost in purging away the remainder of sin , and strengthening the soul ; and sometimes bodily cures , when it is expedient for the health of the soul. so that the primary intention of this sacrament must respect the soul , otherwise it is granted , it could not be a true and proper sacrament . so suarez saith in this case , if the external sign be not immediately appointed for a spiritual effect , it cannot prove a true sacrament of the new law ; no not although the bodily cure were designed for the strengthning of faith. and from hence he proves , that when the apostles are said to anoint the sick , and heal them , mark 6. 13. this cannot relate to the sacrament of unction , because their cures had not of themselves an immediate respect to the soul. the same reason is used by bellarmin , sacramenta per se ad animam pertinent , ad corpus per accidens aut certe secundario . the same is affirmed by maldonat , although he differs from bellarmin about the apostles anointing with oil , which bellarmin denies to have been sacramental for this reason , but maldonat affirms it ; and answers other arguments of bellarmin , but not this . gregory de valentia carries it farther , and saith , that if the anointing with oil were only a symbol of a miraculous cure , it could be no sacrament ; for that is a medium to convey supernatural grace , and then it would last no longer than the gift of miracles . so that we have no more to do , but only to prove that by the tradition of the church st. james his anointing was to be understood with respect to bodily cures in the first place . we cannot pass over so great a man as cajetan , who wrote on that place of st. james , not long before the council of trent , and a good while after the council of florence , which relies on this place for this sacrament of unction . but cajetan saith , it doth not relate to it , because the immediate effect is the cure of the party in saint james ; but in this sacrament the direct and proper effect is remission of sins . all that catharinus hath to say against this , is , that the bodily cure is not repugnant to it ; but what is this to the purpose , when the question is , what is primarily designed in this place ? the school divines , from peter lombard , had generally received this for a sacrament ; but the canonists denied it , as appears by the gloss on c. vir autem de secund . nuptiis decret . gregor . tit. 21. where it is said , that this unction might be repeated , being no sacrament but only prayer over a person . the roman correctors cry out it is heresie by the council of trent ; but the glosser knew no such thing ; and if it were so only by the council of trent , then not by any catholick tradition before . for , i suppose matter of heresie must reach to the canonists , as well as the divines . but the plainest determination of this matter will be by the ancient offices of the church ; for if they respected bodily cures in the first place , then it is owned there could be no tradition for any sacrament in this unction . in the ancient ordo romanus it is called benedictio olei ad omnem languorem quocunque tempore . i desire to know whether the oil so consecrated be chiefly designed for the body or the soul. and in the office it self , this place of st. james is mentioned : and then follows , te domine peritissimum medicum imploramus , ut virtutis tuae medicinam in hoc oleum propitius infundas . and a little after ; prosit pater misericordiarum , febribus & dysenteria laborantibus , prosit paralyticis , caecis & claudis simulque vexatitiis , with abundance more ; which manifestly shews that this consecrated oil was intended primarily for the cure of diseases . in the ambrosian form , the prayer is , infunde sanctificationem tuam huic oleo , ut ab his quae unxerit membra , fugatis insidiis adversariae potestatis , susceptione praesentis olei , sancti spiritus gratia salutaris debilitatem expellat & plenam conferat sospitatem , where the effect relates to the soundness of the members anointed , and not to the sins committed by them . in the gregorian sacramentary , published by menardus , there is a prayer wherein this place of st. james is mentioned ; and presently it follows , cura quaesumus redemptor noster gratia spiritus sancti languores istius infirmi , &c. and immediately before the anointing , sana domine infirmum istum , cujus ossa turbata sunt , &c. and while he was anointing , the patient was to say , sana me domine ; and where the pain was greatest , he was to be so much more anointed , ubi plus dolor imminet amplius perungatur . while the rest were anointing , one of the priests was to pray , pristinam & immelioratam recipere merearis sanitatem ; what was this but bodily health ? and yet this was per hanc sacramenti olei unctionem : after which follows a long prayer for recovery from pains and diseases . and such there are in the several offices published by menardus , in his notes ; although the general strain of them shews that they were of latter times , when the unction was supposed to expiate the sins of the several senses . cassander produces many instances to shew , that the prayers and hymns , and the form of anointing did respect bodily health . in one he finds this form , in nomine patris , & filii , & spiritus sancti accipe sanitatem . not the health of the mind , but the body . maldonat takes notice of cassander's offices , and the expressions used in them ; but he gives no answer to the main design of them . but three things he owns the church of rome to have varied from the ancient tradition in , with respect to this sacrament . 1. as to the form ; the council of trent owns no other but that now used , per istam unctionem , &c. but maldonat confesses it was indicative , ego te ungo , &c. or ungo te oleo sancto , &c. and he runs to that shift , that christ did not not determin any certain form ; whereas the council of trent saith , the church understood by tradition the other to have been the form. here the council of trent makes an appeal to tradition , and is deserted in it , by one of its most zealous defenders ; and gamachaeus affirms this to be an essential change ; and he thinks the sacrament not to be valid in another form. s●arez thinks the other form not sufficient . but maldonat affirms the other form was used ; and so at that time , there was no s●crament of extreme unction , because not administred in a valid or sufficient form. and yet in the gregorian office the form is indicative , inungo te de oleo sancto , &c. so in that of ratoldus , ungo te oleo sanctificato in nomine patris , &c. in the tilian codex , inungo te in nomine patris , & filii , & spiritus sancti , oleo sancto atque sacrato , &c. in the codex remigii the general forms are indicative , ungo te oleo sancto , &c. but there being a variety of forms set down , among the rest there is one , per istam unctionem dei , &c. which afterwards came to be the standing form ; and yet the council of trent confidently appeals to tradition in this matter . which shewed how very little the divines there met were skilled in the antiquities of their own church . suarez shews his skill when he saith , the tradition of the roman church is infallible in the substance of this sacrament , and that it always used a deprecative form ; but maldonat knew better , and therefore on their own grounds their tradition was more than fallible ; since the roman church hath actually changed the form of this sacrament . 2. maldonat observes another change , and that is as to the season of administring it . for the council of trent saith it ought to be in exitu vitae , and therefore it is called sacramentum exeuntium , the sacrament of dying persons ; but maldonat saith , it is an abuse to give it only to such ; for , in the ancient church , they did not wait till the party were near death ; but , he saith , it was given before the eucharist , and that not once , but for seven days together , as is plain , he saith , in the ancient ms. offices ; and he quotes albertus magnus for it . so that here is another great change in the roman tradition observed and owned by him . 3. in not giving it now to children ; for in the ancient writers he saith , there is no exception , but it was used to all that were sick ; and he quotes cusanus for saying expresly that it was anciently administred to infants . but the reason of the change was the doctrin of the schoolmen ; for with their admirable congruities they had fitted sacraments for all sorts of sins ; as bellarmin informs us ; baptism against original sin , confirmation against infirmity , penance against actual mortal sin , eucharist against malice , orders against ignorance , matrimony against concupiscence ; and what is now left for extreme unction ? bellarmin saith , they are the remainders of sin ; and so saith the council of trent . but what remainders are there in children , who have not actually sinned , and original sin is done away already ? therefore the church of rome did wisely take away extreme unction from children ; but therein maldonat confesses it is gone off from tradition . i know alegambe would have maldonat not believed to be the author of the books of the sacraments ; but the preface before his works hath cleared this beyond contradiction from the mss. taken from his mouth with the day and year compared with the copy printed under his name . but if maldonat may be believed , the church of rome hath notoriously gone off from its own tradition as to this sacrament of extreme unction . of matrimony . the last new sacrament is that of matrimony ; which having its institution in paradise , one would wonder how it came into mens heads to call it a sacrament of the new law , instituted by christ ; especially when the grace given by it supposes mankind in a fallen condition . hower the council of trent denounces an anathema against him that saith that matrimony is not truly and properly a sacrament , one of the seven of the evangelical law , instituted by christ. that which is truly and properly a sacrament must be a cause of grace , according to the general decrees about the nature of sacraments . so that those who do not hold the latter , must deny the former . now that there was no tradition even in the roman church for this , i prove from the confession of their own most learned divines since the council of trent . vasquez confesses that durandus denies that it confers grace , and consequently that it is truly a sacrament , ( but he yields it in a large improper sense ) and that the canonists were of his opinion ; and that the master of the sentences himself asserted no more than durandus . and which adds more to this , he confesses that soto durst not condemn this opinion as heretical , because thomas , bonaventure , scotus and other schoolmen did only look on their own as the more probable opinion . but , saith he , after the decree of eugenius and the council of trent it is heretical . gregory de valentia saith the same thing , only he adds that the master of the sentences contradicts himself . so certain a deliverer was he of the churches tradition ; and wonders that soto should not find it plainly enough in the councils of florence and trent , that a true sacrament must confer grace . maldonat yields , that durandus and the canonists denied matrimony to be a proper sacrament , but he calls them catholicks imprudently erring . bella●min denies it not ; but uses a disingenuous shift about durandus , and would bring it to a logical nicity , whereas 〈◊〉 very arguments he pretends to answer , sh●w pl●●●●y that he denied this to be a true and proper sacrament . but he offers something considerable about the canonists if it will hold . 1. that they were but a few , and for this he quotes navarr , that the common opinion was against them ; for which he mentions the rubrick de spons . but i can find nothing like it through the whole title ; and it is not at all probable that such men as hostiensis and the glosser should be ignorant of , or oppose the common opinion . hostiensis saith plainly , that grace is not conferr'd by matrimony , and never once mentions any opinion among them against it ; and the glosser upon gratian affirms it several times , caus. 32. q. 2 c. honorantur , in hoc sacramento non confertur gratia spiritus sancti sicut in aliis . the roman correctors could not bear this ; and say in the margin , immo confert ; this is plain contradicting ; but how is it proved from the canon law ? they refer to dist. 23. c. his igitur , v. pro beneficiis . thither upon their authority i go ; and there i find the very same thing said , and in the same words ; and it is given as a reason why symony cannot be committed in matrimony as in other sacraments , and in both places we are referr'd to 32 q. 2. c. connubia , and to 1. q. 1. c. quicquid invisibilis , the former is not very favourable to the grace of matrimony ; and in the latter the gloss is yet more plain , if it be possible , nota conjugium non esse de his sacramentis quae consotationem coelestis grati● tribuunt . there the correctors fairly refer us to the council of trent , which hath decreed the contrary . but that is not to our business , but whether the canonists owned this or not . and there it follows , that other sacraments do so signifie as to convey , this barely signifies . so that i think bellarmin had as good have given up the canonists , as to make so lame a defence of them . 2. he saith we are not to rely on the canonists for these things , but on the divines . but durand● saith , the canonists could not be ignorant of the doctrin of the roman church ; for some of them were cardinals ; and he gives a better reason , viz. that the sense of the roman church was to be seen in the decretals . for therefore marriage was owned to be a sacrament in the large sense , because of the decret . of lucius iii. extra de haeret . c. ad abolendam ; but the schoolmen argued from probabilities and niceties in this matter , which could not satisfie a man's understanding ; as appears by durandus his arguments , and bellarmin's answers to them . 1. where sacraments confer grace , there must be a divine institution of something above natural reason , but there is nothing of that kind in matrimony , besides the signifying the union between christ and his church ; and therefore it is only a sacrament in a large , and not in a proper sense . in answer to this bellarmin saith , that it both signifies and causes such a love between man and wife , as there is between christ and his church . but vasquez saith , that the resemblance as to christ and his church in matrimony , doth not at all prove a promise of grace made to it . and basilius pontius approves of what vasquez saith , and confesses , that it cannot be infer'd from hence that it is a true and proper sacrament . 2. here is nothing external added , besides the mere contract of the persons ; but the nature of a sacrament impli●s some external and visible sign . bellarmin answers , that it is not necessary there should be in this sacrament any such extrinsecal sign ; because it lies in a mere contract . and that i think holds on the other side , that a mere contract cannot be a sacrament , from their own definition of a sacrament . 3. the marriage of infidels was good and valid , and their baptism adds nothing to it ; but it was no sacrament before , and therefore not after . bellarmin answers , that it becomes a sacrament after . and so there is a sacrament without either matter or form ; for there is no new marriage . 4. marriage was instituted in the time of innocency , and is a natural dictate of reason , and therefore no sacrament . bellarmin answers , that it was no sacrament then , because there was no need of sacramental grace . and although the marriage of adam and eve did represent the union between christ and his church ; yet it was no proper sacrament . but how doth it prove that it is a sacrament upon any other account , under the gospel ? and if that doth not imply a promise of grace , then how can it now ? so that durandus his reasons appear much stronger than bellarmin's answers . but durandus urges one thing more , which bellarmin takes no notice of , viz. that this opinion of the canonists was very well known at that time , and was never condemned as contrary to any determination of the church . now , if there had been any constant tradition even of the church of rome against it , it is impossible these canonists should have avoided censure ; their opinion being so much taken notice of by the schoolmen afterwards . jacobus almain saith , it was a controversie between the canonists and divines , whether matrimony was a sacram●nt ; not all the divines neither ; for the confesses durandus and others seemed to agree with them . what universal tradition then had the council of trent to rely upon in this matter ? when all the cano●ists , according to almain , and some of the divines , opposed it ? he sets down their different reasons ; but never alledges matter of faith , or tradition against them , but only saith , the divines hold the other opinion , because matrimony is one of the seven sacraments . but on what was the opinion of the necessity of seven sacraments grounded ? what scripture , what fathers , what tradition was there , before peter lombard , for just that number ? the sense of the greek church about seven sacraments . but before i come to that , it is fit to take notice of what bellarmin lays great weight upon , both as to the number of the sacraments in general , and this in particular ; which is , the consent of both the greek and latin church for at least 500 years . but i have shewed there was no such consent , as is boasted of even in the latin church . as to the greek church , he saith , it is an argument of universal tradition , when they had the same tradition even in their schism . to this i answer . 1. we do not deny that the latter greeks , after the taking constantinople by the latins , did hold seven mysteries ; which the latins render sacraments . for after there were latin patriarchs at constantinople , and abundance of latin priests in the eastern parts , they had perpetual disputes about religion ; and the latins by degrees did gain upon them in some points ; and particularly in this of seven sacraments , for the latins thought it an advantage to their church to boast of such a number of sacraments ; and the greeks that they might not seem to come behind them , were willing to embrace the same number . the first person among them who is said to have written about them , was simeon bishop of thessalonica , whom possevin sets at a greater distance , that the tradition might seem so much elder among them ; ( for he makes him to have lived 600 years before his time ; ) but leo allatius hath evidently proved , that he lived not two hundred years before him , ( which is a considerable difference , ) for simeon dyed but six months before the taking of thessalonica , a. d. 1430 , as he proves from joh. anagnosta , who was present at the taking it . from hence it appers how very late this tradition came into the greek church . after him gabriel severus , bishop of philadelphia , wrote about the seven sacraments , and he lived at venice in arcudius his time , who wrote since possevin ; and crusius wrote to this gabriel a. d. 1580 , and he was consecrated by jeremias a. d. 1577. so that neither his authority , or that of je●emias , can signifie any thing as to the antiquity of this tradition among the greeks . leo allatius talks of the old as well as modern greeks , who held seven sacraments , but he produces the testimony only of those who lived since the taking of constantinople ; as job the monk , simeon , johannes palaeologus , jeremias , gabriel , cyrillus berrhoensis , parthenius , and such like : but he very craftily saith , he produces these to let us see they have not gone off from the faith of their ancestors , whereas that is the thing we would have seen , viz. the testimony of the greeks before , and not afterwards . as to the ancient greeks , he confesses they say nothing of the number . de numero apud eos altum silentium est . and how could therebe a tradition in so much silence ? but some speak of some , and others of others , but all speak of all . this is a very odd way to prove a tradition of a certain number . for then , some might believe three , others four , others five , but how can this prove that all believed just seven ? however let us see the proof . but instead of that he presently starts an objection from the pretended dionysius areopagita , viz. that where he designs to treat of all the sacraments , he never mentions penance , extreme unction , and matrimony ; and after a great deal of rambling discourse , he concludes that he did ill to leave them o●t ; and that others answers are insufficient . he shews from tertullian , ambrose and cyril that the necessary sacraments are mentioned ; but where are the rest ? and we are now enquiring after them in the ancient greek church ; but they are not to be foun● . as one may confidently affirm , when one who professed so much skill in the greek church , as leo allatius , hath no more to say for the proof of it . 2. those greeks who held seven sacraments , did not hold them in the sense of the council o● trent . and that for two reasons . 1. they do not hold them all to be of divine institution . which appears by the patriarch jeremias his answer to the tubing divines , who at first seems to write agreeably to the church of rome in this matter , ( except about extreme unction ; ) but being pressed hard by them in their reply ; he holds to the divine institution of baptism , and the eucharist , but gives up the rest , as instituted by the churches authority . which is plain giving up the cause . how then comes bellarmin to insist so much on the answer of jeremias ? the reason was , that socolovius had procured from constantinople the patriarch's first answer , and translated and printed it ; upon which great triumphs were made of the patriarch's consent with the church of rome ; but when these divines were hereby provoked to publish the whole proceedings , those of the church of rome were unwilling to be undeceived ; and so take no notice of any farther answer . since the time of jeremias , the patriarch of alexandria , ( as he was afterwards , ) metrophanes critopulus published an account of the faith of the greek church ; and he saith expresly of four of the seven , that they are mystical rites , and equivocally called sacraments . and from hence it appears how little reason leo allatius had to be angry with caucus , a latinized greek , like himself , for affirming that the modern greeks did not look on these sacraments as of divine institution ; but after he hath given him some hard words , he offers to prove his assertion for him . to which end he not only quotes that passage of the patriarch jeremias , but others of job and gregorius ; from whence he infers , that five of the sacraments were of ecclesiastical institution , and he saith nothing to take it off . so admirably hath he proved the consent of the eastern and western churches ! 2. they do not agree in the matter , or form , or some essential part of them , with the council of trent , and therefore can make up no tradition for the doctrin of that council about the seven sacraments . this will be made appear by going through them . 1. of chrism . 1. as to the form , arcudius shews , that gabriel of philadelphia , cabasilas and marcus ephesius , all place the form in the consecration of it ; but the church of rome makes the form to lie in the words spoken in the use of it . 2. as to the minister of it . among the greeks it is commonly performed by the presbyter , though the bishop be present ; but the council of tr●nt denounces an anathema against him that saith , the bishop alone is not the ordinary minister of it . 3. as to the character . the council of trent declares that whosoever affirms that confirmation doth not imprint an indelible character , so as it cannot be repeated is anathematized ; but arcudius shews at large , that the modern greeks make no scruple of reiterating confirmation . but catumsyritus , another latinized greek , opposes arcudius herein ; and saith , that the use of chrism among the geeeks , doth not relate to the sacrament of confirmation , but was a symbolical ceremony relating to baptism ; and for this he quotes one corydaleus a man of great note in the patriarchal church at constantinople . therefore caucus had reason to deny that the greeks receive that which the latins call the sacrament of confirmation . and if this hold , then the tradition of the seven sacraments must fail in the greek church . for they deny that they have any such thing as a sacrament of confirmation distinct from baptism . 2. of the sacrament of penance . 1. the council of trent declares absolution of the penitent to be a judicial act , and denounces an anathema against him that denies it ; but the greek church uses a deprecative form , ( as they call it , ) not pronouncing absolution by way of sentence , but by way of prayer to god. which as aquinas observes , rather shews a person to be absolved by god than by the priest , and are rather a prayer that it may be done , than a signification that it is done ; and therefore he looks on such forms as insufficient . and if it be a judicial sentence , as the council of trent determines , it can hardly be reconciled to such a form , wherein no kind of judicial sentence was ever pronounced ; as arcudius grants ; and in extreme unction , where such a form is allowed , there is , as he observes , no judicial act. but he hopes at last to bring the greeks off by a phrase used in some of their forms , i have you absolved ; but he confesses it is not in their publick offices ; and their priests for the most part use it not . which shews it to be an innovation among the latinizing greeks , if it be so observed , which catumsyritus denies , and saith , he proves it only from some forms granted by patents , which are not sacramental ; and supposing it otherwise , he saith , it is foolish , false and erroneous to suppose such a form to be valid ; because it is no judicial act. 2. the council of trent makes confession of all mortal sins , how secret soever , to be necessary in order to the benefit of priestly absolution in this sacrament , and denounces an anathema against those that deny it ; but the greek church grants absolution upon supposition that they have not confessed all mortal sins : as appears by the form of the patriarch of antioch , produced by arcudius , and another form of the patriarch of constantinople , in jeremias his answer . arcudius is hard put to it , when to excuse this he saith , they only pray to god to forgive them ; for this is to own that a deprecative form is insufficient , and so that there is no sacrament of penance in the greek church . 3. of orders . the greek and latin churches differ , both as to matter and form. the council of trent anathematiseth those who deny a visible and exeternal priesthood in the new testament ; or a power of consecrating and offering the true body and bloud of christ , and of remitting and retaining of sins . and this two-fold power the church of rome expresses by a double form , one of delivering the vessels with accipe potestatem , &c. the other of imposition of hands , with accipe spiritum sanctum . but the greek church wholly omits the former , on which the greatest weight is laid in the latin church , and many think the essential form lies in it . when the office of ordination is over , the book of the liturgy , called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is delivered to the presbyter , but without any words ; and there is no mention of it in their rituals , either printed or mss. so likewise a parcel of consecrated bread is delivered by the bishop to him afterwards . and all the form is , the divine grace advances such an one to the office of a presbyter . if we compare this with the form in the council of florence , we shall find no agreement either as to matter or form , in this sacrament , between the greek and latin churches . for there the matter is said to be that by which the order is conferred , viz. the delivery of the chalice with wine , and the paten with the bread ; and the form , receive the power of offering sacrifice for the living and the dead . and it is hardly possible to suppose these two churches should go upon the same tradition . i know what pains arcudius hath taken to reconcile them ; but as long as the decree of eugenius stands , and is received in the church of rome , it is impossible . and catumsyritus labours hard to prove , that he hath endeavoured thereby to overthrow the whole order of priesthood in the roman church . 4. of extreme unction . bellarmin particularly appeals to the greek church for its consent as to this sacrament ; but if he means in the modern sense as it is deliver'd by the councils of florence and trent , he is extremely mistaken . 1. for the former saith , it is not to be given but to such of whose death they are afraid ; and the council of trent calls it the sacrament of dying persons . but the greeks administer their sacrament of unction to persons in health as well as sickness , and once a year to all the people that will ; which arcudius saith , is not only done by the illiterate priests , but by their patriarchs and metropolitans , &c. and they look on then as a supplement to the ancient penance of the church ; for they think the partaking of the holy oil makes amends for that : but this arcudius condemns as an abuse and innovation among them . but the original intention and design of it was for the cure and recovery of sick persons ; as arcudius confesses the whole scope of the office shews ; and in the next chapter he produces the prayers to that end . and the greeks charge the latins with innovation in giving this sacrament to those persons of whose recovery they have no hope . 2. the council of trent requires that the oil of extreme unction be consecrated by a bishop ; and this the doctors of the roman church , saith catumsyritus , make essential to the sacrament . but in the greek church the presbyters commonly do it , as arcudius shews at large . 5. of matrimony . the council of trent from making this a sacrament , denounces an anathema against those who do not hold the bond indissoluble , even in the case of adultery . and bellarmin urges this as his first reason , because it is a sign of the conjunction of christ with his church . but the greek church held the contrary ; and continues so to do , as both bellarmin and arcudius confess . so that though there be allow'd a consent in the number of sacraments among the modern greeks , yet they have not an entire consent with the roman church in any one of them . the sense of other eastern churches about the seven sacraments . but to shew how late this tradition of seven sacraments came into the greek church , and how far it is from being an universal tradition , i shall now make it appear that this number of sacraments was never received in the other christian churches , although some of them were originally descended from the ancient greek church . i begin with the most eastern churches , called the christians of st. thomas in the east-indies . and we have a clear proof that there was no tradition among them about the seven sacraments . for when alexius meneses , archbishop of goa , undertook to reform them according to the roman church , ( if that may be called a reformation ) and held a council at diamper to that purpose , a. d. 1599. he found that they had no sacrament of chrism , or penance , or extreme unction , of which they were utterly ignorant , saith jarricus from antonius goveanus , who was prior of goa , and published the whole proceedings . which book was translated out of portugese by joh. baptista a glano into french , and printed at brussels , 1609. from whence the author of the critical history of the faith and customs of the eastern nations hath given an account of these things ; and he saith , they owned but three sacraments , baptism , eucharist and orders ; that they knew nothing of the sacrament of chrism or extreme unction , and abhorred auricular confession . but in excuse of them he saith , that they joyned confirmation with baptism , as other eastern churches did ; that the sacrament of extreme unction as it is practised in the church of rome is known only to the latin church ; but the eastern church had the unction of s. james for the cure of diseases , as the greek church had . cotovicus affirms the same of the other eastern churches called chaldean , ( who are under the same patriarch with the christians of s. thomas ) that they knew nothing of the sacraments of confirmation and extreme unction . this patriarch is the same which is commonly called the patriarch of babylon ; whose residence is at mozal ; but called of babylon , because sele●cia , after the desolation of the true babylon had the name given to it ( as it were ●asie to prove , if it were pertinent to this design ) and upon the destruction of sele●cia the patriarch removed first to bagdat and then to mozal ; whose jurisciction extends over all those eastern christians , which are called nestorian . in the abyssine churches , godignus saith positively from those who had been conversant among them , that they knew nothing of the sacraments of chrism and extreme unction ; and that all the confession they have is g●neral and rare ; and that they have no bishops under the abuna , and believe the bond of matrimony easily dissolved . so that the tradition of seven sacraments is wholly unknown to them , but as it was imposed by the roman m●ssionaries ; which imposition was so ill received there and brought such confusion and disorders among them , that they are for ever banished . in the armenian churches , joh. chernacensis a latinized armenian saith , that the armenians owned not the seven sacraments , that they knew nothing of chrism and extre●● unction . here we see a general consent as to the total ignorance of two of the seven sacraments in these churches . but clemens galanus , who had been many years a missionary among the armenians endeavours to prove that they had the tradition of the seven sacraments ; but very unsuccessfully . for he produces none of their ancient authors for it : but he names vartanus whom he sets himself to confute afterwards ; and he confesses , that he took away the sacrament of penance , and made burial of the dead to be one of his seven . but more than that , he saith , the armenian churches have forbidden extreme unction as the nestorians had done auricular confession . so that nothing like a truly catholick tradition can be produced for the number of seven sacraments either in the church of rome or elsewhere , within bellarmin's own term of 500 years . i am now to give an account when this number of seven sacraments , came into the church , and on what occasions it was advanced to be a point of faith. the first i can find who expresly set down the number of seven sacraments , was hugo de s. victore , who lived in the twelfth century , not long before peter lombard . but that there was an innovation made by him in this matter , i shall make appear by comparing what he saith with what others had delivered who were short of the primitive fathers . rupertus tuitiensis lived much about the same time in germany that hugo did at paris , and he gives a different resolution of the question about the principal sacraments : for he names no more than baptism , the eucharist and the double gift of the holy ghost ; and , saith he , these three sacraments are necessary instruments of our salvation . but hugo saith , there are seven principal sacraments ; ( which sufficiently shews , that he thought there were other sacraments besides these ; and so he expresses his mind in another place , where he makes all symbolical signs to be sacraments , ) but the principal sacram●nts he saith , are those which convey grace . fulbertus carnotensis lived in france in the beginning of the tenth century ; and where he discourses of the sacraments he names no more than baptism and the eucharist . he calls the body and blood two sacraments , and so did rabanus maurus before him . who lived in the ninth age , and was a person of great reputation ; and he names no more sacraments than baptism , and chrism , and the eucharist ; where he proposes to treat of them ; and had as just an occasion to have mention'd the rest , as hugo had . but bellarmin saith , he handled all wherein the clergy were concerned , and therefore omitted none but matrimony . but were not they concerned to know whether it were a sacrament or not ? the question is not whether he mention'd the things , but whether he called them sacraments ; but i do not find extreme unction so much as mention'd by him in the place he refers us to . in the same ●ge , walafridus strabo , where he purposely discourseth of the sacraments names no more than rabanus maurus ; and this had been an inexcusable omission in such who treat of ecclesiastical offices ; and were to inform persons of their duties about them . and therefore i lay much more weight on such an omission in them than in any other writers . i know paschasius radbertus mentions no more than three sacraments , baptism , chrism and the eucharist ; but bellarmin and sirmondus say he mention'd them for example sake , because it was not his business to handle the number of sacraments ; but this answer will by no means serve for those who purposely treated of these matters ; and therefore an omission in them is an argument that they knew nothing of them . and this argument will go yet higher ; for in the beginning of the seventh century , isidore of sevil treated of these matters , and he names no more than baptism , chrism and the eucharist ; and he tells us , they are therefore called sacraments , because under the covering of corporeal things a secret and invisible virtue is convey'd to the pa●takers of them . and this very passage is entred into the canon law c. 1. q. 1 c. multi secularium , &c. and there it passes under the name of gregory i. but the roman correctors restore it to isidore . but it may be objected , that ivo carnotensis made a collection of canons before gratian ; who handles the sacraments in his first and second part ; and he seems to make the annual chrism to be a sacrament ; for which he quotes an epistle of fabianus , who saith it ought to be consecrated every year , quia novum sacramentum est ; and this , he saith , he had by tradition from the apostles . which testimony the modern schoolmen rely upon for a sufficient proof of this apostolical tradition . but this epistle is a notorious counterfeit , and rejected by all men of any tolerable ingenuity in the church of rome . thus we trace the original of some pretended apostolical traditions into that mass of forgeries , the decretal epistles , which was sent abroad under the name of isidore . ivo produces another testimony from innocentius i. to prove that extreme unction was then owned for a kind of sacrament , and therefore ought not to be given to penitents . if this rule holds , then either matrimony was no sacrament , or penitents might not marry ; but the canonists say even excommunicated persons may marry , but one of them saith , it is a strange sacrament excommunicated persons are allow'd to partake of . but this genus est sacramenti signifies very little to those who know how largely the word sacrament was used in elder times , from iertullian downwards . but our question is not about a kind of a sacrament , but strict and proper sacraments ; and if it had been then thought so , he would not have permitted any to administer it ; unless they will say it is as necessary to salvation as baptism , which none do . it appears from hence , that there was then a custome among some in regard to s. james his words , if persons were sick , to take some of the chrism to anoint them , and to pray over them in hopes of their recovery ; but this was no sacrament of dying persons , as it is now in the church of rome . if it had been then so esteemed , s. ambrose ( or who-ever was the author of the book of sacraments ) would not have omitted it , and the other supernumeraries , when he purposely treats of sacraments ; the same holds as to s. cyril of jerusalem . and it is a poor evasion to say , that they spake only to catechumens ; for they were to be instructed in the means and instruments of salvation as they make all sacraments to be . and it is to as little purpose to say , that they do not declare there are but tw● ; for our business is to enquire for a catholick tradition for s●ven true and proper sacraments , , as the council of trent determines under an anathema . but if we compare the traditions for two and for seven together , the other will be found to have far greater advantage ; not only because the two are mention'd in the eldest writers , where the seven are not ; but because so many of the fathers agree in the tradition , that the sacraments were designed by the water and blood which came out of our saviour's side . so s. chrysostom , s. cyril of alexandria , leo magnus , but above all s. augustin who several times insists upon this ; which shews that they thought those two to be the true and proper sacraments of christianity ; however there might be other mystical rites which in a large sense might be called sacraments . as to the occasions of setting up this number of seven sacraments , they were these . 1. some pretty congruities which they had found out for them . the number seven they observe was in request in the levitical law , as to sacrifices and purifications . naaman was bid to wash seven times . and bellarmin in good earnest concludes that the whole scripture seemed to foretell the seven sacraments by those things . but besides , he tells us of the seven things relating to natural life which these have an analogy with ; the seven sorts of sins these are a remedy against , and the seven sorts of vertues which answer to the seven sacraments . but none of all these prove any catholick tradition . 2. making no difference between mystical rites continued in imitation of apostolical practices , and true and real sacraments . imposition of hands for confirmation and ordination is allowed to be a very just and reasonable imitation of them ; and as long as the miraculous power of healing diseases continued , there was a fair ground for continuing the practice mentioned by s. james ; but there was no reason afterwards to change this into quite another thing , by making it a sacrament , chiefly intended for doing away the remainders of sin. 3. advancing the honour of the priesthood ; by making them so necessary for the actual expiation of all sorts of sins , and in all conditions . for no sacrament is rightly administred by the council of trent without the priest ; and therefore clandestine marriages are declared void by it . and it pronounces an anathema against those who say any others than priests can administer extreme unction ; however it appears that in the time of innocentius 1. any might make use of the chrism when it was consecrated by a bishop ; but they are grown wiser in the church of rome since that time ; and as they have altered a ceremony of curing into a sacrament of dying , so they have taken care that none but priests shall perform that last office , that the people may believe they can neither live nor dye without them . vi. of auricular confession . the council of trent declares , that the universal church always understood that christ did institute an entire confession of sins ; and that it is received by divine right to all who sin after baptism , because our lord jesus christ before his ascension into heaven , did leave priests as his vicars , to be presidents and judges , to whom all mortal sins were to be made known , and of which they were by the power of the keys to give sentence , so as either to remit or retain them . it farther saith , that the most holy and ancient fathers by a great and unanimous consent did use this secret sacramental confession from the beginning . and it denounces anathema's , 1. against him that denies the sacrament of penance to be of christ's institution . 2. against him that denies that our saviour's words , receive ye the holy ghost , whose sins ye remit they are remitted , &c. are to be understood of the power of remitting and retaining in the sacrament of penance , as the calick church always understood them . 3. against him that denies confession to be a part of it , or to have divine institution , and to be necessary to salvation ; as it relates to all mortal though secret sins . thus we see the sense of the council of trent in this matter ; and i shall now make it evident there was no such catholick tradition , as is here pretended for it , by the confession of their own writers . 1. as to the general sense of the church . 2. as to the founding it on john 22. those sins ye remit , &c. 1. as to the general sense of the church . maldonat reckons up seven several opinions among themselves about confession . 1. of those who denied it to be of divine right , but held it to be useful in the church ; and for this he quotes rhenanus and erasmus . 2. of those who make it to be onely of ecclesiastical institution ; and this , saith he , is the opinion of all the canonists . 3. of those who thought it came in by apostolical tradition ; of which he reckons theodore archbishop of canterbury , 4. of some divines who held it to be instituted only by st. james . 5. of others who held it to be of divine right , and not instituted by the apostles , but insinuated by christ ; and for this he quotes alexander hales , and bonaventure . 6. of some who thought it instituted in the old testament . 7 , of those who held it instituted by christ , but not as a precept , but by way of council ; and for this he mentions scotus and his followers . vasquez reckons up among those whose opinions are not condemned , the canonists , erasmus , bonaventure , alexander hales , and scotus , who all differed from the council of trent . suarez mentions three opinions among them 1. of those who said it was instituted in the law of nature . 2. of those who attributed it to the law of moses . 3 of those who d●nyed any institution of it by way of precept from christ in the law of grace ; and for this he quotes hugo de sancto victore , alexandèr hales , and bonaventure , and they went upon this ground , that no such institution could be proved either by scripture or tradition . gregory de valentia confesses , some catholick authors denied the divine institution of confession ; for which he produces the canonists , and erasmus and rhenanus . but he thinks they were not guilty of heresie , because they were not obstinate ; but that is not our business , which is to shew , that by their own confession there was not a constant catholick tradition in the church about it . natalis alexander , who hath lately pretended to answer daillè , confesses , that from the ninth to the thirteenth age , many catholicks did hold , that confession to god alone was sufficient to obtain remission of sins ; and he proves it from lombard , gratian and the canonists . but he saith it was no heresie in them , the point not being yet settled by a general council . boileau in his answer to daillè cannot deny that in the time of lombard and gratian men held several ways about this matter ; but he answers with thomas upon the sentences ; that it was an opinion then , but since the council of lateran it is become a heresie . but if it were no heretical opinion then , what becomes of infallible tradition ? if the church defines by tradition , that tradition must be proved before the definition , otherwise it hath no ground to proceed upon . the council of lateran under innocent iii. ( it seems ) made it a heresie to deny this sacramental confession . within much less than a century before it , lived peter lombard and gratian. peter lombard made it his business to collect a body of divinity out of the sentences of the fathers ; and his work hath been universally esteemed in the roman church . when he comes to state this point of confession out of the fathers , i. e. to give an account of the tradition of the church about it ; he tells us in the beginning , that learned men were of different opinions ; and for what reason ? because the doctors of the church seemed to deliver not only divers but contrary things , i. e. they had no certain and constant tradition about them . and when he comes to the point of confession to god only , he quotes for it , besides scripture , s. ambrose , and s. chrysostem , and prosper , and against it s. augustine and leo , and concludes himself for the latter ; but saith not a word more to shew that the constant tradition of the church had been for this opinion . gratian puts the same question , and for confession to god alone he quotes s. ambrose , s. augustine , and prosper , besides scripture , and argues largely for it after c. convertimini , &c. then he sets down the arguments on the other side from c. 38. and after c. 60. he sums up the force of them , and again after c. 87. and when he hath said all on one side and on the other , he concludes after c. 89. that he left all to the readers judgment ; for both opinions had wise and pious defenders ; and produces that saying as out of theodore's penitential ; that some think that we ought to confess only to god , as the greeks others that we ought to do it to the priest too , as almost all the church besides ; but then he adds , that confession to god purges away sin , but that to the priest shews how they are purged , i. e. by contrition . so the gloss interprets it . bellarmin thinks that , ut groeci , was foisted into the canon , and i shall not dispute against it , provided that which answers to it , ut tota ferè sancta ecclesta , be allowed to be so too , as the roman correctors do confess . boileau hath taken another course , for he saith , this whole distinction is without ground attributed to gratian ; but how doth he prove it ? from ant. augustinus his dialogue , where a ms. is cited that this was not gratian's , but an elder author 's . and what is gotten by this ? but the other answers , it must be gratian 's , because of the citation out of the digests , and other books of civil law then lately found . if this will not do , he saith , gratian hath many errours , as the roman correctors observe . yes truly do they ; and about this point several times ; for the councils of lateran and trent have otherwise determined . but what is all this to the tradition of the church in gratian's time ? innocent iii. in the council of lateran , enjoyns strictly the practice of confession once a year , under the penalty of excommunication , and of being deprived of christian burial ; but there is not a word of the churches tradition before , for the ground of it . but finding several opinions about it , and the waldenses then opposing it , he resolves by his authority to bind all persons to it . but after this the canonists allowed no more than ecclesiastical institution for it ; as is plain by the gloss on the canon law , dist. 5. de poenit. tit. in poenitentia ; but the roman correctours quote against it council . trident. sess. 14. c. 5. i. e. a council some 100 years after , must tell what the tradition then was ; but the gloss saith , the greeks had no such tradition , and therefore were not bound to confession . so that we have no evidence for any catholick tradition in this matter , before the lateran council . 2. but the council of trent hath gone beyond the council of lateran , and hath fixed the divine right of confession on john 20. whose sins ye remit , &c. and therefore i am now to shew , by the confession of their own writers , that this hath not been the traditionary sense of this place . cajetan , not long before the council first sate , in his notes on this place confesses , that no precept of sacramental confession is contained in it . but how should it be of divine right in the sense of the council of trent , if there be no command for it ? tes , by cons quence , if they will obtain remission of sins ; but this can by no means be inferred from hence , because the remission of sins by baptism is implied in it ; but none of them plead for particular confession before baptism , in order to remission ; and therefore not after , unless some command of christ made it more necessary after baptism than before , vasquez saith , that cajetan means no more , than that it cannot be proved out of this place ; but catharinus saith , that neither there nor in any other place doth cajetan allow , that auricular confession can be proved out of scripture . gabriel biel confesses , he cannot find sufficient force to conclude the necessity of confession from the power of absolution here granted ; because it may be valid upon voluntary confession of the party ; and therefore he resolves it into an unwritten tradition . guide brianson takes great pains to prove it out of this place , but at last yields , that christ's instituting such a power , doth not bind persons to confess their faults to them that have it . for the power of retaining doth not imply that no sins are retained which are not retained by the priest upon confession ; neither then doth the power of absolution imply that no sins are remitted but such as are confessed to a priest. and therefore he betakes himself as biel doth , to unwritten tradition ; and so doth nicol. de orbellis . jac. de almain debates the matter at large ; and he says only that it is a probable opinion , that this confession is of divine appointment ; but he yields , that christ's granting a power of absolution , d●th not make it a duty to confess to a priest ; and he saith , it is a false proposition , that where a power of judging is given , others are bound to submit to it ; for all that follows is , that their sentence is valid if they do submit . but the force of what the council of trent deduces from this place , lies wholly in this , as vasquez observes , that because christ hath given authority to absolve , and they cannot exercise that authority without confession , therefore confession is hereby made necessary . and he confesses , that scarce any have deduced the argumert effectually from this place . but he saith one thing very observable , that if this place be extended to remission of sins in baptism , then it can never prove the necessity of sacramental confession . and greg. de valentia as plainly owns , that the fathers did understand it of baptism ; he names s. cyprian , and s. ambrose ; but natalis alexander allows s. cyril of alexandria to have so understood it ; and that jansenius and ferus followed him ; but besides these s. augustin interprets this place as s. cyprian had done . for as s. cyprian from hence infers the power of baptizing and granting remission of sins in the guides of the church ; so s. augustin saith , the churches charity by the h●ly ghost looses the sins of those who are her members , and retains the sins of those who are not . and it may be observed , that whereas st. matthew speaks of the power of baptizing granted to the apostles ; s. john instead of that mentions this p●wer of remitting or retaining sins , and s. mark and s. luke speak of baptism ; to which the one joins s●lvation ; and the other remission of sins . and the●efore this seems to be meant by our saviour in the words of s. john ; and thus s. peter exercised this power of loosing on the converted jews , act. 2. 38. and his power of binding on simon magus , act. 8. 21. peter lombard carries s. augustin's meaning farther , to the power of priests over the sins of the members of the church ; but then he limits this power , and makes it no more than declarative ; as i have observed already ; and for this he quotes a notable passage of s. jerom , who saith , that men are apt to assume too much to themselves under pretence of this power of the keys , whereas god regards not the sentence of the priests but the life of the penitents . but natalis alexander thinks there is no binding power with respect to baptism ; was there not as to simon magus ? and as long as every year the church judged of the competency of persons for it ? when christ spake these words the church was wholly to be formed , and it was a great power lodged with the apostles and their successors to admit into the church , or to exclude from it , not as private persons , but by authority from christ himself . but then this power is vain and idle in a constituted church . by no means ; they have still a power of casting out and taking in again ; and of imposing such acts on offenders , as may give satisfaction to the church , whose honour suffers , and whose discipline is broken . but the question is , whether by christ's appointment under the gospel no known mortal sin can be pardon'd to baptized persons without confession of it to a priest ? and whether these words of our saviour do imply it ? scotus is by no means satisfied with mens reasoning out of this place , that because christ hath given such a power , therefore it is mens duty to confess their sins ; for , saith he , this only implies the usefulness and efficacy of this power if it be made use of ; as in confirmation , none think themselves damned if they do not use it though it be very useful ; and therefore he goes another way to work , viz. by joyning this precept and that of loving god and our selves together with it . but how doth this prove that a man ought to take this particular way ? truly , scotus here shews his sub●ilty . suppose there be another way that is harder , and this be found more easie , he thinks a man is bound to take the shortest and easiest way , viz. by confession and absolution . but for all this his heart did misgive him , and he could not but see , that this proved nothing , unless this way of confession were first proved to be a secure way . and therefore he puts the case , that if it be not proved by these words , it may be by s. james , confess your faults one to ano●her . no , saith he , this will not do ; for which he gives this reason , that it holds no more for confession to a priest than to any other ; therefore , after all , he is willing to resolve it into some unwritten tradition , since there was no convincing evidence for it either in this or any other place of scripture . which shew'd they ran to tradition , when they had nothing else to say . bonaventure denies that christ himself app●inted t●e confession of sins ; for which he gives this reason , lest it should prove an occasion of sinning ; ne ex verbis domini daretur aliquibus recidivandi occasio ; but afterwards he thinks the apostles appointed it , and s. james published it ; which scotus utterly denies . but to the place of s john , bonaventure saith it was not enough to have it implied in the priest's power , because it being a harder duty than absolution , it requir'd a more particular command . which was but reasonably said ; especially when bellarmin after others , urges , that it is one of the most grievous and burthensome precepts ; but his inference from it is very mean , that therefore it must have a divine command to inforce it on the people ; but bonaventure's argument is much stronger , that it ought then to have been clearly expressed . but as to the peoples yielding to it , other accounts are to be given of that afterwards . alexander hales observes , that if christ had intended a command of confession , john 20. it would have been expressed to those who are to confess , and not to those who are to absolve ; as he did to those who were to be baptized , john 3. except a man be born of water , &c. so christ would have said , except a man confess his sins , &c. and he gave the same reasons why christ did not himself institute it , which bonaventure doth , who used his very words . and now who could have imagined that the council of trent would have attempted to have made men believe that-it was the sense of the universal church that christ instituted confession in john 20 ? when so many great divines even of the church of rome so expresly denied it ; as i have made appear from themselves . but now to give an account by what steps and degrees and on what occasions this auricular confession came into the church , these things are to be considered . 1. in the first ages , pu●lick , scandalous offenders after baptism , were by the discipline of the church brought to publick penance ; which was called exomologesis ; which originally signifies confession . and by this , bellarmin saith the ancients u●derstood either confession alone , or joyned with the other parts of penance ; but albaspineus shews , that it was either taken for the whole course of publick penance , or for the last and solemn act of it , when the bishop led the penitents from the entrance of the church up to the b●dy of the congregation , where they expressed their abhorrence of their faults in the most penitent manner , by their actions as well as by words . so that this was a real and publick declaration of their sorrow for their sins , and not a verbal or auricular confession of them . the same is owned by la cerda . but boileau pretends that it had not this sense till after the novatian heresie and the death of irenaeus ; and that before that time it signified confession according to the sense of the word in scripture . this seems very strange , when baronius himself confesses , that tertullian us●s it for that part of penance which is called satisfaction ; and bellarmin grants it is so used both by tertullian and irenoeus ; when he saith the woman seduced by marcus , afterwards spent her days in exmologesi . what! in continual confession of her sin ? no , but in penitential acts for it ; and so petavius understands it , both in irenoeus and tertullian , and he saith , it did not consist onely or principally in words but in actions , i. e. it was nothing of kin to auricular confession , which is a part of penance distinct from satisfaction . and to make these the same , were to confound the different parts of the sacrament of penance , as the ●ouncil of trent doth distinguish them . but besides this , there were several other circumstances . which do make an apparent difference between these penitential acts and the modern notion of confession . 1. the reason of them was different . for , as rigaltius observes , the penitential rigour was taken up after great numbers were admitted into the church ; and a great dishonour was brought upon christianity by the looseness or inconstancy of those who professed it . there were such in s. paul's time in the churches of corinth , and elsewhere ; but although he gives rules about such , yet he mentions no other than avoiding or excommunicating the guilty persons , and upon due sorrow and repentance receiving them in again ; but he imposes no necessity of publick or private confession in order to remission ; much less of every kind of mortal sin , though it be but the breach of the tenth commandment , as the council of trent doth ; yet this had been necessary in case he had thought , as that declares , that god will not forgive upon other terms . and so much the rather , because the evangelists had said nothing of it ; and now churches began to fill , it was absolutely necessary for him to have declared it , if it were a necessary condition of pardon for sins after baptism . but although the apostles had given no rules about it , yet the christian churches suffering so extremely by the reproaches cast upon them , they resolved , as far as it was possible , to take care to prevent any scandalous offences among them . to this end , the actions of all persons who professed themselves christians were narrowly watched ; and their faults , especially such as were scandalous , complained of ; and then if they confessed them , or they were convicted of them , a severe and rigorous discipline was to be undergone by them before they were restored to communion ; that their enemies might see how far the christians were from incouraging such enormities as they were accused of . they were charged with thyestean suppers and promiscuous mixtures ; whereas , any persons among them who were guilty of homicide or adultery were discharged their society , and for a great while not admitted upon any terms ; and afterwards , upon very rigorous and severe terms . and besides these , to preserve the purity of their religion in times of persecution , they allowed no compliance with the gentile idolatry ; and any tendency to this , was looked upon as a degree of apostasie , and censured accordingly . and about these three sorts of sins the severity of the primitive discipline was chiefly exercised ; which shews , that it proceeded upon quite different grounds from those of the council of trent about auricular confession . 2. the method of proceeding was very different ; for here was no toties quoties allow'd ; that men may sin , and confess , and be absolved ; and then sin the same sin again , and confess again , and receive absolution in the same manner . the primitive church knew nothing of this way of dealing with sinners upon confession . if they were admitted once to it that was all . so pamelius himself grants , and produces several testimonies of fathers for it ; and so doth albaspineus and petavius . dare any say this is the sense of the church of rome about confession , that a man cannot be received a second time to confess and be absolved from the same sin ? how then can they pretend any similitude between their confession and the ancient exomologesis ? besides , none ever received absolution from the ancient church till full satisfaction performed . but in the church of rome , absolution is given before satisfaction ; and although some have complained of this , as a great abuse ; yet they have been sharply answer'd , that it is to call in question the conduct of the church for five hundred years ; and they may as well question many other things , which depend upon the authority of the present church . 3. the obligation to confession is very different from what it was in the ancient exomologesis . now by the doctrine of the church of rome , a person looks on himself as bound in conscience to confess every mortal sin ; but in the ancient church none can imagine that persons were bound to undergo the exomologesis for every mortal sin , there being no penitential canons which did ever require it ; but they had respect to some particular sins , and the penance was proportion'd to them . we ought to take notice of two things with respect to the discipline of the ancient church , which will shew the different notion it had of these things from what is now current in the church of rome . 1. that it did not exclude those from all hopes of salvation whom it excluded from penance ; as may be seen in the illiberitan council , where many are wholly shut out from the church , whom we cannot think they thought uncapable of salvation . from whence it follows , that they did not look on confession and absolution as a necessary condition of salvation ; but now in the church of rome they allow confession to all , because they think they cannot otherwise be in a state of salvation in an ordinary way . but in the ancient church they could not look on the desire of confession as necessary , for to what purpose should they make that necessary when they denyed the thing ? but in the church of rome , they make the desire necessary , because they hold the thing it self to be so , if there be means to have it . 2. that the penitential canons never extended in the primitive church to all those sins which the church of rome now accounts mortal , and therefore necessary to be confessed . the council of trent saith expresly , they must confess omnia & singula peccata mortalia — etiam occulta — and an anathema is denounced against him that denies it to be necessary to remission of them . now if we consider their notion of mortal sins , we shall easily discern the vast difference between the obligation to confession by the council of trent , and by the old penitential canons . for mortal sins are not only all voluntary acts committed against the known laws of god , but against the laws of the church ; and even venial sins may become mortal by the disposition of the person , and by other circumstances , which the casuists set down at large ; now the council of trent doth expresly oblige men , not only to relate the acts themselves , but all circumstances which change the kind of sin. and this is a racking the consciences of men far beyond whatever we find in the old penitential canons ; for , petavius confesses that many sins now accounted mortal , had no penance appointed for them by the old canons ; and therefore i need not take any pains to prove it : if any one hath a mind to be satisfied , he may see it in gregory nyssen's canonical epistle , where he owns that several of those sins , for which the scripture excludes from the kingdom of heaven , have no canonical penance prescribed them by the ancient canons of the church . which shews a mighty difference from the rule of the council of trent . the most plausible place in antiquity brought for all mortal sin , is that of s. cyprian , where he saith , that some confessed their very thoughts , though they had not proceeded to actual sin . it is true , that he doth speak of some such ; but was it for sins of thought against the tenth command ? no ; but it is very plain , that he speaks of that sin which was thought to imply a renouncing christianity , and s cyprian elsewhere calls summum delictum , and the sin ag●inst the holy ghost ; viz. consenting to any act of gentile idolatry ; and yet saint cyprian had much ado to perswade those who were actually guilty to submit to due penance for it ; but they obtained tickets from the confessors , and were admitted to communion without undergoing the discipline of the church , the consequence whereof would be , that the discipline would be lost , and the church over-run with apostates ; this makes s. cyprian plead hard against such practices , and among other arguments he uses this of the great tenderness of some , who because they had entertained such thoughts of doing as others did , for their own safety , they offered to unburthen their consciences before them , and desired remedy for small wounds ; how much more ought they to confess their faults whose wounds are greater ? this is the whole force of his reasoning ; where the thought and act relate to the same sin ; and that said to be no less than denying christ , and sinning against the holy ghost . but there is no parity in the case of other sins ; which even s. cyprian calls minora delicta , being against men immediately ; and there is no intimation in him that ever the thoughts of those sins were discovered , or that persons were under any obligation by the rules of the church to do it . 2. private offenders were sometimes advised in those first ages for the ease of their consciences to make confession of their sins ; of which we see an instance as to the practice in one case in s. cyprian's time . and tertullian compares such persons who avoid it , to those who have such secret ulcers that they chuse rather to perish than to discover them . now in cases of this nature he advises to confession and publick penitential acts , that so they may in the judgment of the church have the secret wounds of their consciences healed . and this is that which origen doth advise to in such cases , to seek out a wise spiritual physician , and to make known his inward distemper to him , and to follow his advice and direction , as to the method of cure. now this we never oppose ; but the only question is , whether it be necessary for all persons , and for every mortal sin , to make confession of it to the priest , that it may be forgiven ; and origen never once supposes this ; for he mentions several other ways for the remission of sins after baptism , by martyrdom , by alms , by forgiving and converting others , by great love to god , and in the last place he brings in this of a laborious penance and confession . either the former ways are sufficient without this , or not ; if they are , then this is not necessary to the remission of all mortal sins ; if not , to what purpose doth he mention so many ways , when this one is sufficient without them and all those are insufficient without this ? for boileau confesses , that no mortal sins according to them can be remitted , where there is not at least the desire of this . but origen shews the different ways of obtaining remission , or else he doth not answer the difficulty ; which was that the jews had several sorts of sacrifices for the expiation of sins , to which we have none answerable under the gospel , yes , saith origen , baptism answers to one sort , martyrdom to another , alms to a third , &c. and last of all , penance to the offering baked in the frying pan. from whence it is plain , that he looked on this as one particular way proper to some cases , and not as a general method for the remission of all mortal sins . but he urges that origen quctes scripture for the confession of sins , as necessary , hom. 2. in psal. 37. but what scripture ? even the words of the psalmist , i will confess my iniquity . and was confession to a priest necessary under the law ? how then can those words prove it necessary under the gospel ? although therefore origen might think it very convenient in some cases for penitents to unload their consciences by confession to a spiritual physician , yet we find no proof of any necessity of it , as to all mortal sins . it is confessed , that publick faults , either confessed or proved , had publick penance appointed for them by the penitential canons ; but boileau , after arnauld , pleads , that even secret sins being mortal , were not thought remissible by the keys of the church , without publick penance . but this can never be proved to have been the doctrine of the ancient church , and it is unreasonable to suppose ; for then , all persons must have undergone publick penance who had any mortal sin , and it must have been frequently born by the same persons , both which are inconsistent with the ancient discipline . but they saw there was no other way to maintain the necessity of confession , but by this . for they could find none but publick penance , and that by the penitential canons was prescribed only for some particular scandalous sins ; and therefore they fansied , that persons who committed other faults , were bound to confess them privately , and to undergo publick penance for them . i do not deny , but some great penitents , for secret faults , would of their own accord submit to the publick discipline ; but this was a voluntary act in them , that by this means they might assure themselves the more of the sincerity of their own repentance ; and it being looked on as an act of humility and piety , it made it go down the better with voluntary penitents . 3. for the sake of such voluntary penitents in great churches , whose cases required particular and private examination and direction , there was a penitentiary appointed , whose office it was to receive their confessions , and to direct and order the method of their penance . of this we have a famous instance in the church of constantinople , in the time of nectarius , about which so much pains hath been taken for different purposes . that which seems most probable to me , is , that the penitentiary was appointed to examine and judge of such penitential causes which were brought before him , ( not being notorious , ) and to give sentence according to the canons ; but especially of voluntary confessions of persons , whose consciences were oppressed with the guilt of secret sins ; and to those he was to appoint penance without revealing their faults . where the facts were notorious and scandalous , i suppose the ancient discipline of the church ( part whereof is to be seen in the canonical epistles ) to have still continued at constantinople , as well as in other churches . but there were many private miscarriages , wherein great prudence and judgment was required , both to determine the penance , and to manage it so , that it did not break out into an open scandal . and for cases of this nature the penitentiary was appointed ; to whom all persons might resort in private cases , and open their consciences to him , and take his directions how to perform their penitential acts. so it was with that person of quality at constantinople , who gave occasion to the abolishing the office of penitentiary , both there , and in all the eastern churches . she first went to the penitentiary , as a voluntary penitent , and confessed her faults to him , and took his directions ; and while she was performing her penance in the church , the fact was committed with the deacon , which she afterwards confessed to the penitentiary . who being enraged at the deacon , in probability through his desire to have him punished , the fact came to be discovered , and the people to be highly offended : and it is not reasonable to suppose that the penitentiary put her upon a publick confession of her secret fault ; but that it came out by his means ; and therefore nectarius thought fit no longer to put such a trust into any man's hand , which through his discovery might redound to the dishonour of the church , as that did . what the effect was of abolishing this office , is the great question , whether the taking away publick or private confession . if the historians may be believed , it was the necessity of making any confession at all in secret ; for the right of receiving such confessions , was devolved upon the penitentiary ; therefore when his office was put down , where the case was not notorious , every one must be left to his own conscience ; and that both socrates and sozomen affirm was the consequence of it . if only publick confession was taken away , as some imagine , a secret confession was still continued , how was it possible for the historians to mistake the matter so grosly , by making that the consequence of it ? for , is every man left to his own conscience , where he is bound to go to confession before he partakes of the eucharist ? and why should publick penance be taken away on this occasion , where there seems to have been none ; for that person underwent to publick penance upon her former confession , for then her penance would not have been done in the church , but out of it , among the penitents . but as the former was voluntary , so was the latter too ; for here was no accuser but her self ; and for what reason should publick and solemn penance for notorious cri●●es , be taken away for the sake of the discovery of a secret confession ? whether the punishment of the deacon were the occasion of its coming out , or whatever it was , it seems evident to me , that she was not obliged to any publick consession ; because sozomen saith , the penitentiary was chosen for his gravity , silence and wisdom ; but what silence was there , if the confessions were to be made publick . and on the other side , it is impossible to conceive , that if all persons were then obliged to confess all mortal sins after baptism , that one penitentiary should be sufficient in so vast a city as that of constantinople was . therefore i think it most probable , that the case of notorious and scandalous offenders stood as it did , and so continued in s. chrysostom's time ; but this office of penitentiary relating to voluntary and secret offenders was taken away ; because a greater scandal came to the church by the discovery , when such a publick disgrace made the fact become notorious . and so this act of nectarius in taking away the penitentiary's office , and the approbation of it by other churches following the example , evidently proves , that they did not look on confession of s●●cret sins , as necessary to the remission of them . 4. as the taking away the penitentiary's office shewed the sense of the church at that time against the necessity of confession in order to pardon , so it did likewise in order to the partaking of the eucharist . for socrates saith , that eudaemon gave that counsel to nectarius , that he should remove the penitentiary , and give every one leave to pass j●dgment on himself in his own conscience , and so to partake of the mysteries . the same is affirmed by sozomen . which respects not the publick discipline about notorious offenders , but the private applications made by scrupulous persons and secret offenders to the penitentiary in order to a right preparation for the eucharist . and it is very probable , that it was then believed by many , that they could not be duly fitted for that sacrament , unless they had first unburthened their consciences by a voluntary confession to the penitentiary , and followed his directions . but this office being taken away , the question now is , whether it were thought necessary to confess privately to any other ? the council of trent declares , that sacramental confession is necessary to a worthy partaking of the eucharist , to every one that is conscious to himself of any mortal sin ; and whosoever holds the contrary is declared excommunicate ipso facto . but these historians plainly deny it , and they are justified by s. chrysostom , who speaks to the very case ; not about c●techumens , but such as would fit themselves for the holy eucharist . and he several times declares , that a man needs not reveal his sins to any but to god alone , in order to it . nothing can be more emphatical than what he saith to that purpose . for this cause s. paul saith , let a man examin himself , and so let him eat of that bread , and drink of that cup ; he doth not lay open the secret ulcer ; he doth not bring the accusation into a theatre ; he appoints no witnesses of thy transgressions ; pass judgment within thine own conscience , there examin thy faults , and call thy self to an account for the ●ins of thy life , where ●o●e but god is present , who sees all things ; amend thy faults , and so with a pure conscience draw near to the holy table , and partake of the sacrifice there offered . but left this should be thought one of those sudden eloquent heats which petavius saith , are hardly capable of good sense , if too strictly examined ; we find him very cooly delivering the same doctrine in his exposition of those words of s. paul. than which nothing can be more inconsistent with the doctrine and practice of the church of rome , which makes confession of our sins to a priest a necessary preparation for the eucharist . catharinus saith , that if the church had not limited the time , yet every person would be bound to confess to a priest , as often as he communicated . and although he knew no mortal sin by himself , yet he would deserve the severest censure for not confessing , because he took upon himself to be his own judge . can any thing be more contrary to s. c●rysostom than this ? boileau confesses , that s. chrysostom doth not here refer at all to confession to a priest ; then it follows , that he thought it not necessary to right participation of the holy eucharist . here he speaks not of daily examination of conscience by the faithful ; but of the solemn judgment of conscience by way of due preparation ; and so justifies the fact of nectarius in taking away the penitentiaries office . but we are not to suppose so great and so zealous a man would have done it against his conscience , as he must , if he still thought confession to a priest necessary ; and he doth not say , they need not go now to the penitentiary , but that they need not diselose their sins to any . not to a multitude , or in a theatrical manner , as some expound it ; but to none but god , which excludes the knowledge of a sin●le priest , as well as of a great number . i n●ed not insist on the other places in s. chrysostom to that purpose , since these are sufficient for my design . cassian was a disciple of s. chrysostom , and he supposes confession to god alone to be sufficient for remission of sin , where mere modesty hinders men from consessing to men . boileau answers , that he doth not speak of sacramental confession made to priests ; but of an ascetick confession among the m●nks . but he speaks of a confession to god as sufficient for remission of sins , and therefore must exclude the necessity of any other . 5. after the taking away the penitentiary's office , the publick discipline of the church , as to open and scandalous offenders continued for some time in the eastern as well as the western churches . no one speaks more fully to this than s. chrysostom ; which makes me wonder at those who say the publick penance was taken away by nectarius , for in his 82. homily on s. matthew , towards the conclusion he insists very much upon it ; and not only charges the people not to come with their sins upon them ; but he speaks to those who ministred , to deny the eucharist to open offenders . and he saith , it would be charged as a great fault upon them , if they knew such and permitted them to communicate . but how shall we knew them ? i speak not , saith he , of those who are not , but of those who are known ; and if any such did thrust themselves in , he bid them not be afraid to deny them ; and if they durst not , he tells them , they should bring them to him , and he would rather lose his life than give that sacrament to such unworthy receivers . but still he saith he speaks of open and notorious offen●ers . which shews plainly , that even s. chrysostom never thought the publick discipline was changed ; since he declares so much resolution to maintain it . and this could not be spoken by him while he was a presbyter at antioch , but after he came to the see of constantinople . there was no doubt some alteration as to the penitents , after the taking away the penitentiary ; but it was no more than his office was concerned in . the old penitential canons remained still in force and were executed , as occasion served ; as appears by the canons in trullo so long after s. chrysostom's time which refer to them . if all the publick discipline had been laid aside so long before , to what purpose do those bishops speak of them , as if they were still in force ? see canon 44 , 46 , 53 , 54 , 87. in the last canon indeed they leave it to those who had the power of binding and loosing to temper the severity of the canons as they should judge convenient ; but doth it hence follow , that the ancient discipline as to publick offenders was destroy'd ? s. chrysostom himself several times mentions those who were in the state of penitents and the prayer that was made for them ; to what purpose , in case the whole order of penitents was taken away ? he likewise speaks of the charge for the penitents to go out . what a mockery , were this , if there were no publick discipline then left ? and lest it should be said , that these things were said by him at antioch , before the fact of nectarius , i have shew'd already that the latter homilies on s. matthew were made by him at constantinople ; and in his liturgy there used the dismission of the penitents was continued . 6. while the publick discipline was kept in the several churches none were injoyned to undergo it , but open and publick offenders . the evidence being so clear in antiquity for the publick penance of those who were bound to give the church satisfaction before they receiv'd absolution from it ; there was a necessity found by some learned men of the roman communion to set up a new hypothesis , viz. that by the ancient rules of the church all persons conscious to themselves of secret si●s were bound to undergo publick penance for the remission of their sins . the occasion of the debate was this . some in the church of rome held no more necessary in case of mortal sin to prepare men for communion than confession to a priest and absolution ; others saw the fatal consequence of this , and therefore insisted on the necessity of penance ; both parties made their appeal to the ancient church ; and both were mistaken . for , on the one side , there was no such doctrine then held that confession and absolution did sufficiently prepare persons for the eucharist ; and on the other , there was no good evidence that any were enjoyned publick penance for secret faults . but in the case of such sins , the confession was left to god in secret ; and a true and hearty contrition for them was thought the best as well as most necessary preparation for the eucharist . monsr . arnauld saw well enough that without his hypothesis , it was impossible to prove the necessity of confession in the ancient church ; for he yields that the church did not use the power of the keys but in publick . on the the other hand , petavius urges , that on the same ground that they would reduce , as they pretended , the ancient discipline they must make many other alterations in the church , and so justifie the reformers . but monsr . arnauld was defective in his proofs , as petavius at large shews ; not when he proves that the penance was publick ; but that all persons under mortal sins were bound to undergo it . for petavius makes it appear , that all such as are accounted mortal si●s in the modern sense , were not then thought necessary to be expiated by publick penance ; but only such as were notorious and scandalous , and he at large answers all monsr . arnauld's arguments . notwithstanding which morinus took up monsr . arnauld's opinion , and without any colour charges it on theodore archbishop of ca●terbury , that ●e first in his penitential appointed publick penance to be onely for publick offences . but the learned editor of the abstract of theodore's penitential , hath fully vindicated him in this matter . but after these , boileau resumes the opinion of monsr . arnauld , and lays it for the foundation of his history of auricular confession . but he grants , that all the solemn and ceremonial penance imposed by the penitential canons did not extend to all kind of mortal sins , but chiefly to idolatry , adultery and homicide ; but this he insists upon , that some part of this publick penance , viz. exclusion from the communion was inflicted on persons guilty of secret mortal sins . but this will by no means do his business ; for he is to prove that no secret mortal sin could be forgiven without confession to a priest ; and that all persons were required by the ancient church in case they were conscious to themselves of any such sins , to make them known , and to undergo publick penance for them , before they could obtain remission of them . we do not deny that persons under trouble of conscience for secret sins , were from time to time advised to resort to their guides , to make known their cases to them , and to take their directions ; we do not deny that such persons might be required by such guides to withdraw themselves from joyning in the most solemn acts of publick communion till they had manifested the sincerity of their repentance , by fastin● , and prayers , and other penitential acts ; we do not deny , that some of these persons might either by advice or of their own accord joyn themselves with the publick penitents , as is well known in the case of fabiola at rome so much magnified by s. jerom ; but this is the thing we desire to see proved , that no sin whatsoever of a mortal nature ( as it is defined in the church of rome ) was then thought capable of remission by the penitential acts of the party , ( especially by true contrition ) without confession to a priest and absolution from him . and this is the true state of the case ; and i can find nothing produced by him to this purpose which deserves to be considered . 7. as the publick discipline declined , persons were exhorted to make private confession of their sins ; if they could not be brought to publick penance . thence in the greek church came the penitentials of johannes jejunator ( who first took upon himself the title of oecumenical patriarch in the time of mauritius to the great offence of the bishops of rome ) and of some others after him . morinus grants that there was a great alteration in the greek church about this matter ; he thinks it began with the business of the penitentiary , but after the publick discipline was disused , instead of that , he saith , came up a secret confession and penance ; which was left to the honesty , and piety of the penitent , and not required by any canonical authority among them ; and so he saith it continued from the time of nectarius to this day , as to the people . so that we have a plain confession from him , that there is no rule in the greek church requiring this secret confession of sins in order to the forgiveness of them . but it is observable concerning the modern greeks , that if persons do make confession among them , they think themselves obliged to keep to the old penitential canons , and blame joh. jejunator for receding from them ; for simeon of thessalonica saith , they had them from the fathers , and the fathers by tradition down from the apostles . but although they are therein mistaken , yet they shew how different their tradition is from that of the roman church , which thinks it self under no such obligation , but allows absolution to be granted upon confession , and a right of communion without penance performed , for which there is no colour , as to any ancient tradition either of the eastern or western church . in the western church we find the publick discipline fallen to decay in the beginning of the ninth age , and charles the great summoning several councils for putting things into as good an order as they would then bear . in the second council of cavaillon , a. d. 813. we find a complaint , can. 25. that the old canonical penance was generally disused ; and neither the ancient order of excommunicating or absolving was observed . which is a plain and ingenuous acknowledgment that they had gone off from the ancient tradition of the church ; and therefore they pray the emperor's assistance , that the publick discipline might be restored for publick offenders , and the ancient canons be brought into use again . from whence it follows , that at that time notorious offenders escaped with private confession and penance ; and even that was done by halves , can . 32. and some thought it not necessary to do it at all , can . 33. and upon this occasion , they do not declare it necessary for the remission of sins to confess even the most secret mortal sins to a priest ; but very fairly say , that both are useful ; for confession to god purgeth the sin ; and to the priest , teaches men how their sins may be purged . for god who is the author and giver of health , giveth it often by the inv●sible operation of his power , and often by the means of physicians . boileau yields , that there were some then in the roman church , who denied confession to men to be necessary , but he saith , they were adversaries and rebels . this had been a good answer , if the council had called them so ; which it doth not , but on the contrary declares , that god doth often forgive sin immediately without the priests interposition , or else the latter clause signifies nothing . and the most it saith before , is , that confession to a priest is useful in the church ; which is not the the thing disputed by us , but the necessity of it ; and his critical observations of utrumque signifie just nothing , unless he had proved that the council had before said that both were necessary , which it doth not . he doth not deny , that the opinion of the sufficiency of confession to god alone did continue in the church to the time of the council of lateran , and that it gave occasion to the canon , which enforced the necessity of confession to a priest ; but he adds , that learned and pious men may have false opinions before the judgment of the church . so that at last we find universal tradition is given up , and the necessity of auricular confession is resolved into the authority of the roman churches definition , or rather , the pope's declaration of it , either with or without the consent of the lateran council . but he saith , the fathers did not speak so exactly of the trinity before the council of nice ; nor the greek fathers of grace and predestination before s. augustin . if this be true , it is impossible to prove either of those great points merely by tradition ; for those fathers either delivered the sense of the church , or they did not ; if they delivered the sense of the church , then either the sense of the church was doubtful , or they did not understand it ; if the sense of the church were doubtful , then it is plain those doctrines could not be proved by tradition ; if the sense of the church were not doubtful , but the fathers did not understand it , then how is it possible that the churches tradition should be an infallible guide , when even the fathers of the church were mistaken about it ? but i have sufficiently proved , that not only before , but even after the council of lateran there was no universal tradition for the necessity of auricular confession . finis . a catalogue of some books printed for henry mortlock , at the phoenix in s. paul 's church-yard . a bational account of the grounds of protestant religion , being a vindication of the lord archbishop of canterbury's relation of a conference , &c. from the pretended answer by t. c. wherein the true grounds of faith are cleared , and the false discovered ; the church of england vindicated from the impu●ation of scism ; and the most important particular controversie bêtween us and those of the church of rome throughly examined : by edward stillingfleet , d. d. and dean of s. paul's , folio . the second edition . origines britiannicae : or the antiquity of the british churches ; with a preface concerning some pretended antiquities relating to britain , in vindication of the bishop of s. asaph . by edward stillingfleet d. d. dean of s. paul's , folio . the rule of faith : or an answer to the treatise of mr. j. s. entituled , sure footing , &c. by john tillorson d. d. to which is adjoyned , a reply to mr. j. s.'s third appendix . &c. by edward stillingfleet . d. d. a letter to mr. g. giving a true account of a late conference at the d. of p's . a second letter to mr. g. in answer to two letters lately published concerning the conference at the d. of p's . veteres vindicati : in an expostulary letter to mr. sclater of putney , upon his consensus veterum , &c. wherein the absurdity of his method , and the weakness of his reasons are shewn ; his false aspersions upon the church of england are wiped off , and her faith concerning the euch●rist proved to be that of the primi●ive church : together with animadversions on dean boileau's french translation of , and remarks upon bertram . an answer to the compiler of nubes testium : wherein is shewn , that antiquity ( in relation to the points in controversie set down by him ) did not for the first five hundred years believe , teach and practice as the church of rome doth at present believe , teach and practice ; together with a vindication of veteres vindicati from the late weak and disingenuous attempts of the author of transubstantiation defended by the author of the answer to mr. sclater of putney . a letter to father lewis sabran jesuit , in answer to his letter to a peer of the church of england ; wherein the postscript to the answer to the nubes testium , is vindicated , and father sabran's mistakes farther discovered . a second letter to father lewis sabran jesuit , in answer to his reply . a vindication of the principles of the author of the answer to the compiler of nubes testium in answer to a late pretended letter from a dissenter to the divines of the church of england . scripture and tradition compared , in a sermon preached at guild-hall-chapel nov. 27. 1687. by edward stillingfleet d. d. dean of s. paul's , the second edition . a discourse concerning the nature and grounds of the certainty of faith , in answer to j. s. his catholick letters . by edward stillingfleet , d. d. dean of st. paul's . an historical examination of the authority of general councils , shewing the false dealing that hath been used in the publishing of them , and the difference amongst the papists themselves about their number . the second edition with corrections and alterations . an appendix , in answer to some late passages of j. w. of the society of jesus , concerning the prohibition of scripture in vulgar languages by the council of trent . since the publication of the foregoing book , i have met with a reflexion upon it made by j. w. in the preface to a treatise lately reprinted by him . wherein , he observes that a great part of the objections made against them are either grounded on mistakes , or touch points of discipline not of faith , which alone they are bound to defend . this last clause i could not but wonder at , since the new title of his book is , a defence of the doctrine and holy rites of the roman catholick church , &c. why should i w. take such needless pains to defend the rites of the church , if they are bound to defend nothing but points of faith ? i had thought the honour and authority of the church had been concerned in its commands and prohibitions , as well as in its definitions and decrees . and although it be not pretended , that the church is infallible in matters of discipline ; yet it is a strong prejudice against any pretence to infallibility in a church , if it be found to err notoriously in any thing of general concernment to the catholick church . but how comes my late book to be made an example ? as for instance , ( saith he ) i find in a book newly published , with this title , the council of trent examin'd and disprov'd by catholick tradition , that for 15 pages together dr. st. labours to prove that there is no catholick tradition against translating scripture into vulgar languages . whereas i expresly say , that the prohibition of reading the scripture so translated without a particular license , was that which i undertook to shew could not be justified by any catholick tradition ; and that there was a general consent of the catholick church , not merely for the translations of scripture into vulgar languages , but for the free use of them by the people . which i made out by these particulars , 1. that where-ever the christian religion prevailed , the scripture was translated into the vulgar language for the peoples benefit . which i proved from the ancient italick versions before st. jerom's time , the gothick , persian , armenian , syriack , coptick and aethiopick translations ; without the least prohibition of the common use of them . 2. that where a language grew into disuse among the people there the scripture was translated into the tongue which was better understood . and for this i instanced in the arabick versions after the prevalency of the saracens in the eastern and southern parts , and after the moors coming into spain . 3. that even after the primitive times , christian princes and bishops did take care that the people should read the scriptures in their own language . for princes , i instanced in ludovicus pius and alfred ; for bishops , in waldo bishop of fressing , methodius and cyrill , &c. 4. that the pope himself in the 9th century did approve of it ; and for a reason common to all times and churches , viz. that all people and languages were to praise god , and that god himself had so commanded . 5. that gregory vii . was the first person who forbad the use of scripture and divine offices in the vulgar tongue , and was not ashamed to own that the church saw cause to alter several things from what they were in the primitive church . 6. that upon the setting up the inquisition by innocent iii. this prohibition took place in france and spain , and other places . 7. that some noted divines of the church of rome have highly commended it ; and said that the taking of it away would be pernicious and destructive to faith and devotion . 8. that the prohibition in the church of rome is built on the authority of the council of trent , which appointed the index to be made , in which the fourth rule forbids all persons the use of the scripture in the vulgar tongue without a particular license , and whosoever presumes to doe it is to be denied absolution . 9. from hence it follows , that the council of trent is evidently disproved , as to catholick tradition , for any foundation of such a prohibition . and what now saith j. w. against all this ? he would gladly know against whom i dispute . against j. s. and all such who would make the world believe the council of trent did proceed upon catholick tradition . to prove i am mistaken , he tells me in his 6th chap. i may find an account of several new translations of scripture into vulgar tongues , made by catholicks and approved in the roman church . then he mentions an english translation made by the rhemish and doway colleges ; and in french by the doctours of lovain ; and some others . what now follows from hence ? is it any mistake in me to say , there was such a prohibition of reading the scripture in the church of rome , and inforced by the rule made by appointment of the council of trent ? this had been indeed to the purpose if it could have been proved . i do not deny , that there have been such translations made , where it was found impossible to hinder all translations ; and the use of them have been connived at or allow'd to some particular persons , whom they were otherwise secure of . but such translations are like the galenists allowing some chymical medicines to their patients ; they declare against their use as dangerous ; but if the patient will have them , then pray take them of my apothecary , who is a very honest man and prepares mischievous medicines better than another . this is just the case of the church of rome , as to translations of scripture ; if we ask their opinion in general , whether translations be allowable or not , their answer hath been formerly very free and open , by no means ; for they are very dangerous and mischievous things . and here besides those i have already mentioned , i could produce many more to the same purpose . but alas ! these men lived before the age of mis-representing and expounding . now all is mistake on our side , and infallibility on theirs . we cannot for our hearts understand their doctrines or practices aright , although we take never so much pains and care to doe it . one would think by the present way of dealing with us , that the church of rome were like the new name on the white stone , which no man knows but he that hath it ; and so it were impossible for any else to understand it , but such as are in it . i thought my self pretty secure from mistaking , when i pitched on the council of trent for my guide . but it seems , i am mistaken here too : how so ? did not the council of trent appoint the congregation of the index at first , sess. 18 ? did it not own that the matters of it were prepared before its dissolution ? and if there were a prohibition of the free use of the scripture in vulgar languages by the rules of the index , is not the council of trent justly chargeable with that prohibition ? especially when the title in the roman edition is regulae indicis sacrosanctoe synodi tridentinoe jussu editoe . jacob. ledesma was one of the same society with j. w. and he frankly owns the prohibition of reading the scripture , made by the rule of the index , to have been done by the authority of the council of trent . the faculty at paris in the articles sent to gregory xiii . against the translation of rene benoit ; several times own the rules of the index as done by the council of trent . quacunque authoritate transferantur in vulgarem linguam biblia & edantur , vetat idem sacrosanctum concilium ea passim sine discrimine permitti . the same ledesma goes farther , and vouches the authority of the council of trent in this matter , from the decree sess. 23. c. 8. where it forbids all the parts of the mass to be in the vulgar tongue . which could not be reasonable , if the scripture were allowed to be translated . alphonsus à castro , thinks the case so alike , that a prohibition of one amounts to a prohibition of the other too , because the greater part of the office is taken out of the scriptures , and if the scripture may be translated , he saith , it must follow that divine offices ought to be in the vulgar tongue . but to return to the index . the congregation of the index was ( as is said ) established by the council in the 18. session as the council it self owns in the last session ; and withall , that the rules of it were then formed , but because of the multiplicity and variety of the books , the matter of the index was referred to the pope , and to be published by his authority , as likewise the catechism , missal and breviary . so that the rules of the index have the same authority in the church of rome with the roman catechism , missal and breviary . pius iv. in his bull , when he first set forth the index a. d. 1564. owns that it was finished by the fathers appointed by the council of trent , but it was remitted to him by the council , that it might be approved by him and published by his authority . and he strictly commands the rules of it to be observed under pain of mortal sin ; and excommunication , ipso jure . after him clement viii . in his a instructions about the rules of the index owns them to be made by the fathers of the council of trent , and the same pope is so far from renewing the power of granting licenses to read the scripture in the vulgar languages , that he declares against them . for by the 4th rule of the index , the ordinary and inquisitor by the advice of the parish priest or consessor might permit persons to read the bible in the vulgar language , so the translation were made by catholick authours ; and it was apprehended by some , that the new printing the rule might be giving new authority to bishops and inquisitors to grant licenses , therefore the pope declares against it ; and saith it was contrary to the command and use of the roman church and inquisition , which ought to be inviolably observed . in pursuance of this we find in the roman index of prohibited books , these words , bidlia vulgari quocunque idiomate conscripta ; i. e. all bibles in vulgar languages are prohibited . therefore i cannot understand how the giving license to persons since the declaration of clemens viii . is consistent with the duty which persons of that communion owe to the authority of the roman see , unless they can produce a revocation of the bull of clemens viii . and some latter explications of the fourth rule which take away the force of his . but instead of that , alexander vii . who published the index again , after clement viii . owns that the first index was made by authority of the council of trent : and it is observable that in his bull a. d. 1664. he not onely prefixes the rules of the index , but the observations and instruction of clement viii . and confirms all by his apostolical authority ; and injoyns the punctual observation of the orders contained therein inviolably ; under the same pains which were expressed in the bull of pius iv. therefore as far as i can understand , the faculty of granting licenses to reade the translations of the bible is taken away as far as the pope's authority can doe it . to what purpose then are we told of some modern translations , as long as the use of them is forbidden by the pope's authority ? and no ordinaries can have authority to grant licenses against the popes solemn declaration to the contrary ; nor can any of that communion with good conscience make use of them . but i am told there are translations approved in the roman church . by whom have they been approved ? by the pope , or the congregation of the index ? i do not sind any such approbation given to any of them . but on the contrary even in france , such translations have been vehemently opposed by the bishops and divines there , as being repugnant to the sense of the roman church . and this is apparent by a book published by order of the gallican clergy , a. d. 1661. where-in it is said that it was the common and unanimous sense and practice of all orthodox persons , that neither the scriptures nor divine offices ought to be put into vulgar languages , it being injurious to the christian church , and giving occasion of offence to the weak and unlearned . how then can we imagine that such translations should not onely be allowed but approved among them ? and besides the entire treatises there collected against them , of card. hosius , lizetius , spiritus roterus , ledesma , &c. and the fragments and testimonies of several others ; we have a particular account of the proceedings of the sorbon as to this matter . in the censure of erasmus , dec. 17. 1527. the sorbon declared vulgar translations of scripture to be dangerous and pernicious . the like declaration had been made before a. d. 1525. and that all translations of the bible , or of the parts thereof ought rather to be suppressed than tolerated . a. d. 1607. the faculty again declared , that it did not approve any translations of scripture into the vulgar language . but j. w. instances p. 26. in some translations that have been approved ; as a french translation by the doctours of lovain . but in the french collection before mention'd , i find , that a. d. 1620. dec. 1. a debate arose in the faculty at lovain about it ; and the faculty declared that it by no means approved of it . another is of rene benoit ; which was so far from being approved , that it was first condemned by the faculty at paris , and then sent to rome to be condemned by the pope ; which was effectually done ; and gregory xiii . directed his bull to the faculty of divinity in paris , nov. 3. a. d. 1575. wherein he doth expresly forbid this translation , and reject it with an anathema . and yet this very translation of rene benoit is one of those made by catholicks and approved in the roman church ; which j. w. refers me to . one of us two must needs be under a great mistake , but to whom it belongs i leave the reader to determin . the sense of the gallican clergy in this matter doth fully appear by the representation which they sent to alexander vii . about the translation of the missal into french. which was done by voisin a doctour of the faculty , and was published at paris by the permission of cardinal de retz archbishop there , and had the approbation of some doctours of the sorbon . the rest of the bishops and clergy highly resented this matter , and assembled together to consult about it , nov. 29. 1660. where they proposed two things to be considered . 1. the matter of right , whether such a translation were to be permitted or not . 2. the matter of fact , whether this were a good translation or not . the debate was adjourned to dec. 3. and from thence to the 7th on which they came to a resolution to suppress it . and a circular letter was sent to all the bishops to forbid the use of it under pain of excommunication ; and the king desired to interpose his authority in it . dec. 9. they agreed to send an account of the whole matter to the pope in the name of the gallican clergy ; wherein they declare their great dislike of it , as contrary to the custom of the church , and as pernicious to the souls of men. and in the body of it , they say that they look on the translations of scripture into vulgar languages as the great occasion of the northern heresies ; and quote vincentius lerinensis , saying that the scripture is the book of hereticks . and after add , that they bad sent to the pope their condemnation of all translations of scripture and divine offices into the vulgar languages . this was subscribed by the general assembly of the clergy , jan. 7. 1661. the pope sent a brief in answer , which was received feb. 25. wherein he very tragically complains that some sons of perdition in france had to the ruine of souls , and in contempt of the churches laws and practice , arrived to that degree of madness as to translate the roman missal into french. and he charges the doing of it not onely with novelty , but disobedience , sedition , schism , &c. and declares that he abhorred and detested it ; and for ever damned , reprobated and forbad it , under pain of excommunication ; and requires all persons to deliver up their books to the several ordinaries that they might be burnt . i now desire j. w. to inform me whether we are bound to believe that in france translations of scripture into the vulgar language are allowed and approved ? i am really so unwilling to mistake , that i take the best care i can to be rightly informed . i have no design either to deceive others , or to be deceived my self ; and therefore have not trusted to second-hand evidence ; but searched and considered the authours themselves , whose testimonies i rely upon . i am certain i have fallen into no wilfull mistake , but have truly and impartially stated things according to the clearest evidence i could find ; and therefore i think it some what hard to be told , that our objections are grounded on mistakes , and especially as to this matter about the prohibition of reading scripture in the vulgar language ; for i hope i have made it appear not onely that there is such a prohibition but that it is founded on the authority of the council of trent . and if it be so , then it serves my main design , viz. to prove that it went off from catholick tradition , for if there were so many translations of old without the least prohibition , and there be since the council of trent , so severe a one , backed with the pope's authority , here must be a very great change in tradition . for that is accounted pernicious and mischievous to the souls of men , which before was accounted usefull and beneficial to them . if the physicians in one age should condemn the common reading of hippocrates and gale● as destructive to the health of mens bodies , which those of former ages extremely commended , would not any one say , there was a great change in the opinions of physicians , and that they did by no means hold to the judgment of those before them ? if the common lawyers ●hould now say littleton's tenures is a book very unfit to be read by young lawyers , that it fills their heads with seditious and dangerous principles , and therefore ought to be taken out of their hands ; would not any one say , here is a wonderfull change , for no such thing was ever apprehended before , but the book was thought very usefull and proper to instruct students in some fundamental points of the law ? when manna was rained from heaven in the wilderness for 40. years , and for 30. of them every man gathered his own share and proportion , and ate of it as he saw cause ; would it not have been thought a strange alteration among them , if after 30. years a sett of physicians should have risen up and told the people it was true , manna was angels food , but if they had not great care in the taking it , and used it promiscuously , it would turn them to devils ; or at least it would fill them with such distempers , as they would never be able to reach to canaan ? this might be pretended to be great care and tenderness of them , in these new physicians ; but on the other side , they would tell them , they had done very well with their eating manna for 30. years together ; and there had been no such distempers among them , but such as humane nature is always subject to ; that such an alteration might be of worse consequence than their common use of manna ; for so it was at first appointed and so it had continued , and they could not tell but their new physicians might be worse to them than their old distempers ; and they could never believe that could be so hurtfull which god himself had appointed for their food . the former discourse makes the application needless . but after all , it is said : this is but a point of discipline and not of faith ; and in such the church may change her measures . to that i answer , 1. it is more than a point of discipline , for it is changing the rule of faith with respect to the people . while the scriptures were in the hands of the people , they resolved their faith into the word of god , as it was delivered to them and understood by them . but when that is taken out of their hands and they are bid to trust to the churches testimony for matters of faith ; they have a different resolution of their faith and a different ground and reason of believing . for they cannot ground their faith upon a written rule who are uncapable of understanding it . 2. it is no matter of discipline to overthrow the design of publishing the scripture for the universal benefit of the church of god. and this the jansenists have well proved in defence of their translation of the new testament against the prohibitions of it . for , say they , the prohibition of reading the scripture under pain of excommunication , is it self contrary to the gospel and ought not to be obey'd . for bread and nourishment is not more necessary to preserve the life of the body , than the word of god is to uphold the life of the soul. that for men to speak of so much danger in reading the scripture is to reflect very dishonourably on the providence and groodness of god ; for it was by means of trans●ations in vulgar languages that god's word came to be kno● to the world , and the gospel was at first published in those tongues , which were most generally understood . and therefore those do manifestly oppose the design and method of providence for advancing the gospel , who decry translations of scripture , as pernicious to the souls of men. and farther , that such a prohibition , is a contempt of our lord jesus christ and a design to suppress the gospel ; and a contradiction to the will and command of god ; a contempt of the scripture , which was intended to be understood by all , a contempt both of councils and fathers , which looked on the scripture as the best judge of controversies , and who advised all believers to a continual reading of the word of god. if after all this , the council of trent could so notoriously err not onely against scripture and reason , but tradition too in such a matter of concernment to the souls of men , as this is , it will be hardly possible to persuade men , it could not as well err in any point of faith. and it renders the whole proceeding suspicious as to particular points , when the rule of faith is so industriously kept out of the hands of the people . for those who follow their instructions , are never ashamed to produce their credentials . as to what j. w. saith in his book concerning jupiter , &c. i had answered it so fully many years since , that i have reason to expect a reply to what i had there said in my own vindication , before i can think it fit to trouble the world with needless repetitions . and it were hard for me to be put to answer again to the same things , when a person will not take the pains to see whether he were not answer'd already . the end . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61532-e150 third letter p. 64. catechism rom. part 2. reply to the defence of the expo●●tion , &c. p. 134. sess. 13. can. 2. 3 q. 75. a. 2. regist. f. 47. registr . arundel p. 2. f. 143. maignan philosophia sa●ra . part 2. append. 5. notes for div a61532-e9010 necnon traditiones ipsas tum ad ●idem tum ad mores pertinentes , tanquam vel ore tenns â christo vel à spiritu sancto dictatas & continuâ successione in ecclesia catholica conservatas , pari pietatis affectu ac re●erentià suscipit & veneratur . hist. concil . trident. l. 6. c. 14. n. 3. n. 4. aug. l. 2. c. julian . et caetera nostrae saluti necessaria , quae omnia sola docet sacra scriptura . lection . in canon . missae 71. haec autem in sacris scripturis discuntur , per quas solas plenam intelligere possumus dei voluntatem . ib. e●●e quo tendit utilitas divinae scripturae ad perfectionem hominis dei ( hoc est qui totum seipsum deo dat ) perfectionem inquam ta●em ut sit perfectus ad omne bonum exercendum . in 2. ad tim. 3. 16. dico i●●a omnia scripta esse ab apostolis quae sunt ●mnibus necessaria , & quae ipsi palam omnibus vulgò praedicaverunt . bellarm. de verbo dei. l. 4. c. 11. illud imprimis statuendum erit propheticos & apostolicos libros juxta mentem ecclesiae catholicae verum esse verbum dei & certam ac stabilem regulam fidei . id. l. 1. c. 1. at sacris scripturis quae propheticis & apostolicis literis continentur , nihil est notius , nihil certius . id. c. 2. quare cum sacra scriptura regula credendi certissima tutissimáque sit . ibid. l. 4. c. 9. * et quantum ad ea quae pro●onantur omnibus credenda quae per●inent ad fiaem . 2. 2. q. 171. prol . † 1. q. 1. a. 5. ‖ melch. can. l. 12. c. 3. marsil . in 4. lib. sentent . l. 1. prooem . q. 2. art . 2. pet. de alli●co in sent. l. 1. q. 1. a. 3. greg. arimin . q. 1. a. 2. durand . prol. q. 5. n. 9. a. 13. n. 21. l. 3. dist. 25. q. 2. nam in concernentibus fidem etiam dictum unius privati esset pra●erendum dicto papae si ille movere●ur melioribus rationibus novi & veteris testamenti quam papae . cùm ergo in omni veritate veritas divina sit certior & immutabilior , ergo omnes aliae debent regulari per illam , & in quantum conformantur illi sunt verae ; in quantum autem deviant ab illa , deviant à natura veritatis . sacra autem scriptura veritas divina est , ideo judicium nostrum debemus regulare per illam applicando ad eam , &c. tostatin ep. hieron . c. 6. p. 28. d. non quod in auctoritate aequantur , absit ; sed sequantur . non quidem in subsidium auctoritatis canonicae sed in admonitionem posterorum , l. 2. art. 2. c. 22. c. 28. c. 27. joh. gerson . exam. doctr. p. 540. part. 1. cons. 5. cons. 6. nihil audendum dicere de divinis nisi quae nobis à sacra scriptura tradita sunt . cujus ratio est , quoniam scriptura nobis tradita est tanquam regula sufficiens & infallibi●i● , pro regi●●ine totius ecclesiastici corporis & membrorum usque in finem seculi . est igitur talis ars , talis regula , vel exemplar , cui se non conformans alia doctrina , vel abjicienda est ut haereticalis , aut suspecta , aut impertinens ad religionem prorsus est habenda . exam. doctr. part. 2. consid. 1. lyra , praesat . ad lib. tobiae . scot. in sentent . prolog . q. 2. n. 14. ea enim quae ex sola dei voluntate supra omne debitum creatur● , nobis innotescere non possunt , nisi quatenus in sacra scriptura traduntur , per quam divina voluntas nobis innotescit . 3. q. 1. a. 3. in c. suarez , in 3. p. 117. authoritatibus autem canonicae scripturae utitur propriè ex necessitate argumentando ; autoritatibus autem aliorum doctorum ecclesiae quasi arguendo ex propriis sed probabilitér . inni●itur enim fides nostra revelationi apostolis & prophet is factae , qui canonicos libros scripserunt , non autem revelationi si qua fuit aliis doctoribus facta . 1. q. 1. a. 8. ad 2. quae igitur fidei sunt non sunt tentanda probari nisi per autoritates his qui autoritates suscipiunt . 1. q. 32. a. 1. c. si autem ad veritatem eloquiorum sc. sacrorum respicit , hoc & nos canone utimur . ib. dicendum quod veritas fidei in sacra scriptura diffusè continetur — ideó fuit necessarium ut ex sententiis sacrae scripturae aliquid manifestum summariè colligeretur , quod proponeretur omnibus ad credendum ; quod quidem non est additum sacrae scripturae , sed potius ex sacra scriptura sumptum . 2. 2. q. 1. a. 9. ad primum . quantum ad prima credibilia , quae sunt articuli fidei , tenetur homo explicitè credere , sicut & tenetur habere fidem . quantum autem ad alia credibilia non tenetur homo explicitè credere , sed solùm implicitè , vel in praeparatione animi in quantum paratus est credere quicquid scriptura continet ; sed tunc solùm hujusmodi tenetur explicitè credere , quando hoc ei constiterit in doctrina fidei contineri . 2. 2. q. 2. a 5. c. et nihil nobis dicendum est , praeter ea quae nobis ex sacris eloqui● claret . bonav . in 3 sent. dist. 1. art. 2. q. 2. quod autem credimus posterioribus circa quos non apparent virtutes divinae , hoc est , quia non praedicant alia quàm quae illi in scriptis certissimis reliquêrunt , quae constat per medios in nullo fuisse vitiata ex consensicne concordi in eis omnium succedentium usque ad tempora nostra . hen. gandav . sum. a●t . 9. q. 3 n. 13. 2. quia veritas ipsa in scriptura immobiliter & impermutabiliter semper cuf●●ditur . — in personis autem excclesiae mutabilis est & variabil●s ut dissentire fidei possit multitudo illorum , & vel per errorem , vel per malitiam à side discedere licet ; semper ecclesia in aliquibus just●s stabit . art. 8. q. 1. n. 5. suspecta est mihi omnis veritas , quam non confirmat scriptu●arum auctoritas . rich. de s. victore , de praepar . animi ad contempl. part. 1. c. 81. de verbo dei l. 4. c. 2. c. 12. cùm enim ex divinis scripturis integram quis & firmam regulam veritatis susceperit . quibus sacris literis unica est credendi pariter & vivendi regul● praescripta . sed in han● insipientiam cadunt , qui cùm ad cognoscendam veritatem aliquo impediuntur obscuro , non ad propheticas voces , non ad apostolicas liter as , nec ad evangelicas auc●oritates , sed ad seipsos recurrunt . nec quasi hoc sacra scriptura contineat , quo negato tota scriptura sacra redditur dubia ; & per consequens articuli fidei , qui habeat per scripturam sacram probari redd●●tur dubii & incerti . extrav . joh. 22. cum inter gloss. per consequens . turrecrem . de ecclesia , l. 4. part . 2. c. 9. turrecre● . l. 2. c. 18. morin . de ordinat . sacris , p. 275. morin p. 333. mabillon a. nalect . to. 2. p. 468. amalarius de offi●i●s , l. 3. c. 5. isidor . de offic . l. 2. c. 23. rab. maur. de inst. cler. l. 3. c. 2. l. 2. c. 53. bed. in cant. l. 5. de tabernaculo l. 1. c. 6. vindic. of the answ. to some late papers . commonit . 1. c. 2. cùm sit perfectus scripturarum canon sibique ad omnia satis supérque sufficiat . c. 39. c. 6. of the necessity of church-guides p. 201. p. 199. p. 199. tabulae suf●ragial . p. 54. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ de sp. sancto c. 7. de vera fide , p. 386. a. c. p. 391. c. ascet. reg. 26. reg 80. c. 22. de sp. san●t . c. 9. c. 10. c. 21. c. 29. richer . hist. conc. general . l. 1. c. 11. n. 13. scot. in l. 1. sent. dist. 11. l. 4. dist. 11. n. 15. n. 13. scripturas esse and tempus adaptatas & variè intellectas , ità ut uno tempore secundùm eurrentem universalem ritum exponerentur , mutato ritu iterum sente●tia mutaretur cusan . ad bohem. epist. 2. hist. of the council of tr. l. 2. p. 154. ibid. l. 6. c. 11. p. 4. p. 8. can. loc. theol. l. 2. c. 11. cajet . in eccles . fine . ad ester c. 10. ad fin . annot. in cajet . l. 1. p. 37. de verb. dei , l. 1. c. 11. jul. ruger . de libris canonicis , p. 80. p. 41. euseb. l. 4. c. 25. l. 6. c. 25. philocal . c. 3. euseb. demonstr . l. 8. p. 368. chronic. gr. p. 172. athanas. ep. 39. cyril . cabech . 4. epiph. de mensuris & ponder . basil. in origen . philocal . greg. nazianzen . in carm. amph. in canon . ep. apud balsam . s. chrysost. in gen. hom . 4. conc. laodicea , c. 59. no●el . 131. leont . de sect●s , act. 2. d●mascen . de ●ide , lib. 4. c. 18. niceph chro●●gr . p. 419. anastas . hist. p. 189. not. in can. 27. carthag . niceph. in epigram . metroph . confess . c. 7. p. 82. phil. cyprii chronic. eccles . graec. p. 459. hilar. prolog . in psalm . de praedest . sanctor . c. 14. prolog . gal. prolog . in lib. salom. ad paul. & eust. ad chromat . ruffin . in symbol . pag. 188 , 189. greg. moral . in job . l. 19. c. 17. can. loc. theol . l. 2. c. 11. ad 4. cath. de ca●o●icis scrip. in opuscul . p. 302. cassiodor . de instit. divin . liter . cap. 12 , 13 , 14. c. 6. s. antonin . sum. hist. p. 1. tit. 3. c. 4. can. loc. theol . l. 2. c. 11. part. 3. tit. 18. c. 6. sect. 2 , & 3. eur in adait . ad lyram ad c. 1. ester . & 7. tostat. in matt. pr●f . q. 1. 2. xim. praef. ad bib. comp. aug. de civ . dei , lib. 15. c. 23. l. 17. c. 20. aug. de civ . dei , l. 18. c. 36. c. gaudent . c. 29. de doctr. l. 3. c. 8. not. in vigil . taps . p. 150. hist. concil . trident. l. 6. c. 11. ● . 12. sum. 1. q. 1. a. 9. sixt. senens . biblioth . l. 6. n. 152. alphons . à castro , l. 1. c. 13. azor. instit. moral . l. 8. c. 26. aug. de doct. christian. l 2. c. 11. hier. praes . in josuam . socr. l. 4. c. 33. soz. l. 6. c. 37. nicep . l. 11. c. 48. isid. in chron. gothorum . walas . strab. de reb. ec●l . c. 7. euseb. de vit. const. l. 4. c. 8. c. 13. soz. l. 2. c. 14. c. 12. ammianus marcell . l. 23. soz. l. 2. c. 9. theod. l. 5. ● . 39. theod. de cur. graec. affect . serm. 5. p. 555. serm. 9. p. 615. chrys in joh. hom 2 p. 561. vit. chrys. c. 113. conc. eccl. armen . cum rom. c. 7. p. 63. hist. orient . c. 79. abr. ecchell . not . in ebe● . jesu . greg. hist. dynast . 6. s. chry●ost . bom . 2. in joh. ambros. hex . 1. c. 8. aug. de civit. dei , l. 15. c. 13. diod. ad gen. 27. 27. theod in psal. 3. 4. in ps. 103. 26. in ps. 112. 1. in ps. 115. de verb. dei , l. 2. c. 4. prodr . copt . c. 8. p. 1●6 . dissert . epist. 13. epist. 14. hottinger . methurgem . p. 189. de ordinat . sacris , p. 504. catal. m s s. p. 31. ludolph . hist. aethiop . l. 3. c. 4. gabr. sionita de arab. c. 12. polyb. l. 3. conc. turon . 3. c. 17. sigeb . ad an. 807. nithard . l. 3. freher , in exposit. foederis inter lud. & car. v. capitul . caroli calvi . tit. 8. marineus sicul . de rebus hisp. l. 5. ● . 4. alchuin . de divin . offic. c. 29. amalar. de offic. l. 2. c. 1 , . ●●en●● . rer. german . p. 112. rer. alem. to. 1. p. 120. to. 2. p. 119. hist. franc. to. 2. p. 326. bed. epist. ad egbert , p. 65. saxon treatise of the old and new testament . bell. de verbo dci , l. 2. bar. ad an 880. n. 16. ave●●in . annal . l. 4. p. 434. ●ar . a. 869. n. 80. luci. de regno dalmatiae , l. 2. c. 3. catal. m s s. p. 33 , 34. greg. regist. l. 7. ep. 11. cum primitiva ecclesia multa dissimulaverit quae à sanctis patribus postmodum sirmatachristianitate , & religione crescente , subti●● examinatione correcta sunt . labb . concil . to. 11. p. 427. cochl . c. alex. alesium , a. d. 1533. andrad . defens . concil . trident. l. 4. ledesma de div. script . quavis ●ingua non leg . p. 155. pet. sutor de tralatione bibliae , p. 99. p. 96. vega de justif . l. 8. c. 8. suarez de grat. l. 12. c. 1 n. 8. suarez de g●●t . l. 12. c. 1. ● . 12. disputat . ratisbonae an. 1546. p. 568. hist. conc. trid. l. 8. c. 4. n. 4. rich. de media . vill. in l. 2. sent . dist . 17. art . 2. q. 1. nich. de orbellis in 3. sent . dist . 27. credis non pr●priis meritis , sed pass●●●● domini nostri jesu christi virtute & merito ad gloriam pervenire ? credo . credis quod dominus no●●er jes●s christus pro salute nost●● m●r●●us sit ; & quo●●x propriis meri●is , vel al●o in ●●●ull●s 〈◊〉 salvari nis● in merito p●ss●●nis ejus ? credo . h●● . conf●ss . petricovi , c. 73. p. 144. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 16. 2. enchirid colon . f. 176. 2. adrian . de sacr. eucbar . f. 61. pet de alliaco , in 4. l. sent. q. 1. art . 1. f. 225. ● . bicl in l. 2. sent . dis● . 27. art . 1. ●o● . 3. walden . de sacram. ti● . ● . c 7. vega i●opu●c . qu. 4. marfil . in l. 2. 〈◊〉 . ● . 1● . durand . in sent . l. 2. di●● . 27. q. 2. n. 14. ockam in 4. s●nt . q. 3. ad secundum . in. l. 1. dist . 17. q. 1. in l. 1. dist . 17. q. 2. greg. arim. in l. 1. sent . dist . 17. art . 2. scot. in l. 1. sent . dist . 17. q 3. n 24. bell. de just. l. 5. c. 17. jos. scalig. in varr. de l. l. p. 172. bud . in pandect . pag. 362. plir● . ep . l. 1. 8. cassand . in hymn . eccl. p. 179. aug. in joh. tr. 31. n. 9. neque enim talia sunt hominion merita , ut propter ea vita aeterna deberetur ex jure , aut deus injuriam aliquam faceret , nisi eam donaret . nam ut taceam quod merita ●mnia dona dei sunt , & ita bomo m●gis propter ipsa deo debitor est , qu●m deus bomini , quid sunt merita omnia ad tantam gloriam ? bernard se●m . 1. de aunur . bellarm. de justis . l. 5. c. 6. hugo de s. ●ict . annot. elucidator in rom. lomb. sent. l. 2. dist . 27. genebrard . de trinit . l. 3. p. 312. pull . sentent . part. 1. c. 13. guliel . antis . l. 3. tr . 12. q. 2. de m●rito virt . 1. 2. q. 114. art . 1. art . 3. richard. in sent. l. 2. dist . 27. art . 2. q. 3. nich. deorb . in sent. l. 2. dist . 27. hos. confess . petrico c. 73. p. 141. p. burg. addit . ad lyram in ps. 35. bell. de justif . l. 5. c. 17. coster . en●●rid . p. 294. suarez . de grat. l. 12. c. 1. n. 18. vasquez in 1. 2. disp. 213. c. 5. bhemists on 2 tim. 4. 8. on heb. 6. 8. gamach . in 1. 2. th. q. 114. c. 2. concil . 2. omnes catholici fatentur justos suis bonis operibus mereri gloriam de condigno . aug. reding defens . conc. trident. tr. 4. se●t . 2. ad sess . 6. c. 1. sess. 7. can. 1. c●tech . trident . part. 2. n. 10. bell. de sa●●am . l. 2. ● . 25. in quatuor quae sunt propriè dict● sacramenta novae legis est forma instituta à domino vel ab ecclesia . alex. halens . part. 4. q. 5. m. 3. 4. 2. memb. 2. a. 1. memb. 3. a. 2. sect . 3. ●ell . de sacr. l. 1. ● . 21. suarez . in 3. p. tb. tom. 3. disp. 2. sect . 3. lugo de 〈◊〉 . d●p . ● . 〈◊〉 . 5. p●t . à sanct. joseph . idea theol. sacr. l. 1. c. 3. conc. tri● . de confirm . can 2. conc. florent . decret . u●isnis . ma●●il . in s●●● . l. 4 q. 5. 4. 1. aureol in 4. d. 7. q. 1. greg de val. tom. 4. q. 5. pun● . 2. gui●o brianson in 4. sent . q. 5. con● . 1. guil. antis . in l. 4. tract . 9. bonav . in 4. d. 7. a. 1. q. 2. alex. p. 4. q. 9. m●mb . 1. j●● . de vitr . hi●● . occid . c. ●7 . aq. p. 3. q. 72. a 1. resp. ad 1. conink de sacram. q. 72. a. 3. dab . 1. petr. aurel. oper. p 546 , 547. p. 567. sirmo● , ant. 2. p. 64. p. 6● . petr. a●rel . op. p. 5●7 . suarez . to. 3. q. 3. p. th. ● . 72. disp. 33. sect . 5. d●●ret . uni●nis . bell. de sacr. ordinis , l. 1. c. 9. arcud . de sacram . l. 6. c. 4. l●go de sac. disp. 2. sect . 5. n. 85. n. 92. ysambert . de sacram. ordinis , disp. 3. art. 6. hallier de sacris elect. & ordinat . sect . 2. c. 2. art . 1. p. 439. petr. à sanct. joseph , idea theod. sacr. l. 4. c. 1. p. 396. morin . de sacris ordin . part. 3. ex. ercit . 7. c. 1. c. 3. n. 1. n. 6. c. 6. n. 2. bell. de sacram . l. 1. c. 24. aug. in joh. tr. 80. st. aug. ●● . ad bonifac. suarez . t●m . 3. in 3. c. q. 60. disp. 1. a. 3. sect . 4. concil flor. decr. union . concil . trid. sess. 14. c. 3. bell. de poenit . l. 1. c. 16. soto in l. 4. sent . d. 14. q. i. vasq. in 3. p. ● . 34 art. 1. n. 9. enchirid. colon . f. 180. bell. de poenit . l. 1. c. 16. major . in 4. sent . dist . 14. q. 2. biel in 4. dist . 14. q. 2. brianson in 4. sent . q. 8. concl. 3. durand . in l. 4. dist . 16. q. 1. ockam in 4. sen. q. 8. scot. in l. 4. sent . dist . 16. q. 1. cancil . trid. sess. 14. de poenit. sacr. can. 4. can. 9. b●●l in 4. dist . 14. 1. 2. ●ot . 2. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 4. 〈◊〉 . ● . 12. 〈◊〉 . tostat. defens . part . 1. c. 6. ockam in l. 4. q. 9. a. 4. ad 1. thom. de argent . l. 4. dist. 18. a 3. gul. antis . l. 4. f. 254. bonavent . l. 4. dist . 18. q. 1. alex. halens . part 4. q. 21. memb . 3. art . 1. pet. lomb. l. 4. dist . 18. part . 1. vasquez in 3. q. 84. a. 3. dub . 2. 17. hadrian quodlib . q. 5. 3. princip . concil . trid. sess. 14. can. 1 , 2. cap. 1 , 2 , 3. suarez in 3. part . disp . 39. sect . 1. n. 5. bell. de extr. unct. c. 2. makl . de sacram . extr. unct. q. 2. greg. de val. to. 4. disp. 8. q. 1 punct . 1. cath. ●●not . in comment . cajet . l. 5. p. 464. s●●r . greg. p. 252. cassand . not . in hymn . p. 288. maldonat . de sacramen ex●r . unct. q. 1. gamach . de extr. u●●t . c. 3. suar●z in 3. p●r● . disp. 4● . 〈◊〉 . 3. ●reg . sacr. p. 252. menard . not. p. 337. p. 342. p. 353. p. 352. suarez ibid. ● . 3. mald. ib. q. 3 bell. de sacr. l. 2. c. 26. c. 2. conc. trid. sess. 24. c. 1. vasq. de sacr. matri● . disp. ● . c. 1. ● . 3. greg. de val. to. 4. disp. 10. punct . 5. mald. de sac. matrim . q. 1. bell. de matr. sa●r . l. 1. 0. 5. navar. max. c. 22. n. 20. hostiens . sum. de sacr. non iter . n. 7. durand . in sent . l. 4. dist. 26. q. 3. eell . de sacr. matr. l. 1. c. 5. vasq. da sacr. matr. disp. 2. ● . 6. basil. pont. de matr. l. 1. ● . 5. n. 10. almain in 4. dist. 26. q. 1. bell. de sacr. l. 2. c. 25. de matrim . sacr. l. 1. c. 4. possev . in appar . leo allat . de concord . l. 2. c. 13. n. 13. de simeon . script . p. 185. &c. crusii turc● groec . leo allat . de concord . l. 3. c. 16. n. 4. n. 9. n. 10. n. 15. n. 17. act. theolog. wirtemberg . p. 240. metroph . confess . eccl. orient . p. 74. leo allat . de concord . e●●l . occident . & orient . l. 3. c. 17. arcud . d● concord . l. 2. c. 6. c●●●il . trid. de 〈◊〉 . c●● . ● . de sa●ra● . 〈◊〉 . 9. 〈…〉 . 〈…〉 . concil . trid. de paenit . c. 6. ●an . 9. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . p. q. 84. 〈◊〉 . a● . 1. arcud de concord . 4. l. c. 3. p. 36● . p. 370. catumsyritus de vera conc. proleg . p. 153. concil . trid. de poenit. c. 5. can. 7. arcud . p. 373. s●● . 2● . de 〈◊〉 . or●i● . c●● . 1. bell. de extr. unit. l. 1. c. 4. arcud . de concord . l. 5. c. 4. p. 389. c. 5. c. 7. p. 403. con● . tri● . de extr. 〈◊〉 , c. 1. catumsyr . vera co●cord . tr. 1. p. 156. arcu● . l. 5. ● c. 2. conc. trid. s●ss . 24. can. 7. ●ell . de matr. l. 1. c. 16. pet. jarric . rer j●dic . to. 3. p. 2. c. 12. histoire critique , ch . 8. p. 104. p. 105. p. 112. p. 113. p. 13. cotov . itin. hierosol . & syr. p. 206. godign . de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . l. 1. ● . 〈◊〉 . ● . 〈◊〉 . clem. ga●an . conc. eccles. arm. cum rom. c. 30. p. 516. clem. galan . to. 3. p. 439. p. 636. p. 605. hugo de s. vict. de offi●● l. 1. c. 12. rup . tuit . de vict. verbi . l. 12. c. 11. hugo do sac. l. 1. part . 9. c. 6 , 7. fulb. carnot . epist. 1. de inst. cler. l. 1. c. 31. rab. maur. de inst. cler. l. 1. c. 24. bell. de sacr. l. 2. c. 27. walaf . strab. de reb. e●cl . c. 16 , 17 , 25. pasch. radb . de c●rp . & sang . dom. c. 3. isid. orig. 1. 6. de officiis . iro decret 2. p. c. 73. ysamb. ad . q. 72. disp. 1. ● . 3. ivo ib. c. 75 : alex. consil. s. chrys. in joh. hom . 87. s. cyril . in joh. l. 12. leo in epist. ad flavian . s. aug. in joh. tr. 9. 15. in ps. 40 de ci●●it . dei , l. 15. c. 26. de symbol . c. 6. bell. de sacr. l. 2. c. 26. concil . trid. sess. 14. de poenit. c. 5. ib. can. 1. 3. 4 , 6 , 7. maldonat de sacr. poenit. de confess . c. 2. vasquez in 3. th. to. 4. q. 90. art . 1. n. 4. suarez in 3. p. th. to. 4. disp. 35. § 1. greg. de valent . to. 4. disp. 7. q. 9. punct . 2. nat. alex. de sacr. confess . p. 229. hist. confes. auric . c. 29. lom . sent . l. 4. dist . 17. grat. de paenit . dist. 1. bell. de poenit . l. 3. c. 5. hist. confess . auric . p. 388. vasquez ubi supr . catharin . in cajet . p. 446. biel in 4. sent . dist. 17. q. 1. a. 1. brianson q. 8. doc. 1. f. 138. de orbellis ad l. 4. dist. 17. almain in 4. dist. 17. vasquez ib. dub . 2. greg. de valent . de necessit . confess . c. 3. nat. alex. de sacr. confess . p. 22. cyprian ad jub . ep. 73. aug. in joh. tr. 121. s. mark. 16. 16. s. luke 24. 47. pet. lomb. l. 4. dist. 18. hieron . in matth. c. 16. scot. in l. 4. dist. 17. q. unica . bonav . in 4. dist. 17. q. 3. bell. de poen . l. 2. c. 12. alex. sum. 3. p. q. 18. num . 3. art . 2. bell. de poen . l. 3. c. 6. albasp . obs. l. 2. c. 26. la cerda . advers . sacr. c. 142. p. 2. hist. confess . auric . c. 4. p. 72. baron . ad a. d. 56. iren. l. 1. c. 9. petav. not. ad epiphan . p. 71. de la penit. publique , l. 2. c● . 13. n. 9. rigalt . not . in . tert. de p●n . pamel . not . 1. in tert. de . poenit. albasp . obs. l. 2. c. 5. petav. ad epiph . p. 236. append. ad epiph. c. 3. p. 91. 〈◊〉 . illiber . c. 1 , 2 , 3 , &c. de poenit. can . 7. petav. not . ad epiph. p. 238. greg. nyss. epist. ad let. c. 4 , 5. cypr. de lap-●is , ● . 23. cypr. ep. 10. cypr. ep. 12. orig. in levit . hom. 2. in psal. 37. hom. 2. in luc. hom. 17. hist. confess . auric . c. 5. n. 8. pandect . canon . vol. 2. socr. l. 5. c. 19. soz. l. 7. c. 16. socr. l. 5. c. 19. soz. l. 7. c. 16. concil . trid. sess. 13. c. 7. can. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . s. chrys. to. 6. p. 837. hom. 8. d● poenit. h●m . 28. in 1 ad corin●● . petav. not. ad epiphan . p. 244. cathar . c. cajetan . p. 453. 451. hist. confess . auric . p. 201. cassian . collat . 20. c. 8. hist. confess . auric . c. 18. p. 286. s. chrys. in matth. hom. 71. in 2 ep. ad . cor. hom. 18. hom. 3 in ep. ad ephes. petav. de la penitence publique , l. 5. ch . 10. p. 64. arn. de freq . communione , part. 2. c. 3. p. 205. petav. l. 2 , c. 5. n. 3. l. 6. c. 2 , &c. morin . com. de poenit. l. 10. c. 17. theod. vind. p. 61 , &c. hist. confess● . auric . c. 2. joh. morin . com de poen . l. 6. c. 22 , 23. c. 23. n. 1 , 2. hist. confess . auric . c. 25. n. 3. c. 29. p. 387. notes for div a61532-e69970 apoc. 2. 17. accedit ad hoc , locupletissimum testimonium , atque decretum ex indice librorum prohibitorum per patres à tridentina synodo delectos conscripto & authoritate sanctiss . d. nostri pii 4. p. m. comprobato regula . 4. jac. ledesma . de divin . script . quavis lingua non legend . c. 51. alphons . à castro de heret . punit . l. 3. c. 6. concil . trid. sess. 25. c. 15. a quod indice & regulis confectisper patres à generali synode t●identina dele●●os sanci●um est — praeter ea quae t●dentinorum patrum regul●s supradictis decreta sunt . qui sacrosancti concilii tridentini auctoritate prodierat . e quibus pateat fuisse semper communem & unanimem orthodoxorum omnium sensum ac usum ; divinos libros ac officia ecclesiastica , vernaculo idiomate neutiquam reddendi ; utpote christianae reipubl . damnosum , ac rudibus & imperit is scandali occasionem praebens . collectio auctorum version . vulg . damnant . monit . ad lector . biblia supradicta omnine prohibemus , & ab ecclesia catholicae sub anathemate rejicimus . illam omnim i●p●ob●m●● tanquan ab eccl siae consuctudine alienam , nec niji cum ingenti animarum perni●ie conjunction . dialogue 1. p. 26. 29. p. 63. dialogues in answer to t. g. part. 4. the jesuits loyalty, manifested in three several treatises lately written by them against the oath of allegeance with a preface shewing the pernicious consequence of their principles as to civil government. 1677 approx. 405 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 100 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61561 wing s5599 estc r232544 12131586 ocm 12131586 54736 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61561) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 54736) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 880:3) the jesuits loyalty, manifested in three several treatises lately written by them against the oath of allegeance with a preface shewing the pernicious consequence of their principles as to civil government. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], 48, [2], xiv, 132 p. printed by e. flesher, for r. royston ..., london : 1677. reproduction of original in huntington library. attributed (in part) to bp. e. stillingfleet. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng jesuits -great britain. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-03 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-04 judith siefring sampled and proofread 2004-04 judith siefring text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the jesuits loyalty , manifested in three several treatises lately written by them against the oath of allegeance : with a preface , shewing the pernicious consequence of their principles as to civil government . london , printed by e. flesher , for r. royston , bookseller to his most sacred majesty , 1677. to the authours of the following treatises . gentlemen , i hope you will forgive me the not setting your names before this address , although i am not wholly a stranger to them : for however it be against the usual custome , yet you have reason to take it more kindly from me . i assure you , my design is , not to doe any injury to your persons , but onely to let you and the world know , we are not altogether unacquainted with your present principles , or practices . and although , like the plague , you walk in darkness , and doe mischief ; yet i intend onely to set such marks and characters upon you , that when others see them , they may take the wind of you , and avoid the infection . it may be , men of your retirement and modesty may be somewhat surprised , to see themselves in print against their wills : but i hope you will pardon this presumption , and absolve me as soon as i have confessed my fault . for it is very agreeable to your casuistical theology so to doe , without staying for the performance of penance ; and the contrary doctrine is accounted one of the heresies of iansenism , which i know you love as little as the oath of allegeance . i find in a supplication to the late pope clement x. that to assert the necessity of penance before absolution , is to charge the church with a dangerous errour for four or five of the last ages , and to revive an opinion condemned by the head of the church . ( which are the very same arguments used in the first treatise , for the pope's power of deposing princes . ) you need not therefore wonder , if it be with me as it is with thousands of others , that when absolution may be had at so easy a rate , i presume to offend . if i may be said to offend , in obtaining that for you , which you sometimes sadly complain of the want of , viz. a liberty of printing your books . you may by this see how frankly we deal with you , in that we do not onely suffer , but procure the coming abroad of your most mischievous treatises . it may be you will be ready to ask me , if i account these treatises such , why i venture to publish them . because some poisons lose their force when they are exposed to the open air : and it may doe good to others , to let them understand what doses you give in private to your patients . we are to hear of nothing from you , but professions of the utmost loyalty and obedience to government ; and that it is nothing but a little squeamish scrupulosity of conscience which makes any of your stomachs check at the oath of allegeance : the ingredients are a little too gross and fulsome for you to get it down ; but if they were neatly done up in pills and gilded over , to prevent the nauseousness of them , you could swallow them all , and they would work kindly with you . we have been told over and over , that you onely stick at some inconvenient phrases and modes of expression ; but for what concerned any real security to the government , you would be as forward and ready to give it , as any of his majestie 's subjects . if this really were the case , you deserved both to be pitied and considered . but we thank you , gentlemen , for the pains you have taken in these treatises , to make us understand that this is not your case . for it is easy to discern by them , what lies at the bottom of all , viz. the unwillingness to renounce the pope's power of deposing princes . which the authour of the first treatise , like an open plain-hearted man , avows and maintains : and the other two more craftily insinuate . i shall therefore deal freely with you in this matter , by endeavouring to prove these two things . 1. that if you do not renounce the pope's power of deposing princes , and absolving subjects from their allegeance , you can give no real security to the government . 2. that if you do renounce it , you have no reason to stick at the oath of allegeance . 1. that if you do not renounce the pope's power of deposing princes , and absolving subjects from their allegeance , you can give no real security to the government . i shall not insist on any of the beaten topicks to prove this ; but onely make use of this argument , that it is allowed by all friends to our king and his government , that the commonwealth-principles are destructive to it , and that none who do own them can give sufficient security for their allegeance . if i therefore prove , that all the mischievous consequences of the republican principles do follow upon the owning the pope's power of deposing princes , i suppose you will grant i sufficiently prove what i intend . now the mischief of the commonwealth-principles lay in these things : 1. setting up a court of judicature over sovereign princes ; 2. breaking the oaths and bonds of allegeance men had entred into ; 3. justifying rebellion on the account of religion . every one of these i shall prove doth naturally follow from the pope's power of deposing princes . 1. setting up a court of iudicature over sovereign princes ; or , if you please , a spiritual high court of iustice at rome ; where princes are often condemned without being heard , because they have no reason to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the court. it is no satisfaction , in this case , to distinguish of a direct and indirect power : for however the power comes , the effect and consequence of it is the same : as a man may be as certainly killed by a back blow , as by a thrust or downright stroke . but the question is not , how the pope came by this power , which , i easily grant , was indirectly enough ; but whether he hath any such sovereignty over princes , as to be able by virtue thereof to depose them . and the commonwealths-men do herein agree with you . for they do not say , that the people have a direct power over their princes ; ( which were a contradiction in it self , for subjects to command their sovereigns ; ) but onely , that in case of breach of trust , the people have an indirect power to call their princes to an account , and to deprive them of their authority . but are the commonwealth-principles the less mischievous to government , because they onely assert an indirect power in the people ? why then should the same distinction be of less pernicious consequence in this case ? the main thing to be debated is , that which doth immediately concern the just rights of sovereignty , whether sovereign princes have a supreme and independent authority inherent in their persons or no : or whether they are so accountable to others , that upon male-administration they may be deprived of their government . this is the first and chief point : and the republicans and asserters of the pope's deposing power are perfectly agreed in the affirmative of the latter question , and onely differ as to the persons in whom the power of calling princes to an account doth lie ; whether it be in the pope , or the people . and even as to this , they do not differ so much as men may at first imagine . for , however the primitive christians thought it no flattery to princes , to derive their power immediately from god , and to make them accountable to him alone , as being superiour to all below him , ( as might be easily proved by multitudes of testimonies : ) yet , after the pope's deposing power came into request , the commonwealth-principles did so too , and the power of princes was said to be of another original , and therefore they were accountable to the people . thus gregory vii . that holy and meek-spirited pope , not onely took upon him to depose the emperour , and absolve his subjects from their allegeance ; but he makes the first constitution of monarchical government to be a meer vsurpation upon the just rights and liberties of the people . for he saith , that kings and princes had their beginning from those , who , being ignorant of god , got the power into their hands over their equals , ( through the instigation of the devil , ) and by their pride , rapine , perfidiousness , murther , ambition , intolerable presumption , and all manner of wickedness . this excellent account of the original of monarchical government we have from that famous leveller gregory vii . that most holy and learned pope , who , for his sanctity and miracles , was canonized for a saint ; as the authour of the first treatise notably observes . did ever any remonstrance , declaration of the army , or agreement of the people , give a worse account of the beginning of monarchy then this infallible head of the church doth ? what follows from hence , but the justifying all rebellion against princes , which , upon these principles , would be nothing else , but the people's recovering their just rights against intolerable usurpations ? for shame , gentlemen , never upbraid us more with the pernicious doctrines of the late times as to civil government . the very worst of our fanaticks never talked so reproachfully of it , as your canonized saint doth . their principles and practices we of the church of england profess to detest and abhorre : but i do not see how those can doe it , who have that self-denying saint gregory vii . in such mighty veneration . i pray , gentlemen , tell me what divine assistence this good pope had , when he gave this admirable account of the original of civil government : and whether it be not very possible , upon his principles , for men to be saints and rebells at the same time . i have had the curiosity to enquire into the principles of civil government among the fierce contenders for the pope's deposing power ; and i have found those hypotheses avowed and maintained , which justifie all the practices of our late regicides , who when they wanted materials , and examples of former ages , when they had a mind to seem learned in rebellion , they found no smith in israel , but went down to the philistins , to sharpen their fatal axe . else , how came the book of succession to the crown of england to be shred into so many speeches , and licensed then by such authority as they had , to justify their proceedings against our late sovereign of glorious memory ? wherein the main design is , to prove , that commonwealths have sometimes lawfully chastised their lawfull princes , though never so lawfully descended , or otherwise lawfully put in possession of their crowns : and that this hath fallen out ever , or for the most part , commodious to the weal-publick ; and that it may seem that god approved and prospered the same , by the good success and successours that ensued thereof . these were the principles of the most considerable men of that party here in england at that time . for it is a great and common mistake in those that think the book of succession to have been written by f. parsons alone . for he tells us , that card. allen , sir francis inglefield , and other principal persons of our nation , are known to have concurred to the laying together of that book , as by their own hands is yet extant ; and this to the publick benefit of our catholick cause . first , that english catholicks might understand what special and precise obligation they have to respect religion , in admitting any new prince , above all other respects humane under heaven . and this is handled largely , clearly , and with great variety of learning , reasons , doctrine , and examples , throughout the first book . this was purposely intended for the exclusion of his majestie 's royall family , k. iames being then known to be a firm protestant : and therefore two breves were obtained from the pope to exclude him from the succession ; which were sent to garnet , provincial of the iesuits . one began , dilectis filiis , principibus , & nobilibus catholicis ; the other , dilecto filio , archipresbytero , & reliquo clero anglicano . in both which the pope exhorts them , not to suffer any person to succeed in the crown of england , how near soever in bloud , unless he would , not barely tolerate the catholick faith , but promote it to the utmost , and swear to maintain it . by virtue of which apostolical sentence catesby justified himself in the gun-powder-treason : for , saith he , if it were lawfull to exclude the king from the succession , it is lawfull to cast him out of possession ; and that is my work , and shall be my care . thus we see the pope's deposing power was maintained here in england , by such who saw how necessary it was for their purpose to defend the power of commonwealths over their princes , either to exclude them from succession to the crown , or to deprive them of the possession of it . the same we shall find in france , in the time of the solemn league and covenant there , in the reigns of henry iii. and iv. for those who were engaged so deep in rebellion against their lawfull princes , found it necessary for them to insist on the pope's power to depose , and the people's to deprive their sovereigns . both these are joyned together in the book written about the just reasons of casting off henry iii. by one who was then a doctour of the sorbon : wherein the authour begins with the power of the church ; but he passes from that , to the power of the people . he asserts * the fundamental and radical power to be so in them , that they may call princes to account for treason against the people ; which he endeavours at large to prove by reason , by scripture , by examples of all sorts , forrein and domestick . and he adds , that in such cases they are not to stand upon the niceties and forms of law ; but that the necessities of state do supersede all those things . if this man had been of counsel for the late regicides , he could not more effectually have pleaded their cause . the next year after the murther of henry iii. by a monk , acted and inspired by these rebellious principles , came forth another virulent book against henry iv. under the name of rossaeus ; but written by w. reynolds , a furious english papist , who , with his brethren , contributed their utmost assistence to the rebellious leaguers in france ; as appears by the books then written . this man proceeds upon the same two fundamental principles of rebellion , the power of the people , and the deposing power of the pope . he makes all obedience to princes to be so far conditional , that if they doe not their duty , their subjects are free from their obligation to obey them : and saith , that the contrary opinion is against the law of nations , and the common reason of mankind . and with great vehemency he pleads for the supreme power over princes to lie in the body of the people , or their representative : which he endeavours to prove by the consent of nations . and it is observable , that he makes the right of succession by nearness of bloud to be a calvinistical doctrine . for , he saith , those pretended catholicks who pleaded for the right of the king of navarre , though of a different religion , had onely the name of catholicks , but were in truth impudent calvinists . the good catholick doctrine which he asserts , is , that no obedience is due to an heretical prince : which he goes about to prove with more then fanatick zeal . but whereas the fanaticks had onely the power of the people to justify themselves by ; he calls in the deposing power of the pope too ; upon which he largely insists . yet this is the book so highly commended in france by clement viii 5 nuncio , the cardinal of placentia . by which we see , how well the republican principles do agree with the pope's deposing power . which may be better understood , when we consider , that these were the common principles of the whole party of the league ; as might be proved from several authentick testimonies , if it were needfull . and he is a mighty stranger in history , that doth not know how that party was encouraged and abetted by the court of rome ; and how sixtus v. made a fanatick oration in the consistory at rome , upon the murther of henry iii. by a iacobin frier , after eight days fasting and prayer to prepare himself for so holy an act , and celebrating masse , and commending himself to the prayers of others ; as one tells us who well knew all the circumstances of that horrid murther . this oration is now stoutly denied by persons of greater zeal then knowledge ; but will. warmington , a romish priest , not onely assures us that he had seen the copy printed at paris 1589. the year of the king's death , with the approbation of 3 doctours of the faculty of paris , ( whereof one , viz. boucher , was the authour of the book of the just abdication of henry iii. ) but he saith , that being then at rome , he sent it to william reynolds , ( the authour of the other treatise , ) who looked on it as an approbation of the frier's fact ; and said , he could not have been gratified by any thing more , then by sending him the approbation of the see apostolick , because he was then writing his book . this speech was published from the notes of card. allen , as warmington saith , who was then one of his chaplains , imploy'd by him in transcribing it ; and the pope himself acknowledged it to be his own oration . let the world then judge , whether the regicides doctrine doth not very well agree with the maxims of the roman court. so true is that saying of spalatensis , that the popes and their followers make it their business to lessen the authority of princes , and to make it as mean and contemptible as they can . and the countenancing the proceedings of the covenanters in france against henry iv. by the successive popes was so open and notorious , that the necessity of his affairs drove him to the change of his religion : but because he was not a persecuter of hereticks to that degree they desired , after several attempts upon his person , by men of these principles , we all know it cost him his life at last . and i have it from a very good hand , that ravilliac himself confessed , that the reason which induced him to murther his sovereign was , because he did not think him obedient enough to the pope . thus we find the most mischievous commonwealth-principles have been very well entertained at rome , as long as they are subservient to the pope's deposing power . but if we enquire farther into the reason of these pretences , we shall find them alike on both sides . the commonwealths-men , when they are asked , how the people , having once parted with their power , come to resume it ; they presently run to an implicit contract between the prince and the people , by virtue whereof the people have a fundamental power left in themselves , which they are not to exercise but upon princes violation of the trust committed to them . the very same ground is made the foundation of the pope's deposing power , viz. an implicit contract that all princes made when they were christians , to submit their scepters to the pope's authority . which is so implicit , that very few princes in the world ever heard of it , unless they were such who took their crowns from the popes hands , after they had resigned them to them ; which few besides our king iohn were ever so mean-spirited to doe . i reade indeed that albertus , archduke of austria , in late times accepted the government of flanders with isabella clara eugenia , upon these terms , that if any of their posterity were declared hereticks by the pope , they should lose all their right to those provinces ; and that the people should be no longer bound to obey them , but to take the next successour . this is a very unusual condition , and i leave it to the politicians to dispute how far such a condition can oblige a sovereign prince ; since it is declared in the case of king iohn , that the resignation of the crown to the pope is a void act : and so consequently will the imposing any such condition be as inconsistent with the rights of sovereignty . but in the general case of princes , nothing is pleaded but an implicit contract , where by princes being excommunicated by the pope , must lose all that just authority over the people which they had before . but who made such conditional settlements of civil power upon princes ? who keeps the ancient deeds and records of them ? for all the first ages of the christian church , this conditional power and obedience was never heard of . not when emperours were open and declared infidels or hereticks . what reason can be supposed more now , then was in the times of constantius and valens , that were arian hereticks ? yet the most learned , zealous and orthodox bishops of that time never once thought of their losing their authority by it : as i could easily prove , if the design of this preface would permit me . suppose there were an escheat of power made , how comes it to fall into the pope's hands ? if it be by virtue of excommunication , every bishop that hath power to excommunicate , will likewise have power to depose princes : and what a fine case are princes in , if their power lies at the mercy of every insolent or peevish bishop ? if it be not by the power of excommunication , by what power is it that the prince is deposed by the pope ? is it by virtue of pasce oves , and dabo tibi claves ? that prince's case is extremely to be pitied , that hath no better security for his power , then what the pope hath for his from those places , in the judgment of the most ingenuous persons of the roman communion . and it seems a very hard case , that princes should lose their unquestionable rights for the sake of so doubtfull an authority , at best , as that of the popes , especially over princes , is . and it is so much the more hard with them , because no private person loses his estate by excommunication ; and yet princes must lose their kingdoms by it . this is indeed no court holy-water , nor a design to flatter princes ; but such horrible injustice and partiality , that it is a wonder to me , the princes of christendom have not long since combined together to dethrone him , who thinks it in his power to depose them , thereby making himself the caliph of the western babylon . and so , no doubt , they would have done , had it not been for the difference of interests among christian princes , that have made some therefore side with and uphold the papal monarchy , because others opposed it ; and every one hopes , at one time or other , to make use of it for his own turn . but yet methinks it is their common interest , to secure themselves against the prevalency of this dangerous doctrine on their own subjects : for all those who believe it , are but conditional subjects to their princes , for their obedience depends on the will and pleasure of another , whom they think themselves bound absolutely to obey , and yet not bound to believe he did right in excommunicating and deposing their prince . for they dare not say he is infallible in his proceedings against princes : so that right or wrong they must obey the pope , and disobey their lawfull sovereign . if the pope through pride , or passion , or interest , or misinformation , thunder out excommunication against a christian prince , ( all which , they say , he is capable of in pronouncing this dreadfull sentence , ) then all his subjects are presently free from their allegeance , and they may doe what they please against him . and what a miserable condition were sovereign princes in , if all christians were such fools , to think themselves bound to obey an unjust sentence of the bishop of rome against their just and lawfull prince ? for upon these principles , though the popes be never so much parties , they must be the onely iudges in this case . and what redress is to be expected there , where it is so much the interest of the person concerned , to have it believed he cannot erre ? if these were really the terms of princes being admitted to christianity , it would make the most considerable argument to perswade them to infidelity . for what have they to doe to judge them that are without ? but princes have no cause to be afraid of being christians for the sake of this doctrine : for if christ and his apostles were the best teachers of christianity , this is certainly no part of it . for the religion they taught never meddled with crowns and scepters , but left to caesar the things that were caesar's , and never gave the least intimation to princes of any forfeiture of their authority , if they did not render to god the things that are god's . the christian religion left mankind under those forms and rules of civil government in which it found them : it onely requires all men , of what rank or order soever , to be subject to the higher powers , because they are the ordinance of god ; and bids all christians pray for them in authority , that under them they may lead quiet and peaceable lives in all godliness and honesty . thus far the christian religion goes in these matters , and thus the primitive christians believed and practised , when their religion was pure , and free from the corruptions and usurpations which the interests and passions of men introduced in the following ages . and how then come princes in these latter times to be christians upon worse and harder terms then in the best ages of it ? but how doth it appear that princes do become christians upon such conditions , that if the pope excommunicate them , they lose their crowns ? what office of baptism is this contained in ? did their godfathers and godmothers undertake this for them ? no , that is not said , but that it is implied in the nature of the thing . how so ? is it because dominion is founded in grace ? no , not that neither . but in my mind there is very little difference , between dominion being founded in grace , and being forfeited for want of it . and so we are come about to the fanatick principles of government again ; which this deposing power in the pope doth naturally lead men to . but this is not all the mischief of this doctrine ; for , 2. it breaks all bonds and oaths of obedience , how sacred and solemn soever they have been . that we may the better apprehend the pernicious consequence of this doctrine , we are to consider , ( 1. ) that there is a mutual duty owing between princes and subjects , on the account of the relation between them , such as doth naturally arise from it , and antecedently to their embracing the christian religion . for without an obligation to obedience on the subjects part , the authority of a prince is an insignificant thing , and the publick good of the society cannot be obtained . ( 2. ) that when subjects are absolved from their oaths of allegeance by the pope , they are thereby declared free from that natural duty they were obliged to before . for allegeance to princes doth not flow from the relation between them and the people as christians , but as members of a civil society ; and therefore the absolving subjects from that , is in plain terms nulling the obligation to a natural duty , and taking away the force of oaths and promises . ( 3. ) that all mankind are agreed , that it is a sin to break a lawfull oath ; and the more solemn and weighty the oath is , the greater the perjury : but in case of the pope's absolving subjects from their oath of allegeance , it must be said , that that which otherwise would be a sin , becomes none ; and a notorious crime becomes a duty , because done by virtue of the pope's authority . this is that now we are to understand , if possible , what authority that is in the pope which can turn evil into good , and good into evil ; that can make civil obedience to princes to be a crime , and perjury to be none . this is an admirable power , and greater then the schoolmen will allow to god himself , where there is intrinsick goodness in the nature of the thing , and inseparable evil from the contrary to it . for , say they , divine providence being supposed , god cannot but forbid those evil actions which natural reason discovers to be evil : for how can the hatred of god , or a wilfull lie , be any other then evil ? the same i say of disobedience to parents , and violation of oaths lawfully made ; which are things evil in their own nature . the question now is , whether the pope can doe that which they say god himself cannot , viz. make perjury not to be a sin. for an oath of allegeance cannot be denied to be a lawfull oath , and a lawfull oath lays an obligation on conscience to the performance of it , and gives another a just right to challenge that allegeance as a duty by virtue of his oath ; and where-ever there is a necessary duty , god himself , saith aquinas , cannot dispense : for then ▪ he would act contrary to the rule of eternal righteousness ; which he can never doe . it is true , they grant , that god , in regard of his supreme dominion , can alter the matter or circumstances of things ; as in abraham's sacrificing his son upon god's particular command , which in those circumstances was not murther : but this , they say well , is no dispensation with the law , nor any act of iurisdiction as a legislator ; but onely an act of supreme power . but our question is onely , about dispensing with the force and obligation of a law of nature , such as keeping our oaths undoubtedly is . and since god himself is not allowed the power of dispensing , it seems very strange how the pope should come by it ; unless it were out of a desire to exalt himself above all that is called god. thomas aquinas saith , that there can be no dispensation to make a man doe any thing against his oath ; for , saith he , keeping an oath is an indispensable divine precept : but all the force of a dispensation lies in altering the matter of an oath , which being variable may be done . to clear this , in every oath are three things to be considered : ( 1. ) the obligation upon the person to perform what he swears to ; ( 2. ) the right which the person hath to challenge that performance to whom the oath is made ; ( 3. ) the interest which god hath , as supreme judge , to see to the performance , and to punish the breakers of it . now which of these is it the pope's dispensation in a promissory oath doth fall upon ? surely the pope doth not challenge to himself god's supreme power of punishing or not punishing offenders ; so that if men do break their oaths , if they have the pope's dispensation , they do not fear the punishment of perjured persons . i am willing to believe this is not their meaning . it must therefore be one of the former . but then how comes the pope to have power to give away another man 's natural right ? a man swears allegeance to his prince , by virtue of which oath the prince challenges his allegeance as a sworn duty : and so it is according to all rules of common reason and justice . the pope he dispenseth with this oath , and absolveth the person from this allegeance ; i. e. the pope gives away the prince's right whether he will or no. is not this great justice , and infinitely becoming god's vicar upon earth ? but how came the pope by that right of the prince which he gives away ? the right was a just and natural right , belonging to him on a meer civil account : what authority then hath the pope to dispose of it ? may he not as well give away all the just rights of men to their estates , as those of princes to their crowns ? the very plain truth is , the defenders of the pope's indirect power are forced to shuffle and cut , and make unintelligible distinctions , and in effect to talk non-sense about this matter . the onely men that speak sense are those who assert the pope in plain terms to have a direct temporal monarchy , and that all kings are their subjects and vasalls ; and therefore they may dispose of their crowns , and doe what they please with them . we know what these men would have ; and if princes be tame enough to submit to this power , they own the pope as their true sovereign lord , and must rule , or not rule , at his pleasure . but it is impossible for those who contend onely for spiritual jurisdiction in the pope , to defend his power of absolving subjects from their allegeance to princes , since this power of altering the matter is not an act of iurisdiction , but of meer power , as was said before as to god himself in the case of abraham . therefore those who contend onely for the pope's dispensing with oaths of allegeance on the account of his spiritual jurisdiction , can never justify the giving away the natural rights of princes ; for that is an act of power , and not of iurisdiction . and cajetan well observes , that the relaxation of an oath by altering the matter , is an act of direct power , because the thing it self is immediately under the power of the person ; as in a father over his son , or a lord over his vassall : and therefore the dispensing with the oath of allegeance cannot be by the alteration of the matter , unless a direct power over princes be asserted . cajetan laies down a good rule about dispensing with oaths , that in them we ought to see that no prejudice be done to the person to whom and for whose sake they are made : and therefore , he saith , the pope himself hath not that power over oaths , which he hath over vows . and yet maldonat saith , that neither the pope , nor the whole church , can dispense in a solemn vow : and that a dispensation in such cases is no less then an abrogation of the law of god and nature . dominicus à soto saith , that although the pope may dispense in a vow , yet he cannot in an oath . for , saith he , the pope cannot relax an oath which one man hath made to another of paying to him what he owes him ▪ which ariseth from the nature of the contract which is confirmed by an oath . the pope having not the power to take away from another man that which doth belong to him ▪ cannot doe him so much injury as to relax the oath which is made to him . and in the loosing of oaths , care ought to be taken that there be no injury to a third person . afterwards he puts this case , whether if the pope dispenseth with an oath without just cause , that dispensation will free a man from perjury . which he denies , for this reason , because a dispensation cannot hold in the law of god or nature . therefore since it is a law of god , that a man should perform what he swears , although that bond doth arise from the will and consent of the party , yet it cannot be dissolved without sufficient reason . but what reason can be sufficient , he determines not . however , we have gained thus much , that the pope cannot take away the right of a third person ; which he must doe , if he can absolve subjects from their allegeance to their prince , which is as much due to him , as a summe of money is to a creditor . i grant , after all this , that cajetan and soto both yield to the common doctrine of their church , about dispensing with oaths made to excommunicated persons , by way of punishment to them : but they do not answer their own arguments . and cajetan saith , that caution is to be used , lest prejudice be done to another by it : i. e. they durst not oppose the common opinion , although they saw sufficient reason against it . cardinal tolet seems to speak home to our case , when he saith , that an oath made to the benefit of a third person cannot be dispensed with , no not by the pope himself , without the consent of that person ; as the pope cannot take away another man's goods . one would have thought this had been as full to our purpose as possible ; and so it is as to the reason of the thing . but he brings in after it a scurvy exception of the case of excommunicated persons , without offering the least shew of reason why the common rules of iustice and honesty ought not to be observed towards persons censured by the church : nor doth he attempt to shew , how the pope comes by that power of dispensing with oaths in that case , which he freely declares he hath not in any other . gregory sayr thinks he hath nicked the matter , when with wonderfull subtilty he distinguisheth between the free act of the will in obliging it self by an oath , and the obligation following upon it , to perform what is sworn . now , saith he , the pope in dispensing doth not take away the second , viz. the obligation to perform the oath , the bond remaining , for that were to go against the law of god and nature ; but because every oath doth suppose a consent of the will , the dispensation falls upon that , and takes away the force of the oath from it . if this subtilty will hold , for all that i can see , the pope may dispense with all the oaths in the world , and justify himself upon this distinction : for , as azorius well observes , if the reason of dispensing be drawn from the consent of the will , which is said to be subject to the pope , he may at his pleasure dispense with any oath whatsoever . sayr takes notice of azorius his dissatisfaction at this answer , but he tells him to his teeth , that he could bring no better ; yea , that he could find out no answer at all . azorius indeed acknowledges the great difficulty of explaining this dispensing power of the pope as to oaths ; and concludes at last , that the bond of an oath cannot be loosed by the pope , but for some reason drawn from the law of nature ; which is in effect to deny his authority : for if there be a reason from the law of nature against the obligation of an oath , the bond is loosed of it self . others therefore go the plainest way to work , who say , that all oaths have that tacit condition in them , if the pope please . but sayr thinks this a little too broad ; because then it follows evidently , that the pope may dispense as he pleases without cause ; which , he saith , is false . others again have found out a notable device of distinguishing between the obligation of iustice ▪ and of religion , in an oath ; and say , that the pope can take away the religious obligation of an oath , though not that of iustice. this widdrington saith was the opinion of several grave and learned catholicks in england ; and therefore they said they could not renounce the pope's power of absolving persons from the oath of allegeance . but he well shews this to be a vain and impertinent distinction , because the intention of the oath of allegeance is , to secure the obligation of iustice ; and the intention of the pope in absolving from that oath is , to take it away : as he proves from the famous canons , nos sanctorum , and iuratos . so that this subtilty helps not the matter at all . paul layman confesseth , that a promissory oath made to a man cannot ordinarily be relaxed without the consent of the person to whom it is made : because by such an oath a man , to whom it is made , doth acquire as just a right to the performance , as he hath to any of his goods , of which he cannot be deprived . but from this plain and just rule he excepts , as the rest do , the publick good of the church ; as though evil might be done for the good of the church , although not for the good of any private person : whereas the churche's honour ought more to be preserved by the ways of iustice and honesty . wo be to them that make good evil , and evil good , when it serves their turn ; for this is plainly setting up a particular interest under the name of the good of the church , and violating the laws of righteousness to advance it . if men break through oaths , and the most solemn engagements and promises , and regard no bonds of iustice and honesty , to compass their ends , let them call them by what specious names they please , the good old cause , or the good of the church , ( it matters not which , ) there can be no greater sign of hypocrisy and real wickedness then this . for the main part of true religion doth not lie in canting phrases , or mystical notions , neither in specious shews of devotion , nor in zeal for the true church : but in faith , as it implies the performance of our promises , as well as belief of the christian doctrine ; and in obedience , or a carefull observance of the laws of christ , among which , obedience to the king as supreme is one : which they can never pretend to be an inviolable duty , who make it in the power of another person to absolve them from the most solemn oaths of allegeance ; and consequently suppose , that to keep their oaths in such case , would be a sin , and to violate them may become a duty : which is in effect to overturn the natural differences of good and evil , to set up a controlling sovereign power above that of their prince , and to lay a perpetual foundation for faction and rebellion ; which nothing can keep men from , if conscience and their solemn oaths cannot . 3. therefore the third mischief common to this deposing power of the pope and commonwealth-principles , is , the justifying rebellion on the account of religion . this is done to purpose in boucher and reynolds , the fierce disputers for the pope's and the people's power . boucher saith , that it is not onely lawfull to resist authority on the account of religion ; but that it is folly and impiety not to doe it , when there is any probability of success . and the martyrs were onely to be commended for suffering , because they wanted power to resist . most catholick and primitive doctrine ! and that the life of a wicked prince ought not to be valued at that rate as the service of god ought to be : that when christ paid tribute to caesar , he did it as a private man , and not meddling with the rights of the people : that , if the people had not exercised their power over the lives of bad princes , there had been no religion left in many countries . and he finds great fault with the catholicks in england , that they suffered heretical princes to live ; and saith , that they deserved to endure the miseries they did undergo , because of it : that there is no juster cause of war , then religion is : that the prince and people make a solemn league and covenant together to serve god , and if the prince fail of his part , the people ought to compell him to it . and he accounts this a sufficient answer to all objections out of scripture , if he will not hear the church , ( how much more if he persecutes it ? ) let him be to thee as a heathen or a publican . and he brings all the examples he could think of to justify rebellion on the account of religion . rossaeus proves , that hereticks , being excommunicated , lose all right and authority of government ; and therefore it is lawfull for their subjects to rise up against them ; and that no war is more just or holy then this . which he endeavours at large to defend , and to answer all objections against it . and the contrary opinion , he saith , was first broached by the calvinists in france , when they had the expectation of the succession of henry iv. which doctrine he calls punick divinity , and atheism , and the new gospel . the truth is , he doth sufficiently prove the lawfulness of resisting princes on the account of religion to have obtained together with the pope's power of deposing princes . and there can be no other way to justifie the wars and rebellions against henry iv. of germany , and france , and other princes , after their excommunications by the pope , but by stifly maintaining this principle , of the lawfulness of resisting authority on the account of religion . and therefore this cannot be looked on as the opinion of a few factious spirits , but as the just consequence of the other opinion . for the pope's deposing power would signifie very little , unless the people were to follow home the blow , and to make the pope's thunder effectual , by actual rebellion . and the popes understand this so well , that they seldom denounce their sentence of excommunication against princes , but when all things are in readiness to pursue the design ; as might be made appear by a particular history of the several excommunications of princes , from the emperour henry iv. to our own times . if they do forbear doing the same things in our age , we are not to impute it to any alteration of their minds , or greater kindness to princes then formerly , but onely to the not finding a fit opportunity , or a party strong and great enough to compass their ends . for they have learnt by experience , that it is onely loss of powder and ammunition , to give fire at too great a distance ; and that the noise onely awakens others to look to themselves : but when they meet with a people ready prepared for so good a work , as the nuntio in ireland did , then they will set up again for this good old cause of rebellion on the account of religion . and it is observable , that cardinal bellarmin , among other notable reasons to prove the pope's deposing power , brings this for one ; because it is not lawfull for christians to suffer an heretical prince , if he seeks to draw his subjects to his belief . and what prince that believes his own religion doth it not ? and what then is this , but to raise rebellion against a prince , whenever he and they happen to be of different religions ? but that which i bring this for , is to shew , that the pope's deposing power doth carry along with it that mischievous principle to government , of the lawfulness of resisting authority on the account of religion . and from this discourse i infer , that there can be no real security given to the government , without renouncing this deposing power in the pope . but that which is the present pretence among them , is , that it is not this they stick at ; but the quarrel they have at the oath of allegeance , as it is now framed . i shall therefore proceed to the second thing , viz. ii. that if they do renounce the pope's deposing power in good earnest , they have no reason to refuse the oath of allegeance . and now , gentlemen , i must again make my address to you , with great thanks for the satisfaction you have given me in this particular . i have seriously read and considered your treatises ; and i find by them all , that if you durst heartily renounce this doctrine , all the other parts of the oath might go down well enough . the authour of the first treatise is so ingenuous , as to make the following proposition the whole foundation of his discourse ; viz. that it is not lawfull to take any oath or protestation renouncing the pope's power , in any case whatsoever to depose a christian prince , or absolve his subjects from their allegeance . and in my mind he gives a very substantial reason for it , because the holding that he hath no such power is erroneous in faith , temerarious , and impious . what would a man wish for more against any doctrine ? whatever p. w. and his brethren think of this deposing power , this piece doth charge them home , and tells them their own ; and that they are so far from being sound catholicks that deny it , that , in one word , they are hereticks , damnable henrician hereticks . what ? would they be thought catholicks that charge the church , for so many ages ▪ with holding a damnable errour , and practising mortal sin ? as their church hath done , if the pope hath no deposing power . for this honest gentleman confesseth , that it is a doctrine enormously injurious to the rights of princes , and the cause of much deadly feud betwixt the church and secular states , of many bloudy wars of princes one against another , and wicked rebellions of subjects against their princes . o the irresistible power of truth ! how vain is it for men to go about to masquerade the sun ! his light will break through , and discover all . it is very true , this hath been the effect of this blessed doctrine in the christian world ; seditions , wars , bloudshed , rebellions , what not ? but how do you prove this to have been the doctrine of the church of rome ? how ? say you ; by all the ways we can prove any doctrine catholick popes have taught it from scripture and tradition , and condemned the contrary as erroneous in faith , pernicious to salvation , wicked folly and madness , and inflicted censures on them that held it . have they so in good sooth ? nay then , it must be as good catholick doctrine as transubstantiation its own self ; if it hath been declared in councils , and received by the church . yes , say you , that i prove by the very same popes , the same councils , the same church , and in the same manner that transubstantiation was . and for my part i think you have done it , and i thank you for it . i am very well satisfied with your proofs , they are very solid , and much to the purpose . but above all i commend your conclusion , that if this doctrine be an errour , the church of rome for several ages was a wicked and blind church , and a synagogue of satan : and if it were no errour , they that now call it an errour are wicked catholicks , and in damnable errour . nor though all the doctours of sorbon , all the parliaments and vniversities of france , all the friers or blackloists in england or ireland , all the libertines , politicians and atheists in the world , should declare for it , could it ever be an authority to make it a probable opinion . bravely spoken , and like a true disciple of hildebrand ! hear this , o ye writers of controversial letters , and beware how ye fall into these mens hands . you may cry out upon these opinions as long as you please , and make us believe your church is not concerned in them : but if this good man may be credited , you can never find authority enough to make your opinion so much as probable . a very hard case for princes , when it will not be allowed so much as probable , that princes should keep their crowns on their heads , if the pope thinks fit to take them away ; or that subjects should still owe allegeance to princes , when the pope absolves them from it ! very hard , indeed , in such an age of probable doctrines , when so small authority goes to make an opinion probable , that this against the pope's deposing power should not come within the large sphere of probability . hear this , ye writers of apologies for papists loyalty , who would perswade us , silly people of the church of england , that this doctrine of the pope's power of deposing princes is onely the opinion of some doctours , and not the doctrine of your church ; when this learned authour proves , you have as much reason and authority to believe it , as that transubstantiation is the doctrine of it ; and father caron's 250 authours cannot make the contrary opinion so much as probable ; this having been for some ages ( one at least ) the common belief , sense and doctrine of the church , as our authour saith . from whence it follows , it must have been always so ; or else oral tradition and infallibility are both gone . for how could that be the doctrine of one age which was not of the precedent ? what ? did fathers conspire to deceive their children then ? is it possible to suppose such an alteration to happen in the doctrine of the church , and yet the church declare to adhere to tradition at that time ? if this be possible in this case , then , for all that we know , that great bugbear of transubstantiation might steal in in the dark too . and so farewell oral tradition . but how can infallibility stand after it , when the church was so enormously deceived for so long together , as this authour proves it must have been , if this doctrine be false ? if the blackloists in england and irish remonstrants do not all vanish at the appearance of this treatise , and yield themselves captives to this smart and pithy authour , i expect to see some of them concerned for their own vindication , so far , as to answer this short treatise : but i beseech them then , to shew us the difference between the coming in of transubstantiation and this deposing doctrine , since the same popes , the same councils , and the same approbation of the church , are produced for both . this is all i have to say of this first treatise , whose authour i do highly commend for his plain dealing ; for he speaks out what he really thinks and believes of this doctrine of the pope's power of deposing princes . but i am no sooner entred upon the second treatise , but i fansy my self in fairy-land , where i meet with nothing but phantastick shows and apparitions : when i go about to fasten upon any thing , it is immediately gone ; the little fairy leaps up and down , and holds to nothing , intending onely to scare and affright his party from the oath of allegeance ; and when he hath done this , he disappears . the substance of the oath ( saith the authour of the questions , whom he pretends to answer , ) is , the denying and abjuring the pope's power of deposing princes . this is plain , and home to the purpose ; what say you to this ? is this doctrine true , or false ? may it be renounced or not ? hold , say you ; for my part , it is as far from my thoughts , as forein to my present purpose , to speak any thing in favour of this deposing power . is it indeed forein to your purpose , to speak to the substance of the oath ? no , say you , the substance of the oath is contained in this question , whether a catholick may deny by oath , and universally abjure , the pope's power to depose princes : not , whether he may deny it , but , whether he may deny it by oath . and the great argument to prove the negative is , that it hath been a question debated for 500 years , and no clear and authoritative decision of the point yet appeareth , to which both sides think themselves obliged to stand and acquiesce . where are we now ? methinks we are sailing to find o brasil . we thought our selves as sure as if we had got the point , in the first treatise , a good firm , solid , substantial point of faith ; and now , all of a sudden , it is vanished into clouds and vapours , and armies fighting in the air against each other . is it possible for the sense , belief and doctrine of the church , as the first authour assures us it was , to become such a moot-point , always disputed , never decided ? this hath been the common received doctrine of all school-divines , casuists , canonists , from first to last , ( afore calvin 's time , ) in all the several nations of christendom , yea even in france it self ; and neither barclay , nor widdrington , nor caron , nor any other champion for the contrary tenet , hath been able yet to produce so much as one catholick authour , ( afore calvin 's time , ) that denied this power to the pope absolutely , or in any case whatsoever . thus the authour of the first treatise . since it is but more undeniably evident then all good men have cause to wish , and that experience , the easiest and clearest of arguments , puts it too sadly beyond dispute , that this grand controversie , whether the pope hath any power or authority to depose princes , for any cause , pretence or exigency whatsoever , hath been for divers ages , from time to time , disputed in the schools by speculative men , and is to this day , among catholick controvertists , and catholick princes too ; as the authour of the second treatise confesseth . what shall i say to you , gentlemen , when you thus flatly contradict each other ? how come you to be so little agreed upon your premisses , when you joyn in the same conclusion ? there is some mysterie in this , which we are not to understand . this i suppose it is . among those who may be trusted , this is an article of faith , and for such the first treatise was written . but for the sake of such who would see too far into these things , we must not own it , for fear we lose some residences , and patrons of the nobility and gentry : therefore among these we must not own it as an article of faith , but as a controverted point . how then , say some of the fathers of the society , shall we keep them from taking the oath of allegeance ? and if we do suffer them to doe that , farewell to our interest in england ; p. w. and the blackloists will prevail . come , come , saith father w. never fear , i have a topick will scare them all , though we own it as a controverted point . what is that ? say they with great joy. let me alone , saith he to them , i will prove them all guilty of perjury , if they take the oath , because it is a controverted point . excellent ! they all cry , this will doe our business in spite of them . let us now come near , and handle this mighty argument , that we may discern whether it be a mere spectre , or hath any flesh and bones . the oath of allegeance is a mixt oath , partly assertory , and partly promissory . in an assertory oath it is essentially requisite , that what we do swear be undoubtedly and unquestionably true . very well ; but suppose a person doth in his conscience believe that the pope cannot depose princes , nor absolve subjects from their allegeance ; may not such a man swear it without perjury ? no , says our good father ; a man may swear against his conscience , not onely when he doubts , but when he hath just cause to doubt . how is that ? good sir ; when other men see that he hath cause to doubt , or when himself sees it ? if he sees himself that he hath cause to doubt , he doth not believe in his conscience that to be so as he swears it is ; for how can a man firmly believe that , which he sees cause to doubt ? if he sees none himself , what is that to his conscience , if others think they do ; if he does not think his conscience bound to be swayed by their authority ? but the mysterie of this iesuitism is , that no gentlemen ought to have judgments of their own in these matters , but to be swayed by the extrinsick authority of their teachers . and therefore if they say , they have cause to doubt , they must doubt , whether they do or no. if gentlemen of freer understandings and education allow themselves the liberty to enquire into these matters , they presently see through all this tiffany sophistry , and find the thing still carried on is meer blind obedience ; although in following the conduct of such self-interested leaders they run themselves into continual difficulties . if a man be satisfied in his conscience , the pope hath no deposing power , according to the rules of their own best casuists , he may lawfully abjure it . the truth required in an oath , saith cardinal tolet , is , that by which a man speaks that which he thinks in his heart ; and to swear falsly is , to swear otherwise then one thinks . and to swear otherwise then a thing really is , provided he think it to be so , is neither mortal nor venial sin ; but ( 1. ) in case a man hath not used diligence to enquire ; and to this he doth not require the utmost , but onely some and convenient diligence : ( 2. ) if he be doubtfull in his mind when he swears , and yet swears it as certain : ( 3. ) when he is ready to swear , although he knew the thing to be otherwise . suarez saith , that in an assertory oath , the truth confirmed by it lies in the conformity of the assertion to the mind of the speaker , rather then to the thing it self ; so that if a man thinks it false which he swears , although it be really true , he is guilty of perjury : and so on the contrary , if a man swears a thing really false , which he invincibly thinks to be true , he is not guilty of perjury , but swears a lawfull oath , according to the doctrine of s. augustine and s. thomas . by invincibly , suarez means no more then tolet doth by thinking so after convenient diligence . for suarez lays down this rule afterwards , that , when a man swears what is really false , but he thinks it true , if his thinking be joyned with sufficient care , and a probable opinion of the truth , ( mark that ) he is free from the guilt of perjury . this he saith is the common and express doctrine , and built upon this ground , because the truth and falshood of an oath doth not so much relate to the matter sworn , as to the mind and conscience of him that swears . dominicus soto determines this case very plainly : if a man swears that to be true , which he thinks so , after due enquiry , though it be false , he doth not sin at all . and the measure of diligence he proportions to the nature and quality of the thing , which is therefore left to prudence and discretion . iacobus de graffiis hath this assertion ; he that swears a thing to be true , which he thinks so , although it be really false , sins not , unless he neglected to use that diligence which he was bound to use : and according to the greatness of that neglect , the measure of his sin is to be taken . greg. sayr saith , that to a lawfull assertory oath no more is required , then the agreement of what a man saith with the inward sense of his mind , according to the reasonable judgment a man passes upon what he swears . which words are taken out of gregory de valentia . qui non videt , vel dubitat esse falsum quod jurat , perjurus non est , saith vasquez ; he that doth not see , or doubt that to be false which he swears , is not guilty of perjury . which words are quoted and approved by layman ; because all perjury must have its foundation in a lie. and , saith he , he that swears in an assertory oath , doth not affirm the certainty of his own knowledge , but directly the very thing which he swears . nay he farther saith , that where the matter sworn is capable of no more then probability , a man may lawfully swear the truth according to that degree of certainty which the thing will bear ; although it should happen to be otherwise then he thinks . so that , according to the common and received doctrine of their own casuists , the foundation of this second treatise is false , ( as might be shewed by many more testimonies , if these were not sufficient , ) which is , that since this doctrine about the pope's deposing power hath no infallible certainty in it , a man cannot attest the truth or falshood of it by an oath . which was the more surprising to me , considering how usual it is among your selves , to swear to such opinions of which you cannot pretend to infallible certainty by any evidence of faith , or authoritative decision of the church . what think you of the doctrine of thomas aquinas ? are there no mere opinions , undecided by the church , in his works ? is there infallible certainty in of all them ? i do not think any iesuit in the world will say so , for a reason every own knows ; because his order holds the direct contrary in some points . and yet the dominicans swear to maintain s. thomas his doctrine . what think you of the immaculate conception , which so many vniversities have sworn to maintain , as luc. wadding hath shewed at large ? and yet all these oaths were made before any authoritative decision of the church . one of you hath found out an evasion for this , by saying , that it is one thing to swear to maintain a doctrine as true , and another to swear to it as true . i cry you mercy , gentlemen : i had thought no persons would have sworn to maintain a falshood ; or to defend that as true , which at the same time they believed or suspected not to be true . why may not you then swear that you will maintain , the pope hath no power to depose princes , when your prince requires it , as well as swear to maintain the immaculate conception , when the vniversity requires it , whatever your private opinion be ? but to prevent this subterfuge , wadding saith from surius , that the vniversity of mentz would admit none to any degree in divinity , without swearing that he would neither approve nor hold in his mind any other opinion . what think you now of swearing to the truth of an opinion not decided by the church , upon the best probable reasons that can be given for it ? and therefore all this outcry about perjury , was onely to frighten and amuse , and not to convince , or satisfy . the rest of that treatise consists of impertinent cavills against several expressions in the oath of allegeance ; which ought to be understood according to the intention of the law-givers , the reason and design of the law , and the natural sense of the words : and if they will but allow these as the most reasonable ways of interpreting laws , all those exceptions will be found too light to weigh down the balance of any tolerable judgment , and have been answered over and over from the days of widdrington to the authour of the questions ; and therefore i pass them over , and leave them to any who shall think it worth their pains to make a just answer to them . the third treatise is written by a very considering man , as any one may find in every page of it . he bids his readers consider so much , as though he had a mind to have them spend their days in considering the oath , without ever taking it . as he had , that desired time to consider the solemn league and covenant ; and when he was asked , how long time he would take for it , he told them , but a little time ; for he was an old man , and not likely to live long . but what is it which this person offers , which is so considerable ? his main argument is , from the pope's authority prohibiting the taking this oath expressly , at several and distant times , and after the most ample information , and the writings on both sides : it being a thing belonging to the pope's authority , as spiritual governour , and not to the civil power , to determine . this is an argument i must leave to those to answer , who think themselves obliged to justify the pope's authority , and to disobey it at the same time . to this some answer , that the pope's prohibition proceeding on a false supposition , and a private opinion of his own , viz. that there are some things in the oath repugnant to faith , they are not bound to obey it ; because it belongs not to the pope , without a council , to determine matters of faith : that the popes have sometimes required very unjust and unreasonable things , of which warmington gives some notable instances of his own knowledge : that obedience to all superiours is limited within certain bounds , which if they exceed , men are not bound to obey them : that the very canonists and schoolmen do set bounds to the pope's authority : as ( 1. ) when great mischief is like to ensue by his commands ; so francisc. zabarell , panormitan , sylvester , and others : ( 2. ) when injury comes to a third person by it ; so card. tolet , panormitan , soto , &c. ( 3. ) when there is just cause to doubt the lawfulness of the thing commanded ; so pope adrian , vasquez , navarr , and others cited by widdrington : ( 4. ) when he commands about those things wherein he is not superiour ; so tolet determins , a man is onely obliged in those things to obey his superiour , wherein he hath authority over him . now , say they , we having just cause to doubt , whether the pope may command us in things relating to our allegeance , and apparent injury coming to princes by owning this doctrine , and much mischief having been done by it , and more designed , as the gunpowder-treason , the true occasion of this oath : it is no culpable disobedience to take the oath of allegeance , notwithstanding the pope's prohibition . and upon the very same grounds and reasons which made the king's royal ancestours , with their parliaments , to limit the pope's authority in england , in the ancient statutes of provisors and praemunire , his majestie 's grandfather might , with his parliament , enact that law which requires the taking of the oath of allegeance : and how comes such disobedience in temporals , say they , to be now more repugnant to catholick religion , then it was in those days ? nay , in those times it was good doctrine , that when a dispute arose , whether a thing did belong to the civil or ecclesiastical power to judge , the civil power hath made laws , and determined it , and the subjects did submit to the civil authority . this and much more might be said to shew the inconsequence of this argument , upon which the stress of the third treatise lies : but i leave the full answer to those that are concerned . the plainest , shortest and truest answer is , that the pope hath no jurisdiction over us , either in spirituals or temporals . but this is sufficient to my purpose , to shew , that if they would renounce the pope's deposing power , there is nothing else , according to the principles of their own religion , could hinder them from taking the oath of allegeance . which is in effect acknowledged at last by this authour of the third treatise , when he offers a new form of an oath , rather more expressive of civil obedience then the oath of allegeance . are not princes mightily obliged to you , gentlemen , that take such wonderfull care to have a more express oath then this already required by law ? how comes this extraordinary fit of kindness upon you ? do you really think the oath of allegeance defective in this point ? no , no. we know what you would have : if we can get but this oath out of the way , the same interest which can remove this , will prevent another ; as some argue about other matters at this time . well , but what security is this which you do so freely offer ? first , you are ready to swear , without any mental reservation , that you acknowledge our sovereign lord charles the second to be lawfull king of this realm , and of all other his majestie 's dominions . a wonderfull kindness ! while the old gentleman at rome pleases , you will doe this : but suppose he should declare otherwise , what think you then ? will you then own him to be lawfull king , in spite of the pope's excommunication , and sentence of deposing ? speak out , gentlemen ; why do you draw in your breath , and mutter to your selves ? will you ? or will you not ? if you will , why do ye stick at the oath of allegeance ? if you will not , is not his majesty much obliged to you , that you will own him to be lawfull king as long as the pope pleases ? but you go on , that you renounce all power whatsoever , ecclesiastical or civil , domestick or forein , repugnant to the same . what doth this same relate to ? to his being lawfull king , or to your acknowledgment of it ? if you meant honestly without reservation , why could ye not speak plainly , in saying , that ye renounce all power of the pope as to the deposing the king , and absolving his subjects from their allegeance ? if this be not your meaning , it is a falsity to say , you swear without any mental reservation , when in the mean time you reserve the pope's power to depose the king , and then he is no longer a lawfull king to you . so that till you in plain terms renounce this power of the pope , all other forms are mere shuffling , and full of tricks and equivocations , on purpose to amuse the unwary reader . but you would have us think you come home to the point in the last clause , wherein you declare that doctrine to be impious , seditious and abominable , which maintains , that any private subject may lawfully kill or murther the anointed of god , his prince . now , say you , let any one judge , protestant or catholick , whether these foremention'd clauses are not more , at least as expressive of civil allegeance , as the ordinary oath is . not too fast , good sir ; the world is not so easily cheated as it hath been . would you indeed have us believe this to be as good security as the oath of allegeance , when some of the greatest defenders of the deposing power would say as much as this comes to , that it is impious and abominable for a private subject to kill or murther his prince ? but when the pope hath deposed a prince , those that were subjects before , according to your opinion , cease to be so : and the same person may lawfully kill or murther his prince , although not the same subject , because the relation is alter'd , by virtue of the pope's sentence . besides , this reaches onely to the case of a private subject , and not to the power of the people or the pope . that may be thought unlawfull to be done by a private person , without power and commission , which may be thought lawfull when he doth it by authority derived from others . so that this form can give satisfaction to none but such as will be satisfied with any thing . for it doth not at all touch upon the main business ; but is in truth an equivocal , deceitfull and sophistical form. for , as the authour of the reflections saith very well , princes are little advantaged by such an oath , wherein the swearers say , princes may not be murthered or killed by their subjects , unless they say withall , they may not be deposed ( by the pope : ) for whosoever hath a supreme just right upon any pretence whatsoever to depose princes , hath thereby right to cause them to be killed , in case they by arms oppose the execution of the sentence . and can it be imagined , that any prince , judged an heretick or otherwise guilty by the pope , and by him sentenced to be deposed , will thereupon quietly descend out of his throne , and yield up his scepter to one of a contrary religion ? or rather , is it not most certain , that they will not , but , on the contrary , bring with them many thousands of their armed subjects , to resist the execution of such a sentence , all which together with them must be killed or murthered , before it can have its full effect ? but this is not the onely thing wherein you design to put tricks upon your readers ; it would take up too much time for a preface to lay them all open ; yet some of them are too gross to be passed by . as when the authour of the first treatise would have his reader believe the publisher of the fasciculus rerum expetendarum & fugiendarum to have been a protestant ; when any one that looks into the book may find , it was set forth by ortwinus gratius , a known and fierce papist : and when the authours of the two other treatises both assert , that sanctarellus his book was condemned at rome before it was condemned at paris . i stood amazed at the impudence of this assertion , when i read it in the second treatise ; but much more when i saw it confirmed in the third . i looked once and again on the roman index expurgatorius , and examined the decrees of the congregation ; but i could find no sanctarellus ever condemned there . but looking into sanctarellus himself , i found the book so far from being condemned , that it came forth with the approbation and special licence of mutius vittelescus , then general of the iesuits order , bearing date at rome may 25. 1624. i pray mark it , gentlemen ; the general of the iesuits at that time gave this licence to a book written by one of that order , wherein he shews , that princes may be deposed , not onely for heresie , but for other faults , for negligence , if it be expedient , if they be thought insufficient , if vnusefull , or the like . and yet you would bear us down , that your order , many years before , was prohibited writing or teaching any thing about this matter . some such temporary order is talked of in the time of claudius aquaviva , when the clamours were so great against the iesuits for asserting this doctrine . yet that prohibition extended no farther , then to teaching it to be lawfull for any person to kill princes under a pretence of tyranny . what is this but meer artifice and collusion ? it is not to be taught ; but they may think as they please : not lawfull for any person ; but it doth not deny it to be lawfull to persons authorized by the pope , after he hath deposed them . so that there never was any prohibition of teaching the pope's deposing power as to princes . but suppose there were , you very well know of how little force such an order is , when that general is dead , and another succeeds ; as appears by this very licence of mutius vittelescus . have a little pity upon us , gentlemen , and tell somewhat more probable untruths then this , that your order is forbidden to meddle with these points . so it seems indeed by the authour of the first treatise , who was under some very strict prohibition , without doubt , which made him , out of the crosseness of humane nature , so free to vent his opinion . but to give you a little more satisfaction about this book of sanctarellus : it was not onely approved by the general of the iesuits , but by alexander victricius and vincentius candidus , and printed by order of the master of the pope's palace . call you this the condemning of it at rome ? but for all this , the authour of the third treatise quotes spondanus for it . the plain truth of the story is this : sanctarellus his book coming to paris , met with so ill reception there , that it was condemned by the sorbon , burnt by order of the parliament , and the iesuits hard put to it upon very strict examinations , wherein they shuffled and shewed all the tricks they had : but these would not serve their turn , they are commanded to disown and confute this doctrine . pierre coton , upon whom the main business lay , being too hard set , made a shift to escape the difficulty of his province by dying . notwithstanding this , the doctours of sorbon would not let the business die with him , but renewed it the beginning of the next year : upon which the king sent the bishop of nantes to them , to let them know they had done enough in that matter , the book being condemned , and the pope having forbidden the sale of the book at rome . a very wonderfull condemnation of it , that a book should be forbidden to be sold , and at rome too , and that so long after the publishing of it , and when all that had a mind to it were provided already ; without any censure upon the authour or doctrine ! who dares talk of the severity of the court of rome ? could any thing be done with greater deliberation , and more in the spirit of meekness , and to less purpose , then this was ? but after all , this doth not to me look any ways like the condemning of it at rome , before it was burnt at paris ; and i suppose upon second thoughts you will be of my mind . but you will tell me , you did not expect to hear of these things in print . that may be , for we live in an age wherein many things come to pass we little thought of . for i dare say , you never thought these papers would have come into my hands : but since they did so , i could not envy the publick the benefit i receiv'd by reading of them ; hoping that they will contribute much to the satisfaction of others , at least in this one point , that you hold the very same principles about the pope's power of deposing princes , and absolving subjects from their allegeance , that ever you did . and therefore i conclude , it would be great weakness to recede from our legal tests against the men of such principles , for any new devices whatsoever . feb. 13. 1676 / 7 ▪ the jesuits loyalty . the first treatise against the oath of allegeance . the conclusion to be proved . it is not lawfull to take any oath or protestation , renouncing the pope's power , in any case whatsoever to depose a christian prince , or absolve his subjects from their allegeance . the proof . my reason is , because the opinion that the pope hath no such power is erroneous in faith , temerarious , and impious . which i prove thus . that opinion which must suppose that the church hath at some time been in a damnable errour of belief , and sin of practice , is erroneous in faith , temerarious , and impious . but this opinion is such . ergo. the major , i suppose , will not be denied by any catholick : because that were to suppose that the church hath at some time ceased to be a catholick and holy church : which were heresy to suppose possible . the minor is proved . if the church at some time hath believed , and supposed as certain , that the pope hath such a power in some case , and upon that belief and supposall hath exercised it in her supremest tribunals ; and if her errour ( supposing she erred in it ) was a damnable errour , and her practice ( if unlawfull ) a mortal sin : then this opinion must suppose , that the church hath , &c. but the church hath at some time so believed and practised , and ( if amiss ) it was a damnable errour and practice . ergo. the sequele of the major is evident in terminis . the second part of the minor is likewise evident : because it was a doctrine enormously injurious to the right of princes , ( to withstand which is a damnable sin , rom. 13. ) and cause of much deadly feud betwixt the church and secular states , of many bloudy wars of princes one against another , and wicked rebellions of subjects against their princes . for the first part of the minor , if i shew , 1. that popes have taught it as sound doctrine , proving it from scripture , and tradition ; and condemned the contrary , as erroneous in faith , pernicious to salvation , wicked folly and madness , and inflicted censures on them that held it : 2. that popes have , in the highest tribunals of the church , deposed sovereign princes , and absolved subjects from their allegeance ; and this with the advice and assent of their councils , and not onely patriarchal , but sometimes even general : 3. that popes , and general councils by them confirmed , have denounced excommunication to such as should obey their princes after such sentence of deposition , and absolution of their subjects from their allegeance : 4. that a general council , confirmed by the pope , hath made a canon-law , regulating the manner of deposing princes in some case , and absolving their subjects from their allegeance : 5. that all catholick divines and casuists that have treated of it , from the first to the last , ( afore calvin's time ) in all the severall nations of christendom , have asserted this power of the pope , without so much as one contradicting it in all that time : 6. that all catholick emperours , kings , ( yea even they that were deposed , ) states , magistrates , and lawyers , and finally all the catholicks in the world for the time being , have ( by tacit consent at least ) approved and received this doctrine of popes , divines , and casuists , and these censures , canons , and practices of popes and general councils : i say , if i shew all this , i hope it will be granted a sufficient proof , that the church hath at some time so believed , taught , and practised . now to shew this , among a multitude of instances , i shall name some few of the principal . as , 1. in anno 1074. s. gregory vii . ( a most holy and learned pope , who , for his sanctity and miracles was canonized for a saint b , ) threatned philip the french king , that unless he abstained from his simoniacall selling of bishopricks , he would excommunicate him , and all his subjects that should obey him as king ; which he counted none would , after such sentence , but apostates from christianity c . and that king hereupon submitted to the pope , and amended his fault d . 2. in anno 1076. the same holy pope , in a patriarchal council of rome , wherein were present 110 bishops , with the advice , and upon the importunity , of the whole synod , deposed henry iv. king of the germans , and absolved his subjects from their oath of allegeance to him b . and did it ex cathedra , as vicar of christ , and successour of s. peter , in virtue of the power of binding which christ gave to him in s. peter c . and this sentence he published in a breve , to all the princes , prelates , and people of the empire a . and it was published by his legates in several nations of christendom b ; and confirmed afterward in divers national councils c . and after his death , was confirmed by the three popes that succeeded him , during that king's life d . and the catholick subjects of that king obeyed it ; and such as denied the pope's jurisdiction to depose the king , were by the catholicks called hereticks and schismaticks , and had the name of henriciani * . yea , even the king himself , in his letter to the pope , wherein he complained of the sentence , denied not the pope's jurisdiction to depose him if he had been an heretick ; but pleaded he was no heretick , in which case alone the tradition of holy fathers ( as he said ) allowed the deposition of kings by the pope f . nay , and even that cardinal villain , beno , ( ring-leader of the schismaticks ) in that libell against the pope , wherein he raked together all the matters he could to make him odious , and particularly accused his deposing the king , yet accused it not for being done without jurisdiction , but onely that he did it contra ordinem juris g . finally , in a diet of the empire , called on purpose to decide , by the canons of the church , which had the juster cause , the pope or the king , where met the wisest of the princes and prelates of the german nation , of both parties , the archbishop of saltzburg ( prolocutor of the pope's party ) alledged , and shewed by the canons , that the deposition was just . to which was answered by the archbishop of mentz , ( prolocutor of the king's party ) that the pope and princes had done the king injury , in that he being at rome , performing his penance injoyn'd him by the pope , they had set up another king ( rodulph ) against him . and he added , that by the canons , the king being spoliatus , could not be condemned , or cited , till he were restored to possession h . so here was no plea then against the pope's jurisdiction , no not by the king 's own advocates . 3. the same holy pope did not onely believe , and suppose this doctrine to be most certainly true and sound , ( as he shewed by his practice of it ; ) but did formally teach it to the church , by canons published in a patriarchal council at rome a , and to the german prelates that consulted him of it , and prove it to them from scripture and tradition b ; and by s. peter's authority , exhorted and required all subjects of the empire , to obey and execute the sentence , by resisting the deposed king : putting them in mind , that it is a sin as bad as idolatry , to disobey s. peter's see c : and termed it no less then wicked and damnable folly and madness , to deny that power to be in the pope . 4. in anno 1215. the council of lateran ( an undoubted general council , and the greatest for number of prelates that ever was ) settled a rule to be observed in the deposing of princes , and absolving their subjects from their allegeance , in case they be negligent in purging their land from hereticks a . and the canon was made in the presence , and with the consent of both the emperours , ( greek and roman ) and the greatest part of the kings and princes of christendome , and of the embassadours of the rest . answ. 1. those that goe under the name of the canons of this council , were not decreed by the council , but onely published for canons of it by gregory ix . repl. it is against reason to imagine , that holy and learned pope would commit so gross a forgery , and in matters of that high concern , and at a time so soon after the council , as the greatest part of the prelates that assisted at it were living , to confute it , and protest against it ; the decretals of that pope being published within twelve years after that council . answ. 2. all historians of those times testify , no canons were made in that council , except one or two about the recovery of the holy land , and the subjection of the greek church to the roman . repl. not one historian testifies any such negative . answ. 3. this decree was not found among the other acts of the council for 300 years . repl. it was always among the other canons in the decretals of gregory ix . published within twelve years after the council : and in the first copy that was printed of the canons of that council , this was one ; and cochleus , that sent the copy of it to the printer , said , it had been long agoe written out of an ancient book . answ. 4. this canon names not sovereign princes , but lords onely . repl. it names lords , qui non habent dominos principales , which can be none but sovereign princes . 5. in anno 1245. pope innocent iv. in a general council at lyons , by a formal definitive sentence , published in the council , and approved by all the prelates , deposed the emperour frederick ii d. and absolved all his subjects from their oath of allegeance : and not onely that , but by his apostolick authority , inhibited them to obey him as emperour or king , and not to advise or aid him as such , under pain of excommunicatio latae sententiae . and he grounded his authority for it upon that text , quodcunque solveris , &c . and it was afterward inserted into the canons of the church . and it was not given precipitately , or in passion , but upon consult first had with divers of the most able divines , that were at the council , and after mature debate in divers consistories , in which some of the cardinals pleaded as advocates for the emperour , and others answered them ; insomuch as the pope could not remember that ever any cause was discussed with more exactness and longer deliberation . and they proceeded to the sentence with much unwillingness , and forced by necessity , ( because they saw no other way , without offending god , the church , and their own consciences , ) and condoling his misery that was sentenced . all which the pope himself wrote in a letter to the cistertian abbots here in england b . and when the pope objected in council to the emperour the crimes for which he proceeded against him ; the emperour's advocate ( a wise and eloquent man , doctour of both laws , and judge in the emperour's court ) pleaded to it , ( not that the pope had no jurisdiction to depose the emperour , but , which acknowledged the jurisdiction ) that the emperour was not guilty of the crimes objected , and namely , not of heresie : and prayed respite for the emperour , to make his defence in person . and the embassadours of the kings of france and england seconded his petition , ( which also was an acknowledging by them of the pope's jurisdiction to depose the emperour : ) and thereupon two weeks respite was granted . and when the emperour heard of it , he refused to appear , ( not because they had no jurisdiction in the cause , but ) because they appeared to be his adversaries c . and upon that and other pretexts , appeal'd from that , to the next more general council d . and this sentence was ( as i said ) published with approbation of all the prelates present in the council , ( which were to the number of 140 archbishops and bishops . ) and in token of their concurring thereunto , after it was pronounced , all the prelates lighting their tapers , held them downward , and so put them out , and threw them on the ground . and every one of them set his hand to the bull of the sentence * . and there were present at it , the other emperour ( of constantinople , ) the embassadours of france and england , and of most other christian states : and not one of them , no not the emperour 's own advocate , opened his mouth against the jurisdiction of the court ; onely he put in his appeal from it , to the next more general council ; which is an acknowledging the jurisdiction . yea , and the emperour himself , when the sentence was reported to him , though he slighted it as unjust and frivolous f , yet he never excepted to it as given à non iudice . and the king of england , and the french king ( lewis ix . afterwards canonized for a saint , ) and their nobles , justified the sentence g ; and the french king took upon him the protecting of the pope's cause against the emperour h . 6. in the same general council of lyons was made a canon i , that whatever prince should cause any christian to be murthered by an assasin , he should ipso facto incurre the sentence of excommunication , and deposition . 7. in anno 1606. pope paul v. by a breve written to the english catholicks , declared , and taught them as pastor of their souls , that the oath of allegeance establish'd by parliament 3. iac. salvâ fide catholicâ , & salute animarum suarum , praestari non potest , cùm multa contineat quae fidei ac saluti apertè adversantur . now there are not in it multa to which this censure is possibly applicable , unless this be one , that the pope hath no power to depose the king , or absolve his subjects from their oath of allegeance . therefore this proposition was condemned by that pope , as contra fidem & salutem animae . 8. in anno 1648. pope innocent x. censured the subscribers negatively to these propositions . 1. the pope , or church , hath power to absolve any persons from their obedience to the civil government established , or to be established , in this nation , in civil affairs . 2. by the command or dispensation of the pope , or church , it is lawfull to kill , or doe any injury to , persons condemned or excommunicated for heresy or schism . 3. it is lawfull , by dispensation at least from the pope , to break promise or oath made to hereticks , to have done unlawfully , and incurred the censures contained in the holy canons and apostolick constitutions , contra negantes pontificiam authoritatem in causis fidei . now there is none of these propositions to which this censure can reasonably be fastened , but the first onely ; therefore that was thus censured . 9. this very last year , the now pope , being consulted touching the lawfulness of taking the late irish protestation , in which is renounced this power of the pope , declared , that , instar repullulantis hydrae , it did contain , propositiones convenientes cum aliis à sede apostolica olim reprobatis , signanter à fel. mem . paulo v. per constitutionem in forma brevis , & nuper anno 1648. in congregatione specialiter commissa ab innocentio x. &c. se graviter indoluisse , quòd per exemplum ecclesiasticorum , tracti sint in eundem errorem nobiles seculares ejusdem regni hiberniae ; quorum protestationem ac subscriptiones pariter reprobat ; idque ad eximendas catholicorum conscientias à dolo & errore quo circumveniuntur . 10. that this hath been the common received doctrine of all school-divines , casuists , and canonists , from first to last , ( afore calvin's time ) in all the several nations of christendome , yea even in france it self , yea even of those french divines that were most eager for their temporal princes against the pope , ( as occam , almain , ioann . parisiens . gerson , &c. ) you may see abundantly proved by that admirable man cardinal peron , in his oration made in the name of all the bishops of france to the third estate of parliament . and it is convinced by this , that neither barclay , nor widdrington , nor caron , nor any other champion for the contrary tenet , hath been yet able to produce so much as one catholick authour , ( afore calvin's time ) that denied this power to the pope absolutely , ( or in any case whatsoever : ) as will appear by examining their quotations . to conclude then . this having been for some ages ( one , at least ) the common belief , sense and doctrine of the church , according to which she hath frequently and avowedly practised and proceeded in her highest courts , and inflicted her highest censures upon the opponents of it : if it be an errour , the church was at that time a wicked and blind church , a synagogue of satan ; the pillar and ground of truth , and with it the whole fabrick of faith and religion , shook and tottered . if it were no errour , they that now call it an errour , are wicked catholicks , and in damnable errour . nor , though all the doctours of sorbon , all the parliaments and vniversities of france , all the fryars or blackloists in england or ireland , all the libertines , politicians and atheists in the world , should declare for it , could it ever be an authority to make it a probable opinion . the second treatise against the oath of allegeance . some few questions concerning the oath of allegeance , which have now been publick for divers years , reduced to one principall question , concerning the substance of the said oath . chap. i. the occasion and state of the present question . in the year 1661. was published a small treatise under this title , [ some few questions concerning the oath of allegeance , which were proposed by a catholick gentleman in a letter to a person of learning and honour . ] a late officious hand hath now in the year 1674. * thought it seasonable to re-publish this short and judicious treatise , for the satisfaction of such as are at present either concerned , or curious . the authour 's professed design in these questions concerning the oath was , to propose his sense by way of quaere's ; wherein he hopes not to be accused of presumption , whilst he onely seeks what he professeth not to know : and yet is so knowing , that though he could heartily wish for a more condescending form of oath , he † sticks not to affirm , and he is positive in it , that if the manner of expression were a little changed , every syllable of the substance might be intirely retained . now if you ask him what he means by the substance of the oath , he expresly tells you , that * the substance of the oath is , the denying and abjuring the pope's power to depose princes . for my part , 't is as far from my thoughts , as forrein to my present purpose , to speak any thing in favour of this deposing power : nor shall i at all play the criticall interpreter of the oath , nor concern my self with raising any artificiall and learned obscurities , such as the publisher hints at , about any inconvenient phrase , nor boggle at the form and dress ; but closely apply my reason to the substance of the oath , taking for the measure of its notion the rule and standard the authour of the questions hath already given us , saying that the substance of the oath is the denying and abjuring the pope's power to depose princes . here then lies the grand case , here is the principal question , whether a catholick may ( i do not say barely deny , but ) deny by oath , and universally abjure , the pope's power to depose princes . concerning which question , first , as i meet with nothing either in the authour or publisher of the questions which in my judgement does in the least evince the affirmative : so , secondly , i think enough is said by both to conclude manifestly for the negative , to wit , that no catholick can safely admit of and take the substance of the oath , even as the case is understood , and stated in the authour 's own terms . this i shall endeavour with all possible clearness and brevity to make out in the first place ; and afterwards set down and answer the grounds the authour of the questions proceeds on , which are principally three . 1. the censure of many famous french universities , denying , rejecting and condemning the doctrine of the pope's deposing power , as new , false , erroneous , contrary to the word of god , pernicious , seditious , and detestable . 2. the subscription of the french iesuits to two of the most remarkable of these censures . 3. the practice of the clergy , the religious and the wiser sort of the laiety in other countries , when the pope makes war , or any other way contends with their sovereign princes or states . all which being put together , to the end it may appear how far the argument even in its full and united strength is from reaching our case , let it be once more remembred , that the state of our question is not , whether a catholick may deny , reject , censure and condemn the pope's power to depose princes , ( which yet is the utmost that can be proved by warrant of these forrein precedents ; ) but , whether he may safely deny , reject , censure , and condemn by his oath , and universally abjure , this deposing doctrine : this is that which the authour of the questions affirms ; that which he calls the very substance of the oath ; and that for which i am sure no french university , quoted by him , no subscription of the iesuits , no practice of the clergy , the religious and the wiser sort of the laiety in other countries , afford us so much as any single instance . chap. ii. why it cannot be safe either to swear to the deposing doctrine as true , or to abjure it as false . since it is but even more undeniably evident then all good men have cause to wish , and that experience , the easiest and clearest of arguments , puts it but too sadly beyond dispute , that this grand controversy , ( whether the pope hath any power and authority to depose princes for any cause pretence , or exigency whatsoever , ) hath been for divers ages from time to time disputed in the schools by speculative men in their subtile and notionall way of reasoning : and what * trithemius recorded to posterity above 500 years agoe , ( that scholastici certant , & adhuc sub iudice lis est , utrùm papa posset imperatorem deponere , ) may , for ought we know , 500 years hence be as much a question , and as far from ending , as now it is ; whereas even in our days the controversy finds but too many stirr champions and abettors to maintain the quarrell , and keep life in the debate by their warm and smart contests ▪ no clear and authoritative decision of the point yet appearing to which both sides think themselves obliged to stand and acquiesce : since likewise , when a point is thus in dispute amongst catholick princes , ( some of them peremptorily denying and hotly opposing what others as positively assert and vigorously maintain , and this openly , avowedly , and in the face of the world , ) no one can determinately swear to either side of the point in dispute as true , nor warrantably abjure the other as false ; for this were to swear a thing as true , or to abjure it as false , which is confessedly in dispute whether it be so or no , which is never lawfull : from hence i conceive , that for the deciding of our question , ( whether a catholick may lawfully abjure the pope's deposing power and authority , ) there needs no more then barely to suppose , that it is a question whether the pope hath any such power and authority or no. for here one question resolves the other : grant this second to be a question , the first will be none . for if it be a question whether the pope hath any such power and authority or no , no man can safely swear , that without all question he hath none ; i say , without all question , because what we swear as true ought to be unquestionably such , otherwise we fall under the guilt and sacrilege of perjury . for a more full evidence and farther clearing of this so important a truth , ( namely , that the swearing or abjuring a controverted doctrinall point unavoidably draws upon us the execrable guilt of perjury , ) let us consider the difference of oaths in generall , and the different parts of the oath of allegeance in particular . of oaths some are assertory , others promissory . an assertory oath is , when we positively say such or such a thing is true or false , and then bind this saying of ours with an oath : a promissory oath is that whereby we engage to doe what we promise , or to leave undone what we promise not to doe , and thereupon give our oath as a bond of performance . the oath of allegeance is a mixt oath , partly assertory , ( as where it is affirmed that the pope hath not any power or authority to depose the king , or to authorize any forrein prince to invade or annoy him or his countries , or to discharge any of his subjects from their allegeance , &c. ) partly promissory , ( as namely , where the swearer engages that , notwithstanding any declaration , or sentence of excommunication , or deprivation , made or to be made against the king , his heirs or successours , he will bear faith and true allegeance to them , he will defend them to the utmost of his power against all conspiracies or attempts whatsoever . ) that which here principally falls under consideration is the nature of an assertory oath : in which oath it is essentially requisite , that what we do swear be undoubtedly and unquestionably true ; and all little enough for the securing us against god's and truth 's sworn enemy , perjury , which abominable sin is defined by the * schools to be a lie confirmed by oath : and to lie , saith † st. austin , is to speak against that which a man thinks in his mind or conscience , or , as we usually express it , when a man speaks not as he thinks ; viz. when there lies a secret check and contradiction in the breast to what is uttered by the mouth . put these two together , and the case stands thus : to speak contrary to what a man thinks in his conscience , is , according to true morals , the definition of a lie ▪ and , to swear contrary to the inward dictates of his conscience , is that wherein consists the formall notion and malice of perjury . now this swearing contrary to what a man thinks in his conscience may happen two ways : not onely when he is conscious to himself , and knows that what he swears is not true ; but also when he knows not , and therefore doubts , or hath just cause to doubt , whether it be true or no : in which case if he chance to swear , it is at the perill of his soul , and contrary to the secret information of his conscience , which must needs check at the act , and inwardly protest against it . for it is a folly beyond dotage , and carries with it the prejudice of the highest self-condemnation imaginable , for a man to say , i will swear such a thing is true , and yet i know not , i doubt , or have just cause to doubt , whether it be so or no. chap. iii. an objection answered ; with a farther display of the former evidence . if any one shall here pretend , that he for his part is so far from doubting , that he is already fully perswaded , and thinks verily in his conscience , the pope hath not any power or authority to depose kings ; and why then may not he safely swear as he thinks , because no more is required of him then onely to swear according to the best of his knowledge ? let him who pretends this please to remember , that neither is less required of him then to swear according to a true knowledge ; that is , that he be sure or certain , and have no just cause to doubt of the truth of what he swears . let knowledge then signify knowledge ; let it not be a meer term , or the abuse of a term : let not , i think , but , i know ; not , i am perswaded , but , i am certain , be the ground of his oath , and he is secure . but if his knowledge signify no more then his uncertain perswasion and judgment that the thing is so or so , then the best of his knowledge is to him no better then ignorance ; and to swear according to the best of his knowledge , will be the same as to swear according to the best of his no-knowledge : and it is this want of knowledge will arraign , convict and condemn him at the bar of his own heart for a forsworn man. thus if a witness in any publick court of justice should offer to swear a thing as true , and yet , being ask'd if he were sure of it , should answer , no ; though we should suppose that he verily thinks it true , yet if he be not certain of it , 't is manifest it may be as well false , as true , for any thing he knows ; for thinking is one thing , and knowing another . and therefore if upon no better ground then his thinking it to be true , he should offer to swear it is so , no honest man would stick to say , this witness owes a forfeiture to the pillory , and satisfaction to god and man for so foul a scandal , in offering to swear a thing to be true , which he knows not whether it be so or no. true it is , where an oath is tendered requiring no more but onely to swear a man's perswasion and judgment , ( not absolutely what is or is not true , but onely what he thinks is or is not true , ) there indeed a man may swear according to true knowledge , in regard the familiar converse and intimacy with his own thoughts may give him a sufficient assurance and certainty of the truth of what he is to swear ; because in this supposition he is to swear no more then what he thinks : but if any one should goe about to transfer this qualifying gloss and milder exposition to the oath of allegeance , as an expedient to prevent the sad danger and heavy charge of perjury , in abjuring the controverted doctrine of the deposing power , as if no such abjuring was intended by the oath ; ( which yet the authour of the questions terms the very substance of the oath ; ) let him who either makes or values this gloss but cast an eye upon the first , the middle and the last branches of the oath , and he will plainly perceive , this is onely an exchange of one perjury for another : it alters indeed the mode , but shuns not the guilt ; and by striving to weather out one rock , splits upon another . for first , in the beginning of the oath the swearer solemnly calls god and the world to witness the truth of what he is about to acknowledge , profess , testify , and declare in his conscience ; and then , having uttered all he has to say , ( and particularly , in one of the middle clauses , having not onely abjur'd the pope's deposing power , but also abjur'd it as hereticall , ) in the end concludes thus , [ and all these things i do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear according to these express words by me spoken , and according to the plain and common sense and understanding of the same words , without any equivocation or mental evasion or secret reservation whatsoever . ] by which last clause he again ratifies and binds afresh all his former asseverations and already-sworn engagements , by a repeated and reflex oath looking universally back upon the premisses : and all these things ( says he ) i do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear . now amongst all these things which he doth thus plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear , the chief and principal of all others was , that the pope hath not any such power and authority as we speak of . and he farther adds , that he swears this according to the express words by him spoken , without any equivocation , mental evasion , or secret reservation ; that is , without any farther gloss or comment upon his own thoughts or words whatsoever . whereas on the contrary , if we should suppose , that , whilst he expresly abjures the deposing doctrine , and absolutely swears that the pope has not any such power and authority , he yet reserves in his mind a mental evasion and secret meaning of his words , ( viz. that he onely thinks and is perswaded he hath no such power and authority ; ) then directly he forswears himself in swearing otherways then what he professes to swear , that is , in swearing not according to his express words , but according to an unexprest meaning of his words , which thing he utterly disavowed and renounced by his oath . and is not this a remedy as bad as the disease , and a rare expedient to prevent the danger of perjury , to make a man forswear himself for fear of being forsworn ? let us make the best hand of it we can ; here is onely choice of perjuries for the comfort and relief of the swearer , whether he do or do not abjure the deposing power . for if he pretend not to abjure it , this is contrary to his express words , according to which he professeth to swear , and by which he doth expresly swear that the pope hath not any deposing power ; and so he is perjur'd , by pretending to swear one thing , and actually swearing another ; which is as much as to swear two oaths in one , the one directly cross and contradictory to the other . but if he do abjure , ( as absolutely he doth , if he takes the oath , ) this same abjuring is the very charge of perjury which is now under my pen , and , as i conceive , inevitable , by reason that the necessary knowledge , certainty and assurance of the truth of what he swears , or of the falsehood of what he abjures , ( without which every such assertory oath necessarily ends in perjury , ) is not to be had nor expected , whilst this speculative point remains under dispute ; a dispute ( as experience too clearly testifies ) not yet effectually determined by any publick , nor , i am sure , determinable by any private authority , as shall appear yet more fully in the next chapter . chap. iv. a continuation of the former discourse , shewing the manifest unlawfulness , as of swearing , so of abjuring the deposing power . a duty we owe to the pope , ( saith the * authour of the questions , ) a duty to the king ; both commanded by god , both obliging under sin , yet both confined to their proper limits : too much of the temporal may be ascribed to popes , too much of the spiritual to kings , too much may be challenged by both . all which is most true ; but the difficulty is , when these two supreme powers contest ( as actually they do ) concerning power in temporalls , who shall then be judge ? the pope claims a deposing power , the king denies it : if the pope be judge , the deposing power will carry it ; if the king , it will be cast . if we consult or appeal to the authority of the learned , and bring the cause to their bar , there is nothing but noise , censures , and loud disagreements . bellarmin and suarez write for the deposing power , and are condemned at paris : barkly and withrington appear against it , and are condemned at rome : the censurers all this while on both sides professing a previous , mature and impartial examination of the books and doctrines they condemn . caron , the laborious defender of the first remonstrance , in his loyalty asserted what betwixt canonists and divines , schoolmen and fathers , popes , councils , universities and kingdomes , is said to have made a catalogue of more then 250 opposers of the deposing doctrine . on the contrary , what number of favourers and abettors there are for it , may appear by this , that even the authour of the 8 th controversial letter tells us , ( pag. 5. ) that the face of authority is on that side ; and again , ( pag. 7. ) that of learned men , those who write of this subject , write generally in favour of it : as likewise the authour of the questions , in his preface , acknowledgeth the maintainers of the deposing power to be the more numerous party , and that he himself sides with the few against the many ; and withall granteth , ( pag. 24. ) that this act of deposing kings hath not onely been done by popes , but approved by councils . if we step over into france , there we are strangely surprized with instances on both sides . behold in the year 1626. eight universities of that realm declare smartly against the deposing power : and yet but a few years before , viz. in the year 1614. in the general assembly of the three estates , ( in which were present 5 cardinals , 7 archbishops , and 47 bishops , besides many other learned ecclesiasticks and dignitaries of the gallican church , ) two parts of three of this great representative of that kingdome were of another mind , and so far from hearkening to or countenancing the hot proposalls that were made against the deposing doctrine , that they left it in possession , as they found it , of whatsoever right or title it could pretend to . what now shall the private christian and loyal subject doe , who passionately desireth to share himself in all humble duty between god and caesar ? what , i say , shall he doe in this unfortunate competition of the two grand powers ? shall he by his single sufficiency dare to assume to himself the right of judicature , and boldly swear either for or against the deposing power , and to pass a decisive sentence under oath , that the pope hath , or hath not , the power in contest ? were i worthy to offer my advice in this particular , i should conceive it much more pertinent and proper for him seriously to consider with himself , whether an act of this nature be not the same , or rather indeed much worse then if a stander by , upon hearing an assembly of grave divines or counsellours learned in the law , all of them much above his size and abilities in their respective professions , warmly debating a perplext law-case , or sturdy knot in divinity , should by a rash and unlicensed confidence take upon him the umpirage of the cause , and without any more adoe bluntly swear these men are in the right , and the other in the wrong , or the others are in the right , and these in the wrong : and whether he proceed not upon as meer a blind peradventure , whatever part of the contradiction he swears in this last case , and that it be not as slippery a piece of pure contingency in him , whether he hit or miss ; as if upon the sight of an handfull of guinnies , he should all at a venture swear odde or even for a wager ; since that he hath no true knowledge for his guidance , nor the least degree of certainty to steer by or fix him . chap. v. a farther confirmation of the premisses . all this which i have hitherto discoursed is no more then what is evidently deducible from and throughly grounded in the principles and concessions of those learned persons who utterly deny the pope hath any power to depose princes ; who yet neither do , nor can , make out a title and claim for their doctrine to any higher pretence or degree then that of opinion : and in this , i presume , i shall speak the sense of all , if i say , it is never lawfull , nor justifiably safe , to swear to an opinion as true , nor to abjure an opinion as false , ( speaking , as here i do , of such free and debatable tenets as are openly and avowedly held and taught by catholick divines , divided amongst themselves in their private sentiments and school-disputes , ) because no one of these opinions can sufficiently answer for its own truth , nor secure the officious swearer , who lends it his oath , that he goes christianly and groundedly to work , whether side soever of the opinion he makes choice of to be sworn or abjur'd . for it is not in opinions as in things which we know by clear and certain evidence , as it happens in those early and fair notions implanted in us by nature from the first glimmering of reason , called first principles , as , that every whole is greater then a part of the whole ; it is impossible for the same thing to be and not to be at the same time , &c. which great maxims of nature sufficiently speak for and evidence themselves , without the help of syllogisms , moods , or figure ; and are no sooner understood , then readily and necessarily assented unto . nor is it in opinions as in certain scientifical deductions and demonstrative conclusions , partly flowing connaturally by a train of immediate consequences , partly drawn and hammered out with much pains , study and speculations from the abovesaid principles : which deductions ▪ and conclusions are called sciences , whose chiefest property and richest piece of satisfaction , whereby they gratifie the understanding of man , is their clear and convincing evidence , placed beyond all contradiction from sense or reason . nor , lastly , is it in opinions as in those supernaturall truths made known unto us by divine revelation , and are of faith ▪ where there is absolute certainty , though without evidence : for faith wears a scarf before her eyes , and believes what she sees not . both which , to wit faith and science , as they justly command and challenge , so withall they fully secure our assent from all danger , and suspicion of errour , the one by its evidence , the other by its certainty ; the one interessing the light and patronage of the first principles , the other engaging a divine and infallible authority for the truth of their proposalls . but in opinions it fares quite otherwise : for an opinion having neither the evidence of science , nor the certainty of faith , nor indeed any other inferiour degree of certainty , physicall or morall , ( as the schools speak , ) but onely the slippery knot of probability to hold by , leaves the considering opiner in a state of suspence and indetermination , not daring , nor indeed knowing how , to yield any more then a faint and timorous assent to either side of the tenet , seeing that neither side is any more then onely probably true , or probably false . and because true , and onely probably true , false , and onely probably false , are not the same , but two very different things , and at so great a distance , that no art or law of consequence can ever bring them together , or convincingly argue from the one to the other ; hence it is , that what is onely probably true , is not therefore true , and what is onely probably false , is not therefore false : from whence it is finally and manifestly concluded , that neither side of an opinion is lawfully attestable by oath as simply true , nor safely abjurable as simply false . to come now to the particular tenet which denies the pope's deposing power in all cases , circumstances and emergencies whatsoever . if we address our selves to the maintainers and abettors of this tenet , if we consult the authour and publisher of the questions , if we propose the case to the sorbon doctours and the faculty of paris , we shall find all their answers concurring in this , that their negative tenet is no more then an opinion . for , first , the publisher of the questions coming to speak of the difference between the deniers and abettors of this power , and the nature and quality thereof , plainly professeth , that this difference is no difference of faith , but onely of opinions : and the authour of the questions calls it an opinion ; a safe opinion indeed , but no more or other thing then an opinion : an opinion also the sorbon doctours take it for ▪ nor is their own censure or doctrine any more then their opinion . neither do they , nor indeed could they with any shew of reason , or coherence to their own principles , discourse at any other rate , or ever intend to screw it up any higher then an opinion . for it is not to be imagined , that those grave , learned and prudent divines , who in their publick articles concerning papal and regal authority ( in the year 1663. ) do not own or look upon any censures , decrees or definitions of rome , ( antecedent to , and abstracting from , the joynt consent or acceptation of the church as inerrable , ) would ever goe about to set up an independent or infallible chair in the sorbon , and deliver their doctrine either as a point or article of faith in it self , or as a rule of faith to others , but onely as a rule of opinion , ( if you please ) and a judgment whereby such as were under their charge might remember to frame and regulate ( not their faith , but ) their opinions : which are the express words of the decree it self . since then the deniall of the pope's deposing power neither doth nor can pretend any higher then an opinion , admit that its being the opinion of so many learned divines might render it safe to hold and embrace it ; yet it s being but an opinion , though of learned divines , renders it unsafe to swear it , and no less unsafe to abjure what is contrary to it . the reason i have already given , because nothing can lawfully be sworn as true which is not more then meerly probable or probably true , that is , which is not either certain or infallible : now all the learned know , that a certain or infallible opinion is as great a bull as an uncertain fallible article of faith ; so that to swear to an opinion as certainly true , is as much as to swear an opinion is no opinion , and the swearer doth thereby at one breath intangle himself in his own words , his reason in a contradiction , and his soul in perjury . chap. vi. a particular danger of abjuring the pope's deposing power according to the form set down in the oath of allegeance . i shall here annex a particular consideration of the wofull snare those souls run themselves into , and apparent danger of swearing they know not what , who venture to abjure the deposing power as it lies expressed in its several branches in the oath of allegeance ; whereas those learned persons who undertook to defend and explain the oath render it not onely difficult , but next to impossible , to understand what it is that is to be abjured . i think i may take it for granted , that no person of integrity and candour can ever conceive it lawfull for him to swear , without first endeavouring to gain a right understanding of what he is to swear : for to swear what a man understands not , is blindly to rove at a venture , and to swear he knows not what , wilfully abandoning the conduct , and slighting the inward upbraidings and reproofs of his reason : and , which is worse , it bewraies a feared soul , a wretched and sinfull preparednesse of mind to prostitute an oath to the attesting of any thing that comes next to hand , where self-indemnity or other secular ends and advantages are proposed as the accursed purchace or reward of perjury . in the oath of allegeance it is required of us to abjure the pope's deposing power in all and every its respective branches therein expressed : one of which branches is , that the pope hath not any power to authorize any forrein prince to invade or annoy the king or his countries . which branch ( by the way ) the authour and publisher of the questions in the form of the oath set down by them have wholly omitted in both editions , as well that of the year 61. as the other of this present year 74. through what mistake or how occasioned i know not . it is not easily to be conceived what subtle obscurities and learned intricacies roger withrington , one of the greatest champions that ever appeared for the oath , and his friend c. i. ( who confesseth to have compiled his * book out of withrington's expresse grounds and doctrine , ) plunge themselves and their reader into , in descanting upon this one point of the oath . † they tell us , that by this clause is not denied the pope's authority to command ( but onely his power to authorize ) in temporals , in order to a spirituall good ; or , to declare that they who have authority to depose , or to make war , are bound to use their temporal authority , and to draw the temporal sword , when the necessity of the church and spiritual good of souls shall require the same : for that this authority to declare and command doth not exceed the limits of a spiritual power . thus these learned persons . let me here intreat the courteous reader to lend me his eyes and attention to help me out . for if temporal princes , as is here supposed , have power and authority to invade or annoy forrein princes or their countries , nay to depose them , when the good of souls and necessity of the church shall require it ; if the pope is to be judge of this necessity , and to declare when , against whom , and upon what occasion the temporal sword is to act its part by invading or annoying the delinquent prince his person or state ; if , i say , the pope hath power ( though not to authorize , yet ) to declare , and not onely to declare , but to command the doing of all this , as being in the line of spirituality , and within the vierge of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction : truly my opinion is , ( and i think every sober and disinteressed judgment will upon due reflexion subscribe to the same , ) that this doctrine , as it contributes little to the security of princes , and as little to the satisfaction of intelligent readers ; so it is not every one can easily understand , or be able to reconcile it to truth and its self : for , if i mistake not , it foully clashes with both . for , ( since we are here treating of the legality or illegality of an oath , and what we may or may not safely swear or abjure , ) what can seemingly have more of the riddle , or less to the purpose in it , then to be gravely told for our instruction , and the quieting of our consciences , that we may lawfully abjure the pope's power of authorizing , but not in any wise abjure his power of commanding a forrein prince to invade or annoy his majesty or his kingdoms ? again , that we may safely swear the pope hath no power to depose princes , but that we must not abjure his power of commanding others to depose them ? alas ! and is not this a much mistaken favour , a mere mock-pretence of security to crowned heads , and of ease and relief to troubled consciences , wholly built upon this nice and ambiguous distinction , of authorizing , and commanding ? a distinction in this case so subtile , that it is impossible to find where the difference lies , and is therefore in very deed no distinction at all ; either in respect of the king , to whom it is all one , ( and his perill or ruine undistinguishably the same , ) whether he be invaded and deposed by the pope's authority , or onely by his command . neither is it any distinction in respect of the swearer , who cannot securely , nor without a self-contradiction , ( from which this distinction can never clear him , ) swear that the pope hath not any power and authority to depose princes , if he have power and authority to command others to depose them : because this authoritative injunction of his is enough to intitle him to the fact ; and his very commanding others to depose , both makes and denominates him the deposer . besides all this , if it be true what these authours assume , that temporall princes have ( when the good of souls and the necessity of the church requires it ) power to depose one another , how can any man , being of this opinion , lawfully swear the pope hath not any such power , who , as we all know , is a mixt person , and as well a temporal prince as a spiritual pastour ? and therefore it would argue great partiality in this doctrine , wholly to exclude him , at least as he is a temporal prince , from his share in the deposing power : from whence it would finally follow , that the oath could not be taken without a distinction of different formalities in the same person , that is , without distinguishing the pope as pope from himself as he is a temporal prince ; and then also the two formalities being at odds , the temporal prince would be the more powerfull pope of the two . these and the like entangled positions i take to be clearly consequential , and absolutely necessary inferences from the aforesaid dark and perplexed discourse of these authours . now the use and advantage the reader may please to make hereof is this sober and wholesome reflexion , that since withrington , who bestowed much pains , and since large and learned comments , upon the oath , since he , i say , whilst he pretends to explain one of the branches of that very point wherein the substance of the oath consists , ( according to the authour of the questions , ) leads us into such a labyrinth of thorny and insignificant distinctions , cross and thwarting niceties of words , as that a more then ordinary clue of reason and attention is necessary to wind us out ; what consciencious and considerate person of less leisure , industry , learning , and other abilities , then withrington was , seriously pondering this oath , shall hope he understands what he is to abjure , or dare to abjure what he understands not ? chap. vii . the just plea of conscience in refusing to abjure the deposing doctrine consider'd with the like reference to the depositions of popes as of kings . i am much taken with the seasonable advice and wholesome caution i find in the fourth of the controversial letters , which i shall elsewhere have occasion to quote more at large : princes and bishops , saith this gentleman , ( pag. 8. ) are both sacred ; let what belongs to them be so too , and not touched without the excuse of necessity , or obligation of duty . it was under the warrant of this apology to my own thoughts , and the confidence of my reader 's candour , that i first engaged in this discourse ; and that now , for his farther satisfaction , ( to shew that there is nothing of any popishly-affected partiality in the refusing this abjuring oath , but that our recusancy is wholly grounded upon sound reason and upright conscience , ) i shall compare the unlawfulness of abjuring the pope's deposing power , with the like unlawfulness of abjuring the power of deposing popes ; both these powers· being alike controvertible amongst some of the learned , whereof divers do freely and openly teach that popes may be deposed as well as kings , and for the like cause . for which end i shall here advance and confront in their severall instances two propositions of a more large and comprehensive nature in relation to the deposing power : as first , that there is absolutely no power or authority upon earth , either spiritual or temporal , to depose kings , let the cause or pretence be what it will ; secondly , that there is absolutely no such power or authority upon earth , spiritual or temporal , to depose the pope . the first of these propositions is that which in the year of our lord 1614. the house of commons in france , in the general assembly of the three estates , would have been at , and offered not onely to own and swear to it themselves , as a fundamental and holy law , but also passionately endeavoured that others should be compelled by rigorous penalties to doe the like . but the project was stifled in the birth , and the abortive bill laid aside by the lords spiritual and temporal , who , well weighing the controverted nature of the case , were more considerate , and tender of their oaths , then to venture them upon a foundation which , take whether side they pleased , must needs fail , and betray the swearer to an active sin and shame . but what shall we say to the second proposition ? may we not strain a little farther for the pope then the king ? will not religion bear us out , if we adventure to swear , that there is not any power upon earth , spiritual or temporal , to depose the pope ? to which i answer , it is neither religion , veneration , duty , or awe to the see of rome , which ought either to perswade or extort , any more then it can legitimate , such an oath ; which it can never do , in regard of the publick and unreproved disputableness of the case . for whether we consider matter of fact or right , it is no news amongst catholick divines , that if the pope should become an heretick , ( and they grant the [ if ] to be no impossible supposition , ) he then forfeits his right to the apostolical chair , and thereupon may lawfully be judged and deposed by the spiritual power of the church . and this is a doctrine which hath been long publick to the world ; a doctrine pretending a canonical constitution and a conciliary act for its ground and support ; a doctrine not unknown to italy , yet uncensured at rome , nay , held and taught by some who lived and wrote even at the pope's feet . where , by the way , our impartiall school-men seem at least to clear themselves from all sinister prejudices of favour and flattery , and the stale imputation of framing and modelling their doctrines to the humour and interest of the court of rome ; whereas we here see that some of them , and those of eminent note , make as bold with the common father of the church , the pope himself , and even run him down with their speculations as confidently , and with as much show of zeal , as at other times they set themselves to unthrone the meanest prince in christendome , upon the same pretence . and though his holiness knows that popes sit not so fast , nor are so firmly rivetted to their thrones , but that divers of them have been deposed ; and sees withall this particular deposing doctrine , threatning popes no less then princes , taught under his very eyes , and for the same cause , and that cause heresy , and that heresy hath even by catholicks been charged more then once against some of his predecessours : yet ( notwithstanding this concurrence and complicated pretence of fears and jealousies ) he never goes about to establish his rights , person and authority , by any such assertory oath as ours is ; but chuseth rather to trust providence with his concerns , then that the triple crown should owe any part of its security to an illegal and unnecessary oath , or his people be compell'd needlesly to swear away the peace of their conscience , for securing that of the common-wealth . but to draw the case yet to a nearer parallel , and to close more particularly with the oath of allegeance , wherein we are commanded to swear , that the pope neither of himself , nor by any authority of the church or see of rome , nor by any other means , with any other , hath any power or authority to depose the king ; ( and this to be understood as to comprehend all causes , cases or pretences possible . ) let us spell the oath backwards , and reade pope for king , and king for pope ; and then suppose we were injoyned to swear , that no king or prince , either of himself or by any authority of the church or see of rome , or by any other means , with any other , hath in any possible case any power or authority to depose the pope ; let us see what the schools and the publick and currently-allowed tenets of divinity will award as to the taking or refusing this oath . it is acknowledged on all hands , there are divers instances from history of depositions of popes by temporal princes , as well as of temporall princes by popes , which yet our divines seem to restrain to the common case of heresy : and therefore the otherwise-pious and godly emperour otho incurred at least the mild censure and reprehension of such pens as record the fact , for deposing pope iohn the xii . because ( though he was one of the worst of popes , yet ) by the crime of heresy he was wanting in the black list of his offences to fill up the measure of his crying misdemeanours , and justify the sentence and severity of his deposition ; though even taking the case as it was , not onely the pious emperour ( saith bellarmine ) conceived this pope might be deposed , but many doctours thought so as well as he . but however , nothing is more certain , then that it is a common and allowed opinion of divers divines , that in case of heresy the pope may be judged and deposed by the church . some of which carry it yet a step farther , adding [ ought ] to [ may , ] that is , that he not onely may , but ought to be deposed : and that this may and ought is not onely the churche's right , but her obligation , and she thereby bound to proceed to due execution thereof , to the utmost of her power : and if the pope , who is to be deposed , should chance to resist , oppose and stand in defiance of the churche's judgment , and she not in a condition to call his obstinacy to an account , and to turn him out of his chair by virtue of her spiritual arms alone , and yet her duty still supposed incumbent and pressing upon her , to discharge and free her self and her children from the thraldome of an usurper ; then these authours will tell us , that the law of nature , or that which is a law to it self , necessity , ( which even in causes ecclesiastical takes upon her to justify force , when nothing but force will serve , for the compassing a just and necessary end , ) will prompt the church , as is usual in some other cases , to have recourse to the temporal power , and call in the assistence of the secular arm to her succour . in which juncture , no doubt , any king , prince , or zealous otho , who would please to interest himself in and espouse the churche's quarrel , might both deserve and receive her commission and thanks , to act with authority , as a welcome auxiliary in the holy war , even to the deposing of the pope , and placing another in his throne , in order to the good of souls , and the just recovery of the ecclesiastical liberties and spiritual rights . here then being a case confessedly possible , and an opinion which authority renders probable , in which case , and according to which opinion , kings and princes have , at least by authority of the church , and with others , power and authority to depose the pope , i see no objection offer it self , but the way open and fairly smoothed to this resolution of the case , that no catholick can safely take this counter-oath , nor securely swear , that no king or prince , either of himself , or by any authority of the church or see of rome , or by any other means , with any other , hath ( in any possible case ) any power or authority to depose the pope . and therefore comparing the two oaths together , this and the oath of allegeance , i think that , as no man could rightly be accounted a bad catholick at rome , for denying to take this , so neither can he justly be reputed a bad subject in england , for refusing the other ; because this recusancy is equally blamable in either of the two cases , or absolutely unreprovable in both , the ground of both being one and the same , which indeed is neither favour nor fear of man , but rather a just fear of incurring god's disfavour , and the inviolable duty we owe to truth , and an upright conscience , which lays an indispensable tie of recusancy upon us , so far as never to take any assertory oath , requiring of us to swear or abjure any speculative controverted doctrines , though we suppose the oath to be as much in favour of the pope , as our oath of allegeance is conceived to be of the king. chap. viii . abjuring the deposing doctrine neither is , nor can be any part of the oath , as it is an oath of allegeance ▪ and therefore not at all necessary to a true oath of allegeance . more allegeance may be sworn , and better security given to princes , by abjuring all discourses and disputes in favour of the deposing doctrine , then by abjuring the doctrine it self . i have seen , and taken some pains to peruse , a * book of oaths , and the several terms thereof , ( above two hundred in all , ) both ancient and modern , forrein and domestick , out of sundry authentick books and records , wherein , amongst so many oaths of fealty , service and duty , as are mentioned there , ( which generally run in the promissory strain , ) i find not one that injoyns the swearing or abjuring of any controverted doctrine , save onely our two oaths of allegeance and supremacy ; which upon that account lie under the just exception ( as i think ) of being singular and without precedent in their kind : wherefore what the authour of the questions so expresly assumes , ( my self also , for his and the argument's sake , having been willing hitherto to goe along with him in his own supposition , ) viz. that the abjuring the pope's deposing power is the substance of the oath , cannot be strictly made out without the help and allowance of a distinction , nor regularly understood but onely of the assertory part : for otherwise , if we speak properly , it is so far from being the substance , that it is not so much as a part of the oath , as it is an oath of allegeance , and a bond of duty from the subject to his supreme lord. and of this there will need little proof , when it is considered , that the bond of an oath is in reference to something which is to be performed for the future ; and therefore cannot appertain to an assertory oath , ( which is a thing present or past , ) but belongs onely to a promissory oath . wherefore since it is plain , that this abjuring the pope's deposing power is an assertory oath , there can be no doubt , that it being in it self , and in the nature of the thing , no bond at all , it can be no bond of allegeance , and therefore also no part of the oath as it is an oath of allegeance . and if the forbearing all disputes and discourses any ways favouring the deposing power may be ( as i think it is ) look'd upon as part of our allegeance ; then it follows likewise , that more allegeance may be sworn by the promissory oath , in abjuring all such disputes and discourses in favour and defence of the deposing doctrine , then by abjuring the doctrine it self ; because this last oath of abjuring the doctrine it self , being purely assertory , contains no promise , bond , or tie at all : so that in fine it is the promissory oath alone that is the true oath of allegeance , and the sole bond of duty from the subject to his prince . this i take to be the reason why some learned catholicks , who understood both themselves , the difference of oaths , and the nature of allegeance , full well , having upon sundry emergent occasions exhibited to the publick several oaths of fidelity for the quieting of all state-jealousies and fears from the pope's deposing power , have wholly confined themselves to the promissory form . thus 13 catholick priests made a solemn protestation of their allegeance to queen elizabeth by a publick instrument the last day of ianuary , and the last year of her majestie 's reign , wherein , after having acknowledged the queen ( though divided from the church of rome in communion ) for their true and lawfull sovereign , they promised that they would yield to her majesty all obedience in temporal causes , notwithstanding any authority or any excommunication whatsoever denounced , or to be denounced , against her majesty or her subjects . the like declaration and acknowledgment mr. iames haughton , ( aliàs mr. thomas green , ) professour of divinity of the holy order of saint benedict , gave under his hand to the then lord bishop of durham , the 5. november an. 1619. and did promise and vow to be a true and faithfull subject to his majesty and his successours during his life , notwithstanding any sentence from the pope whatsoever of excommunication , deposition , or absolution of his majestie 's subjects from their natural obedience to him or his heirs . there hath of late years been often reprinted a brief explanation of the roman catholick belief concerning their church-worship , justification , and civil government , in the last clause whereof are these express words : we are ( say they ) most strictly and absolutely bound to the exact and entire performance of our promises made to any person of what religion soever , much more to the magistrates and civil powers under whose protection we live , whom we are taught to obey by the word of god , not onely for fear , but conscience sake , and to whom we will most faithfully observe our promises of duty and obedience , notwithstanding any dispensation , absolution , or other proceedings of any forrein power or authority whatsoever . and this they sincerely and solemnly professed in the sight of god , the searcher of all hearts , without any equivocation or mentall reservation whatsoever . the objection which some offer against the sufficiency of these or the like forms , grounded upon the difference which the objectours make between [ will not ] and [ cannot , ] is , in my opinion , wholly groundless : what they pretend with so much solicitude in behalf of the state being onely this , that it is not enough for a man to swear he will not , unless he swear also he cannot be dispensed with or absolved from his allegeance . which to me seems no reason at all , why will not may not be as good a subject , and give as full security for his allegeance , as cannot : his oath by which he swears he will not ever accept or make use of any dispensation or absolution from his allegeance , being to him as indispensably binding , and tying him as fast to his prince and his interest , as any oath can possibly do . for if it be replied , that he who now swears he will not ever accept or make use of any such dispensation or absolution , may come hereafter to alter his mind ; and then what is become of his cobweb-oath , and the security he gave for his fidelity ? it may with as much reason and truth be retorted , that he who now swears he cannot be dispensed with , nor absolved from his allegeance , may come hereafter to alter his opinion ; and then where is his cobweb-oath , and the security he gave for his fidelity ? i answer then for both , that though wills and opinions are flippery things , yet an oath may fix both the one and the other ; yet with this difference and advantage against the foresaid opinion , that wills may be fixed immediately , opinions onely mediately , and indeed by no other means then by first fixing of wills. first then , that an oath may immediately fix and restrain the will , i take to be a clear case : for he that swears ( for example ) he will not doe such or such a thing tending to the prejudice of a third person , is without more adoe under as streight and indispensable a ty as any oath can bring upon him ; that is , he cannot so much as change his will , nor goe back with his promise , without perjury , and proving false to god , his own heart , and his oath . as for opinions , since it hath been already proved , that it can never be safe to swear or abjure an opinion ; and then , ( secondly , ) though it were , yet such an oath , being an assertory oath , could bring no bond or obligation upon the swearer , so much as of not changing his opinion for the future : hence it plainly follows , that the way of fixing and restraining opinions is onely mediately , and by first fixing and restraining the will , either by a promissory oath , or by the severity of the law , or by both jointly . for instance , take in king henry the viii . his daies ; upon occasion of the then six famed articles of religion , it was ordained and enacted by authority of parliament , that if any person or persons within this realm of england , or in any other of the king's dominions , did by word , or writing , printing , cyphering , or any otherwise , publish , preach , teach , say , affirm , declare , dispute , argue , or hold any opinion contrary to the foresaid articles , that then such person or persons so offending should be liable to such and such particular penalties as are expressed in the statute . were this pattern copied out by our age , and that there were a law now in force , that if any person or persons within this realm , or in any other of the king's dominions , did by word , writing , printing , cyphering , or any other waies , publish , preach , teach , say , affirm , declare , dispute , argue , or hold any opinion in favour of the pope's power of deposing princes , that then such person or persons so offending should be liable to such and such penal severities , as the legislative power of this nation had in their grave wisedom thought fit to appoint ; were there , i say , such an act as this in force , he who would swear to a strict observance thereof , would have no more to answer for his opinions in this particular . but yet again , though there be no such law extant , let but the good subject be admitted to swear , that he will never by word , deed , or any otherwise , countenance , abett , defend , maintain , preach , teach , or publish any opinion in favour of the pope's direct or indirect deposing power , and for the rest , that he will inviolably bear faith and true allegeance to the king , notwithstanding any dispensation or whatever other proceeding to the contrary , and not onely never act against him , but also assist , to the best of his power and skill , and side with him against any power whatsoever , that shall at any time act against him , or attempt against his sacred person , crown , or dignity : questionless , no security imaginable can be greater then this ; forasmuch as no one can be more faithfully true to his king , or more securely incapable of proving disloyal to him , whilst this oath is kept . and for security that he will keep it , i conceive , no good subject will refuse to swear that he will be content , if ever he fail in the performance hereof , to be deemed and adjudged a disturber of the peace , and an enemy to his king and country , a man forsworn before god and the world ; and will therefore freely offer to be punished as in case of perjury and rebellion , that is , to forfeit his body to the law , his soul to the doom and wrath of the last day , and his name to scorn and reproach . were this throughly weighed and duly sworn , i know no expedient that could more effectually contribute to the perfect quieting of all just fears of the state , nor more securely answer for the peaceable disposition and opinions of the swearer ; whenas even the most hidden thoughts and abstracted notions of the speculative man , being under unjust restraint , and having for guaranty such an oath and sacred engagement , are sufficiently bound to their good behaviour , and secured from all sacrilegious attempts of breaking inclosure , and shewing themselves abroad , though onely by way of publick and open discourse . wherefore i shall conclude with the fourth controversial letter , in behalf of the silencing and abjuring all disputes in reference to the deposing doctrine , heartily wishing , as * he doth , that we may all preserve the majesty of supreme powers in an awfull distance , and submit to them with the reverence of a quiet obedience , and not make them cheap by unreasonable disputes . princes and bishops are both sacred ; let what belongs to them be so too , and not touched , without the excuse of necessity , or obligation of duty : let every quiet and peaceable spirit say , obedience is the duty which god and my condition require from me ; and in the performance of that i will endeavour to be found unblamable , and leave disputing to those who value the praise of a witty and subtle man , above that of a faithfull and quiet subject . chap. ix . an answer to the authour of the questions as far as concerns our present question . in the first place i shall speak to matter of fact , relating to the sorbon censures , and the subscription of the french iesuits ; the clearing of both which particulars from some unwary misrepresentations and disguises of our authour shall be the chief subject of this chapter . the first and leading censure was that of the sacred faculty of theology , which , upon occasion and mature examination of a certain latine book printed at rome 1625. having in the 30. and 31. chapters found these propositions , that the pope may with temporal punishments chastise kings and princes , depose and deprive them of their estates and kingdoms , for the crime of heresy , and exempt their subjects from the obedience due to them ; and that this custome hath been alwaies practised in the church , &c. and on the 4. of april 1626. censured these propositions of that pernicious book , and condemned the doctrine therein contained as new , false , erroneous , contrary to the word of god , rendring odious the papal dignity , opening a gap to schism , derogative of the sovereign authority of kings , which depends on god alone , retarding the conversion of infidels and heretical princes , disturbing the publick peace , tending to the ruine of kingdoms and republicks , diverting subjects from the obedience due to their sovereigns , precipitating them into faction , rebellion , sedition , and even to commit parricides on the sacred persons of their princes : the university of paris in their general assembly on the 20. of april 1626. decreed , that this censure should be publickly read every year ; and that if any doctour , professour , master of arts , or scholar , should resist , disobey , or make any the least opposition against the said censure , he should immediately be expell'd , and deprived of his degree , faculty and rank , without hopes of re-admittance . the like decrees on the same occasion , the same year , against the same doctrine , were made by seven other universities of france . likewise the french iesuits subscribed the sorbon censures , as the authour of the questions tells us . and that this was actually done , he is confident will not be denied : that it was commanded , we need no farther evidence ( says he ) then the arrest it self of the parliament of paris , dated the 17. of march 1626. wherein it is ordered , that the priests and scholars of clairmont , and of the other two houses which the iesuits have in paris , should within three daies subscribe the censure made by the faculty of sorbon . this the authour of the questions ; who needed not have been so confident of this last evidence drawn from the arrest of the parliament , which doubtless must needs be a mistake : for otherwise , ( unless we be resolved to rob the year 1626. of some more daies then were thrown out of the year 1582. for the reformation of the calendar , ) it will be a little hard to understand , how the iesuits should be commanded , by an arrest of parliament dated the 17. of march 1626. to subscribe the sorbon censures within three daies , whereas the first of these censures was not made before the 4. of april 1626. and the other not before the 20. day of the same month and year , even according to his own computation . the occasion and ground of the mistake , i conceive , was this ; in the month of december 1625. the sorbon issued out a censure against another book , entituled admonitio ad regem ; and it was the single censure against this book , and not the two other censures against santarellus his book , ( as our authour mistakingly supposed , ) which the iesuits were commanded to subscribe within three daies by an arrest of parliament dated the 17. of march 1626. and looking back to december 1625. this very quotation and copy of the censure of the 4. of april is not free from its mistake , or at least of begetting a mistake in others , and making them think the censure more clear and home to the point then possibly it is . for amongst the propositions and doctrines which the faculty of theology had found in the 30. and 31. chapters of santarellus his book , the authour of the questions having onely set down these , that the pope may with temporal punishments chastise kings and princes , depose and deprive them of their estates and kingdoms , for the crime of heresy , and exempt their subjects from the obedience due to them , and that this custome has been alwaies practised in the church — here he cuts off what follows , and defeats his reader of his full information with an unreasonable [ &c. ] as if these propositions were the onely , or at least the principal , object of the censure : which yet may justly be doubted , for the faculty goes on in the charge against santarellus , as teaching in the foresaid chapters , that princes may be punished and deposed , not onely for heresy , but for other causes ; ( 1. ) for their faults , ( 2. ) if it be expedient , ( 3. ) if they be negligent , ( 4. ) if their persons be insufficient , ( 5. ) if unusefull , and the like ; and then follows the censure it self , not singly and separately upon each proposition by it self , ( which yet is the usual method of the faculty , ) but upon the whole taken in gross : which puts a quite different face upon the matter from what our authour had given it , and renders it doubtfull whether the faculty would have pronounced so severe a judgment against the first part of the doctrine , had not those last propositions proved to be the aggravating circumstance ( or rather cause ) that deservedly occasioned and sharpened the censure . as to the subscription of the iesuits , the true account of that action stands thus : santarellus his book had been condemned at rome , which it was not for our authour's purpose to take notice of , and his doctrine generally cried down , and disavowed by all good men , before ever it fell under the brand of the sorbon censures : all which notwithstanding , such and so eminently singular was the caution and zeal of france against this ( though already sufficiently supprest ) mischief , that upon the 14. of march 1626. the principal of the french iesuits , with three superiours , and three other ancient fathers , being summoned to appear before the parliament of paris , and being asked what they held as to the points noted in santarellus ; father cotton , the then provincial , ( having in the name of the rest of his order disclaim'd all singularity of opinions different from other divines , ) answered , that the doctrine of the sorbon should be theirs , and what the faculty of paris should determine and subscribe , they were ready to subscribe also . and this indeed may pass for a subscription to the sorbon censures , even before they were made . but from this subscription of the french iesuits our authour runs into another mistake , seeming to wonder why the english iesuits should scruple a downright oath , which is exacted of us , any more then the french iesuits did a simple subscription , which was onely required of them : and then taking upon him a sober and grave style to open the mystery of ( this particular ) iesuitism , he attempts it in these very terms . now were i demanded a reason , ( says he ) why so circumspect and wise a body should act so differently in the same cause , but different countries , i could onely return this conjectural answer , that , being wary and prudent persons , they could not but see the concerns they hazarded in france , by refusing to subscribe , far more important then what they ventured at rome , by subscribing ▪ whenas in england all they can forfeit by declining the oath of allegeance ( being themselves but few , and without the engagements of colledges and foundations , ) is perhaps of less esteem with them , then the interest of their universall body at rome , whence so many advantages are continually derived to the rest of their society . this is to a tittle his full discourse upon this subject . and now were i demanded a reason , why this gentleman should thus freely let loose to a weak and meer conjecturall descant upon the very thoughts and secret intentions of religious men , ( as if any temporal interest were or could be more dear to , or sway more with them then loyalty to their king and country , ) my charity would prompt me to ascribe it to something of a too precipitate and mistaken zeal , or sinister preoccupation of judgement , which is too easily taken up at unawares in this age of ours , and oftentimes fostered to the great prejudice of the innocent , even by persons otherwise of a sober and no immoderate temper ; who might doe a great deal of right , no less to themselves then others , would they be pleased to consider , that this is a great breach of christian charity , and is one day sadly to be reckoned for , when an impartial and all-knowing justice shall sit upon the bench to judge between man and man. neither is the strength of the gentleman's discourse , nor the depth of his politicks , such , but that a very common reason and an easy reflexion ( bating passion and prejudice ) may be machiavil enough both to fathome and answer him . for if the cause of the french and english iesuits were the same , ( as he pretends it is , ) and withall they supposed to be those circumspect , wise , wary , prudent persons , as he is pleased to character them in this place ; then the english iesuits must needs see , that by writing after the copy which the french iesuits have set them , they could not in any likelihood hazard any of their publick concerns at rome , nor justly fear the endangering the interest of their universal body there , by acting no more then the french had done in the same cause without any known check or censure from the see apostolick to this day . and the authour of the questions affords me a convincing proof of this in his second question , from whose mouth i take the words , and argue thus ; that if there be reasons enough to turn the eye of authority quite away from seeing what the french ( iesuits ) so openly avowed in the face of the world , are there not enough to connive at the english ( iesuits , ) who are but a few , and act privately , and not without the excusing plea of extreme necessity ? the argument cannot be disliked , because it is perfectly his own . wherefore if ( as he saith ) the cause of the english and french iesuits be the same , i conceive our authour was much mistaken in his conjectural answer , as to the reason he assigns of their different actings in the same cause . for if the cause be not the same , ( as plainly it is not , ) then this mistake is much the greater , and his charity the less . had he produced a censure against the pope's deposing power ( equal to that of the sorbon ) drawn up , signed and assented to by the generality of seculars and regulars here in england , ( for the satisfaction of the state , demanding as a test of our allegeance the subscription of such a censure , ) and the iesuits alone should stand out , and refuse to subscribe and set their hands to it ; or if he had given us an oath of allegeance , exactly parallel to ours , taken by the french iesuits , and declined by the english ; then indeed the cause of both had been the same , and their actings different : but these two conditions both failing , that is , the french iesuits having no such oath of allegeance to take as ours , nor the english any such censure to subscribe as the french ; evidently the cause of the one and the other is not the same , and so it will be no wonder to an impartial . considerer they should act differently in different causes : though i shall shew afterwards , that nothing can difference either their principles or practices , where the cause will bear it . another mistake of the authour of the questions is , the very reason given by him why he conceiveth the distinction between a simple subscription and a down-right oath to be a meer unnecessary scruple ; because ( saith he ) no sincere and generous honesty will solemnly and deliberately attest under his hand , what he will not in due circumstances swear to be true . how ? swear to be true ? and yet this gentleman knew full well ( had he but reflected on it ) that the onely question here is , of swearing or abjuring opinions . wherefore had this reason of his faln under montalt's hands , and that he had catcht it dropping from a iesuit's pen , how he would have answered it i know not : but i am sure , the daily practice of the church , in a free and unoffensive subscribing of opinions , abundantly confutes it : for what more usuall amongst our greatest divines , in resolving cases of weight and concern , then to deliver and attest their opinion under their hand ? and was it not thus that the faculty of theologie delivered and subscribed their censure , as a judgment for others to remember to frame and regulate their opinions by ? again , doth not our authour himself , in his preface , reason the case in this very manner , that if three or four doctours , nay perhaps one , who hath well studied the point , can make an opinion safe , how much more where a greater number and whole universities engage their judgment ? and if then the french iesuits , submitting their own , subscribed to the judgment of the university of paris , and by it were willing to frame and regulate their own opinions ; let any friend of our authour , or his principles , speak wherein or what was their trespass . for if , as he argues , the authority of so many catholick doctours rendered their opinion safe ; sure it could not be unsafe in the iesuits to subscribe it as such . but now , to draw a generall consequence from a simple subscription to a down-right oath , as our authour doth , and to conclude , that a sincere and generous honesty will oblige a man , in due circumstances , to swear every thing he attests under his hand to be true ; this , in other terms , is to conclude , that a sincere and generous honesty will oblige a man in some circumstances to act against reason and conscience , by swearing an opinion to be true : which kind of oath is a gross offence both against logick and divinity , and no less then sacrilege and self-contradiction , as hath been already proved in the fifth chapter . the last mistake ( waving many others ) i shall concern my self with at present is found in the authour's fourth question , where he informs his reader , that the iesuits are the strictest of all religious in maintaining and extending the pope's prerogatives . this he gives and attests under his hand in print : but i hope his sincere and generous honesty would have been loth deliberately to swear it to be true : for as i question not but he was too good a christian deliberately to swear an untruth ▪ so i think he was too much a scholar deliberately to take this for a truth . for let any learned and unprejudiced person but compare bellarmine , suarez , or any other writer of the society , not onely with the loose and exorbitant fantasies of carerius , musconius , or zecchius , but with other grave religious men , with panormitanus , alvares pelagius , augustinus triumphas , bosius , and too many others to be listed here ; and then let him freely judge and speak as he sees cause , which of these religious are the strictest in maintaining and extending the pope's prerogatives . i am sure io. barkley , one of bellarmine's greatest adversaries , was yet so just to him , as to let the world know , that sixtus quintus expressed his great displeasure ( and it was near passing to a censure ) against the learned cardinall , not for extending , but rather for clipping the pope's prerogatives , by disputing and writing so much as he did against the direct power , and so giving less to the pope then the pope himself claimed , and other religious men asserted as his due . besides , how can it be averred with truth , that the iesuits are the strictest religious in maintaining and extending the prerogative of the deposing power , who of all religious are the onely persons that , by especiall precept and decree , ( which was first made by themselves , and afterwards renewed at the instance of the parliament of paris , ) have silenced this doctrine in their pulpits , shut their school-doors against it , banished it from their publick disputes , and suffer not so much as the mention of it to pass under their pens , unless where necessity or duty make it a crime to be wholly silent ? lastly , how far the iesuits are from being the strictest in maintaining and extending the pope's prerogatives by any particular doctrine of their own , and how ready they are to disavow and renounce all singularity in this kind , both england and france afford us a fair instance , in a very observable ( and , i think , unexceptionable ) harmony of professions and acting between the english and french iesuits in point of allegeance . for as father cotton , the mouth and speaker of the rest of his order in france , freely offered , that the doctrine of the sorbon should be theirs , and that what the faculty of paris should determine and subscribe , they were ready to subscribe also : so in the year 1661. ( the very year wherein these questions concerning the oath of allegeance first came to light ) an english iesuit , in the behalf of the rest of his brethren , offered in print , that what oath of allegeance the english clergy and other religious should agree upon , that they would most readily take themselves , and willingly invite all others to take it . an evidence then which i think a greater cannot easily be given , how far they are from any particular kindness to any less allowable doctrine of their own , who shew so much of submission and deference to others judgments , as best suiting with the modesty and humility of religious men . chap. x. the rest of the answer to the authour of the questions . after a carefull survey , and a no less impartial then particular and due examination , of his small treatise , i find the main question throughout the whole so generally mis-stated by him , even contrary to his own expresse assertions , and the very terms wherein he first proposed , and thereby engaged to dispute it , ( which i set down in the first chapter , and purposely stated the principall controversy out of him , with this previous and particular observation , that our present question was not , whether a catholick may safely deny , but , deny by oath , ( that deniall also being the very substance of the oath , ) and universally abjure the pope's power of deposing princes : ) which point he hath treated so cursorily , and spoken so little directly to it , that the onely application of my former discourse by way of answer to his few proofs , will be all the answer which the rest of his book can justly claim , and the discovery of his mistakes will be the refutation of his arguments . as first , where he endeavours to fetch the parallel over from france to england , arguing from the censures and judgment of the french divines , and pressing the question home , why we may not safely and uncensurably profess as much as they . to which is answered from the foresaid grounds , that though we might safely and uncensurably profess as much as they , yet 't is one thing to profess as much as they , and another to swear as much as they profess ; and that though the first might , yet the second cannot be safely and uncensurably done : and this for the same reason which by repeated instances i have often inculcated , that where catholick divines teach differently , some one way , some another , there can be no safe ground for an assertory oath in either way , because , chuse which of the two ways you please , it will still be a question amongst the learned , whether truth lies in that way or no ; and it is this questionableness of the point ( till the church interpose for the decision of the case ) will rise up in judgment against the swearer , and make out the charge of perjury against him . and truly , were there no more in taking the oath of allegeance , then in subscribing the sorbon censures , i would gladly ask this question of the authour or publisher of the questions , that whereas the said oath hath been long since translated , and hath now travelled abroad in the latine tongue for some more then one or two scores of years , how it comes to pass that so many famous french universities , which so unanimously and solemnly and deeply condemn this position of the pope's deposing power , ( and all this , as the authour of the questions observes , without constraint , voluntarily delivering their free judgment , unmenaced by their king , unconcerned in self-preservation , ) should not ( at least out of a common concern for religion , whose credit is at stake , or out of a sense of compassion to us their suffering brethren in england , where our laws so threatningly command , and our all is so near concern'd ) voluntarily deliver their free judgment , and unanimously subscribe our oath , and by their subscribing encourage us to the taking of it ; if it were really true , that the taking of the said oath amounted to no more then the denying or condemning of this position of the pope's deposing power , or that a simple denying and denying by oath , or condemning and abjuring , were all one . then for his next argument , ( that however the deposing power may by some be held speculatively probable ; yet , as to any execution , it is practically no power at all against one in possession , and consequently may be abjured as such ; ) this , i say , seems too plainly to beg the question , and to take that for an uncontrovertible truth , which hath been already shewn ( and is necessarily implied in the very state of the question ) to be the chief , or rather the onely point in controversie , between the deniers and assertors of the deposing power . for , that this deposing doctrine hath been held by popes and other learned divines , not onely as speculatively probable , but also as safely practicable , even against one in possession , appears manifestly , not onely by their open pretence and claim , but also by their frequent and publick sentence of deposition against severall sovereign powers , ( all of them actually in possession , ) even from the time of the emperour hen. iv. to the days of king hen. iv. of france , the first and last of christian princes who stand as instances upon record , and sad testimonialls , of papal deposition ; the one having had the sentence of deprivation passed against him by pope gregory vii . the other by sixtus v. england in particular hath cause to remember and deplore the lamentable effects of the like sentence pronounced by paulus tertius against king hen. viii . and of pius quintus against queen elizabeth . likewise i have already , in the fourth chapter , quoted the testimony and free acknowledgment of the authour of the questions , that this act of deposing kings hath not onely been done by popes , but approved by councills . all which i do not produce ( any more then he himself doth ) with the least intention or design to interest my self in the decision of that question , or to prove that the doctrine is in it self practically probable ; but onely that it was held so by popes , councils , and learned divines ; and therefore , as being a controverted point of doctrine , can be no due and immediate object of an assertory oath , nor safely abjurable ( even by those who otherwaies hold it safely deniable ) as practically no power at all . there followeth another argument , which the authour of the questions , in pursuance of his usual way of arguing , and conformably to the title of his work , proposeth by way of quere . let them tell me , ( saith he , pag. 25. ) are they not ready to swear they will faithfully serve their king whiles they live , and that notwithstanding any papall dispensation , or whatever other proceeding to the contrary ? what signifies this but an express renouncing all obedience to the pope in these points ? true , say they , we renounce obedience , but not the acknowledgment of his power : we will adhere to the king , though the pope should depose him ; but will not say he cannot depose him . what wise and reall difference ( as to government and the practicall part of humane life ) can we imagine between these two , i 'll swear never to obey my commander , and , i 'll swear he has no power to command me ? the summe of the first part of this discourse ( which is quite besides the question ) in a short word is this , either deny the pope's authority , or obey it : so that if those good subjects , who are ready to swear they will adhere to the king , though the pope should depose him , will but say ( though not swear ) he cannot depose him , ( which is no more then with the french divines to deny the deposing power , ) then the gentleman and the first part of his argument are satisfied . now to his question that follows , ( which is the second , and indeed the onely pertinent part of his argument ; ) what wise and real difference ( as to government and the practicall part of humane life ) there is between these two , i 'll swear never to obey my commander , and , i 'll swear he hath no power to command me ; they will easily answer , that the last of these two oaths is an assertory oath , and swears to a disputable piece of doctrine as to an absolute truth , which is down-right perjury , as hath been proved already in the 2.3.4 . and 5. chapters : the other ( i 'll swear never to obey my commander , to wit , the pope , in this particular case of deposing the king , ) being a promissory oath , and tending wholly to practice , engages not for the absolute truth of any doctrine , but onely for the swearer's allegeance and loyalty , and therefore requires no absolute certainty to build on , but onely a safe and practically-probable opinion , as a sufficiently-strong principle of action , such as the authour of the questions every-where designedly maintains the deniall of the pope's deposing power to be ; from whence they will lastly conclude , that there is as much difference between these two oaths as between perjury and loyalty : and sure that is difference enough , even as to government and the practical part of humane life . in the last place comes his conjectural proof , or rather his meer affirmative presumption , that our glorious ancestours , who refused , and suffered for refusing , the oath of allegeance , would certainly have changed their judgment , had they but seen , read , perused , examined , and throughly considered , all those many particulars which he dilates upon in a large flourish of words . to all which my fifth chapter may serve for a reply , and a sufficient evidence , that had these worthy predecessours of ours seen the unanimous judgment of so many universities , and the publick subscriptions of so many eminent regulars , ( they are the words of the authour of the questions ; ) had they examined the sense of antiquity towards sovereign princes , which acknowledge them supreme in temporals , and accountable to none but god ; had they read the learned treatises composed by catholick writers , both of our own and other nations , where this king-dethroning power is absolutely disavowed ; had they perused the declarations of the kings in france , and arrests of parliaments there ; had they , i say , done all this , and more then this ; yet after all , they could have found the opinion denying the deposing power to be no more then an opinion . neither the judgment of the french universities , nor the learned treatises of both the barkleys , father and son , nor withrington's gloss and exposition , together with the apologetical answer , his theological disputation , and whatever else he wrote against suarez , lessius , fitzherbert and skulkenius , can prove it to be any more then an opinion , in the opinion of the authour and publisher of the questions . and since that enough hath already been said to prove , that an opinionative assent cannot safely ground a consciencious oath , asserting the truth or abjuring the falsehood of the thing that is sworn , i shall now pass to this final conclusion of my discourse , that whereas it is the voice and law of nature , that protection claims allegeance , and that perfect subjection to civil powers under which we live is the strict injunction no less then dictate of reason , whereby it comes to pass that nothing is or ought to be more inviolably dear to a loyal heart , nor more highly and justly valuable in it self , then to be and to bear the name of a good subject ; ( life and fortunes are nothing to it : ) yet since that to take the oath as it lies , were to over-buy that precious title , by making perjury the price of it , and laying out our very souls upon the purchace , whenas it is to be had at a much cheaper rate , and as with more ease to the conscience of the subject , so with no less security to the prince ; we must conclude upon the whole , that it can never be lawfull thus to rob god of the things that are god's , under pretence of rendring unto caesar the things that are caesar's , nor to ground our allegeance to the king upon the forfeiture of our loyalty to the king of kings . the third treatise against the oath of allegeance . several considerations proposed for the satisfaction of such catholicks as desire to be informed concerning the oath of allegeance , enacted tertio iacobi , capite quarto . 1. concerning the lawfulness of an oath in general ; consider , first , that ( as all do confesse ) three conditions are requisite for the lawfulness of an oath , viz. truth , iustice , and necessity . so that an oath wherein any thing whatsoever contained , though never so little , is either unjust , false , or doubtfull , or if the taking of it be not necessary and effectual to some good end , is unlawfull , and ought to be refused . secondly , consider , that any oath whatsoever , wherein any of the forementioned conditions is wanting , is , according to the constant sentiment of divines , intrinsecally evill , and such as cannot be justified in any case possible , though never so great good be hoped for by taking it , or never so great evill be feared by refusing it . thirdly , consider , that whoever takes any oath , though in it self never so just , without a due previous consideration , swears rashly , and commits a grievous sin. to this all do agree . whence i conclude , that to the end one may lawfully take this oath , it is necessary that , after a serious consideration , he finds nothing therein unjust , nothing false , nothing doubtfull , and that he judges the taking thereof to be requisite and effectuall for some good intent . 2. concerning the unlawfulness of this oath , deduced from the briefs of popes issued forth against it , consider , first , that the unlawfulness of this oath has been declared by * three several briefs of popes . the first was issued forth by paul the v. september 21. 1606. the second by the same pope september 21. 1607. the third by pope vrban the viii . may 30. 1626. this neither protestants nor catholicks deny . secondly , consider , that several things are contained or involved in this oath , the decision whereof appertains onely to the spirituall and ecclesiasticall court ; viz. how far the spirituall power extends it self , what authority christ left to the supreme spirituall pastour as such , what are the effects of an excommunication , what propositions are hereticall : and the main debate about this oath is , whether it be sinfull or not . the decision of all which things , ( wherein consists the chief difficulty of this oath , ) according to the unanimous consent of both catholicks and protestants , belongs onely to the ecclesiasticall court. withrington , the great stickler for the oath , made his † humble address to the pope concerning this matter , representing unto him his reasons for the lawfulness thereof , and earnestly beseeching him , that , laying aside the misinformation of others , he would be pleased to give his judgment therein according to his own knowledge . which certainly he would never have done , had he not been perswaded that there was something contained in this oath , the judgment whereof did appertain to the pope and to the ecclesiasticall court. moreover , the same authour , with other catholicks who have written in defence of the oath , do plainly professe , that , were the unlawfulness thereof declared by a general council , they would think themselves bound to submit . and yet neither in that case would they be bound to submit , were not the cause ecclesiasticall ; for such causes onely appertain to councills . 3. consider , thirdly , that the pope is supreme governour in all spirituall and ecclesiasticall affairs : which no true catholick can question . fourthly , that an exteriour * obedience at least is due to the sentence or judgment of all supreme governours , in all matters appertaining unto them , and so far as they do appertain unto them ; which all do grant who grant any government : and consequently , that an exteriour obedience at least is due to the orders or prohibition of the pope in all ecclesiasticall matters . and this all must confess , who confess him to be supreme governour in such matters . fifthly , consider , that it is unlawfull to deny any obedience or compliance that is due , as is manifest ; and by consequence , that it is unlawfull to deny an exteriour obedience to the orders or prohibition of the pope in all matters appertaining unto him , and no farther then they appertain unto him , or in all spirituall and ecclesiasticall matters . sixthly , that the popes have prohibited this oath , by reason of the clauses it contains relating to the ecclesiasticall court , and for spirituall and ecclesiasticall respects onely : viz. for † containing things contrary to faith and salvation ; or , for being noxious and sinfull . for such motives , and no other , are exprest in the forementioned briefs . and consequently , that they have prohibited this oath upon the account of matters appertaining unto them , and no farther then they do appertain unto them . lastly , consider , that whoever takes this oath denies an exteriour obedience to the pope's prohibition contained in the briefs . for he exteriourly takes an oath , which the pope in such briefs prohibits to be taken ; as is evident . 4. hence i frame this argument , to conclude the unlawfulness of the aforesaid oath : whoever takes this oath , denies an exteriour obedience to the pope's prohibition in matters appertaining unto him , and no farther then they appertain unto him . but it is unlawfull to deny an exteriour obedience to the pope's prohibitions in matters appertaining unto him , and no farther then they appertain unto him . therefore it is unlawfull to take this oath . 5. if it be objected , first , that the pope's briefs are of no force here in england without the king's approbation , ( which these briefs have not , ) according to the statutes 25. of edward the third , and 16. of richard the second , made in catholick times ; and that it cannot be unlawfull to deny obedience to a brief where it is of no force ; neither is there any reason why the present catholicks of england should not have the same liberty to refuse the pope's brief , not approved by the king , as the ancient catholicks had : 6. in answer to this objection , consider , first , that what is alledged out of the forementioned statutes , does not prove that briefs brought into england without the king's licence are void and of no force ; but onely that those who procure them and bring them hither without the king's approbation , are liable to a praemunire , and other penalties : which is very different . for though it be punishable to doe a thing , yet the thing once done may be valid . those who contract a clandestine marriage here in england are liable to the penalties enacted by the canons in such cases : yet the marriage so contracted is valid and obligatory . 7. consider , secondly , that should we grant ( as we do not ) that such statutes render the briefs they speak of void and of no force ; they are to be understood either of briefs which import an absolute power in the pope to defeat and avoid at his will the laws and statutes of this realm , and consequently touch the king's regalities , as the statute expresses it , and destroy his sovereignty in temporals ; which the briefs we produce do not ; for they onely enjoyn a meer forbearance of this oath , which certainly does not dethrone his majesty of his sovereignty in temporalls ; as will appear by what hereafter shall be added : or else of briefs enactive , ( as in other kingdoms the like statutes are understood , ) whereby some new law is enacted , or some new thing ordained , relating to the external government of the church ; as the presentments to churches or benefices , or the translation of bishops or bishopricks , and such like things which are mentioned in the statutes : but not of briefs declarative , whereby such a doctrine is declared erroneous or hereticall , such an action sinfull and destructive to salvation . as , for instance , the declarative part of the councill of trent , though never admitted in england by publick authority , does oblige all english catholicks ; but not the enactive part thereof . now the briefs we speak of are not enactive , as is manifest , but declarative : for they do not make this oath unlawfull , but onely declare it to be so . 8. consider , thirdly , whether , should it be admitted , that these statutes in their primary institution did extend to all briefs whatsoever , it can prudently be thought , that they were ever intended by the catholicks that made them for the condition wherein we now are in england ; viz. of an open rebellion against the pope and the church of rome ; when no brief , though never so just , nor nothing else that comes from rome in order to our spirituall direction , is admitted by publick authority . suppose that before the late civil wars it had been enacted by the king and parliament , ( perhaps there is some such act , ) that no commission sent by his majesty to any particular person should be of force , unless it were delivered unto him by the lieutenant of the county where he resided : could we prudently think , that such an act was ever intended by loyal subjects , that voted it , for the case of a publick rebellion , when all the lieutenants were manifest rebells against the king , and resolved to pass nothing in his favour , and , consequently , to deprive thereby his majesty of all power to send orders to his loyall subjects remaining in england , in a time when he had most need of their assistence ; or that whoever should refuse to obey his majestie 's expresse commands , under such a pretence , could be esteemed a faithfull subject ? 9. consider , fourthly , whether , should these statutes be taken in the latitude the opponent pretends , all intercourse between the pope and the english catholicks , and all direction from him in order to their spiritual conduct , would not be quite cut off in a time when they had greatest need thereof , ( such is the time of persecution ; ) and all dispensations , indulgences and faculties , and all powers or prohibitions whatsoever , that come from rome , ( for they all come in bulls , briefs , and such like instruments , ) would not be rendered void and of no force . 10. consider , fifthly , whether this be not against the common perswasion and practice of the english catholicks , not excepting even those who defend the lawfulness of this oath ; who , without any scruple , use their faculties sent to them from rome ; who procure thence , as occasion requires , dispensations , indulgences , and other powers ; who make their application to rome in severall emergencies , ready to submit to the pope's judgment : and whether it would not be very ridiculous , both for them to procure such things , and for the pope to grant them , were it true what this objection pretends , viz. that no brief or grant brought from rome without the king's approbation ( which in this conjuncture of affairs cannot be hoped for ) is here of any force . 11. consider , sixthly , whether it be reasonable that there should be the same liberty to treat with , ( as the opponent pretends ) or the same obligation to depend of princes who are out of the church , as of those who are in the church , in order to ecclesiasticall affairs : such is the admission or refusall of the pope's bulls or briefs : and consequently , whether the present catholicks of england ought to have the same dependence of their prince ( who is no catholick ) in order to ecclesiastical matters , as the ancient english catholicks had of their princes , who were catholicks . certainly no body will say , that we have the same obligation to depend of governours who are rebells in order to civill concerns , as of those that are faithfull ; or that there ought to be the same liberty to treat with persons infected , as with persons who are not infected . it was no absurdity for the ancient catholicks of england , to make their application to their catholick princes , for leave to get such a grant from the pope ; whereas now it would seem very absurd , should they make any such application to his majesty . for though we do acknowledge our selves to be as much bound to obey his majesty in all civill and temporall concerns as the ancient catholicks were bound to obey their respective catholick princes ; yet hence it does not follow , that we are so much bound to depend of his majesty that now is ( so long as he is of a different religion from us ) in order to ecclesiasticall discipline , as the ancient english catholicks did depend of their princes . 12. consider , lastly , that in the above-mentioned statute of richard the second express mention is made of the sentence of excommunication ; yet all catholicks , even those who deny the pope to have any power to depose kings , do unanimously grant him a power to excommunicate kings , if they become hereticks , and remain obstinate : nay , king iames refused to oblige his catholick subjects to renounce such a power in the pope . now , according to this objection , no sentence of excommunication fulminated against any english king ( the same is of any of his subjects ) is of any force here , unless approved and submitted unto by himself : and if he submits unto it , he is not obstinate , and by consequence does not deserve to be excommunicated . so that if what this objection pretends be true ▪ the pope has no power to excommunicate any hereticall king of england , unless in a case wherein he deserves it not : which is , to have no power at all to excommunicate him . 13. if it be objected , secondly , that the pope with a generall councill is above the pope without it ; that with it he is infallible , without it fallible ▪ and that therefore we are not bound , with our own prejudice , to stand to his decrees which are issued out without a generall councill , as these briefs are , nor to forbear taking this oath , till the unlawfulness thereof be declared by a generall councill , the supreme judge of controversies , which hitherto has not been done : that the pope may be , and was mistaken and misinformed concerning this oath , thinking that therein are contained severall things repugnant to faith and salvation , though he specifies none of them ; and that thereby is abjur'd implicitly a power in the pope to excommunicate princes , and his supremacy in spiritualls ; all which is false ; and we are not bound to submit to briefs grounded upon mistakes and misinformations : that the pope is a party in this debate , and by consequence ought not to be judge in his own cause : that he must give sentence according to the canons or rules prescribed him by the church ; which he does not observe in the prohibition of this oath : finally , that we ought not to take notice of the prohibitions or commands of the pope , when the compliance with them may be a cause of great disturbance in the church , or is prejudiciall to the right of others , especially of sovereign princes , and to the duty due unto them , to which god and the law of nations obliges us ; all which inconveniences intervene in the prohibition of this oath : 14. concerning the superiority of a general councill over the pope , contained in the objection ; consider , first , that though the king and parliament be above the king out of parliament ▪ yet we are bound to submit , even against our own interest , to the orders of the king and his councill in civill matters , till the contrary be decreed by parliament ; which at least is enjoyned us by such parliaments as command us to bear due allegeance to his majesty as our sovereign in all civill matters : and that , in like manner , we are bound to submit to the pope's ordinances in ecclesiasticall matters , even against our interests , notwithstanding the superiority of a general councill over the pope , till the contrary be defined by such a councill ; which at least is asserted in such councills , and by such fathers , as recommend unto us due obedience to the pope , as our supreme pastour in spiritualls . for the pope is as supreme in spiritualls out of a councill , as the king is in temporalls out of a parliament ; and consequently requires the like submission to his ordinances . 15. consider , secondly , that the reasons one may seem to have either against the pope's decrees out of a councill , or the king's ordinances out of a parliament , cannot justify the refusing an exteriour compliance with them ; but onely may give one ground to make his addresses to the councill or parliament when assembled , to have such decrees or ordinances repealed : and that what we require in our present case , is onely , that we should forbear the taking this oath till the lawfulness thereof be declared by a general council , to which we may apply our selves , when convened , to have this matter declared . 16. concerning the fallibility of the pope , and the infallibility of a general council ; consider , first , that if it be warrantable to refuse an exteriour obedience to the pope's decrees in ecclesiastical matters , because fallible ; upon the same account it will be lawfull to refuse an exteriour obedience to the orders of kings and princes in civill affairs ; for doubtless they are all fallible , and may be mistaken and misinformed : and so farewell all government . secondly , consider , that even those catholicks who affirm the pope to be fallible out of a general council , do notwithstanding confess that an exteriour obedience is due to his commands in ecclesiastical matters : as the like obedience is due to the ordinances of sovereign princes in civil affairs , though fallible . and in this present case no more is required , then a meer exteriour compliance with the pope's prohibition . thirdly , consider , that even protestants also , who confesse their whole church , and not onely the particular pastours thereof separately , to be fallible , do yet affirm , that an exteriour obedience is due to their ordinances . and it seems somewhat odde , that catholicks should deny the pope that obedience under pretence of fallibility , which protestants assert to be due to the pastours of their church though fallible . 17. lastly , consider , that the difference between a general council and the pope , supposing the infallibility of the one , and the fallibility of the other , is , that the decrees and declarations of the pope do oblige onely to an exteriour obedience , but those of a general council to an interiour assent also . 18. concerning the capacity of the pope of being misinformed , and the pretended mistakes in this present matter ; consider , first , that between the publishing of the first and the last brief against the oath , there past twenty years : that in this time the present question concerning the lawfulness thereof was canvased on both sides by learned men , both english and forreiners : that withrington ; the chief defender of the oath , and who brings all that is material for it , represented in this interim to paul the fifth his reasons for the lawfulness of it , and his answers to what had been objected against him : that the popes , in the forementioned briefs , use as significant terms to remove all just suspicion of misinformation , mistakes and inconsiderateness , [ as , motu proprio , ex certa nostra scientia , — post longam gravémque deliberationem de omnibus quae in illis continentur adhibitam — haec mera , pura , integráque voluntas nostra est , &c. ] as are used in any briefs or instruments whatsoever , in order to that intent . and if this be so , as certainly it is , then consider , secondly , that if all these diligences and preventions be not thought sufficient to remove all just suspicion of misinformation , mistakes , and inconsiderateness , what brief , or what decree , ecclesiastical or civil , is there that the party therein condemned may not ( under pretence of the like flaws ) reject and disobey ? such liberty as this , to reject the ordinances of our sovereigns , both spirituall and temporall , must needs induce a perfect anarchy . 19. consider , thirdly , that it belongs to the pope to determine , whether this oath does contain any thing contrary to faith and salvation , or destructive to his sovereignty in spiritualls , or no. for the determination of such questions belongs to the spiritual court , as has been above insinuated ; as it belongs to the king , and the civil court , to determine whether such a thing be contrary to the civil laws , and publick welfare of the kingdome , or destructive to his sovereignty in temporalls , or not . and since the popes , after so much diligence used to be informed of the truth , have severall times declared , that this oath contains many things destructive to faith and salvation , and upon that account have prohibited the taking thereof ; we are bound to afford at least an exteriour compliance to this prohibition . 20. consider , fourthly , that as to prohibit a book , 't is not necessary to point out the particular propositions for which it is prohibited , as appears by several publick prohibitions of books and pamphlets , issued forth either by civil or ecclesiastical authority ; neither would it be prudence , to design alwaies the particular propositions for which a pamphlet is prohibited , when they are scandalous and offensive : so neither was it necessary , for the prohibition of this oath , that the pope should assign the particular propositions which he looked upon as repugnant to faith and salvation . the prohibition of suarez his book , made by the parliament of paris , as containing things destructive to the honour due to the kings , does not express , at least as it is related by withrington , what those particular things or propositions are , contained in that book , which are destructive to the veneration due to kings : and yet no body upon that account does quibble at such a prohibition . why therefore might not the pope prohibit this oath , as containing things destructive to faith and salvation , without setting down in particular which those things are ? 21. consider , lastly , whether , whoever takes this oath , does not implicitly deny , either that the pope has any power to excommunicate an heretical king , which power is inherent in the pope as supreme head of the church ; or at least , that though he should excommunicate such a king , the excommunication would have in the person excommunicated these effects , viz. to deprive him of all civill communication with others , &c. which are assigned in scripture , in those places whence the power in the pope to excommunicate is deduced . 2. joan. 1. neque ave ei dixeritis . 1 cor. 5. cum hujusmodi nec cibum sumere . for sure a king who is deprived of all civill communication with others , is deprived of all civill government , in order to the exercise thereof ; which is a certain kind of deposing . and if some persons , though excommunicated , are excepted from these effects , either by the indulgency of the pope , or otherwise , whether it does not belong to the pope to determine which those persons are ; and whether he has excepted princes . 22. concerning the pope being a party in this debate , and not proceeding according to the canons ; consider , first , that supreme governours , whether spirituall or temporall , in debates wherein their prerogatives are concerned , either are not styled properly parties ; or if they be parties , they are also iudges . otherwise we should not be bound to stand to the decision of a generall councill , in matters relating to the authority of the church or generall councills ; nor to the determination of the king and parliament , in matters relating to the authority and prerogatives of his majesty or his parliament . consider , secondly , that if the pope is not to be hearkened unto , when he prohibits the taking of this oath , because he is the party concerned in the not-taking thereof ; neither the king , upon the same account , is to be hearkened unto , when he commands us to take the oath , because he is the party concerned in the taking thereof . 23. consider , thirdly , that as * there are canons and rules prescribed for the proceedings of popes ; so there are , in the like manner , rules prescribed for the proceedings of kings , of councills , and of parliaments . but as the king , or councill , or parliament , must be their own judges , whether they have proceeded , in such a decision or determination , according to the respective rules prescribed unto them , and not any particular person or subject : so must the pope be his own judge , and not any particular doctour , whether he hath observed , in the prohibition of this oath , the rules and canons prescribed unto him in such cases . and since the popes have sufficiently declared , that in the prohibition of this oath they have proceeded according to the canons for such cases , it is not reasonable , that under pretence that they have not observed such canons , we should deny an exteriour obedience to their prohibitions . 24. concerning the disturbance of the church , which the opponent pretends may follow from the submission to the briefs , and the prejudice created thence , or pretended to be created , to the duty and loyalty due to sovereign princes ; consider , first , that if the defenders of the oath would be quiet , we might enjoy the same peace and tranquillity , in relation to this point , which we have enjoyed for many years . for the oppugners of the oath have not printed any thing for a long time , contenting themselves with the sentences which the above-mentioned popes have been pleased to issue forth in their favour : and consequently , the disturbance , if any follow , is rather to be attributed to the defenders of the oath , then to the oppugners . 25. consider , secondly , that if the pope ( whose office it is to declare the lawfulness or unlawfulness of an action , especially if he be required thereunto , and the inconsistency thereof with faith and salvation ) should forbear to declare such an action unlawfull , for fear of some disturbance , or persecution , by the contrivance of some obstinate and discontented persons : upon the same account the councill of nice should have forborn to have declared against the arrians , the consubstantiality of the son with his father ; and other generall councills , in the like manner , should have waved the definitions of severall other doctrines ; because some malicious men , taking occasion thence , have raised severall disturbances and persecutions . nay , our saviour , and the apostles , should , upon the same score , have forborn the preaching christian religion , since they foresaw , that many calamities , disturbances and persecutions would arise , by the malice and obstinacy of men , upon the account of christian religion . and therefore simeon foretold , that the coming of christ would be the occasion of the ruine of many . ecce hic positus est in ruinam , & resurrectionem multorum in israel , & in signum cui contradicetur . luc. 2.34 . 26. consider , thirdly , that though it be not the intention , neither of popes , nor of generall councills , that their enactive decrees , in some extraordinary and extravagant cases , should oblige , when the compliance with them is very prejudiciall ; or at least they are supposed to have dispensed for such cases ; as appears in the precept of fasting , or such like : yet this cannot reach to their declarative decrees , such as the present decree against the oath is . for it cannot be their intention , neither can they dispense in any case whatsoever , that we may lawfully doe what they have declared , and do declare , to be of it self unlawfull . 27. consider , fourthly , whether what the popes enjoyn in the above-mentioned briefs , can be prejudiciall to the duty and loyalty due to sovereign princes . for though popes be as jealous of their prerogatives , as kings are of theirs ; yet they do not enjoyn us in these briefs to swear , that the pope has any power or authority to depose kings , or to swear any thing else contrary to any clause contained in this oath : but onely not to take the oath , or not to swear positively , that the pope has no such power ; leaving things in the same condition wherein they were ( in order to any such obligation ) before this oath was framed . for although as long as there is a debate whether such a thing belongs to me , or another , i cannot lawfully take the possession of it ; yet i may lawfully hinder my adversary from taking it . neither do they prohibit us to take other oaths of allegeance , wherein all civill allegeance is contained in as , or more expressive terms , then in the present oath ; as shall be made appear hereafter : nay , nor to take those clauses of the oath , which do manifestly contain no more then meer civill allegeance . neither do they in rigour oblige us to give an interiour assent to the reasons why they prohibit this oath . for even the decrees of generall councills , according to the common sentiment of divines , do not oblige us always to believe the reasons for the framing such decrees , inserted in them , to be good and solid . as in the second councill of nice it was declared , that angels may be painted , because they have bodies . the declaration is good , but the reason is false . so that though one refuses the oath in compliance to the pope's commands , it does not follow , that he does not think the oath in it self , and speculatively speaking , to be lawfull : and consequently , if he thinks that the acts therein contained do concern meer civill allegeance , he is bound , as long as he remains in such a persuasion , to comply with those acts , whether he has taken this oath or not . for a subject is bound to civill allegeance by the law of god and nature , antecedently to all oaths . finally , the popes do not forbid us in these briefs an act of loyalty , or civill allegeance : for the taking of this oath , which is onely forbidden us in these briefs , is not ( properly speaking ) any act of civil allegeance , but onely a security thereof , ( and how little trust is to be put in such a security , does appear by the sad experience of the late wars ; ) as a bond for the payment of such a sum of money is no part of the payment , but onely a security for it , if the debtor denies it . nay , a subject may be obliged to his civill allegeance , and equally punished for his not-complying therewith , or for being a traitour , whether he has taken the oath or not . whence i conclude , that , since the briefs do not forbid us any act of civill allegeance , it is manifest , that the compliance with such briefs cannot be inconsistent with the duty and loyalty due to sovereign princes ; which reaches no farther then to all acts of civill allegeance . 28. consider , lastly , whether those who reject the forementioned briefs of the popes , published after so long and so serious deliberation , under such frivolous pretences as we have already seen , and shall see hereafter , do not open a way for subjects to resist , and disobey the express commands or prohibitions ( if they be condemned therein ) of their respective sovereigns , though issued forth after never so serious a debate , pretending that they were grounded upon inconsiderateness , misinformation , and mistakes , in thinking , that such a thing was contrary to the laws of the realm , and the prerogatives of his majesty ; or that the king did not proceed therein according to the rules prescribed in such cases ; or that his majesty was a party in the debate , and that consequently he ought not to be judge ; or , finally , that such prohibitions and commands are prejudiciall to the liberty of the people and common welfare of the nation , and that they may be occasion of great disturbances in the kingdome . and whether , if such exceptions as these be warrantable , and not to be decided by the sovereigns themselves , they do not render the authority of kings ( though our adversaries , who make use of them , will needs seem to be stout champions for regall power ) very weak and insignificant , as in effect they do render the authority of the pope . 29. if it be objected , thirdly , that to refuse this oath , when we are required to take it by the king , is sinfull , inductive to schism , and scandalous to our religion , as if the principles thereof were inconsistent with civill allegeance due to princes ; and in such matters no man is bound to obey the pope's decrees , but rather to the contrary : that should the pope declare it sinfull to bear his majesty civill allegeance , ( which is due unto him by the law of god and nature , ) certainly we should not think our selves bound to submit to such a declaration : that this oath contains onely a meer civill allegeance , as our kings have declared , and to them it belongs to declare what is meer civill allegeance , and not to the pope , whose jurisdiction extends onely to spiritualls : that we are bound to obey our sovereign's commands in all probable matters , and which are not manifestly sinfull , as the taking of this oath is not : that since it is doubtfull at least whether the things contained in this oath ( wherein the difficulty thereof consists ) appertain to the spirituall or civill court , why should the pope decide it rather then the king ? and since the king commands us to take the oath , and the pope prohibits us to take it , the thing being of it self doubtfull , and not manifestly sinfull on either side , why should we submit rather to the pope's ordinance then to the king's ? that the king may confine the pope's power , and declare , that he has not a direct and absolute power over this kingdome in temporalls , or to vacate the civill laws thereof at his pleasure ; and consequently , that it is not proper for the pope to declare how far his spirituall authority does extend it self in all causes : finally , that the like argument may be made to shew the refusall of this oath to be unlawfull , as we made above to prove unlawfull the taking thereof , in this manner ; whoever of his majestie 's subjects refuses this oath , being required thereunto , denies an exteriour obedience to the king's ordinance in matters appertaining unto him , and no farther then they appertain unto him : but it is unlawfull to deny such an obedience to the king's ordinance , and in such matters : therefore it is unlawfull for any of his majestie 's subjects , when required thereunto , to refuse this oath : 30. concerning the sinfulness of the refusall of this oath , objected against us ; consider , first , whether this objection be not against all or most of those catholicks who defend the lawfulness of this oath ; whose aim onely is , to shew , not that it is a sin to refuse this oath , but that it is no sin to take it . secondly , consider , whether the refusall of this oath can be sinfull , unless the taking thereof be absolutely obligatory : and if not , then consider , whether there be any absolute obligation to take this oath , since the taking thereof is no part of civill allegeance , as has been already shewn . neither does his majesty absolutely require of us the taking of this oath , but onely conditionally , if we will enjoy such and such employments or priviledges ; which we are not bound to accept of . and though those who refuse the oath in many circumstances are liable to some penalties enacted against roman catholicks ; yet they are punished even in that case , not so much for refusing the oath , but because , by refusing it , they are suspected to be popishly inclined . whence therefore can there be proved any absolute obligation to take this oath , especially since the pope hath expresly prohibited the taking thereof ? 31. consider , thirdly , whether , according to the common persuasion of divines , we are not bound to obey the commands of our lawfull superiour in probable matters appertaining unto him , and which are not manifestly sinfull : and whether it can prudently be presumed , that the meer forbearance of this oath , ( the thing that is onely required of us , ) which has been enjoyned three severall times , in terms so significant , by two different popes , who are the onely competent judges of what is sinfull , and what not ; which has been , and is still maintained by so many grave , learned and consciencious men , against their own interest ; which hath been authorized with the imprisonment , or death , of several persons , [ fifty eight were put in prison at york , in the time of arch-bishop matthews , for refusing this oath , and forty of them died in prison , ] who rather chose to undergoe those punishments then take this oath ; is notwithstanding manifestly sinfull . 32. concerning the schism objected against us ; consider , first , that it is impossible , that those who refuse the oath should upon that account , and for complying therein with the ordinances of the supreme head in ecclesiasticall matters , become schismaticks ; as it is impossible that a subject , for complying with the commands of his king , should become a traitour or rebell . for as rebellion implies a disobedience to our sovereign in temporall affairs ; so schism necessarily imports a separation from or a disobedience to the pope , supreme head in ecclesiasticall matters . hence it follows , that should all the english catholicks joyn in taking the oath , they would not therefore be less schismaticks , but rather more in number ; as the more the rebells are , they are not therefore less rebells . 33. consider , secondly , that since union amongst catholicks here in england , in order to this point , may be obtained in either of two manners , viz. if all take the oath , or if all refuse it ; it is far more easy to obtain it , and far more warrantable to procure it , the latter way , then the former : because those who refuse it are far more numerous then those who take it ; and it is far more easie , and more warrantable , that the minor part should conform to the major , then on the contrary ; especially whenas by refusing it we unite with our head , and supreme pastour , and by taking it we separate from him . and there can be no true ecclesiasticall union , without a conjunction with the ecclesiasticall head. and sure it is more rationall , that the members should submit to the head , then the head to the members . 34. consider , thirdly , that hitherto the far greater part of english catholicks have thought it better to conserve an union among themselves , in relation to this point , by refusing the oath , then by taking it . and certainly , if ever there was any reason for catholicks to take this oath , there was more reason for it heretofore , when it was first enacted , then now . for a little before had been contrived that horrible plot of gunpowder-treason , whereunto concurred some catholicks ; but it was fathered , though unjustly , upon the whole body of catholicks then living . but now there is no catholick alive that could be actour or contriver in that plot , or that is suspected to have contrived any plot whatsoever against his majesty , much less such a detestable plot as that was : and consequently , the present catholicks of england have far less obligation ( or rather no obligation at all ) to wipe off any suspicion of disloyalty by taking the oath , then the ancient catholicks had . those catholicks who then lived , had not given so universall and so signall proofs of their loyalty to the then present king , as catholicks now alive have done to his majesty and his royall father : and by consequence , there is less reason why they should be forced to give in security , or testimony of their loyalty by oath . then there had not been issued forth so many several briefs , and after so long a deliberation , condemning this oath , as since have been published , nor the question so much discussed ( the major part sticking alwaies to the negative ) as since it has been : which had those catholicks seen who first took the oath , very probably speaking , many of them would have refused it . some of those thirteen priests who in the time of q. elizabeth subscribed an oath of the like tenour , having seen afterwards the pope's briefs , refused this oath ; and two of them , viz. robert drury and roger cadwallader , were put to death upon that account . 35. neither are there now greater advantages for catholicks who take the oath then there were in those times ; nay , the conveniency now in taking it is so inconsiderable , that no catholick is thereby alone rendered capable so much as to enter into white-hall or st. iames's park . and though the catholick lords , who take the oath , may sit in the house , and those who refuse it may not : yet how long will this ( besides that it comprehended also those ancient catholick lords , ) probably last ; seeing that scarce had some catholick lords , upon that account , taken the oath , when it begun to be agitated in the parliament , how another test might be framed to exclude all catholicks ? and the sitting of the catholick lords in the house , as things now stand , is ineffectual to carry any thing in favour of catholicks ; the far major part being against them , nay and against their sitting too in the house . for had the major part effectually desired the concurrence of the catholick lords , it would never have been carried , that all the lords should be put to the oath , if they intended to sit in the house . for such a vote would in all probability force all the catholick lords ( or at least some of them ) to forbear coming to the house . so that , were not the house against the sitting of the catholick lords , they would never have voted , that all those who would sit should take the oath . and if they be against their sitting , though all the catholick lords should take it , they will find out some other way to exclude them . moreover , if things be well sifted , perhaps many will find no little conveniency in having so handsome an occasion as this is for any catholick for not coming to the house , especially since they are not therefore debarred from voting by their proxies . wherefore if , notwithstanding the reasons above alledged , the ancient catholicks of england , or at least the far greater part of them , as even our adversaries confess , preferred to conserve union amongst themselves by refusing the oath ; why should not the present english catholicks follow , in this point , their ancestors , and take the same way of conserving union ? 36. concerning the scandal objected ; consider , first , whether the scandal ( if any lies upon catholicks or their religion in order to civil allegeance , after so many signall proofs given of their loyalty in the late civil wars , ( and , sure , works are better proofs of loyalty then words , ) after so many publick declarations thereof made by his majesty in his gracious speeches , and by many other protestants in their publick votes in parliament , whether , i say , this scandal , if any remains , ) be not rather acceptum , then datum , like to that which christian religion lay under among the iews for transgressing their ceremonies , and consequently not to be taken notice of . 37. consider , secondly , whether should all catholicks concurre to take the oath , protestants would not , in all probability , attribute this their concurrence rather to a desire of their safety , or of some particular interest , then to the principles of their religion ; as they have , and do yet , attribute the constant and general loyalty of the catholicks in the late wars , not to the tenets of their religion , but to the generosity of their minds , or desire of their security , as they have published in their books and sermons . nay , some ( as i hear ) have said the same already of catholicks that have taken the oath . so that the taking of the oath is ineffectual for the end pretended ; since protestants would not therefore have a better opinion of our religion , but worse opinion of catholicks who take the oath , as professing a religion to whose principles , as by protestants understood , they are ashamed to conform . and if so , then consider , whether ( probably speaking ) protestants are not more scandalized at catholicks who take the oath , as not standing ( in their opinion ) to the maximes of the religion they profess , and as denying an exteriour compliance with the express commands of him whom they acknowledge to be their supreme pastour ; ( which compliance even protestants grant to be due to the pastours of the church ; ) then at catholicks who refuse it : which refusal protestants ascribe not to any want of loyalty in them , ( whereof they have sufficient proofs already , ) but to some scruple of conscience , or to the submission they think themselves obliged to pay to the ordinances of the pope . and one may easily gather , by what is set down in a letter to a parliament-man , lately printed , concerning peter walsh , ( who , amongst those who profess themselves to be catholicks , seems now to be the onely man , who openly and in print vindicates the taking this oath : one may gather , i say , by what is couched in that letter , ) what opinion protestants have of such catholicks ; who , though they acknowledge the pope to be their supreme pastour , yet justify the taking this oath , against several express prohibitions of the pope . so that , by taking the oath , the scandal , if any , is not removed from our religion , but rather a new scandal is fastened upon catholicks that take it . 38. consider , thirdly , whether protestants are not of opinion , that the supremacy in spiritualls is inherent and annexed to the crown , as has been declared in parliament ; and consequently , that as long as catholicks refuse the oath of supremacy , ( which they must doe as long as they will be catholicks , ) they refuse to acknowledge the supremacy of his majesty in temporalls , and his crown . for whosoever refuses to acknowledge any thing inherent and annexed to the crown , refuses , at least implicitly , to acknowledge the crown , and his loyalty thereunto . so that , as long as we remain catholicks , we shall be accounted by protestants not loyal subjects in our tenets , whatsoever we be in our practices . 39. consider , fourthly , whether such catholicks as take the oath , whilst ineffectually they pretend to remove the scandal protestants have so unjustly conceived of our religion , by taking the oath , do not create a just scandal in other catholicks who refuse it , seeing how they slight the expresse order of their supreme head in ecclesiastical matters . 40. concerning the case contained in the objection , wherein the opponent supposes that the pope should forbid us to bear civil allegeance to his majesty , due unto him by the law of god and of nature , or should declare such an allegeance to be sinfull ; consider , first , that supposing ( as we do suppose ) that his majesty is our sovereign in all civil and temporal concerns , and that not onely in order to the civil power , but also to the exercise thereof ; to deny unto him civil allegeance , due unto him by the law of god and nature , is manifestly sinfull : and in matters manifestly sinfull we are not bound to obey the ordinances of our superiours , whether spiritual or temporal . nay , it would be heretical to prohibit a meer civil allegeance , in that supposition , or declare it unlawfull : and a pope that should teach an heresy , or become an heretick , would , according to the common consent of divines , cease to be pope ; and consequently , his orders in that case were not to be obeyed . 41. consider , secondly , whether it be reasonable , that , because there may be feigned a case or cases wherein the pope , or any other superiour , ecclesiastical or civil , might command a thing manifestly sinfull , and therefore not to be done ; we should , upon that account , deny obedience to the commands of the pope , or any other lawfull superiour , in matters evidently , or at least probably , lawfull : and the forbearance of this oath ( which is onely enjoyned us in the forementioned briefs , as has been shewn ) is manifestly or probably lawfull , as our adversaries seem to confess . 42. consider , thirdly , that the popes have been so far from forbidding catholicks to render civil obedience to his majesty , his royal father and grandfather , kings of england , that rather they have several times , and in terms very significant , charged the english catholicks to render to their majesties all civil allegeance and obedience . neither have the popes declared any of their majesties deprived of their crown . nay , never any pope ( as some have well advertised ) has declared any heretical prince , brought up alwaies in that profession , ( as the three forementioned kings were brought up protestants , ) deprived of their dominions . neither do the popes , in the above-mentioned briefs , whereby they prohibit the taking of this oath , declare in expresse terms , that they have any authority to depose hereticall princes ▪ and much less do they oblige us to swear , or to make any acknowledgement , that they have any such authority : but onely they enjoyn us a meer forbearance of the oath , the taking whereof is not properly ( as has been shewed above ) any act of civil allegeance , or at least of bare civil allegeance . 43. concerning the meer civil allegeance pretended to be contained in this oath , and that alone ; consider , first , whether whatsoever a prince is pleased to put into an oath , which he terms an oath of allegeance , is to be held as appertaining to meer civil allegeance ; and whether the refusers thereof are to be lookt upon as refusers of civil allegeance . as for instance , if an oath , intitled an oath of meer civil allegeance , were framed , wherein were expresly denied a power in the pope to excommunicate any of his majestie 's subjects in any case whatsoever , or to direct them in spiritual affairs ; sure no catholick would say , that such an oath did contain meer civil allegeance , though the prince , by whose order it was framed , should term it an oath of civil allegeance , or that the refusers thereof were guilty of disloyalty . 44. consider , secondly , whether , since it is manifest that an oath , though styled an oath of meer civil allegeance , may contain some things not appertaining to civil allegeance , but to spiritual jurisdiction , as the forementioned oath , denying a power in the pope to excommunicate ; whether then ( i say ) the pope , to whom the supreme spirituall jurisdiction belongs , and not the king , whose jurisdiction is onely civil , may not judge of such an oath , so far as it contains things appertaining to spiritual and ecclesiastical jurisdiction . and if so , whether , since this present oath contains such things , as has been declared above , the pope may not judge of this oath , as far as it contains such things , though it be pretended by some that it contains meer civil allegeance : and whether we are not bound to stand rather to the pope's judgment , in order to such things , then to the king's declaration . 45. consider , thirdly , that there is this difference between the king commanding us to take this oath , ( supposing he does command it , ) and the pope prohibiting us to take it ; that to the end the king may command us to take it , 't is necessary , that there be nothing therein contained which does not belong to the civil power , since we acknowledge his majesty to be our sovereign onely in civil matters : but to the end the pope may prohibit us to take this oath , 't is enough , that any thing whatsoever therein contained belongs to the ecclesiastical court , whose head the pope is , and that he judges such things to be unlawfull . so that far less is required , or sufficient , to prohibit an oath , then to command it . neither does the pope prohibit each part of the oath by it self , and separately taken ; but he prohibits us to take the whole oath : and to prohibit the whole , 't is enough , that any part thereof whatsoever be unlawfull , according to that maxime , bonum ex integra causa , malum ex quocunque defectu . 46. consider , fourthly , that we are bound to submit to the king's commands onely in civil matters , as to the pope's ordinances onely in spiritual ; since , as we acknowledge the pope's supremacy onely in spirituals , so we acknowledge the king's supremacy onely in temporals . and since this oath contains , as has been proved , some things not appertaining to the civil jurisdiction , we do not think our selves obliged to submit to his majestie 's orders , wherein he commands us to take this oath as it lies : as upon the same account we are not bound to take the oath of supremacy , though his majesty commands his subjects as much to take the one as the other , and penalties are enacted against the refusers of both . nay , if the thing commanded by the pope be a civil matter , though it should be lawfull , we are not bound to submit to such a command , since the pope's jurisdiction extends onely to spirituals : so if the thing commanded by the king be spiritual , though it should be lawfull , we are not bound to submit to such a command , because the king's jurisdiction extends onely to temporals . whence appears , that the major proposition of the argument , framed in the objection , to prove the refusal of the oath unlawfull , is false and of no force . for since this oath contains things not appertaining to civil jurisdiction , the king , by commanding us to take this whole oath as it lies , commands us things not appertaining unto him : but the pope , by prohibiting us to take this oath , by reason of things appertaining unto him contained therein , and not farther then they appertain unto him , does not exceed his jurisdiction ; and it is unlawfull to deny obedience to the commands of a superiour in matters appertaining unto him , and no farther then they do appertain unto him . 47. consider , fifthly , that though we should grant , as we do not , that it is doubtfull , whether the matters contained in this oath , ( wherein the main difficulty thereof consists , ) considered in themselves , do appertain to the ecclesiastical or civil court : yet since the pope's and the king's orders in this point do contradict one another , we ought rather to submit to the pope's prohibition , then the king's command , in this case . first , because , though the pope and the king be both supreme , the one in spirituals , the other in temporals ; yet the pope's supremacy ( the end whereof is eternal bliss ) is of a higher hierarchy then the king's supremacy , ( the end whereof is temporal felicity onely . ) and certainly , when two supreme governours clash one with the other , so that we cannot obey them both , but must obey one of them , ( as in our present case , we must obey either the pope , forbidding the oath , or the king , commanding it ; ) we are bound , caeteris paribus , to submit rather to him , whose jurisdiction is of a higher hierarchy , then to the other , and to our spiritual governour , then to our temporal . neither will the protestants deny this doctrine to be true , when it happens that the spiritual and temporal powers do thwart one another , all other circumstances being equal . secondly , because , according to the common sentiment of divines and canonists , when it is doubtfull , whether such a matter , considered in it self , does appertain to the spiritual or temporal court , it belongs to the spiritual judge to decide to which of these two courts it does appertain : for , other circumstances being equall , the spiritual judge is to be preferred before the temporal : neither is there any other commodious way to decide the question . thirdly , because the pope requires less of us then the king. for the pope onely requires , that we should not take this oath ; not , that we should swear any thing contrary to it : but the king requires , that we should positively take this oath as it lies ; which is far more . and when two precepts contradict one another , we ought to submit to that precept of the two , caeteris paribus , wherein least is required of us . fourthly , because the pope's precept in this matter is negative , but the king's precept is affirmative : and when two precepts oppose one another , we ought rather , all other circumstances being equall , to embrace the negative precept then the affirmative , according to the common opinion of divines . 48. consider , sixthly , that the pope does not expresly condemn , as the opponent seems to suppose , any of the points under debate , contained in this oath ; neither does he require of us , that we should swear , that he has any power to depose kings ; but onely , that we should not swear , that he has not any such power : which is what the king requires of us . so that the king , and not the pope , decides the point under debate in his own favour , requiring us to swear positively the part favourable unto him. since therefore withrington and his other catholicks , who defend the oath , do confess , that this question , whether the pope has any authority to depose kings , is yet under debate between popes and kings , certant scholastici , & adhuc sub judice lis est , as they alledge out of trithemius and others ; why should the king decide the question in his own favour , requiring his subjects to swear positively ; that the pope has no such authority ; which is , as it were , to take possession of the part favourable unto him ? or why may not the pope inhibit such an oath , in case the king enjoyns it , as long as the question is in debate between the pope and king , as our adversaries confess it is yet ? adhuc sub judice lis est . for as long as it is under debate to whom such a thing belongs , either of the parties has right to hinder his adversary from taking possession thereof , though he himself cannot take possession of it , till the question be lawfully decided in his favour : and it is much less to hinder another from taking possession of a thing , then to take possession of it himself . 49. consider , seventhly , that whoever acknowledges the king to be our sovereign in temporall and civill matters , as we do , he must confess that neither the pope , nor any one else , has any direct and absolute power over this kingdome ; such a power in any other being inconsistent with the sovereignty of the king in temporalls : as in the like manner , whoever acknowledges the pope's supremacy in spiritualls , as we also do acknowledge , he must necessarily , upon the like ground , deny any other to be invested with the same superiority . so that , should the pope declare himself sovereign in temporalls over this kingdome , or any other his majestie 's dominions , with a direct and absolute power , he would in that case declare a thing manifestly destructive to the king's sovereignty in temporalls , which we acknowledge . neither does it belong to the pope , or the spirituall court , to declare who is the temporall sovereign of such a kingdome ; but to the representative of that kingdome , or to some other civill power , according to the different constitutions of civill government . so that to declare the pope temporall sovereign of such a kingdome , is not to declare how far his spirituall jurisdiction , as such , extends it self , ( which does belong to the spirituall court ; ) but rather it is to declare him sovereign or supreme governour in a different kind : which declaration does not belong unto him . neither , because a lawfull superiour may , perhaps , exceed his power in some matters , does it therefore follow , that in no other thing he is to be obeyed . what therefore we affirm in this point is , that as it belongs to a sovereign temporall prince , to determine what is precisely necessary for the conservation of his temporall sovereignty , in case he be unjustly attacqued by another in his temporalls : so it appertains to the sovereign spirituall prince , ( who is the pope , ) to determine what is necessary to be done for the conservation of his spirituall sovereignty , in case he be unjustly attacqued in spiritualls . 50. consider , eighthly , to the end that it may clearly appear how willing the english catholicks are to give his majesty any just security of their loyalty , that they are ready , if it be necessary , not onely to take all the clauses of this oath , wherein meer civill allegeance due to his majesty is contained , but other oaths also , rather more expressive of civill allegeance then this is ; viz. such as were taken by the subjects of the ancient kings of england , or which are taken now by the catholick subjects of other christian princes , whether catholicks or protestants , or of any other profession . and certainly it would be very ridiculous to affirm , that there is no standing oath , in any other christian country , sufficiently expressive of civill allegeance . and to descend to particulars ; they are ready to swear , without any mentall reservation , that they acknowledge their sovereign lord king charles the second to be lawfull king of this realm , and of all other his majestie 's kingdomes : that they renounce all power whatsoever , ecclesiasticall or civill , domestick or forrein , repugnant to the same : that they confess themselves obliged in conscience , to be as obedient to his majesty in all civill affairs , as true allegeance can oblige any subject to be to his prince : that they promise to bear inviolably , during life , true allegeance to his majesty , his lawfull heirs and successours , and him and them will defend against all attempts whatsoever , which shall be made against his or their rights , the rights of their persons , crown or dignity , by any person whatsoever , or under whatsoever pretence : that they will doe their best endeavour to discover to his majesty , his heirs and successours , or to some of their ministers , all treacherous conspiracies , which they shall know or hear of to be against him or them : that they do declare that doctrine to be impious , seditious and abominable , which maintains , that any private subject may lawfully kill or murther the anointed of god , his prince . now let any one judge , protestant or catholick , whether these forementioned clauses are not more , or at least as expressive of civill allegeance , as the ordinary oath is : and if so , then let them consider , whether , since catholicks are ready to take any of the oaths above mentioned , they can rationally be suspected to refuse the ordinary oath of allegeance for want of loyalty . for did they refuse it upon that account , they would not offer to take the abovesaid oaths , wherein as much or more civill allegeance is contained then in the ordinary oath . and whether also ( probably speaking ) we may not vehemently suspect , that protestants , who will not be content that catholicks should take any of the aforesaid oaths , ( wherein all civill allegeance due to princes is manifestly contained , ) but will needs have them take the ordinary oath , do require of them somewhat more then meer civill allegeance : otherwise , why should not they be content with any of the forementioned oaths ? wherefore it would not be amiss , that when the oath is tendred to any catholick who is resolved to refuse it , he should make a protestation of his fidelity , by offering to take any of the forementioned oaths . which will at least serve to disabuse protestants , that he does not refuse to take the ordinary oath for want of civill allegeance . 51. consider , lastly , that doubtless there may be framed an oath of allegeance , with such glances upon the tenets of protestants , ( the same is of any other religion , ) that no protestant , who will stick to the tenets of his religion , can take : though it would seem very irrationall , to deduce thence , that protestants deny civill allegeance to his majestie , if they be ready to take another oath , wherein all civill allegeance is clearly contained . and if so , why may not we refuse this oath , by reason of some doubtfull or false expressions it contains , or of some glances it has at our religion , without therefore deserving to be impeached of disloyalty ; since we are ready to take other oaths , wherein as much or more civill allegeance is contained ? 52. if they object , fourthly , for the lawfulness of this oath , the authority of the kingdome of france , of the university and parliament of paris , and of other universities and parliaments of that kingdome , who constantly deny the pope to have any authority or power , direct or indirect , to depose kings ; and finally , of the french iesuits , who subscribed the censure and condemnation of some books wherein that power was defended ; and why may not the catholicks of england have the same liberty as the catholicks of france have ? 53. concerning the authority of france , for this oath , objected against us ; consider , first , that though in an assembly * held in france of the three estates , ecclesiasticks , nobility , and commons , in time of cardinall peron , there was drawn up ‖ an oath by the third estate , or commons , wherein is affirmed , † that there is no power on earth , either spirituall or temporall , that hath any right over his majestie 's kingdome , to depose the sacred persons of our kings , nor to dispense with or absolve their subjects from their loyalty and obedience which they owe to them ; for any cause or pretence whatsoever : yet the two chief parts of the assembly , viz. the * spirituall and temporall lords , were so much against this article of the oath , that they were resolved , especially the spirituall lords , to die rather then take it ; and the third estate , or commons , who had drawn it up , after they had heard peron's oration against it , laid it aside , which is as much as handsomely to recall it . and how can we reasonably say that the kingdome of france is for an oath , which the two principall parts of the assembly , representative of that kingdome , were so eager against , and which the third part , after serious consideration , laid aside ? 54. consider , secondly , that rather we may alledge the kingdome of france for the negative , or against the oath , according to what happened in the assembly . for it is a certain kind of argument against a thing , when , having been proposed and debated in an assembly , it was not carried , but rather rejected . neither has there been since enacted by any other assembly of france any oath of this kind , to be tendred unto all , ( neither do our adversaries pretend , that any such thing has been done , ) as our oath of allegeance was enacted for all sorts of people , by our parliament , which corresponds to the assembly in france . neither is there in france any other oath , wherein is expresly denied the forementioned power , established by the king or any parliament , or any other ways , for to be taken by all such who swear allegeance to his most christian majesty . and the english catholicks are ready to take the oath of allegeance to his majesty which is generally tendred in france . and why may not his majesty be content with the same kind of civil allegeance from his subjects , which the french king and other sovereigns require from their subjects ? all which shews , that france cannot reasonably be brought as a precedent in the cause we treat of . 55. consider , thirdly , that since the representative of france has so much favoured the negative , though we should grant , ( and whether it must be granted or not , we shall see by and by , ) that some other particular tribunall or society of that kingdome have favoured the contrary ; yet because the assembly or representative of france is far above those particular societies , we ought to conclude , that france rather countenances the negative , then the affirmative . should we see that our parliament did countenance so much the negative of an opinion , as the forementioned assembly of france did countenance the refusall of that oath ; though some particular court at westminster , or the university of oxford , should countenance the contrary ; we ought to say that england rather stood for the negative , then the affirmative . 56. concerning the authority of the parliament and vniversity of paris in this point ; consider , first , that neither that parliament , nor any other parliament of france , neither that university , nor any other university of that kingdome , have ever yet made any publick and authentick act wherein they approve our present oath of allegeance as it lies , and all its clauses wherein the difficulty thereof consists ; neither do our adversaries pretend any such thing : but onely that the parliament and university of paris , with some other parliaments and universities of france , have made decrees , wherein they deny the pope to have any power whatsoever to depose kings , or to absolve their subjects from the allegeance due unto them , for any cause or under any pretence whatsoever . yet hence does not follow , that the parliaments or universities of that kingdome do approve this oath . for to approve an oath , 't is necessary to approve all and every part thereof : and who onely approves one part , does not therefore approve the whole . so that whosoever argues hence , to shew the lawfulness of this oath , his argument must run thus : the university and parliament of paris approve some clauses of this oath , whereat severall persons do scruple : therefore they approve the whole oath . which argument is inconclusive , as is manifest . 57. consider , secondly , that though the authority of the parliament and university of paris may work so far with some , as to perswade them that this oath ought not to be refused upon the account of any just scruple concerning the power in the pope to depose kings , or absolve their subjects from the allegeance due unto them ; yet it does not therefore follow , that the same authority ( which does not concern it self at least in any publick decrees about other difficulties of the oath ) should perswade them not to refuse at all this present oath , since there are severall other respects , not taken notice of by the parliament or university of paris , in their publick decrees alledged by our adversaries , for which many refuse it . some , though satisfied that the pope has no power to depose kings , yet they have a great difficulty about the word hereticall : for it seems hard unto them , to censure the doctrine which maintains , that princes excommunicate or deprived by the pope , may be deposed by their subjects , for an heresie , or for as bad as an heresie ; and the defenders thereof for hereticks , either materiall or formall , as invincible ignorance does or does not excuse them , or at least for as bad as such ; and to swear that they detest them in the like manner , either for such , or as bad as such . 58. others think , they cannot swear with truth , that neither the pope , nor any other whatsoever , can absolve them from this oath , or any part thereof , in any case imaginable ; since the king himself may absolve his subjects from such an oath , either all of them , by laying down the government with consent of the kingdome , as charles the fifth did ; ( and it is hard to oblige one to swear , that a king of england in no case possible can doe the like ; ) or at least some of them , by passing a town under his jurisdiction to another king , as his majesty passed dunkirk to the french king , and consequently absolved from the oath of allegeance the inhabitants who had taken it . moreover , they do not see how they can swear , that it is impossible , that , in any case whatsoever , a king of england may be justly conquered . for if he be justly conquered , then he is justly deposed ; and if justly deposed , then his subjects are absolved from their oath of allegeance : for no body is bound to pay allegeance to one who is no longer his king or sovereign . 59. others cannot swallow that term [ heartily ] inserted in the oath , nor swear , that all they must swear , if they take the oath , they swear heartily , according to the plain and common sense of the words by them spoken . for to swear heartily is more then to swear onely with a meer power not to swear . a merchant , who throws out his goods into the sea onely to save himself and his ship , cannot be said to doe it heartily ; which signifies , to doe a thing without a reluctancy of mind ; but rather with an inclination and propension of mind thereunto . and how ( say they ) can we swear , that we take this oath heartily , and without any reluctancy of mind , but rather with a great inclination thereunto , when we are forced to take it to conserve our privileges or employments , or not to undergo severe penalties enacted against those who refuse it ? and when we see that so many great difficulties have been started against this oath , and pursued with so much vigour ; that so many learned and consciencious men are against it ; and that the supreme pastour of the church has so often and so severely prohibited it ? all which ( say they ) cannot but create , in any tender conscience , some regret and reluctancy of mind to take the oath . 60. others are deterred by the title of the act wherein this oath is inserted , an act for the discovering and suppressing of popish recusants : whereby it seems to be insinuated , that the taking this oath is made a denial of the roman catholick religion , or of popery . for though other things are contained in the act , which do contribute to the discovery of popish recusants ; yet this oath is inserted among the rest , and compleats the discovery of them . and it is not lawfull to doe any thing which is made by publick authority a denial of the true religion , or a distinctive sign of a false religion . 61. others , though they are satisfied concerning the substance of the oath , yet are gravelled at some ambiguous expressions . the authour of the reflexions upon this oath , though he be very fierce against the pope's power to depose kings , yet he seems dissatisfied with the oath , by reason of several ambiguous expressions therein contained ; as appears by what he says pag. 76 , 77. and an oath must not be ambiguous . nay , the authour of the questions concerning the oath , though so eager for the lawfulness thereof , does notwithstanding confess , ( pag. 26. ) that it is drest up unhappily with some odde expressions , at the first sight ; and therefore he heartily wishes that another form of oath were framed , which might not trouble with scruples the less-instructed conscience of any . 62. others , though they believe that what-ever is contained in the oath is true , and are ready to swear that they believe it , yet they cannot be brought to swear positively , that what-ever is asserted in the oath is true : which is very different . others , finally , though they be satisfied concerning the substance of the oath , and the expressions too , yet see no necessity of swearing , or any good they get by taking the oath : and an oath , amongst other conditions , must be necessary . all such persons as these , though they be fully satisfied , either from the pretended authority of france , or otherwise , that the pope has no power to depose kings ; yet those decrees of france , which our adversaries produce , do not clear , nor so much as touch , the forementioned difficulties ; and consequently are not alone able to induce the aforesaid persons to take the oath , or to justify the taking thereof . whence it follows , that because one refuses the oath , it cannot in rigour be inferred , that he denies such a determinate clause thereof , let them take which they please ; since some dislike one thing , and some another : nay , nor that he does not assent to the whole substance of the oath , and to its expressions also . and much less can it be thence inferred , that such an one who refuses the oath does deny civil allegeance to his majesty . 63. consider , thirdly , that the decree of the parliament of paris published the 27. of iune 1614. quoted by withrington in the place above mentioned , whereby was prohibited suarez his book , intitled defensio fidei catholicae , &c. is to be understood onely , as appears by the chapters cited in the decree , and by the tenour thereof , in order to the prohibition of that doctrine , which maintains the temporal authority of the pope over kings : but it does not concern it self at all with other difficulties , which suarez and other authours raise about the oath : which notwithstanding must be cleared , before we can take it . 64. consider , fourthly , that it is one thing to prohibit the teaching or preaching that the pope has any power to depose kings , or to command one to teach and preach the contrary ; which is all our adversaries can prove from the forementioned decrees , or any other , of the parliaments and universities of france ; and another thing to command one to swear positively , that the pope has no such power , and to abjure the affirmative as heretical , which the king commands us to doe when he commands us to take this oath . so that the argument our adversaries draw from such decrees of france is this ; the parliament or university of paris prohibits any one to teach , that the pope has authority to depose kings , or commands some to teach the contrary : therefore the king may command us to swear positively , that the pope has no such authority , or to abjure the contrary as heretical . which consequence is null , as is manifest . for what university is there , wherein the members thereof are not prohibited to teach certain opinions , or are not commanded to teach the contrary ; many of which opinions are meer scholastical and philosophical questions , either part being probable ? but yet they are not therefore commanded to swear positively , that such opinions are true , neither can they in conscience many times swear it : for one may teach such an opinion to be true , though he cannot swear it to be so ; more being requisite to swear a thing to be true , then to teach that it is so . 65. consider , fifthly , that what was resolved by the parliament of paris , in that decree concerning the iesuits , was , that the rectour , with some others of the principal fathers , should be summoned to appear in the court at such a day : that they should be told , that , contrary to the expresse order of their own general , issued forth in the year 1610. this book of suarez had been printed , and brought into that kingdome : that they should procure the same prohibition to be renewed by their general ; and that they should exhibit an authentical copy thereof within three months : finally , that they should exhort the people , in their sermons , to embrace the contrary doctrine to the propositions they had prohibited . but from all this it cannot be inferred , that the french iesuits did , or would have sworn positively , that the pope has no power , in no case whatsoever , to depose princes ; nor that they did exhort the people to swear any such thing ; nor that they were commanded by the parliament so to doe . one may exhort another to embrace an opinion , which notwithstanding he will not nor cannot positively swear to be true , nor exhort the other to swear it is so . and yet whoever exhorts any one to take the oath , he must exhort him to swear positively , that the forementioned opinion , viz. that the pope has no power to depose kings , is true . much less can it be inferred from the aforesaid decree , that the french iesuits did approve , or were commanded to approve , of all the other clauses contained in the present oath . and consequently , their authority cannot be alledged for the lawfulness thereof . for though the clauses relating to the pope's power to depose princes may seem to some to contain the main difficulty ; yet this to others seems no difficulty at all : and there are several other difficulties involved in the oath , as has been shewn . and to the end we may lawfully take an oath , 't is necessary to be satisfied concerning all , and every difficulty and clause thereof . for to swear any thing either false , or doubtfull , though never so little in it self , is a grievous sin. 66. concerning the authority of the vniversity of paris in particular , for the lawfulness of the oath ; besides what already has been said in general , consider , first , that though we should grant , ( as we do not , ) that the universitie of paris , and other universities of france , are for the oath : yet even our adversaries confess , that the universities of spain are against it , where , beyond debate , there are many learned and consciencious men , and as zealous for the honour and safety of their kings as any in france ; and they have as many prerogatives relating to the security of their sovereigns against the usurpations of any ecclesiastical prince , as in any countrey whatsoever . so that , admitting that on both sides there are grave authours , yet the negative , in the present debate , has the advantage of the affirmative , that the pope , who is the competent judge in these affairs , ( as above has been proved , ) and to whom both parties made their address , has given his express sentence for the negative ; and among other things which render an opinion , before probable , practically or in practice improbable , one is , an authentick declaration or sentence of a competent , especially supreme , judge to the contrary . 67. suppose that in a plea before the king and his councill , there are many brave lawyers on both sides , who produce several pregnant arguments , and excellent precedents , in favour of their respective clients , which render the cause doubtfull ; yet that party must needs carry it , for whom the king and his council gave their definitive sentence : neither is it longer lawfull for the party condemned to stand out , because many learned lawyers are on his side , or to retrive the former arguments produced for his right ; which signifies no more then to plead after the suit is lost . neither would the party who had gained the cause concern himself any farther with what the lawyers of the contrary side object against him . the same happens in our present case . there are many grave and learned authours against the oath : suppose there are also many for it : yet since the impugners of the oath have obtained several express sentences of the supreme judge in their favour , they do not think themselves obliged to take any farther notice of what the defenders of the oath produce against them , which cannot excuse them from an exteriour compliance with the judge's express sentence , as long as it is authentick . and this is the reason , why the impugners of the oath have not in a long time printed any thing against it . for what more can they pretend by their writings , but that the oath be condemned by the pope ? which has been already done . but the defenders of the oath continue still to write , after they have lost the cause ; according to the common saying , losers must have leave to talk , or at least they will take it . 68. consider , secondly , that among other oaths , which those who desire to be incorporated in the university of paris are to take , one for the degree of bachelour is , that they will hold the articles of the faculty of paris to be true ; and that , when occasion offers , they will defend them to be agreeable to faith and religion : which is a promissory oath ; the truth whereof onely requires , that he who swears has a sincere intention to doe what he promises : and ( as we have already seen ) one may promise , even under an oath , that he will defend such an opinion to be true , when occasion offers , though he does not , nor cannot lawfully , many times , swear positively that it is true . for these two oaths are very different , before god , i judge that the pope has no power to depose kings , and i promise to defend it , when occasion requires ; and , before god , he has no such power . the immediate object of the former oath is onely our own judgment , or intention ; whereof every one is certain : and consequently , to call god for witness that he has such a judgment , being certain that he has it , is not to expose god to be a witness to a falsity . but the immediate object of the latter oath is the matter it self , which probably may be otherwise : and to call god for witness of a thing that i know probably may be otherwise , is to expose him to be witness of a falsity ; which , let the matter be never so little , is a great affront . and therefore it is a common way of speaking among consciencious people , i think such a thing is true , but i will not swear it is true . hence it follows , that the immediate object of oaths is not alwaies the judgment of the person who takes them : otherwise it would be impossible that one should ever swear false , judging that he swears true , since every one is conscious of his own actual judgment ; neither can one think that he judges actually , when he does not : and yet certainly it is possible that one should swear false , thinking that he swears true . so that though we should grant that the university of paris does oblige her members to swear , that they will defend , that the pope has no power to depose kings ; it does not therefore follow , that they can be , or are , bound to swear positively , that the pope has no such power : which notwithstanding we must swear , if we will take this oath . neither , because they are bound to swear , that they will defend the articles of the faculty of paris to be agreeable to faith and religion , does it therefore follow , ( as some do seem to pretend , ) that they are bound to defend them as articles of faith. for the common approbation of theological and spiritual books , is , that they contain nothing which is not agreeable to faith and good manners : and yet , sure , those who give such approbations are far from approving all that is contained in such books , as articles of faith. 69. consider , thirdly , that among other articles of the faculty of paris , one is , ( upon which chiefly our adversaries seem to have had an eye , ) that it is not the doctrine of the faculty , that the pope has any authority over the temporals of his most christian majesty ; and that the faculty has alwaies resisted those who affirm this power to be onely indirect . now to infer hence , that the faculty of paris does approve our present oath , even in this point , concerning the pope's power over the temporals of princes , is to argue thus ; the faculty of paris does not teach , that the pope has any authority over the temporals of princes : therefore , according to the opinion of that faculty , we may swear positively , that he has no such power or authority . which consequence doubtless is very weak : for it is one thing , not to teach such a doctrine , or to punish and resist those that do teach it ; and another thing , to authorize one to swear positively , or to teach the contrary . they might , in the like manner , quote all the iesuits who now live , or have been alive for many years , though they are lookt upon as the greatest sticklers against the oath , in favour of it . for they have been prohibited many years agoe , and under excommunication , to teach or preach , that the pope has any authority whatsoever to depose kings ; and whoever among them should teach any such doctrine would be severely punished : whence it manifestly follows , that it is not the doctrine of the iesuits , that the pope can depose kings . will our adversaries therefore infer hence , that it is the doctrine of the iesuits , that we may positively swear that the pope has no such power ? 70. in the same article is contained , that it is not the doctrine of that faculty , that the pope is above a general council , nor that he is infallible without the consent of the church . and sure hence cannot be deduced , that it is the sentiment of the aforesaid faculty , that we may positively swear the contrary tenets to be true . and though in another of their articles it be affirmed , that it is the doctrine of that faculty , that his most christian majestie 's subjects cannot be dispensed with , under any pretence whatsoever , in their loyalty due unto him : yet they are not therefore obliged to swear it . 71. moreover , among other oaths , which the members of the university of paris are bound to take , they must swear , that they will hold , that the b. virgin mary was preserved in her conception from original sin : yet they are not therefore obliged to swear it , and much lesse to abjure the contrary doctrine as heretical . for there is a vast difference between swearing that we will defend such a doctrine to be true ; and swearing that it is true , or abjuring the contrary doctrine as heretical . 72. consider , fourthly , concerning a certain decree made by the university of paris the 20. of april 1626. ( whereof our adversaries make so great an account , ) condemning several propositions of sanctarellus his book as erroneous , seditious , contrary to the word of god , &c. according to a common interpretation of those words of the oath , i abjure as impious and heretical , &c. given by our adversaries , that such a decree or prohibition is void , and of no force . for , according to that interpretation of our adversaries , the forementioned words of the oath are to be taken comparatively , not assertively ; that is , not for abjuring that doctrine for heretical , but onely for as bad as heretical : in the same manner as is commonly said , that we detest such an one as the devil , knowing full well , that he is not the devil . so that , according to this acception , 't is not necessary , that who takes the oath should think that the doctrine there abjured is either impious , or heretical ; nay , he may fully be persuaded that it is neither impious , nor heretical : and he must think so , if those words must be taken comparatively , as some will have ; for all comparison is between distinct things . all which , i confess , does seem somewhat strange to me . neither do i see how , with truth , without hyperbole , and according to the plain sense of the words , one can look upon a doctrine which is not heretical , for as bad as if it were heretical ; since heresy is the blackest censure , and what-ever proposition is not heretical , is less then heretical . but my present design is not to impugn the aforesaid interpretation : what i affirm is , that if such an interpretation be warrantable , yet it cannot be gathered from the above-mentioned decree , wherein the like expression is used , viz. as erroneous , and contrary to the word of god , that the doctours of paris did hold the propositions condemned in that decree to be erroneous , seditious , or contrary to the word of god. nay , notwithstanding that decree , they might , and must think those propositions to be neither erroneous , nor seditious , nor contrary to the word of god. and if so , of what force is this decree , to prove that we may positively swear , that the pope has no power to depose princes ? 73. consider , fifthly , that since the censures contained in the forementioned decree are several , and the propositions therein condemned are also several , it does not well appear which censures fall upon which propositions ; or whether every censure falls upon every one of them . it seems incredible , that those learned men should censure as erroneous , seditious , and contrary to the word of god , &c. this proposition , which is mentioned in the decree , the pope may with temporal punishment chastise kings and princes for the crime of heresy : since 't is manifest , that should an heretical prince be reconciled , the pope , or any other confessarius who should reconcile him , might impose upon him for the crime of heresy some corporal and temporal penance or punishment , enjoyning him to give an alms , to build an hospital , or some such other work . 74. consider , sixthly , that the forementioned book of sanctarellus was prohibited at rome by the pope before it was prohibited at paris , as spondanus , a french authour , relates ; who also says , that the animosities of the university of paris against this book did arise from some hidden seeds of schism . now our adversaries do not so much as pretend , that the pope is for the lawfulness of this oath , or of opinion , that we may positively swear , that he has no power whatsoever to depose kings ; though he prohibited that book . why therefore do they infer , that the university of paris , because it prohibits the same book , is for the oath ? 75. consider , seventhly , whether the censures contained in the above-mentioned decree may not be understood to condemn onely a power in the pope to depose princes , either by reason of some civill insufficiency in the prince to govern , or some light cause mentioned by sanctarellus , or upon the meer account of heresy or apostasy , though they should permit their subjects to enjoy liberty of conscience : which seems to have been the doctrine of sanctarellus . if so , then our case is very different concerning the present point . for neither bellarmine , nor peron , ( against whom our adversaries do so hotly inveigh , ) do speak of a meer civill insufficiency ; neither do they affirm , that a prince may lawfully be deposed , meerly because he is an heretick , unless moreover he forces his subjects to be so too , by persecuting them . and yet , in the oath , we are bound to swear , that the pope has not any power whatsoever , in any case possible , to depose an hereticall prince , whether he persecutes his subjects or not . 75. consider , eighthly , that though in the forementioned decree , sanctarellus his propositions be condemned as contrary to the word of god ; yet this is not properly to condemn them ( as our adversaries pretend ) for hereticall , unless they be declared as such by the church : as , to approve a proposition as agreeable to the word of god , is not to approve it as an article of faith , according to what above has been insinuated . and there is scarce any scholasticall question of divinity , wherein the defenders of either side do not endeavour to prove their opinion out of scripture ; and consequently , they look upon the opposite sentence as contrary to the word of god : yet they are far from censuring it therefore as hereticall , and often prohibited so to doe . nay , protestants , who affirm those tenets wherein we differ from them to be repugnant to scripture , and pretend to prove they are so ; yet they do withall confess , that they are no heresies . so that as well protestants as catholicks , according to the plain and common sense of the words , understand somewhat more by an hereticall opinion , then an opinion contrary to the word of god. 77. concerning other things relating to the authority of france , contained in the objection ; consider , first , that the authour of a book entitled some few questions concerning the oath of allegeance , page 8. sets down an arrest of the parliament of paris , wherein the iesuits were ordered ( as he pretends ) to subscribe the forementioned decree or censure against sanctarellus his book . but this is a great mistake , if the arrest be understood of that decree . for that decree was made upon the 20. of april 1626. and the arrest was dated the 17 th . of march 1626. wherein the iesuits were commanded to subscribe within three days ; so that , according to this account , they were to subscribe a decree 37 days before it was made : and the censure of the sorbon mentioned in the decree was passed the 4 th . of april 1626. so that , were the arrest to be understood of this censure , they were to subscribe 15 days before it past : which is ridiculous . besides , should we grant , that the iesuits had subscribed the forementioned decree and censure , we have already seen how little that decree , or the censure therein contained , does favour the lawfulness of this oath : and consequently , neither can the subscription of the iesuits to such a censure and decree help much thereunto . for they would not therefore subscribe or approve the oath as it lies , nor affirm , that one might positively swear , that the pope has no power whatsoever to depose princes ; and much less , that one might swear , that he abjures the contrary as hereticall : ( all which is required in the oath : ) since the university or parliament of paris never required any such oath or subscription . nay , one's subscription signifies no more , but that he thinks the thing he subscribes to be true : yet one may think a thing to be true , though he will not swear , nor counsell any other to swear it is so . 78. consider , secondly , that there are some other propositions alledged out of france in favour of this oath , which are commonly held in that kingdome ; viz. that his most christian majesty does not receive his kingdome but from god , and his sword — that he does not acknowledge any other superiour in his kingdome , but onely god : ( which is to be understood in temporalls ; for he acknowledges the pope to be his superiour in spiritualls . ) now , even those who refuse the oath do confess the same of his majesty . neither is an indirect and conditionall power to depose kings ( which some ascribe to the pope in certain cases ) inconsistent with such prerogatives . for every king has an indirect and conditionall power or right to wage war against any other sovereign , though he receives his government immediately from god ; and to depose him too , in case he injures such a king or his subjects , as it is possible he may , and refuses , when required thereunto , to give any reasonable satisfaction . what good english subject is there , who , in the late dutch war , ( which we suppose to have been just on our side , ) would have sworn , that his majesty had not right and power to depose the states generall , ( whom we acknowledge to be sovereign , and to depend of god alone in temporalls , ) and consequently , to absolve their subjects from their oath of allegeance made to them , in case they had persisted to refuse to give his majesty the satisfaction that was due ? and what satisfaction was due , his majesty was to be judge . so that , were this indirect deposing power inconsistent with the sovereignty of princes , there would be no sovereign prince at all . and since the pope is sovereign temporall prince of rome , and its adjacent territories , as even protestants confess ; he must have the like indirect deposing power , or right , which is inherent in every sovereign temporall prince , as even our adversaries will not deny . and yet , if we take the oath , we must swear , or testify before god , ( which certainly is to swear , ) that the pope , neither of himself , nor by any authority of the church of rome , has any power to depose kings ; that is , neither temporall nor spirituall , neither direct nor indirect : for the proposition is negative , and by consequence denies all power whatsoever . 79. and here i cannot but ask our adversaries a question ; which is , whether either they or protestants do affirm , that all wars whatsoever undertaken by christian princes , ( whereof some are styled defenders of the faith , others catholick majesties , others most christian majesties , ) in defence of the orthodox religion , against another prince , a persecutour of the true church , and declared to be such by a lawfull and competent judge , whether ( i say ) they affirm , that all such wars are unjust and unlawfull : and if not , whether the pope may not declare a sovereign prince to be an heretick , and a persecutour of the church , if really he be such : and whether , if he may make such a declaration , ( as being a lawfull judge in matters of that nature , according to the unanimous consent of catholicks , ) he may not also in that case invoke the help of some pious and powerfull christian king , ( which is what is understood by authorizing him , ) to stave off by arms the manifest injury done to his sheep in spiritualls : and if he may in that case invoke the help of some christian king to that effect , ( since it is manifest , that ecclesiasticks may in some cases invoke the help of a secular power , ) whether then the king so invoked may not condescend to the pope's request , and compell the hereticall prince , and persecutour , by force of arms , to desist from seducing his subjects ; and in case of refusall , to prosecute the war ( as he may all other just wars ) till he has deposed , him and consequently absolved his subjects from their oath of allegeance . and if they grant all this , how can they counsell us to swear , that the pope neither by himself , nor with any other , has any power to depose kings , or to authorize any forrein prince to invade or annoy them , or their countries ? all which is involved in the oath . 80. consider , thirdly , that because the gallican church has such privileges or liberties granted unto it , either by some particular concessions of the pope , or by some contract , or otherwise ; it does not therefore follow , that every other church or kingdome does enjoy the same privileges or liberties . for one kingdome may have some particular privileges which another has not : and perhaps we had here some particular privileges , granted unto us from rome , which were not granted in france . among the propositions alledged out of france concerning the pope's authority , another is , ( which seems to be held in france , ) that the pope cannot put an interdict ( which is a meer ecclesiasticall censure , as an excommunication is ) either upon the french king , or his kingdome : and moreover , the members of the university of paris do swear , that they will defend , among other articles , that the said university does not approve , that the pope may depose bishops , or deprive them , though ecclesiasticall persons , of their ecclesiasticall iurisdiction , contrary to the liberties and canons of the gallican church , commonly received in that kingdome . and yet , sure , even those catholicks who stand so much for the oath , would think it somewhat harsh , if the parliament should force them to swear , that the pope cannot depose a catholick bishop of england , ( were there any such bishop , ) that deserved to be deposed ; or that he cannot put an interdict upon this kingdome : since they onely pretend to deny the pope any jurisdiction over the temporalls of the kingdome , or to inflict temporall punishments ; but not over the spiritualls thereof , or to inflict ecclesiasticall punishments , such as an interdict is . wherefore this consequence is null ; such a practice , or such a doctrine , is allowed of in france , or for france ; therefore the same practice , or doctrine , must be allowed of in england , and for england . besides that the liberty which the french have concerning our present debate is onely , that they may defend , that the pope has no power to depose kings : which liberty is also given to our english ; since the pope in the above-mentioned briefs does not declare expresly , ( as our adversaries falsely suppose he does , ) that he has any such power , or forbid us to hold or defend the contrary . 81. consider , fourthly , whether , should we grant , ( which we do not ) that there were in france a publick oath for all sorts of people , wherein they do positively swear , that the pope has not any power to depose his most christian majesty , whether ( i say ) there would not be severall particular reasons to refuse such an oath as our present oath is in england , considering the present condition thereof , which are of no force in france , to refuse the like oath . for we may prudently suspect here in england , that since the framers of this oath were mortall enemies to the pope and see of rome , they have made such frequent mention therein of the pope and see of rome ( without specifying any other sovereign temporall prince , nay not so much as containing them in generall terms ; though there be as much need for his majesty to secure the loyalty of his subjects against other sovereigns , as against the pope ; ) out of hatred and contempt of the roman church , the papall dignity , and the pope's supremacy in spiritualls : and since they could not so easily bring catholicks to deny it explicitly by taking the oath of supremacy , they intend to make them deny it implicitly , and under a colour of civil loyalty , inducing them to take this oath of allegeance . and that this was the design of the parliament , is manifest . for they would have inserted in the oath a renunciation of the pope's power to excommunicate ; whereby they would implicitly , even according to our adversaries judgment , have denied the pope's supremacy . and though they left out that clause at king iames his request , yet there remains enough to make us prudently suspect , that the oath was contrived in contempt of the papall dignity . now it is a constant opinion among divines , that when any thing , though it should be indifferent of it self , is required of us in contempt of any lawfull dignity , we are bound to refuse it , though otherwise we might submit unto it . it is related of some ancient christians , that they would rather die then swear by the fortune of caesar ; because such an oath was required of them by the pagan emperours in contempt of the true god , to the end that they who took it might be thought to acknowledge implicitly thereby , that fortune was a goddess : yet christians may , if it be necessary , swear by the fortune of their princes , who are christians . in like manner , should an arrian king require of his subjects , that they should swear or subscribe this proposition , christ is a creature , they might justly refuse it , though that proposition in rigour be true ; because they might prudently suspect , that the arrians did require of them such an oath , or subscription , in contempt of the divinity of our b. saviour ; which they denied , and endeavoured to prove their assertion , because he was a creature . now nothing of this could be suspected in france , where they are roman catholicks , and own the pope's dignity and supremacy in spiritualls . 82. moreover , the very title of the act wherein this oath is inserted , as above has been hinted , does insinuate , that it was instituted by publick authority , as a distinctive sign , for to discover roman catholicks by the refusall thereof . neither can it be said , that the framers of this oath intended thereby onely to distinguish loyall catholicks from those who are not such : first , because the title makes no such distinction ; and i suppose that the title was put in by those who framed the act , and intended thereby to declare their intention . secondly , because we might say the same of distinctive signs of christians instituted by pagan emperours , viz. that they were instituted by them onely to distinguish obedient and loyall christians from others who were not such . for christians , who were put to death by the emperours for not submitting to the publick tests ordained by them , were said to be put to death for disobedience to the emperours edicts : and many of the pagan emperours did feign that they could not be secure of the christians ; as some protestants feign that they cannot be secure of papists : and consequently , those pagan emperours might in the like manner have required a compliance with those tests , in order to their security ; as iulian , the apostata , required his christian souldiers to doe homage to his standard , ( where he and iupiter were painted , ) under pretence of the respect due unto him . thirdly , because protestants are perswaded , that the very principles of our religion are inconsistent with civil allegeance ; and therefore in the beginning of the forementioned act , they look upon this inconsistency as an infection drawn from our religion : and consequently , they intend this oath for to distinguish roman catholicks from not roman catholicks ; or ( which is the same ) catholicks who stick to their principles , as by them understood , from those who do not . so that whoever takes this oath , does , according to the protestants sentiment , renounce or deny some principle of the roman religion ; though they require somewhat more for a perfect conformity to their religion . 83. now 't is certain , according to all divines , that it is never lawfull to comply with the distinctive sign of a false religion , though the thing of it self should be lawfull or indifferent ; as with the eating of swines-flesh in time of the iews , and the burning of incense before an idoll ; which might have been instituted as an affront : for such signs are onely arbitrary . and yet should there have been the like oath enacted in france , we could not prudently suspect , that it would ever have been intended for a distinctive sign of catholicks from not catholicks . 84. again , our present oath has been prohibited by several briefs of the pope particularly directed to the catholicks of england : which is sufficient to perswade any good english catholick to acquiesce , and forbear the taking thereof . but supposing that the oath framed by the third estate of france had past ; yet had it not been prohibited by the pope , there would not have been the same reason to refuse it in france as here . and sure the french are so addicted to the pope , that had * he expresly prohibited them to take such an oath , or to defend such a doctrine , they would have submitted thereunto : since we see that they submitted to the bull of innocent x. wherein the five propositions of iansenius are condemned , and assented unto it , without expecting the determination of a general council , and though severall persons in france are suspected to have adhered to those propositions . 85. the better to explicate this doctrine , let us suppose , that two persons possess their respective lands upon the same title , and that one of them has been condemned by his lawfull judge , as possessing such lands upon an unjust title : the other , who is not personally condemned , though his title be no better , is not bound to take notice of such a condemnation , nor to deliver up his lands , till he be personally condemned . in the like manner , though the english are bound to forbear to take this oath , because they are prohibited particularly to take it : yet the french , supposing they have the like oath , or teach the doctrine contained in our oath , as they do not , would not be bound to take notice of such a prohibition , as not being directed unto them . wherefore as it is not reasonable , that the same liberty should be permitted to them who live in places infected , as to others who inhabit places free from infection ; to them who are in a tempest , as to those who enjoy fair weather : so neither is it reasonable , that we english , who live in a kingdome infected with heresy , and under a persecution , should be permitted to have the same liberty as they have in france , where they publickly profess the catholick religion , and the magistrates are free from the infection of heresy , and obedient sons to the church ; and consequently , what they determine concerning the pope's authority , cannot be suspected to proceed from hatred to the papall dignity : whenas , on the contrary , since our magistrates are implacable enemies to the pope , what they resolve concerning the pope's power , may prudently be thought to proceed out of indignation against him , and with design to bring off catholicks by little and little from their obedience to the pope . and certainly , we ought to trust rather a friend , and to give him more liberty , then an enemy . whence i conclude , that whatever our adversaries produce out of the publick acts or decrees of the parliaments and universities of france , is of little or no force to justifie the taking our present oath . 86. consider , lastly , that though our adversaries do boast , that some doctours of the sorbon , being consulted about this oath , have approved it as it lies ; yet i have never seen their subscriptions produced : and the authours who have written hitherto for the oath , make mention onely of those publick acts above quoted . i remember , that those who heretofore defended the nullity of the marriage between henry the eighth and queen katharine , pretended to have subscriptions from the doctours of paris in their favour ; yet all catholicks now confess that the forementioned marriage was valid , though the validity thereof has never been declared by a general council , but onely by particular bulls or briefs ; as the unlawfulness also of this oath has been declared . moreover , admit that some doctours of paris have approved this oath as represented unto them ; yet we ought to consider how the case was stated . for every one is not able to state rightly a case ; and several times are left out some circumstances very material , which change the nature thereof . and particularly we ought to consider , whether the several differences assigned above between england and france , in relation to the present debate , were taken notice of , wherewith french divines might probably be unacquainted : and perhaps some of them were ask'd onely concerning the pope's power to depose kings ; which because they denied , those who proposed the quere presently inferred , that they approved the whole oath : which inference is ridiculous , as has been shewn . now 't is certain , that the same case differently stated requires a different solution . neither does it appertain to a divine , when he gives his opinion of a case so stated , to examine whether it be rightly stated or not . some french divines , having been asked , whether it be lawfull for catholicks in england to frequent the protestant churches , have answered in the affirmative , because it is lawfull in france for catholicks to goe to the huguenots churches : yet afterwards , being more particularly informed of our laws and customes , and of the pope's brief prohibiting english catholicks to frequent such churches , ( which he has not prohibited to the french , ) they have answered and subscribed the contrary . 87. besides , should we see the subscriptions of those doctours in favour of the oath , if there be any , probably we should find them to be liable to the same exceptions as the publick acts of france , which are produced by our adversaries to the same intent . finally , concerning the sentiment of the ancient french divines about this point , i refer the reader to the learned oration of cardinal peron , delivered before the third estate of france . and admitting that some modern french divines do seem to favour the oath : if the ancient divines be of the contrary opinion , why should we acquiesce rather to the sentiment of the former then of the latter ; especially since the opinion of the latter has been seconded by the pope's briefs condemning the oath ? i have been longer about this point , because i find that the chief or onely inducement of several persons , to believe that the oath may lawfully be taken , is this pretended authority of france . 88. if it be objected , lastly , that many learned english divines have and do defend the lawfulness of this oath : that several english catholicks , consciencious men , have taken it : that the ancient fathers of the church were against the pope's power to depose kings : that so great an authority as this is for the lawfulness of the oath cannot but make the affirmative probable ; and if it be probable that the oath may be taken , why may we not take it ? especially since it is practically improbable , that it is lawfull to deprive a man of what he possesses , viz. a king of his kingdome , upon a meerly probable opinion ? that it is no article of faith , that this oath is unlawfull , or that the pope has any power to depose princes ; and if so , why may we not take the oath , and swear positively , that the pope has no such power ? finally , that those who impugn the oath are for the greater part priests and iesuits , who depend of the court of rome , who are carried away with passion and interest , and who have never seriously considered the merits of the cause ; and consequently , are not to be consulted , nor hearkned unto , in this matter . 89. concerning the divines , and other authours , who defend or have defended the lawfulness of this oath ; consider , first , what character vrban the eighth gives of them , in the brief he published against this oath , the 30. of may 1626. in these words ; they who persuade you otherwise , ( speaking to english catholicks , ) prophesy unto you a lying vision and a fraudulent divination . for sooner ought the sword of the mighty to take from a christian his life , then his faith. yea , if an angel from heaven teach you otherwise then the apostolick truth , let him be accursed , anathema sit . and whether , should his majesty give the like character of one of his subjects , in order to prevent the rest from consulting him , or following his counsell in a certain civil matter , he would deserve to be held for an obedient subject , who , notwithstanding his majestie 's prohibition , should follow such a man's counsell in the very thing prohibited . 90. consider , secondly , that actually the superiours of the clergy and of the religious orders here in england , with several others of their respective subjects , learned , consciencious and grave men , unanimously judge , that the oath ought not to be taken , and publickly profess , that they are of this judgment ; whenas the priests , who are of the contrary opinion , ( excepting one , who is in actual disobedience to his superiours , to whom he has made a vow of obedience , and who for his disobedience has been excommunicated , ) do not dare publickly to declare themselves , though the disadvantage ( if any ) lies here upon those who are against the oath . 91. consider , thirdly , that whoever is against any part or clause of this oath , may justly be alledged against this oath ; whereas no body can be alledged for the oath , unless he be for all and every clause thereof , as is manifest , according to that common maxime , bonum ex integra causa , malum ex quocunque defectu . nay , those who are against the oath need onely to shew , that something therein contained is at least doubtfull ; for a doubtfull oath is unlawfull : whereas those who defend the oath must prove , that whatever is therein contained , as the immediate object of the oath , is certain ; for such must be the immediate object of an oath . and who will not rather think , that so many who are against the oath will evince that something therein contained is at least doubtfull , then so few who are for it will prove that all things therein couched , and sworn , are certain ? it being far easier to evince a thing to be doubtfull , then the contrary certain . 92. consider , fourthly , that even our adversaries do confess , that all the scholastical divines and all the canonists , for about 500 years , have been against some clauses contained in this oath ; and that even now there is scarce any divine , and much less canonist , ( and to divines and canonists properly appertains the discussion of the clauses of this oath under debate , ) who dares to defend publickly the lawfulness thereof . neither is there any catholick authour , besides some few of his majestie 's subjects , either french , german , or of any other countrey , for so much as i have been able to learn , who has printed any thing in defence of this oath as it lies : whereas not onely his majestie 's subjects , but also many forrein authours , spaniards , italians , germans , and flemmings , have printed books against it , even as it lies . now to say that all the divines and canonists were in so gross an errour , and for so many years , no body daring to oppose them , till some few priests of our nation rose up to disabuse the world , and prove , that all those divines and canonists had not understood either the scriptures , or the councills , or the ancient fathers , though in all probability they were as much vers'd in them as these modern divines ; for them to say this , ( i say ) seems somewhat strange , and savours not a little what the protestants affirm concerning their pretended reformation , viz. that the whole church was involved for many hundred years in gross errours , till luther and calvin came to disabuse the world , and to shew , that the doctours of the church , for so many years , had been erroneously mistaken in the true sense of scripture . it seems also very strange , what some of our adversaries insinuate , that those ancient divines and canonists had not seriously , but perfunctorily considered the points under debate in this oath , though they write great tracts concerning them . what man can prudently think , that neither bellarmine , nor peron , nor suarez , nay nor st. thomas , nor any other of so many ancient and modern divines , who have impugned this oath , or some part thereof , have seriously studied the point , but onely slightly examined it ; and that onely withrington , peter walsh , and some others of their caball , have throughly discussed this matter , and seriously studied it ? if it be reasonable to reject the authority of so many grave and learned divines , upon such a precarious supposition as this is ; why may not any one , upon the same account , slight the authority of his adversary , saying that he has not seriously examined the point under debate ; and that had he seriously pondered it , he would have been of the contrary persuasion ? 93. consider , fifthly , that mr. preston , who writ those books concerning this matter , published under the name of withrington , and the principal champion for the lawfulness of this oath , as i am informed by a person worthy of all credit , and one who was well acquainted with him , never took the oath himself , nor advised any other to take it ; but onely writ those books , to shew , for the comfort of catholicks , what might be said in favour thereof . the same authour grants , that the pope has authority to order and direct the temporal affairs of princes , and to impose upon them temporal punishments by way of a precept , or prohibition , or a direction , in order to their spiritual good ; and he inveighs against skulchenius , for accusing him , as if he had denied the pope such a power over the temporalls of princes ; and he saies , that there is no controversy in the present point , concerning the pope's power to command or prohibit princes , even in temporal affairs , with reference to the spiritual good of themselves or their kingdoms . neque de potestate ecclesiastica praecipiendi , sed tantùm coercendi , ulla in praesenti controversia est . now this authority which withrington admits in the pope over the temporalls of princes , seems obnoxious to the same difficulties which he objects against the coercive power of the pope , and is contrary to the authority of the faculty of paris alledged above by our adversaries ; non esse doctrinam facultatis , quod summus pontifex aliquam in temporalia regis christianissimi authoritatem habeat . and certainly , if he has a directive or preceptive authority over the temporals of princes , he must have some authority over their temporals . 94. now consider whether , since withrington and his associates will not grant the pope , as supreme pastour of the church , any power or authority which is not evidently deduced out of the precedents which christ and his apostles have left in scripture , whether ( i say ) this preceptive , prohibitive , and directive power over the temporalls of princes , which withrington grants the pope , can be better declared out of the precedents left in scripture by christ and his apostles , ( for when did any of them exercise such a power over temporal princes in civil matters ? ) then the coercive power , which he denies the pope . and consider farther , whether the forementioned power be not in effect the same with the coercive power . for if the pope may justly , in some cases , and in order to the spiritual good of a nation , command a king to desist from persecuting his subjects upon the score of religion , or otherwise to lay down his government , and prohibit his subjects , in case he goes on in persecuting them upon that account , to bear him civil allegeance ; how can they swear , that , notwithstanding any sentence made or granted , or to be made and granted , by the pope , or his authority , against their prince , they will bear him true allegeance ? for certainly all just precepts are to be obeyed ; and doubtless kings will be as unwilling to grant this prohibitive or preceptive power to the pope over their temporalls , as the coercive power . for they do not so much fear what the pope can doe against them by force of arms , as by force of precepts and prohibitions . 95. besides , the authour of the questions concerning the oath seems to grant , that the pope may , in some extravagant case of absolute necessity , to defend the spirituall welfare of those who are committed to his charge , and acting onely by a commission derived from necessity , depose princes ; as one may justly take away his neighbour's life , when , unjustly attacqued by him , he cannot otherwise defend his own life . now this is all that bellarmine affirms . for he does not grant the pope authority to depose princes , but in case of an absolute necessity , of defending his flock from being infected by their prince with heresie . and if they grant this power to the pope , how do they affirm , that we may swear , that the pope has not any power or authority , in any case possible , to depose princes ? so that , if what the chief maintainers of the oath teach concerning the deposing power be duely sifted , we shall find , that in effect they grant what they seem to deny ; or at least that they grant enough to render the taking of this oath unlawfull . 96. consider , lastly , whether , when it manifestly appears , that the ground whereon an authour proceeds is false , or inconclusive , any account is to be made of the opinion or judgment of such an authour . and if not , then let us briefly consider the main reasons whereon the defenders of the oath bottome their sentiment . it is far from my intention , to defend , that the pope has authority to depose princes : my design onely is , to examine the reasons whereby some authours do endeavour to shew , that the pope has no such authority . for let an opinion be never so good , yet some may ground it ill . 97. the common reason therefore whereon most of those authours , who impugn the pope's deposing power , do ground themselves in this point , is , that a meer spirituall power , such as is onely granted the pope over all christendome , in no case possible , does extend it self to any temporall thing . this reason does not shew , that the pope , as temporall prince of rome , has not an indirect right and power to depose kings , in some cases ; such a power being inherent to every sovereign prince : and yet if one takes this oath , he must swear , that the pope neither by himself , nor otherwise , has any power whatsoever to depose kings . so that whoever takes this oath , does , according to the common sense of the words , ( and he swears he takes them so , ) implicitly deny the pope to be sovereign temporall prince of rome , because he denies him something inherent and proper to all sovereign princes . 98. moreover , a meer spirituall power may extend it self in some cases to temporall things ; and the contrary is manifestly false . and even our adversaries confess , ( as has been seen above , ) that the pope's meer spirituall power may extend it self to temporall things per modum directionis aut praecepti . christ and his apostles either had no temporall power whiles they lived , or at least did not exercise it , but onely a meer spirituall power : regnum meum non est de hoc mundo : and yet he saies , non veni pacem mittere , sed gladium ; i did not come to bring peace , but the sword , and to cause a separation between the nearest relations ; as between mother and daughter , brother and sister , and such like , who are tied one to the other by the law of nature , as subjects are tied to their sovereign : which is to be understood , when a reciprocall communication between them is prejudiciall to their eternall salvation . our saviour also used a temporall power and force , to cast out those who with buying and selling profaned the materiall temple of god ▪ as hereticks profane with their heresies the souls of men , the spirituall temples of god. st. peter gave sentence of death against ananias and sapphira ; and god miraculously concurred to the execution thereof : as he does miracles sometimes to confirm the sentences issued by the pastours of the church . the power of excommunication , which is allowed the pope and other prelats , is meerly spirituall , as all confess : and yet , in some cases , it extends it self to deprive the person excommunicated from all civil communication with others , due unto them by the law of nature ; according to what has been alledged above out of scripture . neither can it be said , that such a punishment was imposed upon excommunicated persons by the consent of temporall princes . for what temporal prince was there in the time of the apostles , who granted any such effect to their excommunication ; since the temporall princes then living were persecutours of christianity ? 99. besides , a confessarius has meer spirituall power over his penitent ; and yet , sure , he may enjoyn some corporall and temporall penance , ( as has already been hinted , ) and oblige him , or declare him obliged , to make such a restitution , or to forbear the going to such a place , where the occasion of his ruine was : all which things are temporall . a wife , who cannot live with her husband without imminent danger of being perverted by him , is bound to quit his company , and deprive him of the right he has over her , though meerly temporall and carnall : and she may be commanded by her spirituall directour to doe so . and sure there is as great a tie between a wife and her husband , though in a different kind , as between a subject and his prince . 100. again , what kingdome is there , where meerly spirituall crimes , as heresie , apostasie , blasphemy , &c. are not punished , by the law , with some temporall punishment , either of death , or imprisonment , or banishment , or confiscation of goods , or such like ? certain it is , that in england there are severall punishments enacted by the law against spirituall crimes , and in matters of religion , as it appears by so many penall laws established against recusants : yea , whoever is excommunicated here in england , is deprived , according to the law , of power to plead , or sue another for what is due unto him . so that protestants , doubtless , are not of opinion , that one cannot be temporally punished by a meer spirituall power , or upon a meer spirituall account . 101. if it be objected , that temporall princes have enacted such laws against spirituall crimes as prejudiciall to the temporall good of their subjects ; or because at least christian princes are impowered , by severall titles allowed them , to defend by their temporall forces the church , and to punish crimes destructive to faith : i answer , that , according to this objection , the pope may deprive one of some temporall thing , ( if nothing else do hinder it , ) when it is prejudiciall to the spirituall good of christians : for he is invested also with severall titles , which enable him to direct the temporalls of princes in order to their spirituall good , or the spirituall good of their nation : because if a meer temporall power ( such as we onely ascribe to kings ) can extend it self to the temporall punishment of a meer spirituall crime , ( when it is prejudiciall to the temporall good , the judgment of which crime does not belong to the temporall court ; ) why may not a meer spirituall power ( such as we attribute onely to the pope over all christendome ) enjoyn , in certain cases , ( if there be not some other obstacle , ) a temporall punishment , or deprive of some . temporall thing , in order to a spirituall end ? the execution of which punishment , and the deprivation of which thing , belongs to the temporall prince . and so we see , that the ecclesiasticall power does , and may justly , in some cases , invocare auxilium brachii secularis , ( invoke the assistence of the secular power , ) in order to inflict some temporall punishment upon the account of some spirituall crime . 102. yet farther , the power of excommunicating ( which is meerly spirituall ) may in some cases extend it self to punish meer civill crimes ; as may be made appear by severall instances : why may not therefore , in the like manner , a meer spirituall power extend it self , in some cases , to inflict a temporall punishment ? and a meer temporall power also may , in certain cases , extend it self to punish ecclesiasticall princes , who are exempt from the ordinary civill jurisdiction : why therefore , on the contrary , may not a meer spirituall power extend it self to punish , in some cases , temporall persons , and with temporall punishments , at least by the assistence of civil magistrates ? for temporalls are not out of the reach of the spirituall power , more then spiritualls are out of the reach of the temporall power . 103. finally , the stoutest maintainers of the oath , and the greatest impugners of the pope's power to depose princes , cannot deny , but that a subject who is persecuted by his prince upon the score of his religion , and is in imminent danger of being perverted , may lawfully flie , and steal away into a forrein country , according to the ancient practice of christ and his apostles , and the primitive christians , and according to those words of the gospell , cùm autem persequentur vos in civitate ista , fugite in aliam ; and this even against his prince's express prohibition : and his spirituall directours may counsell him , or enjoyn him , to doe so : and consequently , such a man may lawfully , in that case , deprive his prince , upon a meer spirituall account , ( viz. the salvation of his soul , ) of a naturall-born subject ; which belongs to the temporalties of the prince . yea , what priest or lay-catholick is there , even among those who are so hot for the oath , and against the pope's deposing power , pretending thereby to signalize with particularity their loyalty to the king , who does not transgress , and thinks he may do so lawfully , upon some spirituall account , severall civil and temporall laws , enacted by the king and parliament against popish recusants ; either sending over their children beyond seas , against the express laws of the realm ; or tarrying in the kingdome , against severall proclamations of his majesty ; or doing many other meer temporall things prohibited unto papists by the law ? 104. all which instances , most whereof are granted by our adversaries , do evidently evince , that spirituall and temporall things are not so vastly different , that they cannot , in any case possible , interfere the one with the other : that it is not always unlawfull to deprive one of a temporall thing upon a meer spirituall account ; and that a meer spirituall power may , in some cases , extend it self to temporall things : and consequently , that this proof of the forementioned assertion , viz. that the pope has not power to depose kings in any case possible , is manifestly false , and of no force , whatever the assertion be in it self . neither do i say , that , because a spirituall power may , in some cases , extend it self to temporalls , it may therefore depose kings ; but onely , that it is not a good reason to prove , that the pope cannot depose kings in any case whatsoever , because a meer spirituall power can in no case possible extend it self to temporalls . 105. another reason very common among those who defend the oath , and deny the pope's deposing power , is , because neither the unlawfulness of the oath , nor the pope's power to depose kings , is any article of divine faith. whence they infer , that one may lawfully take the oath , and , by consequence , swear positively , that the pope has no such power . now let any one judge , whether this consequence be not manifestly null : such a thing is no article of faith ; therefore we may lawfully swear the contrary . it is no article of divine faith , that his majesty is king of great britanny : shall we therefore swear , that he is not ? it is no article of faith , that the pope is sovereign temporall prince of rome : and yet neither protestant nor catholick will swear , that he is not . the reason is , because a thing may be certain , though no article of faith ; or at least doubtfull : and one cannot lawfully swear what is false , or doubtfull . 106. and as for our present case ; those who defend the pope's power to depose kings , in some cases , do not unanimously affirm , that it is an article of faith , or that it is expresly defined as such by any generall council , or by the universall consent of the church : but some of them endeavour to prove it out of scripture , as a meer theologicall truth ; others deduce it from prescription ; others from a donation or agreement made between catholick princes ; alledging to this purpose that famous canonicall constitution of the council of lateran under innocent the third , assented unto by the embassadours and plenipotentiaries of all or most catholick princes of those times , present at the councill . 107. at least it does not seem impossible , that catholick princes , out of hatred to heresie , and zeal for the conservation of the catholick religion , should make a league among themselves , that if any of them should become an heretick , and should be declared as such by the pope , ( to whom , as all catholicks confess , belongs the authority of declaring one an heretick , ) it should be lawfull for the rest , in that case , to attacque the transgressour , and force him by their arms to recant ; and in case of refusall , to prosecute the war till they have deposed him , and absolved his subjects from their oath of allegeance . and what is agreed upon so by the common consent of princes , cannot be recalled , but by their common consent . this case ( i say ) does not seem impossible . now the pope in that case , by declaring such a prince an heretick , does as it were authorize the rest of the allies to attacque him ; and in case he refuses to recant , to depose him : though he is not then so properly deposed by force of the pope's declaration , as of the contract made between those princes . suppose that some zealous protestant should entail his estate upon his heirs with this condition , that if any of them should quit the protestant religion , and should be declared by the archbishop of canterbury ( whom protestants acknowledge here in england as their primate ) to have quitted protestancy , his inheritance should pass to the next heir . now if the archbishop should declare in this case , that such an one who possest that estate had quitted the protestant religion , he would deprive him , or rather declare him deprived of his estate , though the archbishop has no authority , in rigour , to deprive any man of his estate . and in this case such a man would be deprived of his estate , rather by force of the entailment , then of the archbishop's declaration . 108. finally , protestants do commonly confess , ( to return to the main point , ) that the points wherein they differ from us , as , no purgatory , no transubstantiation , no invocation of saints , and such like negatives , are no articles of faith ; and yet they are far from positively swearing the contrary . whence i conclude , that the forementioned reason of these authours is manifestly false : for it runs thus . whensoever any thing is no article of faith , the contrary may positively be sworn : but the pope's power to depose kings is no article of faith : therefore we may positively swear , that he has no such power . the major proposition is manifestly false , as has been shewn . 109. another main argument , which the defenders of the oath make a great account of in order to deny the pope's deposing power , is , that our saviour did not come into the world to deprive other men of their temporal dominions , ( regnum meum non est de hoc mundo ; ) and much less to deprive kings of their kingdoms , ( non eripit mortalia , qui regna dat coelestia . ) hence they infer , that the pope has no such power , for his power must be immediately derived from christ , whose vicar he is . to this argument i answer , first , that it is manifestly false , that the authority of christ and his apostles did not extend it self , in some cases , to the deprivation of temporals ; as has been proved . secondly , that the pope and other bishops have the temporal sovereignty of several places , granted unto them by temporal princes , or otherwise acquired ; though neither our saviour nor his apostles had any such sovereignty . wherefore this consequence is null , christ had no such power ; therefore the pope has it not : and yet in the oath we are bound to swear , that the pope has not any power whatsoever to depose princes , derived from christ , or any body else . thirdly , that out of those words of the scripture , and the hymn of the church , is not proved , that our saviour had no authority , in some extraordinary case , to deprive kings of their dominions . certain it is , that god has not given me this life to kill my neighbour : yet in some extravagant case , when i cannot otherwise defend my own life , i may lawfully kill him . 't is also certain , that his majesty was not made king of england , to take away from other princes their dominions : yet he may doe it , if otherwise he cannot defend his subjects . neither did christ come to damn any one out of his primary intention , but to save all ; as is evident from several places of scripture : and yet he does , and may justly , condemn men , who will be obstinate , to eternal punishments . in like manner , his primary design in coming into the world was not , to separate a man from his wife , a son from his father , or brother from his sister ; for he commands all , especially relations , to keep union and due correspondence among themselves : and yet 't is said of him in scripture , non veni pacem mittere , sed gladium , i did not come to bring peace , but division , and to make a separation between man and wife , father and son , brother and sister , when the communication with them is destructive to their salvation : and yet 't is certain , that subjects are not more expresly commanded in scripture to honour their sovereigns , then children are commanded to honour their parents , and wives to obey their husbands . 110. if our adversaries object , that the cases alledged by us here and above , to prove that christ and his apostles did sometimes exercise their power over temporals , or deprive others of some temporal thing , did proceed , not from an ordinary , but an extraordinary power ; and by consequence , hence cannot be inferred , that the pope has any such power , since he succeeds christ , and his apostles , in their ordinary jurisdiction onely : to this i answer , that all the cases at least alledged by us are not such . for the power to deprive one , by excommunication , of all civil conversation , and to separate a man from his wife , in certain cases , is inherent in the pope according to his ordinary jurisdiction . that the forementioned instances do shew , that though christ's power upon earth was meerly spiritual , and his kingdom was not of this world ; yet he exercised sometimes his power over temporals : which was the main intent , for which i alledged those precedents of christ and his apostles . finally , that it is a very extraordinary case , for popes to depose kings , and even ( which is much less ) to excommunicate them ; and those who derive the pope's deposing power from christ , affirm , that he has received that power onely for some extraordinary and extravagant cases . 111. and here i cannot but reflect upon these authours , who impugn the forementioned power in the pope . they require their adversaries to shew out of scripture the king-dethroning power : if they cannot shew it thence , then they triumph , and conclude , that the pope has no such power : though that inference be null , as we have insinuated . if they produce out of scripture several instances to prove , that christ's and his apostles power did extend it self sometimes to temporals ; then they answer , that such cases were extraordinary ; and consequently , that they ought not to be brought as proofs of any such power in the pope . so that , though christ had exercised never so great temporal power , and had deposed more kings then ever popes did depose , or pretend to depose ; they might with the same answer put them all off , saying , that they were extraordinary cases , and proceeded from an extraordinary jurisdiction . 112. there follows another reason , of great value among the impugners of the pope's power to depose kings ; and it is , that there cannot be found in all antiquity , till gregory the vii . his time , one precedent for any such power in the pope ; whereas christians were persecuted as much by pagan emperours , as they are or have been persecuted by heretical princes : neither had the ancient christians less courage or zeal for their religion , and the conservation thereof , then the modern . but , whatever the opinion of the pope's power to depose kings be , this reason is not solid . first , because those who ground the forementioned power upon prescription , or an agreement made between princes , can easily answer , that in time of the pagan emperours there was no such prescription or agreement made ; and consequently , that it is no wonder , if in their time no such power was exercised . secondly , because , since the deposition was to be put in execution by the help of some christian prince , there was not , for a long time , any christian prince at all , or any one so powerfull , that could put it in execution : and consequently , the pope's sentence , if he had issued forth any against a pagan emperour , would upon this account have been insignificant : neither would the pagan subjects have taken notice of it ; and the christian subjects were , many times , so inconsiderable , that had they taken notice of it , or not , it would have been of little concern . 113. thirdly , because 't is no good argument , such a power was not exercised till such a time ; therefore there was no such power till such a time . the existency of one onely act does necessarily infer the existency of a power for it : but the denial of several , yea of all acts , appertaining to such a power , though for some long time , does not necessarily infer the denial of such a power . for a power , especially to extraordinary cases , may lie dormant for a long time . the power to excommunicate princes nominatim is certainly derived from christ ; and yet we find very few precedents in ancient times of any such excommunication . and some have reflected very well , as above we hinted , that there is not one instance of an heretical prince , who was alwaies brought up in heresy , excommunicated nominatim : and yet even those who deny the pope any power to depose kings , affirm , that he may excommunicate nominatim such princes . 114. fourthly , i do not remember to have read , that either iulian the apostata , or any of the arrian kings , were speciatim excommunicated : and yet , sure , there was a power to excommunicate them ; yea and they deserved it too . why therefore do these authours infer , that , because several kings , who persecuted the church , were not deposed , there was no power to depose them ? such a thing was not done ; therefore it might not lawfully have been done ; is no good consequence . there was no general council held in the church for many hundred years after christ , till the first general council , which was that of nice ; though there were several heresies , and many zealous popes , in those times : shall we therefore conclude , that the popes had no authority to call a general council derived from christ ? or shall we alledge the continuance of three hundred years without a general council , to prove that there is no power in the pope to call such a council ? and if a power could lie dormant , by reason of certain circumstances , for three hundred years , why not for some years more ? so that , because the popes did not exercise , for many hundred years , a power to depose kings , it does not follow , that they were not invested with any such power . 115. i close up this point with another reason , which is , that the impugners of the pope's deposing power cannot understand , as they will needs persuade us , what difference can be between a direct power and an indirect power : and since they are convinced that the pope has no direct power to depose princes , as even bellarmine confesses , they infer , that he neither has an indirect power to doe it . for what matters it , say they , to make the mischief the less , whether one's eyes be beaten out by a direct stroke from a tennis-ball , or by a bricol ? in answer to this difficulty ; no body denies but that , if a prince be really deposed , the effect is the same , whether he was deposed by a direct , or indirect power : and this is all the instance they bring does amount to . for certainly , 't is harder , more extraordinary , and more skill is required to strike a set mark by bricol , then by a direct stroke of a tennis-ball ; and were one to stand the one or the other stroke , sure he would rather stand a bricol then a direct stroke . moreover , there is a vast difference between a direct and an indirect power to depose kings ; and so palpable , that ( sure ) these authours could not chuse but perceive it . is there not a great difference between the power his majesty has to depose , or recall a lord-lieutenant of ireland , and to depose a forrein prince , when he cannot otherwise defend his subjects ? between the right every one has to make use of what is his own , and to make use of what belongs to another , in case of extreme necessity ? between the right one has to cut off his hair , and to cut off his arm , when otherwise the whole body would perish ? between the power a man has to put away his servant , and to put away his wife , from cohabiting with him , in some extraordinary case ? certainly , such powers are very different ; and as different is a direct or absolute power , from an indirect or conditional power onely , to depose princes . the former is inconsistent with the sovereignty of a prince , but not the latter . a direct and absolute power is easily , often , and many times at the meer pleasure of him that is invested therewith , put in execution : whereas a pure indirect power is seldome reduced to practice , and in some extravagant case onely . hence i deduce , that the indirect power over princes , which some attribute to the pope , is not inconsistent with their security , nor with the duty and respect due unto them . for certainly one prince may be secure of another prince ; and yet every prince has an indirect power to depose any other sovereign , in case it be necessary for the defence of his own subjects . any one that walks in the streets may be secure , that i will not take away his life ; and yet i have an indirect power to kill him , if he attaques me unjustly , and i cannot otherwise defend my self . 116. and as for the respect due to princes , catholick divines affirm more of the pope , concerning this point , ( without being therefore charged with disrespect toward him , ) then of meer temporal princes . for they openly defend , that should the pope become an heretick , ipso facto he would cease to be pope ; and should he persist to retain the papall dignity , christian princes might compell him by force of arms to quit it : and yet they do not assert , that a king , meerly because he becomes an heretick , ipso facto ceases to be king , or that he may be deposed upon that account onely ; since even bellarmine and peron are not of opinion , that a prince can be deposed meerly because he is an heretick , unless moreover he does endeavour to pervert his subjects . so that one cannot swear positively , neither does the pope require it of any one , that a king , neither by himself , nor by any authority derived from his crown , or otherwise , hath any power whatsoever , in any case imaginable , to depose the pope , not onely as a temporal prince , but also as pope , or an ecclesiastical sovereign , according to what has been insinuated . what wonder is it therefore , that catholicks should scruple to swear positively , in as ample terms , that the pope cannot depose kings ? for , sure , no catholick will affirm , that kings have more power over the pope , then the pope over kings . 117. from what hitherto has been discuss'd in reference to this point , i conclude , that though the opinion that denies the pope to have any authority to depose kings should be true , yet the forementioned reasons to prove it are manifestly false , or inconclusive ; and consequently , the authority of such authours , who ground themselves upon those reasons , as most of our adversaries do , is void and of no force . yea , should the aforesaid reasons prove , that the pope has not any power to depose kings , yet it does not therefore follow , that the oath may lawfully be taken . for there are many other difficulties , as we have seen . 118. concerning the example of such catholicks as have taken the oath ; consider , first , whether most of them have not been guided by the authority of such writers , as have grounded themselves upon the above-mentioned reasons ; which are palpably false , or insignificant . and if so , whether , as the authority of such writers , so the example of such catholicks as were guided by them , be of any force . consider , secondly , that as there has scarce ever been any question , which before had been under great debate , and wherein considerable parties were concerned , decided by a general council , but that some persons , who seemed learned and moral men , either out of ignorance , or obstinacy , have stood out ; and yet the example of such ought not to move us to follow them : so neither has there been any debate , wherein numerous parties on both sides were engaged , decided by the pope out of a council , but that some of those who were condemned , blinded with ignorance , or carried away with obstinacy , have refused to submit ; and yet neither ought the example of such to invite us to imitate them , because they go against an express order and declaration of their lawfull superiour , to whom they had referred the decision of the matter under debate , and to whose ordinances they owe at least an exteriour obedience . 119. consider , thirdly , whether it be not much to be feared , that at least some of those who have taken the oath , have been carried away with the prospect to some temporal interest or advantage , which did dazzle their eyes . whether others of them have not of purpose waved the conferring this matter with grave and consciencious men , who were inclined to the contrary , though against their interest , and are ready to subscribe their opinion : and whether they have not guided themselves by some priests , neither more learned , nor more consciencious then the former , nor so many in number , and who refuse to subscribe their sentiment in this matter ; though there does no reason appear , why they should be afraid of any prejudice thereby . and if so , whether such persons , upon this account , may not justly be suspected of some affected ignorance . whether others have not governed themselves meerly by the opinion of lay-men , unvers'd in these controversies ; and not by the sentiment of divines or canonists , to whom the discussion of these matters onely appertains . whether others have not consulted one onely part of the oath , viz. concerning the pope's power to depose kings ; and being informed that he had no such power , have presently taken the oath , without consulting or examining several other difficulties contained therein . whether some of them , being afterwards better informed , do or did not repent that they ever took the oath . and finally , whether the precedents of such catholicks , who are justly presumed to have been governed , in taking the oath , by some of the forementioned waies , ought to move any prudent and consciencious man , to make so solemn an act , as is the taking this publick oath , bringing god or witness of the truth and justice of all and every thing he swears therein . 120. consider , fourthly , whether many of those who have taken the oath , are not ignorant of the several briefs issued forth by popes against it : or at least , whether they have seriously pondered them ; the expressions so weighty , wherewith they declare the unlawfulness of the oath ; and the character they give of such as counsell or teach the contrary ; which certainly is enough to startle any tender conscience : and whether they can think themselves obedient sons to their supreme pastour and father , when they disobey his expresse prohibition , published several times , after so long debate , and so mature deliberation . finally , whether most of them have not been carried away with the pretended authority of france for the lawfulness of the oath : whereas france never approved , by any publick act , the whole oath as it lies ; nor that part thereof , for which onely the authority of france is alledged , as it is couched in the oath . 121. consider , lastly , that if what is commonly reported be true , all or most of such catholicks who have taken the oath have proceeded upon evident mistakes . some of them were induced thereunto , because they thought that the taking this oath was not malum in se , but onely malum quia prohibitum ; and that the popes by their briefs had made it unlawfull , and declared it so : and consequently , that an extraordinary damage , such as they apprehend in the refusall of the oath , does excuse them from complying with this , as with other prohibitions of the same nature . now this is a manifest mistake , as has been shewn above . and certainly , to take a false , doubtfull , unjust or unnecessary oath , is intrinsecè malum , or malum in se. 122. others have taken the oath , making beforehand a publick or private protestation , that they intended onely to swear thereby a meer civil allegeance ; and this way they pretended to secure their conscience . but in the like manner they might take the oath of supremacy , making a protestation beforehand , that they intended onely thereby to swear , that the king is protectour of the church , as all christian princes are ; and that to him , as such , does belong to take care , that the laws established by the church be observed in his kingdome ; and that the pope has no preeminency inconsistent with the aforesaid obligation of christian princes . 123. moreover , one might , in the same manner , take the communion of the protestants , making a protestation that he takes it onely as meer bread and wine , or for his breakfast ; and incense an idol too , protesting that he does it onely to perfume the room : all which are vast absurdities , as no catholick can deny . the reason is , because as long as an action is in it self unlawfull , or as long as it is doubtfull whether it be so or no , no previous protestation can make it lawfull . 124. in fine , some others of them will needs persuade themselves , that in the oath is denied onely a direct and absolute power , but not an indirect and conditionall power in the pope to depose kings . but how can this be credible , when both king iames , who had a great hand in framing the oath , and all other authours whatsoever , either catholicks or protestants , who have hitherto published books in defence of the oath , have unanimously understood , that therein was denied , not onely a direct , but an indirect power also in the pope to depose princes ? and it is not probable , that they would explicate their own opinion to any disadvantage or prejudice , and make it harder then really it is . 125. besides , they all impugn bellarmine , as the chief maintainer of the pope's deposing power , and as the greatest enemy to the oath ; and yet bellarmine as much as any other impugns the pope's direct power to deprive princes of their dominions : and it is not credible , that the maintainers of the oath would make themselves more adversaries then really they were , or make so famous a man as bellarmine their enemy , in a matter wherein he is their friend . moreover , the very cause for which the oath was framed does contain the deniall of an indirect power . for this oath was framed to deny the pope all power and authority to depose a king of england , or dispose of his dominions , or to absolve his subjects from their allegeance , even in case such a king should not onely be an heretick himself , but also force his subjects to be so , and the pope could not defend his flock otherwise then by deposing him . and what is this , but to deny an indirect power in the pope to depose kings ? neither do i think that there is , even amongst protestants , any divine or lawyer , who can deny but that the forementioned case is comprehended in the oath . 126. if they say , that should that clause of the oath be understood in the latitude pretended , even the protestants themselves , who take it , would be manifest perjurers . for they would swear , in taking this oath , that the pope is not sovereign temporall prince of rome ; since every supreme temporall prince has an indirect power to depose any other sovereign , as above has been expounded . and how is it credible , that protestants should frame such an oath , as no body ( protestant or catholick ) could take , without manifestly perjuring himself ? 127. to this i answer , that all catholicks must confess , that whoever takes the oath of supremacy does swear false ; and consequently , that those protestants who framed it , and took it , were manifest perjurers , and many of them without an invincible ignorance , viz. such as denied the supremacy of the pope in spiritualls ; as doubtless many of the first framers of that oath did . yea , severall protestants , and amongst the rest king iames , acknowledge the pope to be patriarch of the west , and that england appertains to the western patriarchate , and consequently , that the pope has some preeminency in england , in order to spiritualls ; for every patriarch has some preeminency in his whole patriarchate : and yet they swear positively , in the oath of supremacy , that no forrein prelate has , or ought to have , any preeminency within this realm ; and by consequence they swear false , even according to their own principles . 128. what wonder therefore is it , that protestants , out of indignation towards catholicks , should frame such an oath of allegeance , that even they themselves could not take without being perjured ? and the like is to be seen in all heterodox countries , where , out of hatred to the true religion , such things are often required of the professours thereof , that even the heterodox professours themselves cannot lawfully execute . besides , the test enacted the last year , 1673. though levelled onely at catholicks , is notwithstanding such , that others , who are not roman catholicks , yea protestants of the english church , cannot comply with , if they understand the principles of their respective religions , and will stand to them : as may easily be made appear . 129. 't is therefore not to be wondered at , that men out of passion should over-doe things ; and that protestants , to the end they might be sure to frame such a test , that roman catholicks could not take , should frame such an one , and in such generall terms , that they themselves could not comply with : for their mind seems to have been so much bent to consider what roman catholicks could not swear , that they did not reflect what they themselves could swear . wherefore it would not be amiss , when they require us to take either the oath of supremacy or allegeance , or comply with the test enacted the last year , to shew them that they require of us what they themselves , even according to their own principles , cannot doe : whereby will easily appear the unreasonableness of their request . from the premisses hitherto set down , one may justly conclude , that the example of such catholicks who have taken the oath , as grounding themselves upon palpable mistakes and misinformations , cannot be a prudent motive for others to take it , nor a good argument to shew the lawfulness thereof . 130. concerning the authority of the ancient fathers , against the pope's power to depose princes , or to absolve their subjects from their allegeance ; consider , first , that though it should be granted , that the ancient fathers are against the forementioned power in the pope ; it does not therefore follow , that they are for this oath , but onely for one part thereof ; neither for that in such a degree , that one may positively swear it . consider , secondly , that to prove , that the ancient fathers and doctours deny the pope to have any power whatsoever , either by himself or by others , to depose princes , in any case imaginable , 't is necessary to prove , that they deny the pope any power whatsoever , to deprive a prince of civil communication with his subjects , by force of any excommunication whatsoever : or , in supposition there has been an agreement made between catholick princes , that if any one of them become an heretick , he should forfeit his kingdome , or be liable to be deposed by the rest , in case he refuses to recant , to declare any one of such princes an heretick , though really he be such : or , in case that a subject , or subjects , cannot live under an hereticall prince , and persecutour of the true church , without imminent danger of being perverted , and consequently is , or are , bound by the law of god and nature , to withdraw themselves ; to declare , i say , in such a case , that he , or they , are bound to withdraw , and to oblige them to it . for those who assert the pope's deposing power , expound it in one of these three ways ; which many do not seem to understand . therefore it would not be amiss to ask them who deny the pope any power to depose princes , what they mean by a power to depose princes . 131. consider , thirdly , whether bellarmine , peron , suarez , and others who assert that power , do not alledge severall ancient councills and fathers for their opinion : and if so , what reason is there why we should not think , that they , being persons so eminent in doctrine and erudition , did not understand them as well as withrington , caron , or peter walsh ; especially , since most of the modern divines and canonists , having seen what both parties do produce out of antiquity in their favour , are for the affirmative ? and had i time , i could lay open the gross mistakes committed by caron in the quotation of ancient authours for his opinion . 132. consider , fourthly , whether it would avail a man in a suit of law , to pretend , that the ancient lawyers are on his side , after that the modern judges and lawyers , or the far greatest part of them , having heard what he could say for himself , had determined the contrary : and if not , apply the same to our present case . 133. consider , fifthly , whether those ancient fathers , which the maintainers of the oath alledge , may not be understood to speak onely of a direct power in the pope to depose princes : and if so , whether they can prejudice the opinion which onely allows him an indirect power . or , whether they may not be understood to deny onely , that the pope , as pope , ( for as such he has no temporall dominions , nor temporall sovereignty , ) cannot compell any prince , by his own temporall forces , to quit his kingdome : and if so , the authority of such fathers cannot be prejudiciall to the opinion , which affirms that the pope , having declared a prince an heretick , and a persecuter of the church , may invoke the help of catholick kings , and authorize them to compell such a prince , by force of their arms , to desist from persecuting his subjects , and , in case of refusall , to depose him . 134. consider , sixthly , whether ancient fathers are to be alledged for an opinion , after it has been condemned by the church , or the pope , as this oath severall times has been : as , for instance , whether it be now a sufficient motive to affirm , that children baptized by hereticks are to be re-baptized , because st. cyprian was of that opinion before the contrary was defined . 135. consider , lastly , whether it be not the unanimous consent of the ancient fathers , that we are bound to afford at least an exteriour obedience to the pope's express commands , in matters appertaining unto him , if the compliance with them be not manifestly sinfull ▪ as the forbearance of this oath ( which is the thing onely required of us by the pope in the above-mentioned briefs ) is not : and whether there be not severall things contained in this oath , the decision whereof , according to the common sentiment of the ancient fathers , does appertain to the ecclesiasticall court , whose head the pope is . 136. concerning the probability of the opinion , that asserts the lawfulness of this oath ; consider , first , whether an express declaration or prohibition of the church , or pope , does not render the thing prohibited practically improbable , or the lawfulness of the practice thereof improbable ; though the thing in it self , and prescinding from such a prohibition , be probably or certainly lawfull . as prescinding from the prohibition of the church , 't is as lawfull to eat flesh upon fridays as upon any other days of the week : yet this is improbable , practically speaking , supposing such a prohibition . and if this be so , consider farther , whether , since the pope ( to whose orders we owe at least an exteriour obedience ) has prohibited us , by severall briefs , to take this oath , it be not practically improbable , that it is lawfull to take it ; though we should grant , that the oath , prescinding from such a prohibition or declaration , is in it self , and speculatively speaking , probable : as severall hidden mysteries of our faith , prescinding from the declaration or definition of the church , do seem probably otherwise . 137. consider , secondly , that it is not probable , nor credible , that the maintainers of the oath would have made ( as they did ) their application to the pope , to the end he might give sentence of the lawfulness thereof , and whether it did contain any thing contrary to faith , or not , had they not been persuaded , that the decision of these matters did appertain to the pope . and if so , that it was very ridiculous for them to make any such application to the pope for the decision of these matters , or to refer themselves to the pope's judgment , if they were resolved not to submit , even exteriourly , to his judgment , in case he should give sentence against them , as he did : and consequently , we cannot probably presume they had any such resolution . so that , unless they will condemn their own proceedings in this matter , ( which 't is not probable they will do , ) they must needs confess themselves bound to afford at least an exteriour obedience to the pope's briefs concerning this matter , till they be lawfully repealed . 138. consider , thirdly , whether the same exceptions which they make against the pope's briefs , and his proceedings in this matter , viz. that he was misinformed ; that the pope's briefs are here in england of no force , without the approbation of the king , who , as things now stand , does acknowledge no spirituall power in the pope over his realm , and consequently , will not approve any thing that comes from him , in order to the direction of his subjects , whether favourable , or not favourable unto him ; that the pope is fallible , and inferiour to a generall councill ; and other exceptions mentioned above ; whether ( i say ) the same exceptions might not have been made by us , in case the pope had given sentence for them , and against us , and had commanded all to take the oath , when they should be required thereunto by his majesty : and whether our adversaries do think , that such exceptions , made by us in that case against the pope's sentence , could have justified our refusall of the oath , or our disobedience to the pope's express commands . or what would they have said of us , should we have persisted still to urge the same reasons , and the authority of so many doctours , against the lawfulness of the oath , after it had been declared lawfull by the pope ; and upon that account , and under pretence of probability , should have still refused the oath ? i am confident , that they will not confess , that such proceedings of ours in that case , though they be the very same which now they make use of , would have been justifiable . 139. consider , fourthly , that the maxime they make so much account of in this great debate , viz. in dubiis melior est conditio possidentis , ( in doubtfull matters better is the condition of him that possesses , ) and consequently , that no body can be lawfully dispossess'd of what he has , upon a meer probable opinion , is insignificant in our present case . for it is to be understood , as our adversaries also understand it , as long onely as the matter under debate has not been decided by a lawfull judge . now the unlawfulness of this oath , which is the main point under debate , has been , severall times , decided by the pope , to whom even our adversaries refer the decision of this matter . neither does the pope decide , in the above-mentioned briefs , ( as the opponents would needs suppose , ) that he has authority to depose kings , which is the thing our adversaries say is under debate ; but onely prohibits us to swear , that he has not any such authority , or hinders the king from deciding it in his own favour : and every one has right , as long as the thing is under debate between him and another , to hinder his adversary from deciding it on his side . 140. consider , fifthly , whether meer indirect power in the pope to depose princes , such as is in every king to depose any other sovereign , be inconsistent with the sovereignty of princes , or whether it does dispossess them actually thereof . if not , then to admit such a power in the pope , ( as some do , ) is not to admit any thing which does actually dispossess kings of their temporall sovereignty . 141. consider , sixthly , whether , according to the severall precedents alledged by such authours who assert the aforementioned power in the pope , and assented unto , as to matters of fact , by their adversaries , popes have not exercised such a power many years agoe : and consequently , whether the popes have not possession of such a power , ( just or not just i do not decide : ) for one takes possession of a power by exercising its acts. so that the debate which remains , is not , whether the pope has possession of such a power , or not ; but onely , whether he has a just possession thereof , or onely an usurp'd : and consequently , according to the maxime produced by our adversaries , in dubiis melior est conditio possidentis , the pope ought not to be deprived of such a power , till the matter be lawfully decided against him . and to oblige men to swear positively that he has no such power , is , in a certain manner , to deprive him thereof , and to oblige men to swear positively a doubtfull thing . 142. consider , lastly , that though it be probable , that one cannot wage war , or deprive any one of what he possesses , upon the account of a meer probable opinion ; whether this be so certain , ( since grave authours are of the contrary sentiment , ) that we may positively swear , that no body , who has onely a probable opinion on his side , can lawfully dispossess another of what actually he has . 143. concerning the interest of those who impugn the oath , objected in the last place against us ; consider , first , whether it be not as probable at least , that those who defend the oath , and deny the pope all power whatsoever to depose princes , are flatterers of princes , and sycophants of temporall courts , as that those who are of the contrary perswasion are flatterers of the pope , and sycophants of the spirituall court : and whether ( morally speaking ) it be not impossible , that where the matter under debate is of so vast an extent , as supremacy in spiritualls , and supremacy in temporalls , there should not be some prospect of interest , of whatsoever side we be , either from the pope , if one defends the negative , that the oath is not lawfull , or from the king , if one maintains the affirmative , that it is lawfull : and consequently , whether , were this exception equitable , one ought to hearken to either side . 144. consider , secondly , whether roman catholicks ( his m●jestie's subjects ) do not depend more of the king , and civill government , in order to their interest and preferment , then of the pope , and roman court : or whether those who impugn the oath , may not fear more dammages from the civill government , then those who defend it , from the ecclesiasticall : or , finally , whether the latter may not hope to obtain greater advantages from his majesty by defending the oath , then the former from his holiness by impugning it . those who defend the oath aim , or may aim , at some particular priviledges , or exemptions , to be granted them , upon that account , from the civill government . neither do i see what dammages they can fear from the pope , by defending the oath . for though , perhaps , the pope may excommunicate some of them upon that score ; yet an unjust excommunication does not any harm : and the defenders of the oath are persuaded , that such an excommunication would be unjust , and not to be taken notice of . on the other side , those english catholicks who impugn the oath , may fear lest the penalties be put in execution against them upon that account ; which , whether justly , or unjustly executed , do in effect equally prejudice . and what such catholicks can hope for from the pope , i see not ; since there is no temporall nor ecclesiasticall preferment here in england to which , in the present conjuncture of affairs , his holiness can promote them . and if this be so , then , upon the account of dependency , we ought rather to suspect those who defend the oath , then those who impugn it . 145. consider , thirdly , whether some of those priests who have shewn themselves most forward to defend the oath , have not received considerable pensions , and sums of money , to print their books relating to this subject , from protestant persons of quality , either clergy-men or lay-men , or both ; and whether they have not been countenanced and caressed by them upon that score . and that this has happened , we can make appear . moreover , whether they can produce any precedents of english priests , who have received the like summs of money , or incouragement , from the pope , for opposing the oath . and if not , then , considering the event that this debate has had hitherto , we must conclude , that the defenders of this oath have got more then the opposers thereof . 146. and here i cannot but reflect upon what is related of some of our protestant prelates , who , being noted that they kept familiar correspondency with some roman priests , and encouraged them in their designs , answered , that they did it to breed a schism among roman catholicks , thereby the better to destroy them . prynne , in his canterbury doom , pag. 557. saies , that archbishop lawd , being accused , that he conversed familiarly with some priests , answered , king iames had conference with , and extended favours to some priests , making good use thereof , to set them at variance among themselves , and induce them to write one against another ; as watson and preston , who wrote divers books in defence of the oath of allegeance , and did good service therein . whereupon my predecessour , archbishop abbott , granted preston a kind of protection under his hand and seal . ibid. lawd granted also preston a protection under his hand . fuller , in his church-history , in the life of king iames , saies thus : doctour bancroft afforded the seculars countenance and maintenance in london-house , accommodating them with necessaries , to write against their adversaries , ( viz. the iesuits , ) hoping that the protestants might assault the romish cause with more advantage , when they found a breach made to their hands by the others own dissensions . where i cannot but note , that as concerning the present point we speak of , the protestants countenanced the priests who defended the oath , as preston , the chief among them , and not those priests who opposed it . whence appears , that protestants are of opinion , that the defenders of the oath are against the church of rome , but not the opposers thereof , since they joyn with the former , and not with the latter ; and sure , they would joyn with the enemies of our church , according to their opinion , and not with her friends . 147. consider , lastly , that those who are most blamed for opposing the lawfulness of the oath are less liable to any suspicion of pretence , or interest , in this matter , since they are tied by a particular vow , not to pretend , neither directly nor indirectly , any preferment or dignity : besides , they have been particularly prohibited by their general , who resides at rome , under pain of excommunication , either to preach , or teach , in publick disputes or books , that the pope has any power to depose kings : the like prohibition , for ought i know , being not imposed upon any other religious order . and whatsoever heretofore some of them have taught concerning this subject , 't is certain , what henry the fourth of france justified in a publick speech , that they taught nothing in this matter , which is not still taught , and has been taught before their society was in the world , by several learned men of other orders . i have proposed these considerations for the satisfaction of such catholicks who have a desire to be informed concerning the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of this oath , to the end , that having perused them over , they may proceed , in a matter of so great concernment , with due consideration . for i have endeavoured to couch , in this short discourse , the main arguments on both sides . i believe that consciencious catholicks , who shall be pleased to peruse seriously the forementioned considerations , will have at least some rational reluctancy to take the oath , as it lies ; which is enough to render the taking thereof unlawfull ; since such as take it do swear , that they doe it heartily , that is , without any reluctancy of mind , but rather with a propension and inclination to take it : which certainly no body can lawfully swear , who feels a reluctancy of mind to any part of the oath . and to summe up the whole substance of this treatise : since it is certain , ( neither do our adversaries deny it , ) that it belongs to the pope , to decide whether this oath be unlawfull or not ; since the pope has determined severall times , that it is unlawfull , and has prohibited the taking thereof , as all do confesse ; since what our adversaries still urge , for the lawfulnesse of this oath in it self , has been long since proposed to the pope , and does concern the very thing , for the decision whereof even they refer themselves to the pope's judgment , with resolution to stand to his determination , otherwise why should they refer it to him ? since , finally , all the exceptions our adversaries make against the briefs , and the proceedings of the pope in framing of them , are frivolous , and such as would vacate ( were they of any force ) all briefs whatsoever , issued forth by popes , and which even they themselves would not have allowed us to make , in case the pope had given the contrary sentence ; since ( i say ) all this is so , as does manifestly appear , by what has hitherto been set down : i conclude , that our adversaries are destitute of all rationall motives , whereby to justify their disobedience to the forementioned briefs ; and that nothing but ignorance or obstinacy can move them to stand out . the end . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61561-e60 supplicatio ad clem. x. per francisc simonis mogunt . a.d. 1675. quis nesciat , reges & duces ab iis habuisse principium , qui , deum ignorantes , superbiâ , rapinis , perfidiâ , homicidiis , postremò universis penè sceleribus , ( mundi principe , diabolo viz. agitante , ) super pares , sc. homines , dominari caecâ cupiditate , & intolerabili praesumptione , affectaverunt ? greg. vii . l. 8. ep . 21. pag. 4. an apologie in defence of ecclesiastical subordination in england , pag. 187. col . 2. rog. widdrington supplicat . ad paul. 5. p. 133. de justa abdicatione henrici tertii è francorum regno . lugd. a. 1591. l. 1. à c. 5. ad c. 9. * à c. 9. ad c. 25. l. 4. c. 1. ad c. 6. lib. 4. c. 23. de justa reip. christianae in reges impios & haereticos authoritate . antw. a.d. 1592. responce de vrays catholiques francois à l'advertisement des catholiques anglois pour l'exclusion du roy de navarre de la couronne de france . a. d. 1588. iuramentum populi non eum astringit ad obediendum regi , nisi rex legitimè & christianè imperet . rossae . c. 2. n. 6. p. 68. c. 2. n. 7. p. 82. c. 2. n. 4. apologie catholique , &c. part . 2. p. 111 , 112. a. 1585. c. 8. n. 14. c. 8. de rege haeretico excommunicando . pi●s . de script . angl. a. 1594. de justa abdicat . henr. 3. l. 4. c. 23. catholick apology p. 336. a moderate defence of the oath of allegeance ▪ a. 1612. p. 127. p. 148. illud unum sciant reges , nihil magìs cordi esse pontifici & ejus asseclis , quàm ut regiam potestatem vilem reddánt , infirmam , imbecillem & abjectam . ortel . error . suarez . c. 3. n. 1. th. graswinckel , dissertat . de praelud . justit . & juris , pag. 257. suarez de legibus l. 2. c. 15. n. 4.16 , &c. azor. instit . moral . l. 6. c. 1. dub . 4. aqu. 1.2 . q. 100. art . 8. 2.2 . q. 89. art . 9. cajetan . in 2.2 . q. 89. art . 9. in juramentis oportet respicere ad praejudicium hominis cui factum est , & in cujus favorem factum est . id. ib. maldonat . summul . qu. 12. art . 7. q. 15. art . 21. enimvero quamvìs papa dispensare valeat in voto , quod est majus , non tamen in iuramento , quod est minus . haud enim relaxare potest iuramentum quod homo homini pr●stitit , id solvendi quod ei debeat . soto de iustit . & jure l. 8. q. 1. art . 9. quando autem est juramentum in alicujus tertii utilitatem ▪ non potest absque voluntate tertii etiam à papa dispensari ; sicut nec papa potest auferre rem alterius . tolet. summa casuum l. 41 c. 23. n. 1. clavis regia cas. consc. l. 6. c. 11. n. 11. azor. instit . mor. l. 6. c. 1. quartò quaeritur . widdrington disp. theolog. c. 6. sect . 3. n. 1 , 2 , 3. theolog. moral . l. 4. tr . 3. c. 11. n. 5. de justa abdicat . henr. 3. l. 1. c. 3. n. 4. c. 18. p. 33 , 34. c. 25. p. 51 , 52 , &c. c. 26 , 27 , 28. ross. de justa reip. christian. author . in reges impios & haeret . c. 9. n. 1. pag. 604 , 608. n. 7. p. 616. de rom. pontif. l. 5. c. 7. tertia ratio . first treatise , p. 1. pag. 5. pag. 2. pag. 3 , 4 , 5. pag. 13. pag. 14. cathol . apology , pag. 121 , 122. pag. 13. treat . 2. p. 2. pag. 3. pag. 4. first treatise , p. 13. second treat . p. 4 ▪ pag. 5. pag. 6. summa cas. lib. 4. c. 21. n. 3. suarez de virtut . relig . to. 2. tract . 4. l. 1. c. 9. n. 4. l. 3. c. 5. n. 3. soto de justit . & jure l. 8. quaest . 2. art . 3. concl . 6. iacob . de graffiis decis . aure . l. 2. c. 16. n. 8. sayr clav. reg. lib. 5. c. 4. n. 2. greg. de valentia tom. 3. diss. 6. quaest . 7. punct . 3. vasquez 1. 2. disp. 127. c. 3. layman theol. mor. l. 4. tr . 3. c. 14. n. 4 , 5. legatio de concept . virg. mariae tract . 13. third treatise par . 65. & 68. wadding p. 402. third treatise , p. 46 , &c. warmington's moderate defence , pag. 44. widdrington advers . schulken . p. 194 , &c. reflections on the oaths of supremacy and allegeance , n. 98. third treatise par . 50. reflections on the oaths of supremacy and allegeance , n. 110. first treatise , p. 5. second treatise , pag. 32. third treat . p. 88. third treat . p. 130. notes for div a61561-e11650 vir in sacris literis eruditissimus , & in tota ecclesia omni virtutum genere celeberrimus . lambertus , a writer of that age. nos s. r. e. cardinales elegimus nobis in pastorem , virum religiosum , geminae scientiae prudentiâ pollentem , aequitatis & justitiae praestantissimum amatorem , bonis moribus ornatum , &c. registr . greg. 7. in init . b gratiâ miraculorum , & prophetiae , erat omnibus admirabilis . binius in vit. greg. 7. eundem , sicut in vita , ità & post mortem claruisse miraculis , bibliothecarius ejus temporis absque ulla dubitatione confirmat . baron . ad ann . 1085. n. 11. in album sanctorum relatus , universali memoriâ nomine celebri perseverat . id. ib. c aut rex ipse , repudiato turpi simoniacae haereseos mercimonio , &c. aut franci pro certo ( nisi fidem christianam abjicere maluerint ) generalis anathematis mucrone percussi , illi ulteriùs obtemperare recusabunt . greg. 7. l. 1. ep . 35. si in perversitate studiorum suorum perseveraverit , nos in romana synodo , à corp●re s. ecclesiae ipsum , & omnes quicunque sibi regalèm honorem vel obedientiam exhibuerint , sine dubio sequestrabimus . id. l. 2. ep . 18. d significâsti nobis per literas & legatos tuos , te b. petro devotè ac decenter velle obedire , &c. id. l. 1. ep . 36. pontifex habito cum 110 episcopis consilio , in eundem regem excommunicationis sententiam protulit . author vit. s. ansel. luc. a writer of that age. cunctis qui convenerant episcopis id fieri decernentibus , regem excommunicat . lambert . cunctis acclamantibus nè talis contumelia inulta remaneret , omnium consilio & consensu , henricum , synodali judicio damnatum , regísque honore & nomine privatum , anathematis gladio percussit . bruno histor. belli saxon ▪ a writer of that age. b henrico regi omnem potestatem & dignitatem regiam tollo , totiúsque regni teutonicorum & italiae gubernacula contradico ; & omnes christianos à vinculo juramenti quod sibi fecère absolvo . greg. 7. l. 3. ep . 6. c b. petre , mihi tuâ gratiâ est potestas à deo data ligandi atque solvendi in coelo & in terra . hâc itaque fiduciâ fretus , ex parte omnipotentis dei , patris , & filii , & spiritûs sancti , per tuam , b. petre , potestatem & authoritatem , henrico regi , &c. ut suprá . a greg. 7. l. 4. ep . 23. b baron . ad ann . 1084. n. 10. & ad ann . 1094. n. 17 , &c. c triburiense , quintiliniburgense , ostionense , claromontanum , roman . 7.8.10 . d victor iii. urbanus iii. paschalis ii. * adversarii nostri , quamvìs ipsi exiverint à nobis , non nos ab ipsis , tamen dicere solent , nos catholici sumus , nos in vnitate ecclesiae sumus . vnde scriptor illius epistolae appellat eos qui sunt in parte sui gregorii , catholicos ; nos , schismaticos , haereticos , & excommunicatos . vercellens . de unit. eccles. a bishop of the king's party . hoc decretum ( synodi quintiliniburg . ) contra henricianos , qui fideles s. petri ( meaning the catholicks ) constringere voluerunt , ut excommunicationem d. papae unà cum illis retractare praesumerent . bertold . a writer of that age. f me quoque quem sanctorum patrum traditio soli deo judicandum docuit , nec pro aliquo crimine , nisi à fide ( quod absit ) exorbitaverim , deponendum censuit , &c. epist. henr. 4. ad greg. 7. set out by a protestant , in fascic . rerum expetendarum . g imperatorem , ( so his own party called him ) in nulla synodo canonicè accusatum , praecipitanter excommunicavit ; in qua excommunicatione nullus cardinalium subscripsit , &c. beno de vit. hildebrand . in the aforesaid fasciculus . h eodem anno , ( 1080. ) condicto , tam ab inimicis quàm amicis imperatoris , alloquio , in thuringia , conveniebant ex utraque parte quicunque sapientissimi de optimatibus judicabantur , canonum authoritate probaturi , cui parti justitia faveret ; imperatore tamen absente ; sic enim ipse consensit . electis , hinc wecilone moguntino , illinc gebehardo saltzburgensi , disputatio coepta est . affirmat gebehardus , ( proponente hoc priùs wecilone ) imperatorem non injusto judicio , tam regno , quàm communione , apostolici sententiâ , privatum . e contrà wecilo , dominum suum , praejudicium non minùs à papa quàm à principibus passum , contendit , dum ipso ad canusium in satisfactione posito , imò jam à papa in communionem recepto , alterum super se regem elevarent . adjecit etiam , quòd imperator , diu jam à saxonia depulsus , & regnandi copiâ , etiam ab illa dissensione quae ante podolphum facta describitur , spoliatus , nec vocari , nec judicari canonicè debuisset , &c. ursperg . ad ann . 1080. a dictatus papae , in concil . roman . 3. ann . 1076. 1. quòd papae liceat imperatorem deponere . 2. quòd à fidelitate iniquorum subditos potest absolvere . b quod postulâsti , te nostris scriptis quasi juvari , & communiri , &c. non adeò necessarium nobis videtur , cùm hujus rei tam multa ac certissima documenta in sacrarum literarum paginis reperiantur , &c. citing the scriptures . l. 8. ep . 21. eos qui dicunt , regem non oportet excommunicari , &c. ad sanctorum patrum dicta vel facta mittimus . legant itaque , &c. considerent cur zacharias papa regem francorum deposuerit , & omnes francigenas à vinculo juramenti quod sibi fecerant absolverit . in registro b. gregorii , &c. l. 4. ep . 2. c b. petri authoritate , ei ( henrico regi ) resistite , & totius regni gubernacula contradicendo , &c. illud semper habentes in memoria , quia scelus idololatriae committit , qui apostolicae sedi obedire contemnit . l. 4. ep . 23. contra eorum insaniam , qui nefando ore garriunt , authoritatem apostolicae sedis non potuisse regem henricum excommunicare , nec quenquam à sacramento fidelitatis ejus absolvere ...... neque enim credimus eos , qui , ad cumulum suae damnationis , veritati impudenter de●rahunt & contradicunt , haec ad suae defensionis audaciam , tam ignorantiâ , quàm miserae desperationis vecordiâ , coaptâsse . id. ibid. eos qui dicunt , regem non oportet excommunicari , licèt pro magna fatuitate , nec etiam eis respondere debeamus ; tamen nè impatienter eorum insipientiam praeteriisse videamur , &c. l. 4. ep . 2. si b. gregorius , doctor utique mitissimus , reges qui statuta sua super unum xenodochium violarent , non modò deponi , sed etiam excommunicari , atque in aeterno examine damnari decrevit : quis nos , ipsius matris ecclesiae , quantum in ipso est , conculcatorem , deposuisse & excommunicâsse reprehendat , nisi fortè similis ejus ? l. 8. ep . 21. a moneantur seculi potestates , &c. si verò dominus temporalis requisitus , & monitus ab ecclesia , terram suam purgare neglexerit ab hac haeretica faeditate , per metropolitanum & comprovinciales episcopos excommunicationis vinculo innodeturm , et si satisfacere contempserit infra annum , significetur hoc summo pontifici , ut extunc ipse vasallos ab ejus fidelitate denunciet absolutos , & terram exponat catholicis occupandam , qui eam , exterminatis haereticis , sine ulla contradictione possideant ; salvo jure domini principalis , dummodo super hoc ipse nullum praestet obstaculum . eâdem nihilominus lege servatâ circa eos qui non habent dominos principales . cap. 3. de haeret. mitto decreta concilii lateranensis olim ex antiquo descripta codice . jo. co●hl . ep . ante concil , lateran . ap . crab. nos cum fratribus nostris & sacro concilio deliberatione praehabitâ diligenti , cùm jesu christi vices teneamus in terris , nobisque in b. petri persona sit dictum , quodcunque solveris , &c. memoratum principem , suis ligatum peccatis , & abjectum , omnique honore & dignitate privatum à domino ostendimus , denunciamus , ac nihilominus sententiando privamus : omnes qui ei juramento fidelitatis tenentur astricti , à juramento hujusmodi perpetuò absolventes : authoritate apostolicâ sirmiter inhibe●d● , nè quisquam ei de caetero tanquam imperatori vel regi pareat ; & decernendo quoslibet , qui deinceps ei velut imperatori aut regi consilium aut auxilium praestilerint , ipso facto excommunicationis vinculo subjacere , &c. in actis concil . b matth. paris . in henrico 3. c video quòd ad confusionem meam aspirat papa , ..... nec sacrum decet imperium maximè adversanti judicio sisti synodali . id. ibid. d id. ibid. * id. ibid. f trithem . in chron. hirsang . g matth. paris . in henrico 3. h paul. aemil . in vit. s. ludov. i in 6. cap. 1. de homicid . * as he speaks . † in his preface . * page 14. page 30. * trithemius in chron. historic . ad ann . 1106. * magister in 3. dist . 39. en. ann . 10. s. thom. † s. aug. lib. de mendacio . * pag. 31. second controversial letter , pag. 31. towards the end of his large preface . vide articulos facultatis parisiensis de authoritate pontificia & regia , art. 6. * this book was printed in an . 1620. and called the new-year's gift , or , a brief and clear explication of the oath of allegeance . † withringt . in apol. n. 99. and in his other books very often . also c. i. in his explication of the oath of allegeance , p. 74. canon de papa , distinct. 40. synod . 8. act . 7. bellarm. de rom. pont . l. 2. c. 29. * printed at london 1649. s. thomas 2.2 . qu. 89. ar . 7. history of the irish remonstrance first part of the first treatise , 3.86 . the publisher of the questions in his preface to the authour himself , pag. 25. and the protestant in the 9. controversial letter . h. 8.31 . * pag. 8. see the censure it self , and first cont. letter , pag. 13. so speaks the decree itself . io. barkley in his vindiciae , pag. 106. this the publisher of the questions observes . the account of the iesuits life and doctrine , pag. 120. so onuphrius mentions him , lib. 4. devaria creat . rom. pont. see chap. 8. * vide aliud breve paul. v. ad d. georg. birket 1. febr. 1608. aliud urban . viii . ad regem galliae 3. maii 1626. & aliud ejusdem pontis . eodem die & anno ad episcop . chalcedonensem . † supplic . to paul v. p. 2.91 . vide etiam supplic . thom. prestoni & thom. greeni ad greg. xv. * sententia papae obligat ad non dogmatizandum contrarium . gers. tract . de exam . doctrin . consid . 2. vide duvall . in elencho , pag. 106. † hujusmodi iuramentum salvâ fide catholicâ & saluteanima . rum vestrarum praestari non potest ; cùm multa contineat quae fidei & saluti apertè adversantur . paul. v. 1. brev. urban . viii . vocat iuramentum noxium & illicitum , & addit , authoritatem b. petri eâ jurisjurandi formulâ imminui . excommunicantur in bulla coenae qui subterfugiunt judicium papae , appellando ad concilium generale . vide synod . general . 5. can. 5. ubi damnat origenem aliòsque , cum suis scriptis , nullò particulari errore nominato . append. ad prop. theolog . de jurament . fidelitatis , initio . vide gloss. cap. cum venissent . de judiciis . * suar. ait , lib. de leg . c. 4. n. 2. nulla est data determinata forma verborum in legibus canonic's ferendis , vel jure divino vel ecclesiastico . malosjudices se esse perpessos , vox est omnium malorum litigatorum , etiam cùm manifestissimâ fuerint veritate convicti . aug. epist. 162. * anno 1615. ‖ quoted in the reflexion upon the oath , pag. 73. † de hoc articulo ait gallic . eccles . in illis comitiis , non aliò tendere quàm ad schisma conflandum , & corroborandum haeresin . mercur. gall. tom. 30. ann. 1615. p. 298 , 247. * rex , silentio imposito , articulum inseri codicillis vetuit . nobilitas clero consentit . id. pag. 336. in convent . episc. gall. habito 27. febr. 1626. damnatus est ille articulus : subscripserunt 2 card. 10 archiep. 30 episc. rochefoc . in ration . cont . schism . sect. 1. sect. 102. & mercur. gallic . ●om . 11. an. 1626. p. 105. etiam major pars tertii ▪ ordinis articuli illius progressum impedivit . card. richelieu lib. cont . 4 ministros calvinist . pag. 173. the university of louvaine is also against this oath , as appears by a censure they gave dec. 29. 1662. anno 162● . feb. 9 facultas parisiensis hanc censuram , quoad formam & tenorem . revocavit , nec hactenus , quod sciam , aliam confecit . mercur. tom. 12. an. 1627. pag. 21. vide etiam rochefoc . pag 386. in the year 1627. plura circa iesuitas gall. quoad hanc rem vide apud mercur. jesuit . pag. 844. & mercur . gall. ann. 1626. nec probant adversarii , iesuitas unquam subscripissè hanc prop. papa in nullo casu potest deponere regem . * vide duval . in elench . & decretum facult . sorbon . ad calcem magistri sentent . ubi dicitur , ad sanctam sedem apostolicam pertinet , authoritate judiciali supremâ circa ea quae sunt fidei judicialiter definire . paul v. commanded birket to take away their faculties from such priests as had taken the oath , or taught that it might be taken , unless they repented . item in the brief to the bishop of chalcedon the pope saies thus ; si quis aliter docuerit , ejus doctrina non è fontibus salvatoris , sed ex aegypti pu●eis hauritur . supplic . ad paul. v. pag. 95. append. pag. 3. respons . ad argum . suarez . cont . jurament . pag. 204. see caron , a great defender of the oath , in his apostolatus mission , printed at paris 1659. q. 13. in canc. 2. q. 29. coroll . 4. & alibi , where he saies as much as bellarmine for the pope's deposing power . joan. 18.36 . matt. 10.34 . matt. 21.12 . act. cap. 5. marc. 10.23 . joan. 18. matt. 10. urban . 8. brev. ad reg . gall. air , iuramentum hoc totius ecclesiae pietas exsecratur . brev. ad epise . chalced . vocat illud abortum mendacii , & impietatis tesseram . paul. v. 1. brev. ait , non potestis absque evidentissima gravissimáque divini honoris injuria obligare vos hoc juramento . a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity with an answer to the late socinian objections against it from scripture, antiquity and reason, and a preface concerning the different explications of the trinity, and the tendency of the present socinian controversie / by the right reverend father in god edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1697 approx. 512 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 188 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-08 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a61548 wing s5585 estc r14244 13589086 ocm 13589086 100626 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a61548) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 100626) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 851:30) a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity with an answer to the late socinian objections against it from scripture, antiquity and reason, and a preface concerning the different explications of the trinity, and the tendency of the present socinian controversie / by the right reverend father in god edward, lord bishop of worcester. stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [2], lxii, [4], 292 p. printed by j.h. for henry mortlock ..., london : 1697. reproduction of original in cambridge university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng trinity -early works to 1800. socinianism -early works to 1800. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-04 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-05 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2004-05 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity : with an answer to the late socinian objections against it from scripture , antiquity and reason . and a preface concerning the different explications of the trinity , and the tendency of the present socinian controversie . by the right reverend father in god , edward , lord bishop of worcester . london , printed by i. h. for henry mortlock at the phoenix in s. paul's church-yard , 1697. the preface . when i was desir'd , not long since , to reprint the discourse lately published , concerning the doctrine of christ's satisfaction , i thought it necessary to look into the socinian pamphlets , ( which have swarmed so much among us within a few years ) to see how far an answer had been given in them to any of the arguments contained in it ; but i found the writers of them thought it not for their purpose to take any notice at all of it ; but rather endeavour'd to turn the controversie quite another way , and to cover their true sense under more plausible expressions . of which i have given a full account in the preface to the late edition of it . but among those treatises which ●or the general good of the nation are gather●d into volumes and dispers'd abroad to make either proselytes or infidels ) i found one , wherein there is p●etended to be an answer to my sermon about the mysteries of the christian faith , ( reprinted with the former discourse ▪ ) and therein i meet with a passage , which hath given occasion to this vindication . for there are these words , that i had utterly mistaken , in thinking that they deny the articl●s of the new creed , or athanasian religion , because they are mysteries , or because , say they , we do not comprehend them ; we deny them , because we do comprehend them , we have a clear and distinct perception , that they are not mysteries , but contradictions , impossibilities and pure nonsense . which words contain in them so spitefull , so unjust , and so unreasonable a charge upon the christian church in general , and our own in particular ▪ that i could not but think my self concerned , especially since they are addressed to me , to do what in me lay ( as soon as my uncertain state of health would permit ) towards the clearing the fundamental mystery of the athanasian religion , as they call it , viz. the doctrine of the trinity , ( which is chiefly struck at by them ) without running into any new explications , or laying aside any old terms , for which i could not see any just occasion . for however thoughtfull men may think to escape some particular difficulties better , by going out of the common roads ; yet they may meet with others , which they did not foresee , which may make them as well as others judge it , at last , a wiser and safer course to keep in the same way , which the christian church hath used , ever since it hath agreed to express her sense in such terms , which were thought most proper for that purpose . for in such cases , the original and critical signification of words is not so much to be attended , as the use they are applied to , and since no other can be found more significant or proper for that end ; it looks like yielding too great advantage to our adversaries , to give up the boundaries of our faith. for although there be a difference between the necessary article of faith it self , and the manner of expressing it , so that those may truely believe the substance of it , who differ in the explication ; yet since the sense of the article hath been generally received under those terms , there seems to be no sufficient reason to substitute new ones instead of the old , which can hardly be done , without reflecting on the honour of the christian church , and giving occasion for very unreasonable heats and disputes , among those , who , if we may believe their own words , agree in the same fundamental doctrine ; viz. a trinity in unity , or three persons in the same undivided divine essence . i am so little a friend to any such heats and differences among our selves especially when we are so violently attacked by our common adversaries , that were there no other reason , i should for the sake of that alone forbear making use of new explications ; but there is another too obvious , which is , the mighty advantage they have taken from hence to represent our doctrine as uncertain , as well as unintelligi●le . for as soon as our unitarians began to appear with that briskness and boldness they have done now for several years , some of our divines thought themselves obliged to write in defence of the doctrine of the trinity . thence came several answers to them , and in several methods , as the persons thought most subservient to the same end ; but whatever their intentions were , our adversaries were too much pleased to conceal the satisfaction which they took in it . for soon after , we had the several explications set forth and compared with each other ; and all managed so , as to make the cause to suffer by the disagreement of the advocates for it . and from hence they have formed a fivefold trinity . 1. the ciceronian trinity , because tully had used the word personae for different respects ; sustineo ego tres personas ; and according to this acceptation , three persons in the godhead are no more than three relations , capacities or respects of god to his creatures , which say they , is downright sabellianism : and is no manner of mystery , but the most intelligible and obvious thing in the world. 2. the cartesian trinity , which maketh three divine persons , and three infinite minds , spirits and beings to be but one god. 3. the platonick trinity , of three divine co-eternal persons , whereof the second and third are subordinate or inferiour to the first in dignity , power , and all other qualities , except only duration . 4. the aristotelian trinity , which saith the divine persons are one god , because they have one and the same numerical substance . 5. the trinity of the mobile , or that which is held by the common people , or by such lazy divines , who only say in short , that it is an unconceivable mystery ; and that those are as much in fault who go about to explain it , as those who oppose it . but that which hath made the most noise , and caused the greatest heat and ferment among us , hath been a difference first begun between two learned divines of our church , about the second and fourth ; and the account which our unitarians give of both is this , that the one is a rational and intelligible explication , but not true nor orthodox ; the other is true and orthodox , but neither rational , intelligible nor possible . i do not mention this , as though their words were to be taken as to either ; but only to shew what advantage they take from both , to represent that which is set up for the churches doctrine , either not to be truly so , or to be neither rational nor intelligible . the design of the following discourse , is to make it appear , ( 1. ) that the churches doctrine , as to the trinity , as it is expressed in the athanasian creed , is not liable to their charges of contradiction , impossibilities and pure nonsense . ( 2. ) that we own no other doctrine than what hath been received by the christian church in the several ages from the apostles times : ( 3. ) and that there are no objections in point of reason , which ought to hinder our assent to this great point of the christian faith. but the chief design of this preface , is to remove this prejudice which lies in our way from the different manners of explication , and the warm disputes which have been occasion'd by them . it cannot be denied , that our adversaries have taken all possible advantage against us from these unhappy differences ; and in one of their latest discourses they glory in it , and think they have therein out-done the foreign unitarians : for , say they , we have shewed , that their faiths concerning this pretended mystery are so many and so contrary , that they are less one party among themselves , than the far more learned and greater number of them are one party with us : this is spoken of those they call nominal trinitarians ; and for the other whom they call real , they prove them guilty of manifest heresie ; the one they call sabellians , which they say is the same with unitarians , and the other polytheists or disguised pagans , and they borrow arguments from one side to prove the charge upon the other ; and they confidently affirm that all that speak out in this matter , must be driven either to sabellianism , or tritheism . if they are nominal trinitarians , they fall into the former , if real , into the latter . this is the whole design of this late discourse , which i shall here examine , that i may remove this stumbling block , before i enter upon the main business . 1. as to those who are called nominal trinitarians . who are they ? and from whence comes such a denomination ? they tell us , that they are such who believe three persons , who are persons in name only ; indeed and in truth they are but one subsisting person . but where are these to be found ▪ among all such , say they , as agree that there is but one only and self-same divine essence and substance . but do these assert , that there is but one subsisting person , and three only in name ? let any one be produced who hath written in defence of the trinity ; for those who have been most charged , have utterly deny'd it that learned person , who is more particularly reflected upon in this charge , is by them said to affirm , that god is one divine intellectual substance , or really subsisting person , and distinguished and diversified by three relative modes , or relative subsistences . and mr. hooker is produc'd to the same purpose , that there is but one substance in god , and three distinct rela●ive properties , which substance being taken with its peculiar property , makes the distinction of persons in the godhead . but say they , these modes and properties do not make any real subsisting persons ; but only in a grammatical and critical sense , and at most , this is no more than one man may be said to be three persons on the account of different relations , as solomon was son of david , father of rehoboam , and proceeding from david and bathsheba , and yet was but one subsisting p●rson . this is the force of what they say . but then in a triumphing manner they add , that the realists have so manifest an advantage against them , that they have no way to de●end themselves but by recrimination , i. e. by shewing the like absurdity in their doctrine . and thus they hope either side will baffle the other , and in the mean time , the cause be lost between them . but in so nice a matter as this , we must not rely too much on an adversaries representation ; for the leaving out some expressions , may make an opinion look with another appearance , than if all were taken together , it would have . we must therefore take notice of other passages which may help to give the true sense of the learned author , who is chiefly aimed at . 1. in the very same page he asserts , that each of the divine persons has an absolute nature distinctly belonging to him , though not a distinct absolute nature ; and to the same purpose in another place . 2. that the eternal father is and subsists as a father , by having a son , and communicating his essence to another . and elsewhere , that the relation between father and son is founded on that eternal act , by which the father communicates his divine nature to the son. 3. that the foundation of the doctrine of the trinity is this , 1. that there can be but one god. 2. that there is nothing in god but what is god. 3. that there can be no composition in the deity with any such positive real being , distinct from the deity it self . but the church finding in scripture mention of three , to whom distinctly the godhead does belong , expressed these three by the name of persons , and stated their personalities upon three distinct modes of subsistence , allotted to one and the same godhead , and these also distinguished from one another by three distinct relations . what do these men mean , to charge one who goes upon these grounds with sabellianism ? doth he make the three persons to be mere names , as s. basil in few words expresses the true nature of sabellianism , that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , one thing with different denominations ? can the communicating the divine essence by the father to the son , be called a name , or a mode , or a respect only ? and these men of wonderfull subtilty , have not learnt to distinguish between persons and personalities . where is the least intimation given , that he look'd on the divine persons as modes and respects only ? that is impossible , since he owns a communication of the divine essence , and that each of the divine persons hath the divine nature belonging to him ; could it ever enter into any man's head to think , that he that owns this should own the other also ? but the personality is a thing of another consideration . for it is the reason of the distinction of persons in the same undivided nature . that there is a distinction , the scripture assures us ; and withall , that there is but one divine essence . how can this distinction be ? not by essential attributes , for those must be in the divine essence , and in every person alike , otherwise he hath not the entire divine nature ; not by accidents , as men are distinguished from each other , for the divine nature is not capable of these ; not by separate or divided substances , for that would be inconsistent with the perfect vnity of the godhead ; since therefore there can be no other way of distinction , we must consider how the scripture directs us i● this case ; and that acquaints us with the father , son and holy ghost , as having mutual relation to each other ; and there is no repugnancy therein to the divine nature , and therefore the distinction of the persons hath been fixed on that , as the most proper foundation for it . and these are called different modes of subsistence , on which the distinct personalities are founded , which can be no other than relative . but a person is that which results from the divine nature and subsistence together ; and although a person cannot be said to be a relative , consider'd as such , yet being joyned with the manner of subsistence , it doth imply a relation , and so a person may be said to be a relative being . but say they , if the three persons have all the same individual substance , then they are truly and properly only three modes ; and therefore a●though among men , personalities are distinct from the persons , because the persons are distinct intelligent substances , yet this cannot hold where there is but one individual substance . the question is , whether those they call nominal trinitarians , are liable to the charge of sabellianism ; the answer is , that they cannot , because they assert far more than three names , viz. that each person hath the divine nature distinctly belonging to him . but say they , these persons are but mere modes . no , say the other ; we do not say that the person is only a modus , but that it is the divine nature , or godhead subsisting under such a modus , so that the godhead is still included in it , joyned to it , and distinguished by it . grant all this , the vnitarians reply , yet where there is the same individual substance , the person can be only a modus . to which it is answer'd , that this individual substance hath three distinct ways of subsisting , according to which it subsists distinctly and differently in each of the three divine persons . so that here lies the main point , whether it be sabelliani●m , to assert the same individual substance under three such different modes of subsistence . if it be , the most learned and judicious of the fathers did not know what sabellianism meant ( as i have shewd at large in the following discourse ) for they utterly disowned sabellianism , and yet asserted , that the several hypostases consisted of peculiar properties in one and the same divine substance . but it is not the authority of fathers which they regard , for they serve them only as stones in the boys way when they quarrel , viz. to throw them at our heads . let us then examine this matter by reason without them . persons among men , say they , are distinguished from personalities , because they have distinct substances , therefore where there is but one substance , the person can be only a mode , and therefore the same with the personality . i answer , that the true original notion of personality is no more than a different mode of subsistence in the same common nature . for every such nature is in it self one and indivisible ; and the more perfect it is , the greater must its vnity be . for the first being is the most one ; and all division comes from distance and imperfection . the first foundation of distinction is diversity ; for if there were no diversity , there would be nothing but entire and perfect vnity . all diversity comes from two things , dissimilitud● and dependence . those philosophers ( called megarici ) did not think much amiss , who said , that if all things were alike , there would be but one substance or being in the world ; and what we now call different substances , would be only different modes of subsistence in the same individual nature . the difference of substances in created beings , arises from those two things . 1. a dissimilitude of accidents , both internal and external . 2. the will and power of god , whereby he gives them distinct and separate beings in the same common nature . as for instance , the nature or essence of a man consider'd in it self , is but one and indivisible ; but god gives a separate existence to every individual , whereby that common nature subsists in so many distinct substances , as there are individuals of that kind ; and every one of these substances is distinguished from all others ▪ not only by a separate internal vital principle and peculiar properties , but by such external accidents , as do very easily discriminate them from each other . and the subject of all these accidents is that peculiar substance , which god hath given to every individual , which in rational beings is called a person ; and so we grant that in all such created beings the personality doth suppose a distinct substance ; not from the nature of personality , but from the condition of the subject wherein it is . the personality in it self is but a different mode of subsistence in the same common nature , which is but one : but this personality being in such a subject as man is , it from thence follows ▪ that each person hath a peculiar substance of his own ; and not from the nature of personality . but when we come to consider a divine essence , which is most perfectly one , and is wholly uncapable of any separate existence or accidents , there can be no other way of distinction conceived in it , but by different modes of subsistence , or relative properties in the same divine essence . and herein we proceed , as we do in our other conceptions of the divine nature , i. e. we take away all imperfection from god , and attribute only that to him , which is agreeable to his divine perfections , although the manner of it may be above our comprehension . and if this be owning the trinity of the mob , i am not ashamed to own my self to be one of them ; but it is not out of lazyness or affected ignorance , but upon the greatest and most serious consideration . they may call this a trinity of cyphers , if they please , but i think more modest and decent language about these matters would become them as well as the things themselves much better . and they must prove a little better than they have done , that different modes of subsistence in the divine nature , or the relations of father and son are mere cyphers , which is so often mentioned in scripture , as a matter of very great consequence ; and that when we are baptized in the name of the father , son and holy ghost , we are baptized into a trinity of cyphers . but our unitarians proceed , and say that the same author affirms not only the personalities , but the persons to be merely relative . for he saith , that every person , as well as every personality in the trinity , is wholly relative . but it is plain he speaks there , not of the person in himself , but with respect to the manner of subsistence , or the relative properties belonging to them . but if the notion of a person doth besides the relative property , necessarily suppose the divine nature together with it ; how can a person then be imagined to be wholly relative ? but they urge , that which makes the first person in the trinity to be a person , makes him to be a father , and what makes him to be a father , makes him to be a person . and what follows from hence , but that the relative property is the foundation of the personality ? but by no means , that the person of the father is nothing but the relative property ? the instance of solomon is not at all to the purpose , unless we asserted three persons founded upon those different relations in his individual nature . who denies , that one person may have different respects , and yet be but one person subsisting ? where doth the scripture say , that the son of david , the father of rehoboam , and he that proceeded from david and bathsheba were three persons distinguished by those relative properties ? but here lies the foundation of what we believe as to the trinity ; we are assured from scripture , that there are three to whom the divine nature and attributes are given , and we are assured both from scripture and reason , that there can be but one divine essence ; and therefore every one of these must have the divine nature , and yet that can be but one. but it is a most unreasonable thing to charge those with sabellianism , who assert , that every person hath the divine nature distinctly belonging to him , and that the divine essence is communicated from the father to the son. did ever n●etus or sabellius , or any of their followers speak after this manner ? is the divine essence but a mere name , or a different respect only to mankind ? for the asserting such relative persons as have no essence at all , was the true sabellian doctrine , as will be made appear in the following discourse . and so much is confess'd by our unitarians themselves , for they say , that the sabellians held , that father , son and spirit are but only three names o● god given to him in scripture , by occasion of so many several dispensations towards the creature , and so he is but one subsisting person and three relative persons ; as he sustains the three names of father , son and spirit , which being the relations of god towards things without him , he is so many relative persons , or persons in a classical critical sense , i. e. persons without any essence belonging to them as such . but those who assert a communication of the divine essence to each person can never be guilty of sabellianism , if this be it , which themselves affirm . and so those called nominal trinitarians , are very unjustly so called , because they do really hold a trinity of persons in the unity of the godhead . 2. let us now see what charge they lay upon those whom they call real trinitarians : and they tell us , that the nominals will seem to be profound philosophers , deep sages in comparison with them . these are very obliging expressions to them in the beginning . but how do they make out this gross stupidity of theirs ? in short it is , that they stand condemned and anathematized as hereticks by a general council , and by all the moderns , and are every day challenged and impeached of tritheism , and cannot agree among themselves , but charge one another with great absurdities ; and in plain terms they charge them with nonsense in the thing , whereas the other lay only in words . because these assert three divine subsisting persons , three infinite spirits , minds or substances , as distinct as so many angels or men , each of them perfectly god , and yet all of them are but one god. to understand this matter rightly , we must consider that when the socinian pamphlets first came abroad , some years since , a learned and worthy person of our church , who had appear'd with great vigour and reason against our adversaries of the church of rome in the late reign ( which ought not to be forgotten ) undertook to defend the doctrine of the trinity against the history of the unitarians , and the notes on the athanasian creed ; but in the warmth of disputing , and out of a desire to make this matter more intelligible , he suffer'd himself to be carried beyond the ancient methods which the church hath used to express her sense by , still retaining the same fundamental article of three persons in one undivided essence , but explaining it in such a manner , as to make each person to have a peculiar and proper substance of his own . this gave so great an advantage to the author of those treatises , that in a little time , he set forth his notes with an appendix in answer to this new explication . wherein he charges him with heresie , tritheism and contradiction . the very same charges which have been since improved and carried on by others ; i wish i could say , without any unbecoming heat or reflections . but i shall now examine how far these charges have any ground , so as to affect the doctrine of the trinity , which is the chief end our adversaries aimed at , in heaping these reproaches upon one who appear'd so early , and with so much zeal to defend it . we are therefore to consider these things : 1. that a man may be very right in the belief of the article it self ; and yet may be mistaken in his explication of it . and this one of his keenest adversaries freely acknowledges . for he plainly distinguishes between the fundamental article and the manner of explaining it , and affirms , that a man may quit his explication without parting with the article it self . and so he may retain the article with his explication . but suppose a man to assent to the fundamental article it self , and be mistaken in his explication of it , can he be charged with heresie about this article ? for heresie must relate to the fundamental article to which he declares his hearty and unfeigned assent ; but here we suppose the mistake to lie only in the explication . as for instance , sabellianism is a condemned and exploded heresie , for it is contrary to the very doctrine of the trinity ; but suppose one who asserts the doctrine of three persons , should make them to be three modes , must such a one presently be charged with heresie , before we see whether his explication be consistent with the fundamental article or not ? for this is liable to very obvious objections , that the father begets a mode instead of a son , that we pray to three modes instead of three real persons , that modes are mutable things in their own nature , &c. but must we from hence conclude such a one guilty of heresie , when he declares , that he withall supposed them not to be mere modes , but that the divine essence is to be taken together with the mode to make a person ? yea , suppose some spitefull adversary should say , that it is a contradiction to say , that the same common nature can make a person with a mode superadded to it ▪ unless that be individuated , for a ●erson doth imply an individual nature , and not a mere relative mode . is this sufficient to charge such a person with the sabellian heresy , which he utterly disowns ? is not the like equity to be shew●d in another though different explication ? suppose then a person solemnly professes to own the fundamental doctrine of the trinity as much as any others ; but he thinks , that three persons must have distinct substances to make them persons , but so as to make no division or separation in the godhead , and that he cannot conceive a communication of the divine essence without this ; must this presently be run down as heresie , when he asserts at the same time three persons in the same undivided essence ? but this is said to be a contradiction ; so it was in the other case and not allow'd then and why should it be otherwise in this ? i speak not this to justifie such explications , but to shew that there is a difference between the heresie of denying an article , and a mistake in the explication of it . even the greatest heresie-makers in the world , distinguish between heresies and erroneous explications of articles of faith , as any one may find that looks into them . and even the inquisitors of heresie themselves allow the distinction between heresie and an erroneous proposition in faith , which amounts to the same with a mistaken explication of it ; and they all grant that there may be propositions that tend to heresie or savour of it , which cannot be condemned for heretical . and even pegna condemns melchior canus for being too cruel in asserting it to be heresie to contradict the general sense of divines , because the schools cannot make heresies . 2. it is frequently and solemnly affirmed by him , that the unity of the godhead is the most real , essential , indivisible , inseparable unity ; that there is but one divine nature , which is originally in the father , and is substantially communicated by the father to the son , as a distinct subsisting person , by an eternal ineffable generation , and to the holy ghost by an eternal and substantial procession from father and son. do the others who maintain a trinity deny this ? by no means . for we have already seen that they assert the same thing . so that they are fully agreed as to the main fundamental article . and even the unitarians yield , that from the beginning he asserted , that the three divine persons are in one undivided substance . wherein then lies the foundation of this mighty quarrel , and those unreasonable heats that men have fallen into about it ; to the great scandal of our church and religion ? in short it is this ; that the same author asserts , ( 1. ) that it is gross sabellianism to say , that there are not three personal minds , or spirits , or substances . ( 2. ) that a distinct substantial person must have a distinct substance of his own proper and peculiar to his own person . but he owns , that although there are three distinct persons , or minds , each of whom is distinctly and by himself god , yet there are not three gods , but one god , or one divinity ; which he saith , is intirely , and indivisibly , and inseparably in three distinct persons or minds . that the same one divine nature is wholly and entirely communicated by the eternal father to the eternal son and by the father and son to the eternal spirit without any division or separation ; and so it remains one still . this is the substance of this new explication , which hath raised such flames , that injunctions from authority were thought necessary to suppress them . but those can reach no farther than the restraint of mens tongues and pens about these matters , and unless something be found out to satisfie their minds and to remove misapprehensions , the present heat may be only cover'd over and kept in ; which when there is a vent given ▪ may break out into a more dangerous flame . therefore i shall endeavour to state and clear this matter so as to prevent any future eruption thereof , which will be done by considering how far they are agreed , and how far the remaining difference ought to be pursued . 1. they are agreed , that there are three distinct persons and but one godhead . 2. that there are no separate and divided substances in the trinity ; but the divine nature is wholly and entirely one and undivided . 3. that the divine essence is communicated from the father to the son , and from both to the holy spirit . so that the charge of sabellianism on those who reject this new explication is without ground . for no sabellian did or could assert a communication of the divine essence . which being agreed on both sides , the dispute turns upon this single point , whether a communicated essence , doth imply a distinct substance or not . on the one side it is said , that there being but one god , there can be but one divine essence , and if more essences more gods. on the other side , that since they own a communicated essence necessary to make a distinction of persons in the son and holy ghost , if the essence be not distinct , the foundation of distinct personalities is taken away . but how is this clear'd by the other party ? they say , that it is one peculiar prerogative of the divine nature and substance , founded in its infinite and therefore transcendent perfection , whereby it is capable of residing in more persons than one , and is accordingly communicated from the father to the son and holy ghost . so that the communication of the divine nature is owned to the persons of the son and holy ghost . but how then comes it not to make a distinct essence , as it makes distinct persons , by being communicated ? the answer we see is , that it is a peculiar prerogative founded on the infinite and therefore transcendent perfection of the divine nature . but they further add , that when the son and holy ghost are said to have the same divine nature from the father , as the origin and fountain of the divinity ; not by the production of a new divine nature but by a communication of his own ; which is one and the same in all three without separation , difference , or distinction ; that this is indeed a great mystery , which hath been always look'd upon by the greatest and wisest men in the church , to be above all expressions and description . so that the greatest difficulty is at last resolved into the incomprehensible perfection of the divine nature ; and that neither man nor angels can give a satisfactory answer to enquiries about the manner of them . and the author of the animadversions saith , that in the divine persons of the trinity , the divine nature and the personal subsistence coalesce into one , by an incomprehensible , ineffable kind of union and conjunction . but do those on the other side think , that the asserting three distinct substances in one and the same individual substance tends to clear and explain the notion of the trinity and make it more easie and intelligible ? the divinity , they say , is whole , intire , indivisible , and inseparable in all three . but can one whole entire indivisible substance be actually divided into three substances ? for if every person must have a peculiar substance of his own ; and there be three persons , there must be three peculiar substances , and how can there be three peculiar substances , and yet but one entire and indivisible substance ? i do not say , there must be three divided substances in place , or separate substances , but they must be divided as three individuals of the same kind , which must introduce a specifick divine nature , which i think very inconsistent with the divine perfections ; but of this at large in the following discourse . i do not lay any force upon this argument , that there can be no ground of the distinction between the three substances , if there be but one substance in the godhead , ( as some have done ) because the same substance cannot both unite and distinguish them ; for the ground of the distinction is not the substance but the communication of it , and where that is so freely asserted , there is a reason distinct from the substance it self , which makes the distinction of persons . but the difficulty still remains , how each person should have a substance of his own ; and yet there be but one entire and indivisible substance , for every person must have a proper substance of his own ; or else according to this hypothesis , he can be no person ; and this peculiar substance must be really distinct from that substance which is in the other two : so that here must be three distinct substances in the three persons . but how then can there be but one individual essence in all three ? we may conceive one common essence to be individuated in three persons , as it is in men ; but it is impossible to conceive the same individual essence to be in three persons , which have peculiar substances of their own . for the substances belonging to the persons , are the same essence individuated in those persons : and so there is no avoiding making three individual essences and one specifick or common divine nature . and maimonides his argument is considerable against more gods than one ; if , saith he , there be two gods , there mu●t be something wherein they agree , and something wherein they differ ; that wherein they agree must be that which makes each of them god ; and that wherein they differ must make them two gods. now wherein doth this differ from the present hypothesis ? there is something wherein they differ , and that is their proper substance ; but maimonides thought that wherein they differ'd sufficient to make them two gods. so that i fear it will be impossible to clear this hypothesis as to the reconciling three individual essences with one individual divine essence , which looks too like asserting that there are three gods and yet but one . and the author of this explica●ion doth at last confess , that three distinct whole inseparable same 's , are hard to conceive as to the manner of it . now to what purpose are new explications started and disputes raised and carried on so warmly about them , if after all , the main difficulty be confess'd to be above our comprehension ? we had much better satisfie our selves with that language which the church hath receiv●d and is express'd in the creeds , than go about by new terms , to raise new ferments , especially at a time , when our united forces are most necessary against our common adversaries . no wise and good men can be fond of any new inventions , when the peace of the church is hazarded by them . and on the other side , it is as dangerous to make new heresies as new explications . if any one denies the doctrine contained in the nicene creed , that is no new heresie ; but how can such deny the son to be consubstantial to the father , who assert one and the same indivisible substance in the father and the son ? but they may contradict themselves . that is not impossible on either side . but doth it follow that they are guilty of heresie ? are not three substances and but one a contradiction ? no more , say they , than that a communicated substance is not distinct from that which did communicate . but this whole dispute we find is at last resolved into the infinite and unconceivable perfections of the godhead , where it is most safely lodged ; and that there is no real contradiction in the doctrine it self , is part of the design of the discourse afterwards . but here it will be necessary to take notice of what the unitarians have objected against this new explication , viz. that it was condemned by the ancients in the person of philoponus ; in the middle ages , in the person and writings of abhor ioachim ; but more severely since the reformation , in the person of valentinus gentilis , who was condemned at geneva , and beheaded at bern for this very doctrine . to these i shall give a distinct answer : 1. as to joh philoponus , i do freely own , that in the greek church , when in the sixth century he broached his opinion , that every hypostasis must have the common nature individuated in it , this was look'd upon as a doctrine of dangerous consequence , both with respect to the trinity and incarnation . the latter was the first occasion of it ; for as leontius observes , the dispute did not begin about the trinity , but about the incarnation ; and philoponus took part with those who asserted but one nature in christ after the vnion , and he went upon this ground , that if there were two natures there must be two hypostases , because nature and hypostasis were the same . then those on the churches side , saith leontius , objected , that if they were the same , there must be three distinct natures in the trinity , as there were three hypostases ; which philoponus yielded , and grounded himself on aristotle's doctrine , that there was but one common substance and several individual substances , and so held it was in the trinity , whence he was called the leader of the heresie of the tritheius . this is the account given by leontius who lived very ●ear his time , a. d. 620. the same is affirmed of him by nicephorus , and that he wrote a book on purpose about the vnion of two natures in christ , out of which he produces his own words concerning a common and individual nature , ( which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) which can agree to none else . and the main argument he went upon was this , that unless we assert a singular nature in the hypostases , we must say , that the whole trinity was incarnate ; as unless there be a singular humane nature distinct from the common , christ must assume the whole nature of mankind . and this argument from the incarnation , was that which made roscelin , in the beginning of the disputing age , a. d. 1093 , to assert , that the three persons were three things distinct from each other , as three angels or three men , because otherwise the incarnation of the second person could not be understood , as appears by anselm's epistles , and his book of the incarnation written upon that occasion . but as a●selm shews at large , if this argument hold , it must prove the three persons not only to be distinct , but separate and divided sub●●ances , ( which is directly contrary to this new explication ) and then there is no avoiding tritheism . but to return to joh. philoponus , who , saith nicephorus , divided the indivisible nature of god into three individuals as among men : which , saith he , is repugnant to the sense of the christian church ; and he produces the testimony of gregory nazianzen against it , and adds , that leontius and georgius pisides confuted philoponus . but in that divided time . there were some called theodosiani , who made but one nature and one hypostasis ; and so fell in with the sabellians ; but others held , that there was one immutable divine essence , but each person had a distinct individual nature : which the rest charged with tritheism . which consequence they utterly rejected , because although they held three distinct natures , yet they said , they were but one god , because there was but one invariable divinity in them . nicephorus saith , that conon's followers rejected philoponus ; but photius mentions a conference between conon and others , a●out philoponus , wherein he defends him against other severians . photius grants , that conon and his followers held a consubstantial trinity and the unity of the godhead , and so far they were orthodox : but saith , they were far from it , when they asserted proper and peculiar substances to each person . the difference between conon and philoponus about this point , ( for conon wrote against philoponus about the resurrection ) seems to have been partly in the doctrine , but chiefly in the consequence of it ; for these rejected all kind of tritheism , which philoponus saw well enough must follow from his doctrine , but he denied any real division or separation in those substances as to the deity . isidore saith , that the tritheists owned three gods , as well as three persons ; and that if god be said to be triple , there must follow a plurality of gods. but there were others called triformiani , of whom s. augustin speaks . who held the three persons to be three distinct parts , which being united made one god ; which , saith he , is repugnant to the divine perfection . but among these severians , there were three several opinions : 1. of philoponus , who held one common nature and three individual . 2. of those who said there was but one nature and one hypostasis . 3. of those who affirm'd there were three distinct natures , but withal , that there was but one indivisible godhead ; and these differ'd from philoponus in the main ground of tritheism , which was , that he held the common nature in the trinity , to be only a specifick nature , and such as it is among men. for philoponus himself in the words which nicephorus produces , doth assert plainly , that the common nature is separated from the individuals , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by a mere act of the mind ; so that he allow'd no individual vnity in the divine nature , but what was in the several persons ; as the common nature of man is a notion of the mind , as it is abstracted from the several individuals , wherein alone it really subsists ; so that here is an apparent difference between the doctrine of joh. philoponus and the new explication , for herein the most real , essential and indivisible unity of the divine nature is asserted ; and it is said to be no species , because it is but one , and so it could not be condemned in joh. philoponus 2. we now come to abbat joachim , whose doctrine seems to be as much mistaken , as it is represented in the decretal , where the condemnation of it by the lateran council is extant . but here i cannot but observe what great authority these unitarians give to this lateran council , as if they had a mind to set up transubstantiation by it , which they so often parallel with the trinity . thence in their late discourse they speak of it as the most general council that was ever called , and that what was there defined , it was made heresie to oppose it . but by their favour , we neither own this to have been a general council , nor that it had authority to make that heresie which was not so before . but that council might assert the doctrine of the trinity truly , as it had been receiv'd , and condemn the opinion of joachim justly but what it was , they do not or would not seem to understand . joachim was a great enthusiast , but no deep divine ( as men of that heat seldom are ) and he had many disputes with peter lombard in his life , as the vindicator of joachim confesses . after his death , a book of his was found , taxing peter lombard with some strange doctrine about the trinity , wherein he called him heretick and madman ; this book was complained of in the lateran council , and upon examination it was sound , that instead of charging peter lombard justly , he was fallen into heresie himself , which was denying the essential vnity of the three persons , and making it to be vnity of consent . he granted that they were one essence , one nature , one substance : but how ? not by any true proper unity , but similitudinary and collective , as they called it , as many men are one people , and many believers make one church . whence thomas aquinas saith , that joachim fell into the arian heresie . it is sufficient to my purpose , that he denied the individual vnity of the divine essence , which cannot be charged on the author of the new explication , and so this comes not home to the purpose . 3. but the last charge is the most terrible , for it not only sets down the heresie , but the capital punishment which follow'd it . yet i shall make it appear , ( notwithstanding the very warm prosecution of it by another hand ) that there is a great difference between the doctrine of valentinus gentilis , and that which is asserted in this explication . 1. in the sentence of his condemnation it is expressed , that he had been guilty of the vilest scurrility and most horrid blasphemies against the son of god and the glorious mystery of the trinity . but can any thing of this nature be charged upon one , who hath not only written in defence of it , but speaks of it with the highest veneration ? 2. in the same sentence it is said , that he acknowledged the father only to be that infinite god which we ought to worship , which is plain blasphemy against the son. but can any men ever think to make this the same case with one , who makes use of that as one of his chief arguments , that the three persons are to be worshipped with a distinct divine worship ? 3. it is charged upon him , that he called the trinity a mere human invention , not so much as known to any catholick creed , and directly contrary to the word of god. but the author here charged , hath made it his business to prove the doctrine of the trinity to be grounded on scripture and to vindicate it from the objections drawn from thence against it . 4. one of the main articles of his charge was , that he made three spirits of different order and degree , that the father is the one only god , by which the son and holy ghost are excluded manifestly from the unity of the godhead ; but the person charged with his heresie saith , the reason why we must not say three gods , is , because there is but one and the same divinity in them all ; and that entirely , indivisibly , inseparably . but it is said , that although there may be some differences , yet they agree in asserting , that there are three distinct eternal spirits or minds in the trinity ; and genebrard is brought into the same heresie with them but genebrard with great indignation rejects the doctrine of valentinus gentilis , because he held an inequality in the persons , and denied the individual vnity of the godhead in them ; but he saith , he follow'd damascen in asserting three real hypostases ; and he utterly denies tritheism , and he brings a multitude of reasons , why the charge of tritheism doth not lie against his opinion , although he owns the hypostases to be three distinct individuals , but then he adds , that there is an indivisible and insep●rable union of the divine nature in all three persons . now to deal as impartially in this matter as may be , i do not think our understandings one jot helped in the notion of the trinity by this hypothesis ; but that it is liable to as great difficulties as any other , and therefore none ought to be fond of it , or to set it against the general sense of others , and the current expressions of divines about these mysteries ; nor to call the different opinions of others heresie or nonsense , which are provoking words , and tend very much to inflame mens passions , because their faith and vnderstanding are both call'd in question , which are very tender things . but on the other side , a difference ought to be made between the heresie and blasphemy of valentinus gentilis , and the opinion of such who maintain the individual and indivisible unity of the godhead ; but withal , believe that every person hath an individual substance as a person , and that sabellianism cannot be avoided otherwise . wherein i think they are mistaken , and that the fathers were of another opinion ; and that our church owns but one substance in the godhead , as the western church always did , ( which made such difficulty about receiving three hypostases , because they took hypostasis for a substance ) but yet i see no reason why those who assert three hypostases , and mean three individual substances should be charged with the heresie of valentinus gentilis , or so much as with that of abba● joachim or philoponus , because they all rejected the individual unity of the divine nature , which is constantly maintained by the defenders of the other hypothesis . but it is said and urged with vehemency , that these two things are inconsistent with each other ; that it is going forward and backward , being orthodox in one breath and otherwise in the next ; that all this looks like shuffling and concealing the true meaning , and acting the old artifices under a different form. for the samosatenians and arians , when they were pinched , seem'd very orthodox in their expressions , but retained their heresies still in their minds ; and there is reason to suspect the same game is playing over again , and we cannot be too cautious in a matter of such consequence . i grant very great caution is needfull , but the mixture of some charity with it will do no hurt . why should we suspect those to be inwardly false , and to think otherwise than they speak , who have shew'd no want of courage and zeal , at a time when some thought it prudence to say nothing , and never call'd upon their superiours then to own the cause of god , and to do their duties as they have now done , and that in no very obliging manner ? and if the same men can be cool and unconcerned at some times , ( when there was so great reason to be otherwise ) and of a sudden grow very warm , and even to boil over with zeal ; the world is so ill natur'd , as to be too apt to conclude there is some other cause of such an alteration than what openly appears . but there is a kind of bitter zeal , which is so fierce and violent , that it rather inflames than heals any wounds that are made ; and is of so malignant a nature , that it spreads and eats like a cancer , and if a stop were not given to it , it might endanger the whole body . i am very sensible how little a man consults his own ease , who offers to interpose in a dispute between men of heat and animosity ; but this moves me very little , when the interest of our church and religion is concerned , which ought to prevail more than the fear of displeasing one or other party , or it may be both . i do heartily wish , that all who are equally concerned in the common cause , would lay aside heats , and prejudices , and hard words , and consider this matter impartially ; and i do not question , but they will see cause to judge , as i do , that the difference is not so great as our adversaries for their own advantage make it to be . and since both sides yield , that the matter they dispute about is above their reach , the wisest course they can take is to assert and defend what is revealed , and not to be too peremptory and quarrelsom about that which is acknowledged to be above our comprehension , i mean as to the manner how the three persons partake of the divine nature . it would be of the most fatal consequence to us , if those weapons , which might be so usefully imploy'd against our common adversaries , should still be turned upon one another . i know no manner of advantage they have against us , but from thence , and this is it which makes them write with such insolence and scorn towards those who are far their superiours in learning and wit , as well as in the goodness of their cause . and is it possible that some of our most skilfull fencers should play prizes before them , who plainly animate them against each other for their own diversion and interest ? sometimes one hath the better , sometimes the other , and one is cried up in opposition to the other , but taken alone is used with the greatest contempt . one man's work is said to be learned and accurate , and the more , because it follows , that he concerns not himself with the socinians . the wiser man no doubt , for that reason . at another time it is called the birth of the mountains , and the author parallel'd with no less a man than don quixot , and his elaborate writings with his adventures , and they ridicule his notion of modes as if they were only so many gambols and postures . and then for his adversary , they hearten and incourage him all they can ; they tell him , he must not allow to the other the least title of all he contends for , least their sport should be spoiled ; and to comfort him , they tell him , that his adversary is a socinian at bottom , and doth not know it ; that all his thingums , modes , properties are only an addition of words and names , and not of persons properly so called , and that his whole scheme is nothing but socinianism drest up in the absurd cant of the schools . that his book hath much more scurrility than argument , that his usage of him was barbarous , and a greater soloecism in manners , than any he accuses him of in grammar or speech ; and in short , that his explication of the trinity is a great piece of nonsense , ( though it comes so near to socinianism . ) but how doth the other antagonist escape ? what , nothing but good words to him ? in this place they had a mind to keep him in heart , and only charge him with a heresie which they laugh at ; but in another place , they set him out with such colours , as shew they intended only to play one upon the other . they charge him not only with heresie but polytheism , which , they say , is next to atheism ; that his vindication is a supercilious , disdainfull and peevish answer : that he had neither humanity nor good manners left : that there is nothing considerable in his books but what he borrow'd from them. these are some of the flowers which they bestow on these persons of reputation in polemick squabble as they call it , which plainly shew , that their aim is , as much as may be , to divide and then to expose us . and shall we still go on to gratifie this insulting humour of theirs , by contending with one another , and afford them still new matter for books against both ? as we may see in their late discourse about nominal and real trinitarians , which was intended for a rare shew , wherein the two parties are represented as combating with one another , and they stand by and triumph over these cadmean brethren , as they call them . neither are they the socinians only , but those who despise all religion ( who i doubt are the far greater number ) are very much entertained with such encounters between men of wit and parts , because they think , and they do not think amiss , that religion it self will be the greatest sufferer by them at last : and this is the most dangerous , but i hope not the most prevailing party of men among us . the socinians profess themselves christians , and i hope are so , ( especially if but one article of faith be required to make men so ) but i cannot but observe that in the late socinian pamphlets , there is too strong a biass towards deism , ( which consideration alone should make us unite and look more narrowly to their steps . ) i do not charge their writers with a professed design to advance deism among us ; but their way of managing their disputes , is as if they had a mind to serve them . and such men who are enemies to all revealed religion , could not find out better tools for their purpose than they are . for they know very well , that in such a nation as ours , which is really concerned for the profession of religion one way or other , there is no opening professed schools of atheism ; but the design must be carried on under some shew of religion . and nothing serves their turn so well , as setting up natural religion in opposition to revealed . for this is the way by degrees to loosen and unhinge the faith of most men , which with great reason is built on the scripture as the surest foundation . but here it is fit to observe the several steps they take in order to this advancing deism , and how our unitarians have complied with all of them . i. the first point they are to gain is , the lessening the authority of scripture , and if this be once done , they know mens minds will be left so roving and uncertain , that they will soon fall into scepticism and infidelity . ii. the next is , to represent church-men as persons of interest and design , who maintain religion only because it supports them ; and this they call priest-cra●t , and if they can by this means take away their authority too , the way lies still more open for them ; for it is more easie to make a prey of the flock , when the shepherds are suspected only to look after their fleeces . since such a suspicion takes away all trust and confidence in their guides ; and they know very well , how little others will be able to defend themselves . iii. another step is , to magnifie the deists as men of probity and good sense ; that assert the just liberties of mankind , against that terrible thing called priest-craft ; and that would rescue religion from false glosses and absurd notions taken up from the schools and taught in the universities , on purpose to keep under those principles of universal liberty as to opinions , which those of freer minds endeavour to promote . but especially they are great enemies to all mysteries of faith , as unreasonable impositions on those of more refined vnderstandings , and of clear and distinct perceptions , as they have learnt to express themselves . these they account intolerable vsurpations on men of such elevations as themselves ; for mysteries are only for the mob , and not for persons of such noble capacities . iv. the last thing is , to represent all religions as indifferent , since they agree in the common principles of natural religion , especially the vnity of god , and all the rest is but according to the different inventions of men , the skill of the contrivers , and the several humors and inclinations of mankind . these are the chief mysteries of deism in our age ; for even deism hath its mysteries , and it is it self a mystery of iniquity , which i am afraid is too much working already among us , and will be more if no effectual stop be put to it . i call it deism , because that name obtains now , as more plausible and modish ; for atheism is a rude unmannerly word , and exposes men to the rabble , and makes persons shun the company and avoid the conversation and dealing with such who are noted for it . and this would be a mighty prejudice to them , as to their interests in this world , which they have reason to value . but to be a deist , seems to be only a setting up for having more wit , than to be cheated by the priests , and imposed upon by the common forms of religion , which serve well enough for ordinary people that want sense , and are not skill●d in demonstrations ; but the deists are so wise as to see through all these things . and therefore this name gains a reputation among all such as hate religion , but know not how otherwise to distinguish themselves from prosessed atheists , which they would by no means be taken for ; although if they be pressed home , very few among them will sincerely own any more than a series of causes , without any intellectual perfections , which they call god. a strange god without wisdom , goodness , iustice or providence ! but i am now to shew , how in all these points the present unitarians have been very serviceable to them , in the books which they have lately published and dispersed both in city and country . 1. as to the authority of scripture : they have been already justly exposed for undermining the authority of s. john's gospel , by mustering up all the arguments of the old hereticks against it , and giving no answers to them . and what defence have they since made for themselves ? no other but this very trifling one , that they repeat their reasons but do not affirm them . what is the meaning of this ? if they are true , why do they not affirm them ? if they are false , why do they not answer them ? is this done like those who believe the gospel of s. john to be divine , to produce all the arguments they could meet with against it ; and never offer to shew the weakness : and vnreasonableness of them ? doth not this look like a design to furnish the deists with such arguments as they could meet with against it ? especially , when they say , that s. iohn doth not oppose them why then are these arguments produced against his gospel ? men do not use to dispute against their friends , nor to tell the world what all people have said against them , and give not a word of answer in vindication of them . but they say , the modern vnitarians allow of the gospel and other pieces of s. iohn . a very great favour indeed , to allow of them . but how far ? as of divine authority ? not a word of that . but as ancient books which they think it not fit for them to dispute against . but if the ancient ebionites were their predecessors , as they affirm , they can allow none but the gospel according to the hebrews ; and must reject the rest and all s. paul's epistles ; and in truth , they make him argue so little to the purpose , that they must have a very mean opinion of his writings . but of these things in the discourse it self . as to church-men , no professed deists could express themselves more spitefully than they have done , and that against those to whom they profess the greatest respect . what then would they say of the rest ? they say in general , that it is natural to worldlings , to mercenary spirits , to the timorous and ambitious ; in a word , to all such as preferr not god before all other , whether persons or considerations , to believe as they would have it . but although the words be general , yet any one that looks into them may s●e● find that they were intended for such church-men who had written against their opinions . and the insinuation is , that if it were not for worldly interests , they would own them to be in the right . whereas i am fully perswaded , that they have no way to defend their opinions , but to reject the scriptures and declare themselves deists ; and as long as we retain a just veneration for the scripture , we can be of no other opinion , because we look on their interpretations as unreasonable , new , forced , and inconsistent with the circumstances of places and the main scope and tenor of the new testament . but their introduction to the answer to the late archbishop's sermons about the trinity and incarnation , shew their temper sufficiently as to all church-men . he was the person they professed to esteem and reverence above all others , and confess that he instructs them in the air and language of a father , ( which at least deserved a little more dutifull language from them . ) but some mens fondness for their opinions breaks all bounds of civility and decency ; for presently after , mentioning the archbishop and other bishops who had written against them , they say it signifies nothing to the case , that they are great pensioners of the world. for it is certain we have a mighty propensity to believe as is for our turn and interest . and soon after , that their opposers are under the power of such fatal biasses , that their doctrine is the more to be suspected because it is theirs . for the reason why they maintain the doctrine of the trinity is , because they must . the plain meaning of all this is , that the late archbishop ( as well as the rest ) was a mere self-interested man , ( which none who knew either the outside or inside of lambeth could ever imagine ) that if he were really against them ( as none could think otherwise , who knew him so well and so long as i did ) it only shew'd what a strange power , interest hath in the minds of all church-men . but what bias was it , which made him write with that strength and iudgment against their opinions ? let us set aside all titles of respect and honour as they desire , let reason be compared with reason ; and his arguments with their answers ; and it will be soon found that the advantage which he had , was not from any other dignity than that of a clearer iudgment , and a much stronger way of reasoning whereas their answers are such , as may well be supposed to come from those , who had some such bias , that they must at least seem to answer what in truth they could not . as hath been fully made appear in the vindication of him , to which no reply hath been given , although other treatises of theirs have come out since . in the conclusion of that answer they say , that they did not expect that their answer should satisfie us , and in truth they had a great deal of reason to think so . but what reason do they give for it ? a very kind one no doubt ; because prepossession and interest have taken hold of us . as though we were men of such mean and mercenary spirits , as to believe according to prepossession without reason , and to act only as serves our present interest . but we never made mean addresses to infidels to shew how near our principles came to theirs , nor made parallels between the trinity and transubstantiation , as some did , and defended them , as well as they could , when popery was uppermost . but enough of this . 3. we have seen how much they have gratified the deists by representing church-men in such a manner , let us now see in what manner they treat the deists . it is with another sort of language ; and which argues a more than ordinary kindness to them . in one place they say , that the deists are mostly well-natured men , and men , of probity and understanding ; in effect that they are sincere honest-hearted men , who do good by the impulse of their natural religion , honesty and good conscience , which have great influence upon them . what another sort of character is this from that of the greatest , and in their opinion the best of our clergy ? this must proceed from some intimacy and familiarity with them ; and it is easie to imagine from hence , that they are upon very good terms with one another , because they must be unitarians , if they believe a god at all . but where else are these honest , conscientious deists to be found ? it is rare indeed for others to find any one that rejects christianity out of pure conscience , and that acts by principles of sincere virtue . i never yet could meet with such , nor hear of those that have . and i would fain know the reasons on which such conscientious men proceeded ; for truly the principles of natural religion are those which recommend christianity to me ; for without them the mysteries of faith would be far more unaccountable than now they are ; and supposing them , i see no incongruity in them , i. e. that there is a just and holy god , and a wise providence , and a future state of rewards and punishments ; and that god designs to bring mankind to happiness out of a state of misery ; let these be supposed , and the scheme of christianity will appear very reasonable and fitted to the condition and capacity of mankind . and the sublimest mysteries of it are not intended to puzzle or amuse mankind , as weak men imagine ; but they are discover'd for the greatest and best purposes in the world , to bring men to the hatred of sin and love of god , and a patient continuance in well-doing , in order to a blessed immortality . so that this is truly a mystery of godliness , being intended for the advancement of real piety and goodness among mankind in order to make them happy . but as to these unitarians , who have such happy acquaintance with these conscientious deists ; i would fain learn from them , if they think them mistaken , why they take no more pains to satisfie and convince them ; for i find they decline saying a word against them . in one place they compare the atheist and deist together ; and very honestly and like any conscientious deists , they impute all the deism and most part of the atheism of our age to the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation . is it possible for men that live in our age to give such an account as this of the growth of deism and atheism among us ? what number of atheists is there , upon any other account than from a looseness of thinking and living ? where are those who believe god to be an incomprehensible being , and yet reject the mysteries which relate to his being , because they are incomprehensible ? suppose any reject spiritual substance as nonsense and a contradiction , as they do the trinity on the same pretences . is this a sufficient reason or not ? they may tell them , as they do us that they can have no ideas , no clear and distinct perceptions of immaterial substances ? what answer do they give in this case ? not a syllable ; although they take notice of it . but i hope they give some better satisfaction to the deist ; no , for they say , this is not a place to argue against either atheist or deist . by no means : some would say , they were not such fools to fall out with their friends . and it cannot be denied , that they have been the greatest incouragers of such kind of writings , which serve their turn so well ; and in pure gratitude they forbear to argue against them . iv. to shew how near they come to an indifferency in religion , they speak favourably of mahometans , and jews , and even tartars , because they agree with them in the vnity of the godhead . what an honest-hearted deist do they make that impostor mahomet ? one would hardly think such a character could have come out of the mouth of christians . but these are their words , mahomet is affirmed by divers historians to have had no other design in pretending himself to be a prophet , but to restore the belief of the unity of god , which at that time was extirpated among the eastern christians by the doctrines of the trinity and incarnation . who are those historians who give this character of him ? why are they not named , that their authority might be examin'd ? was the morocco ambassador one of them ? or paulus alciatus , who from a unitarian turned mahometan ? but by the best accounts we can meet with , we find that he was a very cunning impostor , and took in from the jews and ishmaelites his countrymen , circumcision ; from the christians , an honourable mention of christ , as a prophet , and as the the word and spirit of god , and owned his miracles ; from the ancient hereticks he denied his suffering , but owned his being taken up into heaven . yea , he owned , that he had his gospel from heaven ; but that his disciples changed it after his death , and attributed more to christ than he assumed to himself . which shews that he had so much sence , as to discern , that if the books of the new testament were genuine , more must be given to christ , than either mahomet or the unitarians do allow . let any indifferent reader compare their character of mahomet with that of athanasius , which these men give , and they will easily find that they take as much care to blacken one , as they do to vindicate the other . what christian ingenuity is here ? but mahomet was a deist , and athanasius a trinitarian . but they go on . whatsoever the design of mahomet was , its certain , that mahometism hath prevailed over greater numbers and more nations , than at this day profess christianity . but how ? was it not by force of arms and the prevalency of the saracen and turkish empire ? no , say these learned historians , it was not by the force of the sword , but by that one truth in the alcoran the unity of god. it were endless to quote the historians , who say , that it was mahomet's principle , to subdue all by force of arms who opposed his religion ; but the authority of elmacinus alone is sufficient ; for in the beginning of his history he owns that it was his principle , to make war upon those that would not submit to his law. and others say , that in remembrance of this , their law is expounded by their doctors , with a sword drawn by them , and that it is the law of the alcoran to kill and slay those that oppose it . what liberty the turkish empire allows to christians in the conquer'd provinces is not to this purpose , but by what means mahometism prevailed in the world. but say they , the jews as well as mahometans are alienated from us , because they suppose the trinity to be the doctrine of all christians . and what then ? must we renounce the christian doctrine to please the jews and mahometans ? must we quit christ's being the messias , because the jews deny it ? or the suffering of christ , because the mahometans think it inconsistent with his honour ? but if this be the truth of the case , as to jews and mahometans ; no persons are so well qualified to endeavour their conversion , as our unitarians ; which would be a much better imployment for them , than to expose the christian doctrine by such writings among us . i am ashamed to mention what they say of the tartars , when they call them , the shield and sword of that way of acknowledging and worshipping god. so that mahometans , jews and tartars are fairly represented because they agree in the grand fundamental of the vnity of the godhead ; but the christian church is charged with believing impossibilities , contradictions , and pure nonsense . and thus we find our unitarians serving the deists in all their methods of overthrowing revealed religion and advancing deism among us . and if this will not awaken us to look more after them , and unite us in the defence of our common cause against them , i do not think that other methods will do it . for it is become a restless and active , although as yet , but a small body of men , and they tell the world plainly enough that they are free from the biasses of hopes and fears ; and sit loose from the awes and bribes of the world. so that there is no way of dealing with them , but by shewing the falsness & weakness of the grounds they go upon ; and that they have no advantage of us as to scripture , antiquity or reason : which is the design of this vndertaking . worcester , sept. 30. 1696. e. w. the contents . chap. i. the occasion and design of the discourse . pag. 1. chap. ii. the doctrine of the trinity not receiv'd in the christian church by force or interest . p. 10. chap. iii. the socinian plea , for the antiquity of their doctrine , examined . p. 15. chap. iv. of the considerable men they pretend to have been of their opinion in the primitive church . p. 29. chap. v. of their charge of contradiction in the doctrine of the trinity . p. 54. chap. vi. no contradiction for three persons to be in one common nature . p. 68. chap. vii . the athanasian creed clear'd from contradictions . p. 101. chap. viii . the socinian sense of scripture examined . p. 121. chap. ix . the general sense of the christian church , proved from the form of baptism , as it was understood in the first ages . p. 177. chap. x. the objections against the trinity , in point of reason , answer'd . p. 230. errata . pag. 113. l. 12. for our r. one . p. 122. l. 12. r. heb. 1.5 . for unto which . p. 124. l. 7. add n. 11. p. 126. l. 29. for damascenus r. damascius . p. 129. l. 21. for appointed r. appropriated . p. 181. l. 22. after them put in not . p. 192. l. 19 for we r. were . p. 211. l. 1. dele that . p. 217. l. 6. for hypostasis r. hypothesis . p. 234. l. 6. for intermission r. intromission . p. 283. l. 21. r. as well as . a discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the trinity : with an answer to the late socinian objections . chap. i. the occasion and design of this discourse . it is now above twenty years since i first published a discourse about the reasons of the sufferings of christ , ( lately reprinted ) in answer to some socinian objections at that time . but i know not how it came to pass , that the socinian controversy seemed to be laid asleep among us for many years after ; and so it had continued to this day , if some mens busie and indiscreet zeal for their own particular opinions ( or rather heresies ) had not been more prevalent over them , than their care and concernment for the common interest of christianity among us . for it is that which really suffers by these unhappy and very unseasonable disputes about the mysteries of the christian faith , which could never have been started and carried on with more fatal consequence to all revealed religion , than in an age too much inclined to scepticism and infidelity . for all who are but well-wishers to that , do greedily catch at any thing which tends to unsettle mens minds as to matters of faith , and to expose them to the scorn and contempt of infidels . and this is all the advantage which they have above others in their writings . for upon my carefull perusal of them ( which was occasion'd by re●rinting that discourse ) i found nothing extraordinary , as to depth of judgment , or closeness of reasoning , or strength of argument , or skill in scripture or antiquity , but the old stuff set out with a new dress , and too much suited to the genius of the age we live in , viz. brisk and airy , but withal too light and superficial . but although such a sort of raillery be very much unbecoming the weight and dignity of the subject ▪ yet that is not the worst part of the character of them ; for they seem to be written , not with a design to convince others , or to justifie themselves , but to ridicule the great mysteries of our faith , calling them iargon , cant , nonsense , impossibilities , contradictions , samaritanism , and what not ? any thing but mahometism and deism . and at the same time they know , that we have not framed these doctrines our selves ; but have received them by as universal a tradition and consent of the christian church , as that whereby we receive the books of the new testament , and as founded upon their authority . so that , as far as i can see , the truth of these doctrines and authority of those books must stand and fall together : for from the time of the writing and publishing of them all persons who were admitted into the christian church by the form of baptism , prescribed by our saviour , were understood to ●e received members upon profession of ●●e faith of the holy trinity ; the hymns and doxologies of the primitive church were to father , son and holy ghost ; and those who openly opposed that doctrine were cast out of the communion of it : which to me seem plain and demonstrative arg●ments , that this was the doctrine of the christian church from the beginning , as will appear in the progress of this discourse . the chief design whereof is to vindicate the doctrine of the trinity , as it hath been generally received in the christian church , and is expressed in the athanasian creed , from those horrible imputations of nonsense , contradiction and impossibility ; with which it is charged by our vnitarians ( as they call themselves ; ) and that in the answer to the sermon lately reprinted , about the mysteries of the christian faith : which i first preached and published some years since , upon the breaking out of this controversie among us , by the notes on athanasius his creed , and other mischievous pamphlets one upon another . i was in hopes to have given some check to their insolent way of writing about matters so much above our reach , by shewing how reasonable it was for us to submit to divine revelation in such things , since we must acknowledge our selves so much to seek , as to the nature of substances , which are continually before our eyes ; and therefore , if there were such difficulties about a mystery which depended upon revelation , we had no cause to wonder at it ; but our business was chiefly to be satisfied , whether this doctrine were any part of that revelation . as to which i proposed several things , which i thought very reasonable , to the finding out the true sense of the scripture about these matters . after a considerable time , they thought fit to publish something , which was to pass for an answer to it ; but in it , they wholly pass over that part which relates to the sense of scripture , and run into their common place about mysteries of faith ; in which they were sure to have as many friends , as our faith had enemies : and yet they managed it in so trifling a manner , that i did not then think it deserved an answer . but a worthy and judicious friend was willing to take that task upon himself , which he hath very well discharged : so that i am not concerned to meddle with all those particulars , which are fully answer'd already , but the general charge as to the christian church about the doctrine of the trinity , i think my self oblig'd to give an answer to upon this occasion . but before i come to that , since they so confidently charge the christian church for so many ages , with embracing errors , and nonsense , and contradictions for mysteries of faith , i desire to know ( supposing it possible for the christian church to be so early , so generally and so miserably deceived in a matter of such moment ) by what light they have discovered this great error . have they any new books of scripture to judge by ? truly they had need , for they seem to be very weary of the old ones ; because they find they will not serve their turn . therefore they muster up the old objections against them , and give no answer to them ; they find fault with copies , and say , they are corrupted and falsified to speak the language of the church : they let fall suspicious words , as to the form of baptism , as though it were inserted from the churches practice ; they charge us with following corrupt copies and making false translations without any manner of ground for it . and doth not all this discover no good will to the scriptures , at least , as they are received among us ? and i despair of meeting with better copies , or seeing a more faithfull translation than ours is . so that it is plain , that they have no mind to be tried by the scriptures . for these exceptions are such , as a malefactor would make to a jury , he is afraid to be condemned by . but what then is the peculiar light which these happy men have found in a corner , the want whereof hath made the christian church to fall into such monstrous errors and contradictions ? nothing ( they pretend ) but the mere light of common sense and reason ; which they call after a more refined way of speaking , clear ideas and distinct perceptions of things . but least i should be thought to misrepresent them ; i will produce some of their own expressions . in one place they say , we deny the articles of the new christianity , or the athanasian religion , not because they are mysteries , or because we do not comprehend them ; we deny them , because we do comprehend them ; we have a clear and distinct perception , that they are not mysteries , but contradictions , impossibilities , and pure nonsense . we have our reason in vain , and all science and certainty would be destroy'd ▪ if we could not distinguish between mysteries and contradictions . and soon after , we are not to give the venerable name of mystery to doctrines that are contrary to nature's and reason's light , or which destroy or contradict our natural ideas . these things i have particular reason to take notice of here , because they are published as an answer to the foregoing sermon about the mysteries of the christian faith : and this shews the general grounds they go upon , and therefore more fit to be consider'd here . to which i shall add one passage more , wherein they insinuate , that the doctrine of the trinity hath been supported only by interest and force . their words are ( after they have called the doctrine of the trinity , a monstrous paradox and contradiction ) this is that , say they , which because all other arguments failed them in their disputations with the photinians and arians , they at last effectually proved , by the imperial edicts , by confiscations and banishments , by seizing and burning all books written against it or them , by capital punishments , and when the papacy ( of which this is the chief article ) prevailed , by fire and faggot . this is a new discovery indeed , that the doctrine of the trinity , as it is generally receiv'd in the christian church , is the chief article of popery ; although it were embraced and defended long before popery was known ; and i hope would be so , if there were no such thing as popery left in the world . but if every thing which displeases some men must pass for popery , i am afraid christianity it self will not escape at last : for there are some who are building apace on such foundations as these ; and are endeavouring what they can , to remove out of their way all revealed religion , by the help of those two powerfull machines , viz. priest-craft and mysteries . but because i intend a clear and distinct discourse concerning the doctrine of the trinity , as it hath been generally received among us ; i shall proceed in these four enquiries . ( 1. ) whether it was accounted a monstrous paradox and contradiction , where persons were not sway'd by force and interest ? ( 2. ) whether there be any ground of common reason , on which it can be justly charged with nonsense , impossibilities and contradiction ? ( 3. ) whether their doctrine about the trinity or ours , be more agreeable to the sense of scripture and antiquity ? ( 4. ) whether our doctrine being admitted , it doth overthrow all certainty of reason , and makes way for believing the greatest absurdities under the pretence of being mysteries of faith ? chap. ii. the doctrine of the trinity not received in the christian church by force or interest . as to the first , it will lead me into an enquiry into the sense of the christian church , as to this doctrine , long before popery was hatched , and at a time when the main force of imperial edicts was against christianity it self ; at which time this doctrine was owned by the christian church , but disowned and disputed against by some particular parties and sects . and the question then will be , whether these had engrossed sense , and reason , and knowledge among themselves ; and all the body of the christian church , with their heads and governors , were bereft of common sense , and given up to believe nonsense and contradictions for mysteries of faith. but in order to the clearing this matter , i take it for granted , that sense and reason are no late inventions , only to be found among our vnitarians ; but that all mankind have such a competent share of them , as to be able to judge , what is agreeable to them , and what not , if they apply themselves to it ; that no men have so little sense as to be fond of nonsense , when sense will do them equal service ; that if there be no biass of interest to sway them , men will generally judge according to the evidence of reason ; that if they be very much concerned for a doctrine opposed by others , and against their interest , they are perswaded of the truth of it , by other means than by force and fear ; that it is possible for men of sense and reason to believe a doctrine to be true on the account of divine revelation , although they cannot comprehend the manner of it ; that we have reason to believe those to be men of sense above others , who have shew'd their abilities above them in other matters of knowledge and speculation ; that there can be no reason to suspect the integrity of such men in delivering their own sense , who at the same time might far better secure their interest by renouncing their faith ; lastly , that the more persons are concerned to establish and defend a doctrine which is opposed and contemned , the greater evidence they give , that they are perswaded of the truth of it . these are postulata so agreeable to sense and common reason , that i think if an affront to human nature to go about to prove them . but to shew what use we are to make of them ; we must consider that it cannot be denied , that the doctrine of the trinity did meet with opposition very early in the christian church , especially among the iewish christians ; i mean those who strictly adhered to the law of moses , after the apostles had declared the freedom of christians from the obligation of it . these ( as i shall shew by and by ) soon after the dispersion of the church of ierusalem , gathered into a body by themselves , distinct from that which consisted of iews and gentiles , and was therefore called the catholick christian church . and this separate body , whether called ebionites , nazarens , or mineans , did not only differ from the catholick christian church , as to the necessity of observing the law of moses , but likewise as to the divinity of our saviour , which they denied , although they professed to believe him as the christ or promised messias . theodoret hath with very good judgment placed the heresies of the first ages of the ch●istian church , under two distinct heads , ( which others reckon up confusedly ) and those are such as relate to the humanity of christ , as simon magus , and all the sets of those who are called gnosticks , which are recited in his first book . in his second he begins with those which relate to the divinity of christ ; and these are of two kinds : 1. the iewish christians who denied it . of these , he reckons up the ebionites , cerinthians , the nazarens , and elcesaitae , whom he distinguished from the other ebionites , because of a book of revelation , which one elxai brought among them ; but epiphanius saith , he joyned with the ebionites and nazarens . 2. those of the gentile christians , who were look'd on as broaching a new doctri●e among them : of these he reckons artemon as the first , then theodotus ; whom others make the first publisher of it , as tertullian , and the old writer in eusebius , supposed to be caius , who lived near the time , and of whom a considerable fragment is preserved in eusebius , which gives light to these matters . the next is another theodotus , who framed a new sect of such as set up mel●hisedeck above christ. then follow paulus samosatenus , and sabellius , who made but one person as well as one god , and so overthrew the trinity ; with whom marcellus agreed in substance , and last of all photinus . but theodoret concludes that book with this passage , viz. that all these heresies against our saviour's divinity were then wholly extinct ; so that there were not so much as any small remainders of them . what would he have said , if he had lived in our age , wherein they are not only revived , but are pretended to have been the true doctrine of the apostolical churches ? had all men lost their senses in theodoret's time ? and yet there were as many learned and able men in the christian church then , as ever were in any time . chap. iii. the socinian plea for the antiquity of their doctrine examined . but this is not the age our vnitarians will stand or fall by . they are for going backward ; and they speak with great comfort about the old ebionites and nazarens as entirely theirs ; and that they had considerable men among them , as theodotion and symmachus , two translators of the hebrew bible . and among the gentile christians , they value themselves upon three men , paulus samosatenus , lucianus , the most learned person , they say , of his age , and photinus bishop of sirmium . as to the vnitarians at rome , ( whom they improperly call nazarens ) they pretended that their doctrine was apostolical , and the general doctrine of the church till the times of victor and zepherin . this is the substance of their plea , which must now be examin'd . i begin with those primitive vnitarians , the ebionites , concerning whom , i observe these things : 1. that they were a distinct , separate body of men from the christian church . for all the ancient writers who speak of them , do mention them as hereticks , and wholly divided from it , as appears by irenaeus , tertullian , epiphanius , theodoret , s. augustin , and others . eusebius saith of them , that although the devil could not make them renounce christianity , yet finding their weakness , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he made them his own . he would never have said this of any whom he look'd on as members of the christian church . but wherein is it that eusebius blames them ? he tells it in the very next words ; that it was for the mean opinion they entertained of christ ; for they look'd on him as a meer man , but very just . and although there were two sorts of them ; some owning the miraculous conception , and others not ; yet saith he , they at last agreed in the same impiety , which was , that they would not own christ to have had any pre-existence before his birth ; nor that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , god the word . it 's true , he finds fault with them afterwards for keeping to the law of moses ; but the first impiety he charges them with , is the other . that which i inferr from hence is , that eusebius himself ( to whom they profess to shew greater respect than to most of the ancient writers , for his exactness and diligence in church-history ) doth affirm the doctrine which overthrows the pre-existence and divinity of christ to be an impiety . and therefore when he affirms the first fifteen bishops of the church of ierusalem who were of the circumcision , viz. to the siege of it by hadrian , did hold the genuine doctrine of christ , it must be understood of his pre-existence and divinity ; for the other we see he accounted an impiety . and he tells us the church of ierusalem then consisted of believing iews , and so it had done from the apostles times to that of hadrian 's banishment of the iews . which is a considerable testimony to two purposes : 1. to shew that the primitive church of ierusalem did hold the doctrine of christ's pre-existence and divinity . but say our vnitarians , this doth not follow . for what reason ? when it is plain that eusebius accounted that the only genuine doctrine . no , say they , he meant only the miraculous conception , and that they held that , in opposition to those ebionites who said that he was born as other men are . this is very strange ; when eusebius had distinguished the two sorts of ebionites about this matter , and had blamed both of them , even those that held him born of a virgin , for falling into the same impiety . what can satisfie such men , who are content with such an answer ? but say they , eusebius only spake his own sense . not so neither : for he saith in that place , that he had searched the most ancient records of the church of ierusalem . yes , say they , for the succession of the first bishops ; but as to their doctrine he had it from hegesippus , and he was an ebionite himself . then eusebius must not be the man they take him for . for if hegesippus were himself an ebionite , and told eusebius in his commentaries , that the primitive church of ierusalem consisted of all such , then eusebius must suppose that church guilty of the same impiety with which he charges the ebionites ; and would he then have said , that they had the true knowledge of christ among them ? no , say they , eusebius spake his own opinion , but hegesippus being an ebionite himself , meant otherwise . but eusebius doth not use hegesippus his words , but his own in that place ; and withal , how doth it appear that hegesippus himself was an ebionite ? this , one of their latest writers hath undertaken , but in such a manner , as is not like to convince me . it is thus , hegesippus was himself a iewish christian , and made use of the hebrew gospel , and among the hereticks which crept into the church of jerusalem , he never numbers the ebionites or cerinthians , but only the gnosticks . i will not dispute , whether hegesippus was a jewish christian or not . grant he was so , yet how doth it appear that all the iewish christians were at that time ebionites or cerinthians ? it seems they were neither of them hereticks , although they were opposite to each other ; the one held the world created by inferiour powers , the other , by god himself : the one , we see , made christ a mere man ; but the cerinthians held an illapse of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon him , and so made him a kind of a god by his presence , as nestorius did afterwards . but honest hegesippus took neither one nor the other for hereticks , if our vnitarians say true . but yet it doth not appear , that hegesippus was either one or the other . for he speaks of the church of ierusalem , as is plain by eusebius , and the cerinthians and ebionites , were in other parts ; the former in egypt and the lesser or proconsular asia ; and the latter about decapolis and coelesyria , from whence they spread into arabia and armenia , as appears by epiphanius . but origen saith , that all the iewish christians were ebionites . what! no cerinthians among them ? were not those iewish christians ? or were they all turned ebionites then ? no such thing appears by origen's saying . but we are not enquiring now , what they were in his time , but in the church of ierusalem . doth origen say all the iewish christians there were such ? and as to his own time , it is not improbable that those who then made up the separate body of jewish christians were ebionites . but what is this to the first christians of the church of ierusalem ? very much , say they , because the first christians were called nazarens , and the nazarens held the same doctrine with the ebionites . but the title of nazarens did not always signifie the same thing . it was at first used for all christians , as appears by the sect of the nazarens in tertullus his accusation of s. paul ; then it was taken for the christians who stay'd at pella and setled at decapolis and thereabouts , as epiphanius affirms ; for although all the christians withdrew thither before the destruction of ierusalem , as eusebius saith , yet they did not all continue there , but a great number returned to ierusalem , and were there setled under their bishops ; but those who remained about pella kept the name of nazarens , and never were united with the gentile christians , but kept up their old jewish customs , as to their synagogues , even in s. ierom and s. augustine's time . now these nazarens might be all ebionites , and yet those of the church of ierusalem not so at all . 2. the next thing observable from this place of eusebius is , that while the nazarens and ebionites were setled in coelesyria , and the parts thereabouts , there was a regular christian church at ierusalem , under the bishops of the circumcision , to the siege of hadrian . eusebius observes , that before the destruction of ierusalem , all the christians forsook not only ierusalem , but the coasts of iudea . but that they did not all continue there , is most evident from what eusebius here saith of the church and bishops of ierusalem ; between the two sieges of titus vespasian and hadrian , which was in the 18 year of his empire , saith eusebius . who produces another testimony out of iustin martyr , which shews that the christians were returned to ierusalem . for therein he saith , that barchochebas in that war used the christians with very great severity to make them renounce christianity . how could this be , if all the christians were out of his reach , then being setled about pella ? and although eusebius saith , that when the iews were banished their country by hadrian 's edict , that then the church of ierusalem was made up of gentiles ; yet we are not so strictly to understand him , as though the christians who suffer'd under barchochebas , were wholly excluded . orosius saith , that they were permitted by the emperor's edict . it is sufficient for me , if they were connived at , which is very probable , although they did not think fit to have any such publick persons as their bishops to be any other than gentiles . and hegesippus is allow'd after this time , to have been a iewish christian of the church of ierusalem : so that the church there must consist both of iews and gentiles ; but they can never shew that any of the ebionites did admit any gentile christians among them , which shews that they were then distinct bodies . 2. they were not only distinct in communion , but had a different rule of faith. this is a point of great consequence , and ought to be well consider'd . for , since our vnitarians own the ebionites as their predecessors , we ought to have a particular eye to the rule of faith received by them , which must be very different from ours , if they follow the ebionites , as i doubt not to make it appear . they say , the ebionites used only s. matthew 's gospel . but the christian church then , and ever since , have receiv'd the four gospels , as of divine authority . eusebius , one of the most approved authors in antiquity by our vnitarians , reckons up the four evangelists and s. paul 's epistles , as writings universally received by the christian church ; then he mentions some generally rejected as spurious ; and after those which were doubted , among which he mentions the gospel according to the hebrews , which the iewish christians follow'd . now here is an apparent difference put between the gospel according to the hebrews , and s. matthew 's gospel ; as much as between a book receiv'd without controversie , and one that was not . but if the gospel according to the hebrews were then acknowledged to be the true gospel of s. matthew ; it was impossible a man of so much sense as eusebius , should make this difference between them . but it is worth our observing , what our vnitarians say about this matter . and by that we may judge very much of their opinion about the gospels . i shall set down their words , for fear i should be thought to do them wrong . symmachus and the ebionites , say they , as they held our saviour to be the son of ioseph and mary ; so they contended that the first chapter of s. matthew's gospel was added by the greek translators . s. matthew wrote his gospel in hebrew , when it was translated into greek , the translator prefaced it with a genealogy and narration that our saviour was conceived by the holy spirit of god , and was not the son of ioseph , but this genealogy and narration , said symmachus and the ebionites , is not in the hebrew gospel of s. matthew , nay is the mere invention of the translator . as for the other gospels , the ebionites and symmachians did not receive the gospel of s. luke : and for that of s. iohn , they said it was indeed written by cerinthus , to confirm his platonick conceits about the logos or word , which he supposed to be the christ or spirit of god , which rested on and inhabited the person of jesus . let us now but join to this another passage , which is this , those whom we now call socinians , were by the fathers and the first ages of christianity called nazarens ; and afterwards they were called ebionites , mineans , symmachians , &c. if this be true , they must have the same opinions as to the books of the new testament ; and hereby we see what sort of men we have to deal with , who under the pretence of the old ebionites , undermine the authority of the new testament . as to s. matthew's gospel , i see no reason to question its being first written in the language then used among the jews , which was mixt of hebrew , syriack , and chaldee : since this is affirmed , not merely by papias , whose authority never went far ; but by origen , irenaeus , eusebius , s. ierom , and others . but i must distinguish between s. matthew's authentick gospel , which pantaenus saw in the indies , and that which was called the gospel according to the hebrews , and the nazaren gospel . s. ierom in one place seems to insinuate , that s. matthew's gospel was preserved in the library of pamphilus at caesarea , and that the nazarens at berrhaea in syria had given him leave to transcribe it . but if we compare this with other places in him , we shall find , that he question'd whether this were the authentick gospel of s. matthew or not ; he saith , it is so called by many ; but he confesses it was the same which the ebionites and nazarens used . in which were many interpolations , as appears by the collections out of it in s. ierom's works and other ancient writers ; which some learned men have put together . and s. ierom often calls it the gospel according to the hebrews . and so do other ancient writers . from the laying several passages together , erasmus suspects , that s. ierom never saw any other than the common nazaren gospel , and offers a good reason for it , viz. that he never made use of its authority to correct the greek of s. matthew , which he would not have failed to have done in his commentaries ; and he produces the nazaren gospel upon sleight occasions . but how came the preface to be curtail'd in the ebionite gospel ? of which epiphanius gives an account , and shews what was inserted instead of it : no , say the ebionites , the preface was added by the translator into greek . from what evidence ? and to what end ? to prove that christ was born of the holy spirit . this then must be look'd on as a mere forgery ; and those ebionites were in the right , who held him to be the son of ioseph and mary . what do these men mean by such suggestions as these ? are they resolved to set up deism among us , and in order thereto , to undermine the authority of the new testament ? for it is not only s. matthew's gospel , but s. luke's and s. iohn's which they strike at , under the pretence of representing the arguments of these wretched ebionites . if their arguments are mean and trifling and merely precarious , why are they not slighted and answered by such as pretend to be christians ? if they think them good , we see what we have to do with these men ; it is not the doctrine of the trinity , so much as the authority of the gospels , which we are to maintain against them : and not those only , for the ebionites rejected all s. paul 's epistles ; and called him an apostate and a transgressor of the law. what say our vnitarians to this ? why truly , this comes from epiphanius , and because he quotes no author , it seems to be one of his malicious tales . this is a very short way of answering , if it would satisfie any men of sense . but they ought to have remembred that within a few pages , they alledge epiphanius as a very competent witness about the ebionites , because he was born in palestine , and lived very near it . but we do not rely wholly upon epiphanius in this matter . for those whom they allow to be the best witnesses as to the doctrine of the nazarens , say the same thing concerning them . as the most learned origen , as they call him , who lived a long time in syria and palestine it self ; and he affirms , that both sorts of ebionites rejected s. paul 's epistles : and theodoret , who they say , lived in coelesyria , where the nazarens most abound , affirms of them , that they allowed only the gospel according to the hebrews , and called the apostle an apostate : by whom they meant s. paul. and the same is said by s. ierom who conversed among them ; that they look on s. paul as a transgressor of the law , and receive none of his writings . have we not now a very comfortable account of the canon of the new testament from these ancient vnitarians ? and if our modern ones account them their predecessors , we may judge what a mean opinion they must have of the writings of the new testament . for if they had any concernment for them , they would never suffer such scandalous insinuations to pass without a severe censure , and a sufficient answer . but their work seems to be rather to pull down , than to establish the authority of revealed religion ; and we know what sort of men are gratified by it . chap. iv. of the considerable men they pretend to have been of their opinion in the primitive church . i now come to consider the men of sense they pretend to among these ancient vnitarians . the first is theodotion , whom they make to be an vnitarian . but he was , saith eusebius from irenaeus , a iewish proselyte , and so they may very much increase the number of vnitarians , by taking in all the iews as well as proselytes . but must these pass for men of sense too , because they are against the doctrine of the trinity , and much upon the same grounds with our modern vnitarians ? for they cry out of contradictions and impossibilities just as they do ; i. e. with as much confidence and as little reason . symmachus is another of their ancient heroes ; he was , if epiphanius may be believed , first a samaritan , and then a iew , and eusebius saith indeed , that he was an ebionite , and therefore for observing the law of moses . s. augustin saith , that in his time the symmachiani were both for circumcision and baptism . s. ierom observes , that theodotion and symmachus , both ebionites , translated the old testament in what concerned our saviour , like iews , and aquila who was a iew , like a christian ; but in another place he blames all three for the same fault . eusebius goes somewhat farther : for he saith , symmachus wrote against s. matthew 's gospel to establish his own heresie , which shew'd he was a true ebionite . the next they mention as one of their great lights , was paulus samosatenus , bishop and patriarch of antioch . but in another place , they have a spiteful insinuation , that men in such places are the great pensioners of the world ; as though they were sway'd only by interest ; and that it keeps them from embracing of the truth . now paulus samosatenus gave greater occasion for such a suspicion than any of the persons so unworthily reflected upon . for he was a man noted for his affectation of excessive vanity and pomp , and very unjust methods of growing rich . it is well we have eusebius his testimony for this ; for they sleight epiphanius for his malicious tales , and s. ierom for his legends ; but they commend eusebius for his exactness and diligence . and i hope theodoret may escape their censure , who affirms , that paulus samofatenus suited his doctrine to his interest with zenobia who then governed in those parts of syria and phoenicia , who professed her self to be of the iewish perswasion . athanasius saith , she was a iew and a favourer of paulus samosatenus . what his opinions were , our vnitarians do not take the pains to inform us , taking it for granted that he was of their mind . eusebius saith , he had a very mean and low opinion of christ , as having nothing in him above the common nature of mankind . theodoret saith , he fell into the doctrine of artemon to oblige zenobia , and artemon , he saith , held that christ was a mere man born of a virgin , but exceeding the prophets in excellency . where the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used to express the opinion of artemon , which ought to be taken notice of , because our modern vnitarians say , that those words among the ancient writers were taken in opposition to the miraculous conception of our saviour . but paulus samosatenus was universally disowned by the christian church of that time ; although as long as zenobia held her power , he kept his see ; which was for some time after he was first called in question for his heresie . but at first he made use of many arts and devices to deceive the christian bishops of the best reputation , who assembled at antioch in order to the suppressing this dangerous doctrine , as they all accounted it . for hearing of his opinions about our saviour , they ran together , saith eusebius , as against a wolf which designed to destroy the flock . now from hence it is very reasonable to argue , that the samosatenian doctrine was then look'd on as a very dangerous novelty in the christian church . for , although the ebionites had asserted the same thing , as to the divinity of our saviour , yet they were not look'd on as true members of the christian church ; but as s. ierom saith , while they affected to be both iews and christians , they were neither iews nor christians . artemon whoever he was , was but an obscure person ; and theodotus had learning , they say , but was of no place in the church ; but for such a considerable person as the bishop of antioch to own such a doctrine must unavoidably discover the general sence of the christian church concerning it . paulus samosatenus wanted neither parts , nor interest , nor experience ; and he was supported by a princess of great spirit and courage , enough to have daunted all the bishops , at least in those parts , from appearing against him . but such was the zeal and concernment of the bishops of the christian church in this great affair , that they not only assembled themselves , but they communicated it to dionysius bishop of alexandria , and to another of the same name , bishop of rome , and others ; and desired their advice and concurrence , who did all agree in the condemnation of his doctrine . the former said , he would have gone himself to antioch , but for his extreme old age ; and he died soon after the first council , which met at antioch on this occasion ; but he sent his judgment and reasons thither , which we find in an epistle of his still extant , whereof mention is made in the epistle of the second synod of antioch to dionysius bishop of rome , and maximus bishop of alexandria , and all other bishops , priests and deacons of the catholick church , wherein they give an account of their proceedings against paulus samosatenus , and they say , they had invited the bishops of the remoter parts to come to antioch for the suppression of this damnable doctrine ; and among the rest dionysius of alexandria , and firmilian of cappadocia , as persons of greatest reputation then in the church . firmilian was there at the former synod , ( of whom theodoret saith , that he was famous both for divine and humane learning ) and so were gregorius thaumaturgus and athenodorus bishops of pontus , and helenus bishop of tarsus in cilicia , and nicomas of iconium , and hymenaeus of ierusalem , and theotecnus of caesarea ; who all condemned his doctrine , but they spared his person upon his solemn promises to retract it ; but he persisting in it when they were gone home , and fresh complaints being made of him , firmilian was coming a third time to antioch , but died by the way : but those bishops who wrote the synodical epistle do all affirm , that they were witnesses and many others , when he condemned his doctrine , but was willing to forbear his person upon his promise of amendment , which they found afterwards was merely delusory . dionysius alexandrinus , they say , would not write to him , but sent his mind about him to the church of antioch . which epistle is mention'd by s. ierom , ( as written by him a little before his death ) as well as by eusebius and theodoret ; and i do not see sufficient reason to question the authority of that , which fronto ducaeus published from turrian's copy , although it be denied by h. valesius and others . it 's said , indeed , that he did not write to him , i. e. he did not direct it to him , but he might send it to the council in answer to his letters , which he mentions . how far it differs from his style in other epistles , i will not take upon me to judge ; but the design is very agreeable to an epistle from him on that occasion . it 's true , that it seems to represent the opinion of paulus samosatenus after a different manner from what it is commonly thought to have been . but we are to consider , that ●e made use of all the arts to d●sguise himself that he could ; and when he found the making christ to be a mere man would not be born , he went from the ebionite to the cerinthian hypothesis , viz. that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did dwell in him , and that there were two persons in christ , one divine and the other humane ; and two sons , the one by nature the son of god , who had a pre existence , and the other the son of david , who had no subsistence before . this is the opinion which dionysius sets himself against in that epistle ; and which therefore ●ome may imagine was written after nestorius his heresie . but that was no new heresie , as appears by the cerinthians ; and it was that which paulus samosatenus fled to , as more plausible ; which not only appears by this epistle , but by what athanasius and epiphanius have delivered concerning it . athanasius ▪ wrote a book of the incarnation against the followers of paulus samosatenus , who held , as he saith , two persons in christ , viz. one born of the virgin , and a divine person , which descended upon him and dwelt in him . against which opinion he disputes from two places of scripture ; viz. god was manifest in the flesh ; and the word was made flesh : and from the ancient doctrine of the christian church , and the synod of antioch against paulus samosatenus . and in another place he saith , that he held , that the divine word dwelt in christ. and the words of epiphanius are express to the same purpose ; that the logos came and dwelt in the man iesus . and the clergy of constantinople charged nestorius with following the heresie of paulus samosatenus . and photius in his epistles saith , that nestorius tasted too much of the intoxicated cups of paulus samosatenus ; and in the foregoing epistle , he saith , that paulus his followers asserted two hypostases in christ. but some think , that paulus samosatenus did not hold any subsistence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before , but that the word was in god before without any subsistence of its own , and that god gave it a distinct subsistence when it inhabited in the person of christ ; and so marius mercator and leontius understand him ; who say that he differ'd from nestorius therein ; who asserted a divine word with its proper subsistence . but according to them paulus by the word unders●ood that divine energy whereby christ acted , and which dwelt in him ; but dionysius saith he made two christs , and two sons of god. but the doctrine of the christian church , he saith was that there was but one christ , and one son , who w●s the eternal word , and was made flesh. and it is observable , that he brings the very same places we do now to prove this doctrine , as in the beginning was the word , &c. and before abraham was i am . it seems that some of the bishops who had been upon the examination of his opinions before the second synod , which deposed him , sent him an account of their faith and required his answer ; wherein they declare the son not to be god , according to god's decree , ( which he did not stick at ) but that he was so really and substantially ; and whosoever denied this , they said , was out of the communion of the church , and all the catholick churches agreed with them in it . and they declare , that they received this doctrine from the scriptures of the old and new testament , and bring the same places we do now , as , thy throne o god was for ever , &c. who is over all , god blessed for ever . all things were made by him , &c. and we do not find that paulus samosatenus , as subtle as he was , ever imagin'd that these places belong'd to any other than christ , or that the making of all things was to be understood of the making of nothing ; but putting it into mens power to make themselves new creatures . these were discoveries only reserved for the men of sense and clear ideas in these brighter ages of the world. but at last , after all the arts and subterfuges which paulus samosatenus used , there was a man of sense , as it happen'd , among the clergy of antioch , called malchion , who was so well acquainted with his sophistry , that he drove him out of all , and laid his sense so open before the second synod , that he was solemnly deposed for denying the divinity of the son of god , and his descent from heaven , as appears by their synodical epistle . it is pity we have it not entire ; but by the fragments of it , which are preserved by some ancient writers , we find that his doctrine of the divinity in him by inhabitation was then condemned , and the substantial union of both natures asserted . i have only one thing more to observe concerning him , which is , that the arian party in their decree at sardica , ( or rather philippopolis ) do confess that paulus samosatenus his doctrine was condemned by the whole christian world. for they say , that which passed in the eastern synod , was signed and approved by all . and alexander bishop of alexandria , in his epistle to alexander of constantinople affirms the same . and now i hope , i may desire our men of sense to reflect upon these matters . here was no fire nor faggot threatned , no imperial edicts to inforce this doctrine , nay the queen of those parts , under whose jurisdiction they lived at that time , openly espoused the cause of paulus samosatenus , so that here could be nothing of interest to sway them to act in opposition to her . and they found his interest so strong , that he retained the possession of his see , till aurelian had conquer'd zenobia , and by his authority he was ejected . this synod which deposed him , did not sit in the time of aurelian , as is commonly thought , but before his time , while zenobia had all the power in her hands in those eastern parts , which she enjoy'd five years ; till she was dispossess'd by aurelian , from whence ant. pagi concludes , that paulus kept his see three years after the sentence against him ; but upon application to aurelian ; he who afterwards began a persecution against all christians , gave this rule , that he with whom the italian bishops , and those of rome communicated , should enjoy the see , upon which paulus was at last turned out . by this we see a concurrence of all the christian bishops of that time against him , that denied the divinity of our saviour ; and this without any force , and against their interest , and with a general consent of the christian world. for there were no mighty awes and draconic sanctions to compell , of which they sometimes speak , as if they were the only powerfull methods to make this doctrine go down . and what greater argument can there be , that it was then the general sense of the christian church ? and it would be very hard to condemn all his opposers for men that wanted sense and reason , because they so unanimously opposed him . not so unanimously neither , say our vnitarians , because lucian , a presbyter of the church of antioch , and a very learned man , joyned with him . it would have been strange indeed , if so great a man as paulus samosatenus , could prevail with none of his own church to joyn with him , especially one that came from the same place of samosata , as lucian did ; and probably was by him brought thither . he hath an extraordinary character given him by eusebius , both for his life and learning ; and so by s. ierom , without the least reflection upon him as to matter of faith. but on the other side , alexander bishop of alexandria in his epistle concerning arius to alexander of constantinople , doth say , that he follow'd paulus samosatenus , and held separate communion for many years , under the three following bishops . he doth not say that he died so , when he suffer'd martyrdom under maximinus at nicomedia ; neither doth he say the contrary . upon which learned men are divided , whether he persisted in that opinion or not . petavius and valesius give him up ; on the other side baronius vindicates him , and saith , the mis-report of him came from his zeal against sabellianism ; and that alexander wrote that of him before his books were throughly examin'd ; that athanasius never joyns him with paulus samosatenus ; that the arians never produced his authority in their debates , as they would have done , since the emperor's mother had built a city in the place where he suffer'd martyrdom . it cannot be doubted that the arian party would have it believed that they came out of lucian's school , as appears by arius his epistle to eusebius of nicomedia ; but on the other side , the great argument to me is , that this very party at the council of antioch , produced a creed , which they said , was there found written with lucian's own hand , which is directly contrary to the samosatenian doctrine . now , either this was true or false : if it were true , then it was false that he was a samosatenian ; if it were false , how came the arian party to give it out for true ? especially those who valued themselves for coming out of his school . they were far enough from being such weak men to produce the authority of lucian at antioch , where he was so much esteemed , for a doctrine utterly inconsistent with that of paulus samosatenus , if it were there known , that he was his disciple , and separated from three bishops on that account . for therein the son is owned to be god of god , begotten of the father before all ages , perfect god of perfect god , &c. suppose they had a mind to subvert the nicene faith by this creed under the name of lucian , ( only because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was left out ) yet what an improbable way did they take , when they supported the main points by his authority , and that at antioch , where it was greatest ? if philostorgius may be credited , the great men of the arian party had been his scholars , as besides eusebius of nicomedia , maris of chalcedon , theognis of nice , leontius of antioch , and several other leading bishops , and even arius himself pretended to it . which makes me apt to think , that alexander knowing this , and at first not being able so well to judge of lucian's opinion , charged him with following paulus samosatenus , from whence the odium would fall upon his scholars . for his design is to draw the succession down from ebion , and artemon , and paulus samosatenus , and lucian to arius and his associates ; and charges them with holding the same doctrine , wherein he was certainly mistaken ; and so he might be about lucian's separation from the following bishops on that account . the last our vnitarians mention among their great men , is photinus bishop of sirmium . they take it for granted that he was of their opinion . this is certain , that whatever it was , it was generally condemned , as well by the arians as others ; and after several councils called , he was deposed for his heresie . the first time we find him condemned , was by the arian party in a second council at antioch , as appears by the profession of faith drawn up by them , extant in athanasius and socrates . there they anathematize expressly the disciples of marcellus and photinus , for denying the pre-existence and deity of christ. but by christ , they understood , the person born of the virgin , who was the son of god ; but they did not deny the pre-existence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and never dream'd that any could think that christ was to be called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from his office of preaching , as our modern vnitarians assert . but photinus his opinion was , that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was before all ages , but not christ , or the son of god , which divine word was partly internal , and so it was ever with god , and partly external , when it was communicated to the person of christ , whereby he became the son of god. but the arians there declare their belief , that christ was the living word , and son of god before all worlds , and by whom he made all things . the next time he is said to be condemned , was in that which is called the council at sardica , but was the council of the eastern bishops after their parting from the western . this is mention'd by epiphanius and sulpitius severus , the latter saith he differ'd from sabellius only in the point of vnion , i. e. because sabellius made the persons to be merely denominations which was then called the heresie of the vnionitae ; and therefore photinus must assert an hypostasis to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or else he did not at all differ from sabellius . and it appears by epiphanius , that photinus did distinguish between christ and the word . in the beginning was the word , said he , but not the son , which title was promised and foretold , but did not belong to christ till he was born of the holy ghost and mary , so he expresses it . herein , saith epiphanius , he follow'd paulus samosatenus , but exceeded him in his inventions . in answer to him , he saith , that s. iohn's words are not , in the beginning was the word , and the word was in god , but the word was with god , and the word was god. little did either side imagine that this was to be understood of the beginning of the gospel , as our modern photinians would make us believe they think ; but photinus himself was a person of too much sagacity to take up with such an absurd and insipid sence . i pass over the fresh condemnations of photinus in the councils at milan and rome , because his opinion is not to be learnt from them ; and come to that at sirmium , where it is more particularly set ●orth , as well as condemned . but here we must distinguish the two councils at sirmium ; in the former , he was condemned , but the people would not part with him ; but in the second , he was not only condemned , but effectually deposed , the emperor constantius a professed arian , forcing him to withdraw : but it was upon his own appeal to the emperor against the judgment of the council , who appointed judges delegates to hear this cause : and basilius ancyranus was the manager of the debate with him , wherein he is said to have been so much too hard for photinus , that the emperor himself order'd his banishment . and i can find nothing of his return ; but our vnitarians have found out ( but they do not tell us where ) that the people recalled him , and so he planted his doctrine among them , that it overspread and was the religion of the illyrican provinces , till the papacy on one hand , and the turk on the other , swallow'd up those provi●ces . this looks too like making history to serve a turn , unless some good proof were brought for it . but instead of photinus his returning , and his doctrine prevailing and continuing there , we find valentinian calling a council in illyricum , and establishing the nicene faith there : and a council at aquileia against the arians , where the bishop of sirmium was present , and declared against arianism , and joyned with s. ambrose , who condemns photinus for making christ the son of david , and not the son of god ▪ paulinus saith in his life , that he went on purpose to sirmium to consecrate an orthodox bishop there ; which he did , notwithstanding the power of iustina the empress , who favoured the arians . s. ierom in his chronicon saith , that photinus died in galatia which was his own country ; so that there is no probability in what they affirm of photinus his settling his doctrine in those parts , till the papacy and the turk swallow'd those provinces ; for any one that looks into the history of those parts may be soon satisfied , that not the pope nor the turk , but the huns under attila , made the horrible devastations not only at sirmium , but in all the considerable places of that country : so that if these mens reason be no better than their history , there is very little cause for any to be fond of their writings . but as though it were not enough to mention such things once ; in their answer to the late archbishop's sermons , they inlarge upon it . for he having justly rebuked them for the novelty of their interpretations , they , to avoid this , boast of the concurrence of the ancient vnitarians , the followers of paulus and photinus , who , they say , abounded every-where , and even possessed some whole provinces . this passage i was not a little surprized at . since theodoret , who , i think , was somewhat more to be credited than sandius , doth so expresly say , that the samosatenians and photinians were extinct in his time , in a place already mentioned . but upon search i could find no other ground for it , but a passage or two in sandius , who is none of the exactest historians . in one place he saith from an obscure polish chronicle ( extant in no other language but of that country ) that the bulgarians when they first received christianity embraced photinianism . and is not this very good authority among us ? from hence he takes it for granted , that they all continued photinians to the time of pope nicolas , who converted them . but all this is grounded on a ridiculous mistake in platina , who in the life of nicolas saith , that the pope confirmed them in the faith , pulso photino ; whereas it should be pulso photio ; for photius at that time was patriarch of constantinople , and as appears by his first epistle , assumed their conversion to himself ; and insisted upon the right of jurisdiction over that country . sandius referrs to blondus ; who saith no such thing , but only that the bulgarians were converted before ; which is true ; and the greek historians , as ioh. curopalates , zonaras , and others , gives a particular account of it ; but not a word of photinianism in it . so that the archbishop had very great reason to charge their interpretation with novelty ; and that not only because the photinians had no such provinces , as they boast of ; but that neither paulus samosatenus , nor photinus , nor any of their followers , that we can find , did ever interpret the beginning of s. john , as they do ; i.e. of the new creation , and not of the old ; and so , as the word had no pre-existence before he was born of the virgin. i do not confine them to the nicenists , as they call them ; but let them produce any one among the samosatenians , or photinians , who so understood s. iohn . and therein sandius was in the right ( which ought to be allow'd him , for he is not often so ) when he saith , that no christian interpreter before socinus ever held such a sense of the word , as he did ; and therefore his followers he saith , ought to be called socinians only , and not ebionites , samosatenians , or photinians . but to return to photinus his opinion . it is observable , what socrates saith , concerning his being deposed at sirmium , viz. that what was done in that matter was universally approved , not only then , but afterwards . so that here we have the general consent of the christian world , in that divided time , against the photinian doctrine . and yet it was not near so unreasonable as our vnitarians ; for photinus asserted the pre-existence of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and its inhabiting in christ from his conception ; wherein he differ'd from paulus samosatenus who asserted it to have been upon the merit of his virtue . in the anathema's of the council of sirmium against photinus , one is against any one that asserts that there is one god , but denies christ to have been the son of god before all worlds , and that the world was made by him in obedience to the will of the father . others , against him that asserts that there was a dilatation of the divine substance to make him the son of god , who was a man born of the virgin mary ; this appears from anath . 6 , 7 , 9. put together . which is best explained by hilary himself in another place , where he mentions this as the photinian doctrine , that god the word did extend himself so far , as to inhabit the person born of the virgin. this he calls a subtle and dangerous doctrine . and therein he saith photinus differ'd from sabellius ; that the latter denied any difference between father and son , but only in names ; but photinus held a real difference , but not before the nativity of christ ; then he said , the divine word inhabiting in christ made him to be the real son of god. the only doubt is , whether photinus held , the word to have had a distinct hypostasis before or not . marius mercator an author of good credit , who lived in s. augustin's time ( and to whom an epistle of his is extant in the new edition of his works ) gives a very particular account of the opinion of photinus with relation to the nestorian controversie , in which he was very well versed . in an epistle written by him on purpose , he shews that nestorius agreed with photinus in asserting , that the word had a pre-existence ; and that the name of son of god did not belong to the word , but to christ after the inhabitation of the word . but he there seems to think , that photinus did not hold the word to have had a real hypostasis before the birth of christ : but when he comes after to compare their opinions more exactly , he then affirms , that photinus and nestorius were agreed , and that he did not deny the word to be con●substantial with god ; but that he was not the son of god till christ was born in whom he dwelt . by which we see how little reason our vnitarians have to boast of photinus as their predecessor . as to the boast of the first unitarians at rome , that theirs was the general doctrine , before the time of victor ; it is so fully confuted by the ancient writer in eusebius , who mentions it , from the scriptures and the first christian writers , named by him , that it doth not deserve to be taken notice of ; especially since he makes it appear , that it was not heard of among them at rome , till it was first broached there by theodotus , as not only he , but tertullian affirms ; as i have already observed . thus i have clearly proved , that the doctrine of the trinity , was so far from being embraced only on the account of force and fear , that i have shewed there was in the first ages of the christian church , a free and general consent in it , even when they were under persecution ; and after the arian controversie broke out , yet those who denied the pre-existence , and co-eternity of the son of god were universally condemned ; even the arian party concurring in the synods mention'd by hilary . but our vnitarians are such great pretenders to reason , that this argument from the authority of the whole christian church , signifies little or nothing to them . therefore they would conclude still that they have the better of us in point of reason , because they tell us , that they have clear and distinct perceptions , that what we call mysteries of faith , are contradictions , impossibilities , and pure nonsense ; and that they do not reject them , because they do not comprehend them , but because they do comprehend them to be so . this is a very bold charge , and not very becoming the modesty and decency of such , who know at the same time that they oppose the religion publickly established , and in such things which we look on as some of the principal articles of the christian faith. chap. v. of their charge of contradiction in the doctrine of the trinity . but i shall not take any advantages from thence , but immediately proceed to the next thing i undertook in this discourse , viz. to consider what grounds they have for such a charge as this , of contradiction and impossibility . in my sermon which gave occasion to these expressions ( as is before intimated ) i had undertaken to prove , that considering the infinite perfections of the divine nature , which are so far above our reach , god may justly oblige us to believe those things concerning himself which we are not able to comprehend ; and i instanced in some essential attributes of god , as his eternity , omniscience , spirituality , &c. and therefore , if there be such divine perfections , which we have all the reason to believe , but no faculties sufficient to comprehend , there can be no ground from reason to reject such a doctrine which god hath revealed , because the manner of it may be incomprehensible by us . and what answer do they give to this ? they do not deny it in general , that god may oblige us to believe things above our comprehension ; but he never obliges us to believe contradictions , and that they charge the doctrine of the trinity with ; and for this they only referr me to their books , where they say it is made out . but i must say , that i have read and consider'd those tracts , and am very far from being convinced that there is any such contradiction in this doctrine , as it is generally received in the christian church ; or as it is explained in the athanasian creed . and , i shall shew the unreasonableness of this charge from these things . 1. that there is a difference between a contradiction in numbers , and in the nature of things . 2. that it is no contradiction to assert three persons in one common nature . 3. that it is no contradiction to say that there are three distinct persons in the trinity and not three gods. if i can make out these things , i hope i may abate something of that strange and unreasonable confidence , wherewith these men charge the doctrine of the trinity with contradictions . 1. i begin with the first of them . and i shall draw up the charge in their own words . in one of their late books they have these words . theirs , they say , is an accountable and reasonable faith , but that of the trinitarians is absurd and contrary both to reason and to it self ; and therefore not only false but impossible . but wherein lies this impossibility ? that they soon tell us . because we affirm that there are three persons , who are severally and each of them true god , and yet there is but one true god. now , say they , this is an error in counting or numbring , which when stood in is of all others the most brutal and inexcusable ; and not to discern it is not to be a man. what must these men think the christian church hath been made up of all this while ? what ? were there no men among them but the vnitarians ? none that had common sense , and could tell the difference between one and three ? but this is too choice a notion to be deliver'd but once ; we have it over and over from them . in another place , they say , we cannot be mistaken in the notion of one and three ; we are most certain that one is not three , and three are not one. this it is to be men ! but the whole christian world besides are in brutal and inexcusable errors about one and three . this is not enough , for they love to charge home ; for one of their terrible objections against the athanasian creed is , that here is an arithmetical , as well as grammatical contradiction . for , in saying god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost , yet not three gods but one god , a man first distinctly numbers three gods , and then in summing them up brutishly says , not three gods but one god. brutishly still ! have the brutes and trinitarians learnt arithmetick together ? methinks such expressions do not become such whom the christian church hath so long since condemned for heresies . but it may be with the same civility they will say , it was brutishly done of them . but can these men of sense and reason think , that the point in controversie ever was , whether in numbers , one could be three , or three one ? if they think so , i wonder they do not think of another thing ; which is the begging all trinitarians for fools ; because they cannot count one , two and three ; and an vnitarian jury would certainly cast them . one would think such writers had never gone beyond shop-books ; for they take it for granted , that all depends upon counting . but these terrible charges were some of the most common and trite objections of infidels . st. augustin mentions it as such , when he saith , the infidels sometimes ask us , what do you call the father ? we answer , god. what the son ? we answer , god. what the holy ghost ? we answer , god. so that here the infidels make the same objection , and draw the very same inference . then , say they , the father , son and h. ghost are three gods. but what saith s. augustin to this ? had he no more skill in arithmetick than to say there are three and yet but one ? he saith plainly that there are not three gods. the infidels are troubled , because they are not inlightend ; their heart is shut up , because they are without faith. by which it is plain , he look'd on these as the proper objections of infidels and not of christians . but may not christians have such doubts in their minds ? he doth not deny it ; but then he saith , where the true foundation of faith is laid in the heart , which helps the vnderstanding ; we are to embrace with it , all that it can reach to ; and where we can go no farther , we must believe without doubting : which is a wise resolution of this matter . for there are some things revealed , which we can entertain the notion of in our minds , as we do of any other matters , and yet there may be some things belonging to them which we cannot distinctly conceive . we believe god to have been from all eternity ; and that because god hath revealed it ; but here is something we can conceive , viz. that he was so ; and here is something we cannot conceive , viz. how he was so . this instance i had produced in my sermon , to shew that we might be obliged to believe such things concerning god , of which we cannot have a clear and distinct notion ; as that god was from all eternity , although we cannot conceive in our minds , how he could be from himself . now , what saith the vnitarian to this , who pretended to answer me ? he saith , if god must be from himself , then an eternal god is a contradiction ; for that implies , that he was before he was ; and so charges me with espousing the cause of atheists . i wish our vnitarians were as free from this charge as i am . but this is malicious cavilling . for my design was only to shew , that we could have no distinct conception of something which we are bound to believe . for upon all accounts we are bound to believe an eternal god , and yet we cannot form a distinct and clear idea of the manner of it . whether being from himself be taken positively , or negatively , the matter is not cleared ; the one is absurd , and the other unconceivable by us . but still i say , it is a thing that we are bound to believe stedfastly , although it is above our comprehension . but instead of answering to this , he runs out into an examination of one notion of eternity : and as he thinks , shews some absurdities in that , which are already answer'd . but that was not my meaning , but to shew that we could have no clear and distinct notion of eternity ; and if his arguments were good they prove what i aimed at , at least as to that part ; and himself produces my own words to shew , that there were such difficulties every way , which we could not master ; and yet are bound to believe , that necessary existence is an inseparable attribute of god. so that here we have a clear instance of what s. augustin saith , that we may believe something upon full conviction , as that god is eternal ; and yet there may remain something which we cannot reach to by our understanding , viz. the manner how eternity is to be conceived by us : which goes a great way towards clearing the point of the trinity , notwithstanding the difficulty in our conceiving the manner how three should be one , and one three . but s. augustin doth not give it over so ; let us keep stedfast , saith he , to the foundation of our faith , that we may arrive to the top of perfection ; the father is god , the son is god , the holy ghost is god ; the father is not the son , nor the son the father , nor the holy ghost either father or son. and he goes on . the trinity is one god , one eternity , one power , one majesty , three persons one god. so it is in erasmus his edition ; but the late editors say , that the word personae was not in their manuscript . and it is not material in this place , since elsewhere he approves the use of the word persons , as the fittest to express our meaning in this case . for since some word must be agreed upon , to declare our sense by , he saith , those who understood the propriety of the latin tongue , could not pitch upon any more proper than that , to signifie that they did not mean three distinct essences , but the same essence with a different hypostasis , founded in the relation of one to the other ; as father and son have the same divine essence , but the relations being so different that one cannot be confounded with the other , that which results from the relation being joyned with the essence , was it which was called a person . but saith s. augustin , the caviller will ask , if there be three , what three are they ? he answers , father , son and holy ghost . but then he distinguishes between what they are in themselves , and what they are to each other . the father as to himself is god , but as to the son he is father : the son as to himself is god , but as to the father he is the son. but how is it possible to understand this ? why , saith he , take two men , father and son ; the one as to himself is a man , but as to the son a father ; the son , as to himself is a man , but as to the father , he is a son : but these two have the same common nature . but saith he , will it not hence follow , that as these are two men , so the father and son in the divine essence must be two gods ? no , there lies the difference between the humane and divine nature . that one cannot be multiplied and divided as the other is . and therein lies the true solution of the difficulty , as will appear afterwards . when you begin to count , saith he , you go on , one , two and three . but when you have reckon'd them what is it you have been counting ? the father is the father , the son the son , and the holy ghost , the holy ghost . what are these three ? are they not three gods ? no , are they not three almighties ? no , they are capable of number as to their relation to each other ; but not as to their essence which is but one. the substance of the answer lies here , the divine essence is that alone which makes god , that can be but one , and therefore there can be no more gods than one . but because the same scripture , which assures us of the unity of the divine essence , doth likewise joyn the son and holy ghost in the same attributes , operations and worship , therefore as to the mutual relations , we may reckon three , but as to the divine essence , that can be no more than one. boëthius was a great man in all respects , for his quality , as well as for his skill in philosophy and christianity ; and he wrote a short but learned discourse to clear this matter . the catholick doctrine of the trinity , saith he , is this ; the father is god , the son god and the holy ghost ; but they are not three gods but one god. and yet ( which our vnitarians may wonder at ) this very man hath written a learned book of arithmetick . but how doth he make this out ? how is it possible for three to be but one ? first he shews , that there can be but one divine essence ; for to make more than one must suppose a diversity . principium enim pluralitatis alteritas est . if you make a real difference in nature as the arians did , then there must be as many gods , as there are different natures . among men , there are different individuals of the same kind ; but , saith he , it is the diversity of accidents which makes it ; and if you can abstract from all other accidents , yet they must have a different place , for two bodies cannot be in the same place . the divine essence is simple and immaterial , and is what it is of it self ; but other things are what they are made , and consist of parts , and therefore may be divided . now that which is of it self can be but one ; and therefore cannot be numbred . and one god cannot differ from another , either by accidents or substantial differences . but saith he , there is a twofold number ; one by which we reckon ; and another in the things reckoned . and the repeating of units in the former makes a plurality , but not in the latter . it may be said , that this holds where there are only different names for the same thing ; but here is a real distinction of father , son and holy ghost . but then he shews , " that the difference of relation , can make no alteration in the essence ; and where there is no diversity , there can be but one essence , although the different relation may make three persons . this is the substance of what he saith concerning this difficulty , which , as he suggests , arises from our imaginations , which are so filled with the division and multiplicity of compound and material things , that it is a hard matter for them so to recollect themselves as to consider the first principles and grounds of vnity and diversity . but if our vnitarians have not throughly consider'd those foundations , they must , as they say to one of their adversaries , argue like novices in these questions . for these are some of the most necessary speculations for understanding these matters ; as what that vnity is which belongs to a perfect being ; what diversity is required to multiply an infinite essence , which hath vnity in its own nature : whether it be therefore possible , that there should be more divine essences than one , since the same essential attributes must be , where ever there is the divine essence ? whether there can be more individuals , where there is no dissimilitude , and can be no division or separation ? whether a specifick divine nature be not inconsistent with the absolute perfection , and necessary existence which belongs to it ? whether the divine nature can be individually the same , and yet there be several individual essences : these and a great many other questions it will be necessary for them to resolve , before they can so peremptorily pronounce , that the doctrine of the trinity doth imply a contradiction on the account of the numbers of three and one. and so i come to the second particular . chap. vi. no contradiction for three persons to be in one common nature . ii. that it is no contradiction to assert three persons in one common nature . i shall endeavour to make these matters as clear as i can ; for the greatest difficulties in most mens minds have risen from the want of clear and distinct apprehensi●ns of those fundamental notions , which are necessary in order to the right understanding of them . 1. we are to distinguish between the being of a thing , and a thing in being ; or between essence and existence . 2. between the vnity of nature or essence , and of existence or individuals of the same nature . 3. between the notion of persons in a finite and limited nature , and in a being uncapable of division and separation . 1. between the being of a thing , and a thing in being . by the former we mean the nature and essential properties of a thing ; whereby it is distinguished from all other kinds of beings . so god and his creatures are essentially distinguished from each other by such attributes which are incommunicable ; and the creatures of several kinds are distinguished by their natures or essences ; for the essence of a man and of a brute are not barely distinguished by individuals , but by their kinds . and that which doth constitute a distinct kind is one and indivisible in it self : for the essence of man is but one and can be no more ; for if there were more , the kind would be alter'd ; so that there can be but one common nature or essence to all the individuals of that kind . but because these individuals may be or may not be , therefore we must distinguish them as they are in actual being , from what they are in their common nature ; for that continues the same , under all the variety and succession of individuals . 2. we must now distinguish the vnity which belongs to the common nature , from that which belongs to the individuals in actual being . and the vnity of essence is twofold : 1. where the essence and existence are the same , i. e. where necessary existence doth belong to the essence , as it is in god , and in him alone ; it being an essential and incommunicable perfection . 2. where the existence is contingent , and belongs to the will of another ; and so it is in all creatures , intellectual and material , whose actual being is dependent on the will of god. the vnity of existence may be consider'd two ways . 1. as to it self , and so it is called identity ; or a thing continuing the same with it self : the foundation whereof in man is that vital principle which results from the union of soul and body . for as long as that continues , notwithstanding the great variety of changes in the material parts , the man continues entirely the same . 2. the vnity of existence as to individuals may be consider'd as to others , i. e. as every one stands divided from every other individual of the same kind ; although they do all partake of the same common essence . and the clearing of this , is the main point , on which the right notion of these matters depends . in order to that , we must consider two things . 1. what that is , whereby we perceive the difference of individuals ? 2. what that is , which really makes two beings of the same kind to be different from each other ? 1. as to the reason of our perception of the difference between individuals of the same kind , it depends on these things . 1. difference of outward accidents , as features , age , bulk , meen , speech , habit and place . 2. difference of inward qualities and dispositions ; which we perceive by observation , and arise either from constitution , or education , or company , or acquired habits . 2. as to the true ground of the real difference between the existence of one individual from the rest , it depends upon the separate existence which it hath from all others . for that which gives it a being distinct from all others and divided by individual properties , is the true ground of the difference between them , and that can be no other but the will of god. and no consequent faculties or acts of the mind by self-reflection , &c. can be the reason of this difference ; because the difference must be supposed antecedent to them . and nothing can be said to make that , which must be supposed to be before it self ; for there must be a distinct mind in being from all other minds , before it can reflect upon it self . but we are not yet come to the bottom of this matter . for as to individual persons , there are these things still to be consider'd . 1. actual existence in it self , which hath a mode belonging to it , or else the humane nature of christ could not have been united with the divine , but it must have had the personal subsistence , and consequently there must have been two persons in christ. 2. a separate and divided existence from all others , which arises from the actual existence , but may be distinguished from it ; and so the humane nature of christ , although it had the subsistence proper to being , yet had not a separate existence , after the hypostatical vnion . 3. the peculiar manner of subsistence , which lies in such properties as are incommunicable to any other ; and herein lies the proper reason of personality . which doth not consist in a meer intelligent being , but in that peculiar manner of subsistence in that being which can be in no other . for when the common nature doth subsist in individuals , there is not only a separate existence , but something so peculiar to it self , that it can be communicated to no other . and this is that which makes the distinction of persons . 4. there is a common nature which must be joyned with this manner of subsistence to make a person ; otherwise it would be a meer mode ; but we never conceive a person without the essence in conjunction with it . but here appears no manner of contradiction in asserting several persons in one and the same common nature . 5. the individuals of the same kind are said to differ in number from each other , because of their different accidents and separate existence . for so they are capable of being numbred . whatever is compounded is capable of number as to its parts , and may be said to be one by the union of them ; whatever is separated from another is capable of number by distinction . but where there can be no accidents nor division , there must be perfect unity . 6. there must be a separation in nature , where-ever there is a difference of individuals under the same kind . i do not say there must be an actual separation and division as to place , but that there is and must be so in nature , where one common nature subsists in several individuals . for all individuals must divide the species , and the common nature u●ites them . and this philoponus understood very well , and therefore he never denied such a division and separation in the divine persons , as is implied in distinct individuals : which is the last thing to be consider'd here . 3. we are now to enquire how far these things will hold as to the persons in the trinity , and whether it be a contradiction to assert three persons in the godhead and but one god. we are very far from disputing the vnity of the divine essence , which we assert to be so perfect and indivisible , as not to be capable of such a difference of persons as is among men. because there can be no difference of accidents , or place , or qualities in the divine nature ; and there can be no separate existence , because the essence and existence are the same in god ; and if necessary existence be an inseparable attribute of the divine essence , it is impossible there should be any separate existence ; for what always was and must be , can have no other existence than what is implied in the very essence . but will not this overthrow the distinction of persons and run us into sabellianism ? by no means . for our vnitarians grant , that the noetians and sabellians held , that there is but one divine substance , essence or nature , and but one person . and how can those who hold three persons be sabellians ? yes , say they , the sabellians held three relative persons . but did they mean three distinct subsistences , or only one subsistence sustaining the names , or appearances , or manifestations of three persons ? the latter they cannot deny to have been the true sense of the sabellians . but say they , these are three persons in a classical critical sense . we meddle not at present with the dispute which valla hath against boethius about the proper latin sense of a person ( and petavius saith valla's objections are mere iests and trifles ) but our sense of a person is plain , that it signifies the essence with a particular manner of subsistence , which the greek fathers called an hypostasis , taking it for that incommunicable property which makes a person . but say our vnitarians , a person is an intelligent being , and therefore three persons must be three intelligent beings . i answer , that this may be taken two ways . 1. that there is no person where there is no intelligent nature to make it a person , and so we grant it . 2. that a person implies an intelligent being , separate and divided from other individuals of the same kind , as it is among men : and so we deny it as to the persons of the trinity , because the divine essence is not capable of such division and separation as the humane nature is . but say they again , the fathers did hold a specifical divine nature , and the persons to be as so many individuals . this they repeat very often in their late books ; and after all , refer us to curcellaeus for undeniable proofs of it . let us for the present suppose it , then i hope the fathers are freed from holding contradictions in the doctrine of the trinity ; for what contradiction can it be , to hold three individual persons in the godhead , and one common nature , more than it is to hold that there are three humane persons in one and the same common nature of man ? will they make this a contradiction too ? but some have so used themselves to the language of iargon , nonsense , contradiction , impossibility , that it comes from them , as some men swear , when they do not know it . but i am not willing to go off with this answer ; for i do take the fathers to have been men of too great sense and capacity to have maintained such an absurd opinion , as that of a specifick nature in god. for either it is a mere logical notion , and act of the mind without any real existence belonging to it as such , which is contrary to the very notion of god , which implies a necessary existence ; or it must imply a divine nature , which is neither father , son , nor holy ghost . which is so repugnant to the doctrine of the fathers , that no one that is any ways conversant in their writings on this argument , can imagine they should hold such an opinion . and i am so far from being convinced by curcellaeus his undeniable proofs , that i think it no hard matter to bring undeniable proofs that he hath mistaken their meaning . of which i shall give an account in this place , because i fear his authority hath had too much sway with some , as to this matter . i shall not insist upon his gross mistake in the very entrance of that discourse , where he saith , that the bishops of gaul and germany disliked the homoousion , and gave three reasons against it ; whereas hilary speaks of the eastern bishops whom he goes about to vindicate to the western bishops , who were offended with them for that reason ; as any one that reads hilary de synodis may see . but i come to the main point . his great argument is from the use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may extend to individuals of the same kind . who denies it ? but the question is whether the fathers used it in that sense , so as to imply a difference of individuals in the same common essence ? there were two things aimed at by them in their dispute with the arians . ( 1. ) to shew , that the son was of the same substance with the father , which they denied , and made him of an inferior created substance , of another kind . now the fathers thought this term very proper to express their sense against them . but then this word being capable of a larger sense than they intended , they took care , ( 2. ) to assert a perfect unity and indivisibility of the divine essence . for the arians were very ready to charge them with one of these two things . ( 1. ) that they must fall into sabellianism , if they held a perfect unity of essence : or ( 2. ) when they clear'd themselves of this , that they must hold three gods ; and both these they constantly denied . to make this clear , i shall produce the testimonies of some of the chief both of the greek and latin fathers , and answer curcellaeus his objections . athanasius takes notice of both these charges upon their doctrine of the trinity : as to sabellianism he declared , that he abhorred it equally with arianism ; and he saith , it lay in making father and son to be only different names of the same person ; and so they asserted but one person in the godhead . as to the other charge of polytheism , he observes , that in the scripture language , all mankind was reckon'd as one , because they have the same essence ; and if it be so , as to men , who have such a difference of features , of strength , of vnderstanding , of language , how much more may god be said to be one , in whom is an undivided dignity , power , counsel and operation . doth this prove such a difference , as is among individuals of the same kind among men ? no man doth more frequently assert the indivisible vnity of the divine nature than he . he expresly denies such divided hypostases , as are among men ; and saith , that in the trinity there is a conjunction without confusion , and a distinction without division ; that in the trinity there is so perfect an vnion , and that it is so undivided and united in it self ; that where-ever the father is , there is the son and the holy ghost , and so the rest , because there is but one godhead , and one god who is over all , and through all , and in all . but saith curcellaeus , the contrary rather follows from this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or mutual inexistence , for that could not be without distinct substance , as in water and wine . but this is a very gross mistake of the fathers notion , who did not understand by it a local in-existence as of bodies , but such an indivisible vnity that one cannot be without the other , as even petavius hath made it appear from athanasius and others . athanasius upon all occasions asserts the unity of the divine nature to be perfect and indivisible . god , saith he , is the father of his son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , without any division of the substance . and in other places , that the substance of the father and son admit of no division , and he affirms this to have been the sense of the council of nice ; so that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be understood of the same indivisible substance . curcellaeus answers , that athanasius by this indivisible vnity meant only a close and indissoluble vnion . but he excluded any kind of division , and that of a specifick nature into several individuals as a real division in nature ; for no man whoever treated of those matters denied , that a specifick nature was divided , when there were several individuals under it . but what is it which makes the vnion indissoluble ? is it the vnity of the essence or not ? if it be , is it the same individual essence , or not ? if the same individual essence makes the inseparable union , what is it , which makes the difference of individuals ? if it be said , the incommunicable properties of the persons ; i must still ask how such properties in the same individual essence , can make different individuals ? if it be said to be the same specifick nature ; then how comes that which is in it self capable of division to make an indissoluble vnion ? but saith curcellaeus , athanasius makes christ to be of the same substance as adam , and seth , and abraham , and isaac are said to be con-substantial with each other . and what follows ? that the father and son are divided from each other , as they were ? this is not possible to be his sense ; considering what he saith of the indivisibility of the divine nature . and athanasius himself hath given sufficient warning against such a mis-construction of his words ; and still urges that our conceptions ought to be suitable to the divine nature , not taken from what we see among men . and it is observable , that when paulus samosatenus had urged this as the best argument against the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that it made such a difference of substances as is among men ; for that reason saith athanasius , his iudges were content to let it alone , for the son of god is not in such a sense con-substantial ; but afterwards , the nicene fathers finding out the art of paulus , and the significancy of the word to discriminate the arians , made use of it , and only thought it necessary to declare , that when it is applied to god , it is not to be understood , as among individual men. as to the dialogues under athanasius his name , on which curcellaeus insists so much ; it is now very well known that they belong not to him , but to maximus ; and by comparing them with other places in him , it may appear , that he intended no specifick nature in god. but saith curcellaeus , if the fathers intended any more than a specifick nature , why did they not use words which would express it more fully , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ? for that very reason , which he mentions from epiphanius , because they would seem to approach too near to sabellianism . s. basil was a great man , ( notwithstanding the flout of our vnitarians , ) and apply'd his thoughts to this matter , to clear the doctrine of the church from the charge of sabellianism and tritheism . as to the former , he saith , in many places , that the heresie lay in making but one person as well as one god , or one substance with three several names . as to the latter , no man asserts the individual unity of the divine essence in more significant words than he doth . for he uses the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , . as s. cyril of alexandria doth likewise , and yet both these are produced by curcellaeus for a specifick nature . but saith curcellaeus , s. basil in his epistle to gregory nyssen doth assert the difrence between substance and hypostasis to consist in this , that the one is taken for common nature , and the other for individual , and so making three hypostases , he must make three individuals , and one common or specifick nature . i answer , that it is plain by the design of that epistle , that by three hypostases he could not mean three individual essences . for he saith , the design of his writing it , was to clear the difference between substance and hypostasis . for saith he , from the want of this , some assert but one hypostasis , as well as one essence ; and others , because there are three hypostases , suppose there are three distinct essences . for both went upon the same ground , that hypostasis and essence were the same . therefore saith he , those who held three hypostases , did make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a division of substances . from whence it follows , that s. basil did look upon the notion of three distinct substances as a mistake : i say distinct substances , as individuals are distinct ; for so the first principles of philosophy do own that individuals make a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or division of the species into several and distinct individuals . but doth not s. basil go about to explain his notion by the common nature of man , and the several individuals under it ; and what can this signifie to his purpose , unless he allows the same in the godhead ? i grant he doth so , but he saith the substance , is that which is common to the whole kind ; the hypostasis is that which properly distinguisheth one individual from another ; which he calls the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the peculiar incommunicable property . which he describes by a concourse of distinguishing characters in every individual . but how doth he apply these things to the divine nature ? for therein lies the whole difficulty . doth he own such a community of nature , and distinction of individuals there ? he first confesses the divine nature to be incomprehensible by us ; but yet we may have some distinct notions about these things . as for instance , in the father we conceive something common to him and to the son ; and that is the divine essence : and the same as to the holy ghost . but there must be some proper characters to distinguish these , one from another ; or else there will be nothing but confusion : which is sabellianism . now the essential attributes and divine operations are common to them ; and therefore these cannot distinguish them from each other . and those are the peculiar properties of each person , as he shews at large . but may not each person have a distinct essence belonging to him , as we see it is among men ? for this s. basil answers : ( 1. ) he utterly denies any possible division in the divine nature . and he never question'd , but the distinction of individuals under the same species was a sort of division , although there were no separation . and the followers of ioh. philoponus did hold an indissoluble vnion between the three individual essences in the divine nature ; but they held a distinction of peculiar essences , besides the common nature , which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; as appears by photius , who was very able to judge . and it appears by one of themselves in photius , that the controversie was , whether an hyposiasis could be without an individual essence belonging to it self ; or whether the peculiar properties and characters did make the hypostasis . but as to s. basil's notion , we are to observe ; ( 2. ) that he makes the divine essence to be uncapable of number , by reason of its perfect unity . here our vnitarians tell us , that when s. basil saith , that god is not one in number , but in nature , he means : as the nature of man is one , but there are many particular men , as peter , james and john , &c. so the nature of god , or the common divinity is one , but there are as truely more gods in number , or more particular gods , as there are more particular men. but that this is a gross mistake or abuse of s. basil's meaning , i shall make it plain from h●mself . for , they say , that he held , that as to this question , how many gods ? it must be answered , three gods in number , or three personal gods , and one in nature , or divine properties ; whereas he is so far from giving such an answer , that he absolutely denies that there can be more gods than one in that very place . he mentions it as an objection , that since he said , that the father is god , the son god , the holy ghost god ; he must hold three gods ; to which he answers , we own but one god , not in number , but in nature : then say they , he held but one god in nature and more in number . that is so far from his meaning , that i hardly think any that read the passage in s. basil , could so wilfully pervert his meaning . for his intention was so far from asserting more gods in number , that it was to prove so perfect a unity in god , that he was not capable of number , or of being more than one . for , saith he , that which is said to be one in number , is not really and simply one , but is made up of many , which by composition become one ; as we say , the world is one , which is made up of many things . but god is a simple uncompounded being ; and therefore cannot be said to be one in number . but the world is not one by nature , because it is made up of so many things , but it is one by number , as those several parts make but one world. is not this fair dealing with such a man as s. basil , to represent his sense quite otherwise than it is ? as though he allow'd more gods than one in number ? number , saith he again , belongs to quantity , and quantity to bodies , but what relation have these to god , but as he is the maker of them ? number belongs to material and circumscribed beings ; but , saith he , the most perfect vnity is to be conceived in the most simple and incomprehensible essence . where it is observable , that he uses those words which are allow'd to express the most perfect and singular unity . which petavius himself confesseth , that they can never be understood of a specifick nature : and curcellaeus cannot deny , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being added to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , doth restrain the sense more to a numerical vnity , as he calls it . how then is it possible to understand s. basil of more gods than one in number ? and in the very same page he mentions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the sameness of the divine nature , by which the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is better understood . but curcellaeus will have no more than a specifick vnity understood . before he said , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would have signified more , but now he finds it used , the case is alter'd : so that the fathers could not mean any other than a specifick vnity , let them use what expressions they pleas'd . but these , i think are plain enough to any one that will not shut his eyes . in an other place , s. basil makes the same objection and gives the same answer . one god the father , and one god the son ; how can this be , and yet not two gods ? because , saith he , the son hath the very same essence with the father . not two essences divided out of one , as two brothers ; but as father and son , the son subsisting as from the father , but in the same individual essence : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . but curcellaeus hath one fetch yet , viz. that s. basil denied god to be one in number , and made him to be one in nature , because he look'd on a specifick vnity or vnity of nature as more exact than numerical . s. basil look'd on the divine nature as such to have the most perfect vnity , because of its simplicity , and not in the least speaking of it as a specifick vnity ; but curcellaeus himself calls this , an vnity by a mere fiction of the mind ; and can he imagine this to have been more accurate than a real unity ? these are hard shifts in a desperate cause . after all , our vnitarians tell us , that s. basil doth against eunomius allow a distinction in number with respect to the deity . but how ? as to the essence ? by no means . for he asserts the perfect vnity thereof in the same place , even the vnity of the substance . but as to the characteristical properties of the persons , he allows of number , and no farther . but say they , this is to make one god as to essential properties , and three as to personal . how can that be ? when he saith , so often there can be but one god , because there can be but one divine essence ; and therefore those properties can only make distinct hypostases , but not distinct essences . and is this indeed the great secret which this bold man , as they call him , hath discover'd ? i think those are much more bold , ( i will not say impudent ) who upon such slight grounds , charge him with asserting more gods than one in number . but gregory nyssen , saith curcellaeus ▪ speaks more plainly in his epistle to ablabius ; for saith he , to avoid the difficulty of making three gods , as three individuals among men are three men ; he answers , that truly they are not three men , because they have but one common essence , which is exactly one , and indivisible in it self , however it be dispersed in individuals ▪ the same , he saith , is to be understood of god. and this petavius had charged him with before , as appears by curcellaeus his appendix . this seems the hardest passage in antiquity for this purpose , to which i hope to give a satisfactory answer from gregory nyssen himself . 1. it cannot be denied , that he asserts the vnity of essence to be indivisible in it self , and to be the true ground of the denomination of individuals ; as peter hath the name of a man , not from his individual properties , whereby he is distinguished from iames and iohn ; but from that one indivisible essence , which is common to them all , but yet receives no addition or diminution in any of them . 2. he grants a division of hypostases among men , notwithstanding this indivisibility of one common essence : for saith he ; among men , although the essence remain one and the same in all , without any division ; yet the several hypostases are divided from each other , according to the individual properties belonging to them . so that here is a double consideration of the essence : as in it self , so it is one and indivisible ; as it subsists in individuals , and so it is actually divided according to the subjects . for although the essence of a man be the same in it self , in peter , iames and iohn ; yet taking it as in the individuals , so the particular essence in each of them is divided from the rest . and so philoponus took hypostasis for an essence individuated by peculiar properties ; and therefore asserted , that where-ever there was an hypostasis , there must be a distinct essence ; and from hence he held the three persons to have three distinct essences . 3. we are now to consider , how far gregory nyssen carried this , whether he thought it held equally as to the divine hypostasis ; and that he did not , appears to me from these arguments : 1. he utterly denies any kind of division in the divine nature ; for in the conclusion of that discourse , he saith , it is not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( a word often used by the greek fathers on this occasion , from whence athanasius against macedonius inferr'd an identity , and caesarius joyns 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and so s. basil uses it ) but he adds another word , which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , indivisible . yes , as all essences are indivisible in themselves ; but they may be divided in their subjects , as gregory nyssen allows it to be in men. i grant it , but then he owns a division of some kind , which he here absolutely denies as to the divine nature ; for his words are , that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in any consideration whatsoever . then he must destroy the hypostases . not so neither , for he allows that there is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to the hypostases however . for he proposes the objection himself , that by allowing no difference in the divine nature , the hypostases would be confounded . to which he answers , that he did not deny their difference , which was founded in the relation they had to one another ; which he there explains ; and that therein only consists the difference of the persons . which is a very considerable testimony , to shew that both petavius and curcellaeus mistook gregory nyssen's meaning . but there are other arguments to prove it . 2. he asserts such a difference between the divine and human persons , as is unanswerable , viz. the vnity of operation . for , saith he , among men , if several go about the same work , yet every particular person works by himself , and therefore they may well be called many ; because every one is circumscribed : but in the divine persons he proves that it is quite otherwise , for they all concurr in the action towards us ; as he there shews at large . petavius was aware of this , and therefore he saith , he quitted it and returned to the other ; whereas he only saith , if his adversaries be displeased with it , he thinks the other sufficient . which in short is , that essence in it self is one and indivisible ; but among men it is divided according to the subjects ; that the divine nature is capable of no division at all , and therefore the difference of hypostases must be from the different relations and manner of subsistence . 3. he expresses his meaning fully in another place . for in his catechetical oration , he saith , he looks on the doctrine of the trinity as a profound mystery ( which three individual persons in one specifick nature is far from . ) but wherein lies it ? chiefly in this , that there should be number and no number ; different view and yet but one ; a distinction of hypostases , and yet no division in the subjects . for so his words are , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; which is contrary to what he said of human hypostases . now , what is the subject in this case ? according to curcellaeus his notion , it must be an individual . but since he asserts there can be no division in the subjects , then he must overthrow any such individuals , as are among men. these are the chief testimonies out of the greek fathers , whose authority curcellaeus and others rely most upon , as to this matter , which i have therefore more particularly examin'd . but s. ierom , saith curcellaeus , in his epistle to damasus , thought three hypostases implied three distinct substances ; and therefore when the campenses would have him own them , he refused it and asked his advice . then it is plain , s. ierom would not own three distinct substances , and so could not be of curcellaeus his mind . but saith he , s. ierom meant by three substances , three gods different in kind , as the arians did . but how doth that appear ? doth he not say , the arian bishop , and the campenses put him upon it ? but who was this arian bishop , and these campenses ? no other than the meletian party ; for meletius was brought in by the arians , but he joyned against them with s. basil and others , who asserted three hypostases ; and the campenses were his people who met without the gates , as the historians tell us . but it is evident by s. ierom , that the latin church understood hypostasis to be the same then with substance ; and the reason why they would not allow three hypostases , was , because they would not assert three substances . so that curcellaeus his hypothesis hath very little colour for it among the latin fathers ; since s. ierom there saith , it would be sacrilege to hold three substances , and he freely bestows an anathema upon any one that asserted more than one . but hilary , saith curcellaeus , owns a specifick vnity , for in his book de synodis , he shews , that by one substance , they did not mean one individual substance , but such as was in adam and seth , that is of the same kind . no man asserts the vnity and indiscrimination of the divine substance more fully and frequently than he doth ; and that without any difference or variation , as to the father and the son. and although against the arians he may use that for an illustration , of adam and seth ; yet when he comes to explain himself , he declares it must be understood in a way agreeable to the divine nature . and he denies any division of the substance between father and son , but he asserts one and the same substance to be in both ; and although the person of the son remains distinct from the person of the father , yet he subsists in that substance of which he was begotten , and nothing is taken off from the substance of the father , by his being begotten of it . but doth he not say , that he hath a legitimate and proper substance of his own begotten nature from god , the father ? and what is this , but to own two distinct substances ? how can the substance be distinct , if it be the very same ; and the son subsist in that substance of which he was begotten ? and that hilary ( besides a multitude of passages to the same purpose in him ) cannot be understood of two distinct substances will appear by this evidence . the arians in their confession of faith before the council of nice set down among the several heresies which they condemned ; that of hieracas , who said the father and son were like two lamps shining out of one common vessel of oil. hilary was sensible that under this that expression was struck at , god of god , light of light , which the church owned . his answer is , luminis naturae vnitas est , non ex connexione porrectio . i e. they are not two divided lights , from one common stock ; but the same light remaining after it was kindled that it was before . as appears by his words , light of light , saith he , implies , that it gives to another that which it continues to have it self . and petavius saith , that the opinion of hieracas was , that the substance of the father and son differ'd numerically as one lamp from another . and hilary calls it an error of humane understanding which would judge of god , by what they find in one another . doth not s. ambrose say , as curcellaeus quotes him , that the father and son are not two gods , because all men are said to be of one substance ? but s ambrose is directly against him . for , he saith , the arians objected , that if they made the son true god , and con-substantial with the father , they must make two gods ; as there are two men , or two sheep of the same essence ; but a man and a sheep are not said to be men , or two sheep . which they said to excuse themselves , because they made the son of a different kind and substance from the father . and what answer doth s. ambrose give to this ? 1. he saith , plurality according to the scriptures rather falls on those of different kinds ; and therefore when they make them of several kinds , they must make several gods. 2. that we who hold but one substance , cannot make more gods than one. 3. to his instance of men , he answers , that although they are of the same nature by birth , yet the● differ in age , and thought , and work , and place from one another ; and where there is such diversity , there cannot be vnity : but in god , there is no difference of nature , will , or operation ; and therefore there can be but one god. the last i shall mention is s. augustin , whom curcellaeus produces to as little purpose ; for although he doth mention the same instance of several men being of the same kind ; yet he speaks so expresly against a specifick vnity in god ; that he saith , the consequence must be , that the three persons must be three gods ; as three humane persons are three men. and in another place , that the father , son and holy ghost , are one in the same individual nature . and what saith curcellaeus to these places , for he was aware of them . to the latter he saith , that by individual , he means specifick . this is an extraordinary answer indeed . but what reason doth he give for it ? because they are not divided in place or time , but they may have their proper essences however . but where doth s. augustin give any such account of it ? he often speaks upon this subject ; but always gives another reason . viz. because they are but one and the same substance . the three persons are but one god , because they are of one substance ; and they have a perfect vnity , because there is no diversity of nature , or of will. but it may be said , that here he speaks of a diversity of nature . in the next words he explains himself , that the three persons are one god , propter ineffabilem conjunctionem deitatis ; but the union of three persons in one specifick nature , is no ineffable conjunction , it being one of the commonest things in the world ; and in the same chapter , propter individuam deitatem unus deus est ; & propter uniuscujusque proprietatem tres personae sunt . here we find one individual nature ; and no difference but in the peculiar properties of the persons . in the other place he is so express against a specifick vnity , that curcellaeus his best answer is , that in that chapter he is too intricate and obscure . i. e. he doth not to speak his mind . thus much i thought fit to say in answer to those undeniable proofs of curcellaeus , which our vnitarians boast so much of , and whether they be so or not , let the reader examine and judge . chap. vii . the athanasian creed clear'd from contradictions . iii. i now come to the last thing i proposed , viz. to shew , that it is no contradiction to assert three persons in the trinity and but one god ; and for that purpose , i shall examine the charge of contradictions on the athanasian creed . the summ of the first articles , say they , is this , the one true god is three distinct persons , and three distinct persons , father , son and holy ghost are the one true god. which is plainly , as if a man should say , peter , james and john , being three persons are one man ; and one man is these three distinct persons , peter , james and john. is it not now a ridiculous attempt as well as a barbarous indignity , to go about thus to make asses of all mankind , under pretence of teaching them a creed . this is very freely spoken , with respect , not merely to our church , but the christian world , which owns this creed to be a just and true explication of the doctrine of the trinity . but there are some creatures as remarkable for their untoward kicking , as for their stupidity . and is not this great skill in these matters , to make such a parallel between three persons in the godhead , and peter , iames and iohn ? do they think there is no difference between an infinitely perfect being , and such finite limited creatures as individuals among men are ? do they suppose the divine nature capable of such division and separation by individuals , as human nature is ? no , they may say , but ye who hold three persons must think so : for what reason ? we do assert three persons , but it is on the account of divine revelation , and in such a manner , as the divine nature is capable of it . for it is a good rule of boethius , talia sunt praedicata , qualia subjecta permiserint . we must not say that there are persons in the trinity , but in such a manner as is agreeable to the divine nature ; and if that be not capable of division and separation , then the persons must be in the same undivided essence . the next article is , neither confounding the persons , nor dividing the substance ; but how can we , say they , not confound the persons that have , as ye say , but one numerical substance ? and how can we but divide the substance , which we find in three distinct divided persons ? i think the terms numerical substance , not very proper in this case ; and i had rather use the language of the fathers , than of the schools ; and some of the most judicious and learned fathers would not allow the terms of one numerical substance to be applied to the divine essence . for their notion was , that number was only proper for compound b●ings , but god being a pure and simple being was one by nature and not by number , as s. basil speaks ( as is before observed ) because he is not compounded , nor hath any besides himself to be reckon'd with him . but because there are different hypostases , therefore they allow'd the use of number about them , and so we may say the hypostases or persons are numerically different ; but we cannot say that the essence is one numerically . but why must they confound the persons , if there be but one essence ? the relative properties cannot be confounded ; for the father cannot be the son ▪ nor the son the father ; and on these the difference of persons is founded . for , there can be no difference , as to essential properties , and therefore all the difference , or rather distinction must be from those that are relative . a person of it self imports no relation , but the person of the father or of the son must ; and these relations cannot be confounded with one another . and if the father cannot be the son , nor the son the father , then they must be distinct from each other . but how ? by dividing the substance ? that is impossible in a substance that is indivisible . it may be said , that the essence of created beings is indivisible , and yet there are divided persons . i grant it , but then a created essence is capable of different accidents and qualities to divide one person from another , which cannot be supposed in the divine nature ; and withall the same power which gives a being to a created essence , gives it a separate and divided existence from all others . as when peter , iames and iohn received their several distinct personalities from god ; at the same time he gave them their separate beings from each other , although the same essence be in them all . but how can we but divide the substance which we see in three distinct divided persons ? the question is , whether the distinct properties of the persons do imply a division of the substance ? we deny that the persons are divided as to the substance , because that is impossible to be divided ; but we say , they are and must be distinguished as to those incommunicable properties which make the persons distinct . the essential properties are uncapable of being divided , and the relations cannot be confounded ; so that there must be one undivided substance and yet three distinct persons . but every person must have his own proper substance ; and so the substance must be divided if there be three persons . that every person must have a substance to support his subsistence is not denied , but the question is , whether that substance must be divided or not . we say , where the substance will bear it , as in created beings , a person hath a separate substance , i. e. the same nature diversified by accidents , qualities and a separate existence , but where these things cannot be , there the same essence must remain undivided , but with such relative properties as cannot be confounded . but may not the same undivided substance be communicated to three divided persons ; so as that each person may have his own proper substance , and yet the divine essence be in it self undivided ? this is not the case before us . for the question upon the creed is , whether the substance can be divided ? and here it is allow'd to remain undivided . yes in it self , but it may be divided in the persons . the substance , we say , is uncapable of being divided any way ; and to say , that a substance wholly undivided in it self , is yet divided into as many proper and peculiar substances , as there are persons , doth not at all help our understanding in this matter ; but if no more be meant , as is expresly declared , than that the same one divine nature is wholly and entirely communicated by the eternal father to the eternal son ▪ and by father and son to the eternal spirit , without any division or separation ; it is the same which all trinitarians assert . and it is a great pity , that any new phrases or ways of expression should cause unreasonable heats among those who are really of the same mind . for those who oppose the expressions of three distinct substances as new and dangerous ; yet grant , that it is one peculiar prerogative of the divine nature and substance , founded in its infinite , and therefore transcendent perfection , whereby it is capable of residing in more persons than one ; and is accordingly communicated from the father to the son and holy ghost ; but this is done without any division or multiplication . now if both parties mean what they say , where lies the difference ? it is sufficient for my purpose that they are agrred , that there can be no division as to the divine essence by the distinction of persons . and so this passage of the athanasian creed holds good , neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance . the next article , as it is set down in the notes on athanasius his creed , is a contradiction to this . for there it runs , there is one substance of the father , another of the son , another of the holy ghost . they might well charge it with contradictions at this rate . but that is a plain mistake for person ; for there is no other variety in the copies but this , that baysius his greek copy hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and that of constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but all the latin copies persona . but what consequence do they draw from hence ? then , say they , the son is not the father , nor is the father the son , nor the holy ghost either of them . if they had put in person , as they ought to have done , it is what we do own . and what follows ? if the father be not the son , and yet is the one true god , then the son is not the one true god , because he is not the father . the one true god may be taken two ways : 1. the one true god , as having the true divine nature in him , and so the father is the one true god ; but not exclusive of the son , if he have the same divine nature . 2. the one true god , as having the divine nature so wholly in himself , as to make it incommunicable to the son ; so we do not say , that the father is the one true god , because this must exclude the son from being god ; which the scripture assures us that he is ; and therefore though the son be not the father , nor the father the son , yet the son may be the one true god as well as the father , because they both partake of the same divine nature , so that there is no contradiction in this , that there is but one true god , and one of the persons is not the other . for that supposes it impossible , that there should be three persons in the same nature ; but if the distinction of nature and persons be allow'd , as it must be by all that understand any thing of these matters , then it must be granted , that although one person cannot be another , yet they may have the same common essence . as for instance , let us take their own , peter , iames and iohn . what pleasant arguing would this be , peter is not iames nor iohn , nor iames nor iohn are peter , but peter hath the true essence of a man in him ; and the true essence is but one and indivisible ; and therefore iames and iohn cannot be true men , because peter hath the one and indivisible essence of a man in him ? but they will say , we cannot say that peter is the one true man , as we say , that the father is the one true god. yes ; we say the same in other words , for he can be said to be the one true god in no other respect , but as he hath the one true divine essence . all the difference lies , that a finite nature is capapable of division , but an infinite is not . it follows , the godhead of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost is all one , the glory equal , the majesty co-eternal . to this they say , that this article doth impugn and destroy it self . how so ? for , if the glory and majesty be the same in number , then it can be neither equal , nor co-eternal . not equal for it is the same , which equals never are , nor co-eternal for that intimates that they are distinct . for , nothing is co eternal , nor co temporary with it self . there is no appearance of difficulty or contradiction in this , if the distinction of persons is allowed ; for the three persons may be well said to be co-equal and co-eternal ; and if we honour the son , as we honour the father , we must give equal glory to him . but one great point of contradiction remains , viz. so that the father is god , the son is god , and the holy ghost is god , and yet there are not three gods ; but one god. first , they say , this is as if a man should say , the father is a person , the son a person , and the holy ghost a person , yet there are not three persons ; but one person . how is this possible , if a person doth suppose some peculiar property , which must distinguish him from all others ? and how can three persons be one person , unless three incommunicable properties may become one communicated property to three persons ? but they are aware of a distinction in this case , viz. that the term god is used personally , when it is said god the father , god the son , and god the holy ghost ; but when it is said , there are not three gods , but one god , the term god is used essentially , and therefore comprehends the whole three persons , so that there is neither a grammatical , nor arithmetical contradiction . and what say our vnitarians to this ? truly , no less , than that the remedy is worse , ( if possible ) than the disease . nay then , we are in a very ill case . but how i pray doth this appear ? 1. say they , three personal gods , and one essential god make four gods ; if the essential god be not the same with the personal gods : and tho' he is the same , yet since they are not the same with one another , but distinct , it follows , that there are three gods , i. e. three personal gods. 2. it introduces two sorts of gods , three personal and one essential . but the christian religion knows and owns but one , true and most high god of any sort . so far then , we are agreed , that there is but one , true and most high god ; and that because of the perfect vnity of the divine essence , which can be no more than one , and where there is but one divine essence , there can be but one true god , unless we can suppose a god without an essence , and that would be a strange sort of god. he would be a personal god indeed in their critical sense of a person for a shape or appearance . but may not the fame essence be divided ? that i have already shew'd to be impossible . therefore we cannot make so many personal gods , because we assert one and the same essence in the three persons of father , son and holy ghost . but they are distinct , and therefore must be distinct gods , since every one is distinct from the other . they are distinct as to personal properties , but not as to essential attributes ; which are and must be the same in all : so that here is but one essential god , and three persons . but after all , why do we assert three persons in the godhead ? not because we find them in the athanasian creed ; but because the scripture hath revealed that there are three , father , son and holy ghost ; to whom the divine nature and attributes are given . this we verily believe , that the scripture hath revealed ; and that there are a great many places , of which , we think no tolerable sense can be given without it , and therefore we assert this doctrine on the same grounds , on which we believe the scriptures . and if there are three persons which have the divine nature attributed to them ; what must we do in this case ? must we cast off the vnity of the divine essence ? no , that is too frequently and plainly asserted for us to call it into question . must we reject those scriptures which attribute divinity to the son and holy ghost , as well as to the father ? that we cannot do , unless we cast off those books of scripture , wherein those things are contained . but why do we call them persons , when that term is not found in scripture , and is of a doubtful sense ? the true account whereof i take to be this . it is observed by facundus hermianensis , that the christian church received the doctrine of the trinity before the terms of three persons were used . but sabellianism was the occasion of making use of the name of persons . it 's true , that the sabellians did not dislike our sense of the word person , ( which they knew was not the churches sense ) as it was taken for an appearance , or an external quality ; which was consistent enough with their hypothesis , who allow'd but one real person with different manifestations . that this was their true opinion , appears from the best account we have of their doctrine , from the first rise of sabellianism . the foundations of it were laid in the earliest and most dangerous heresies in the christian church , viz. that which is commonly called by the name of the gnosticks , and that of the cerinthians and ebionites . for how much soever they differ'd from each other in other things ; yet they both agreed in this , that there was no such thing as a trinity , consisting of father , son and holy ghost ; but that all was but different appearances and manifestations of god to mank●nd . in consequence whereof , the gnosticks denied the very humanity of christ , and the cerinthians and ebionites his divinity . but both these sorts , were utterly rejected the communion of the christian church ; and no such thing as sabellianism was found within it . afterwards , there arose some persons who started the same opinion within the church : the first we meet with of this sort , are those mention'd by theodoret , epigonus , cleomenes , and noëtus , from whom they were called noe●ians ; not long after , sabellius broached the same doctrine in pentapolis , and the parts thereabouts ; which made dionysius of alexandria appear so early and so warmly against it . but he happening to let fall some expressions , as though he asserted an inequality of hypostases in the godhead , complaint was made of it to dionysius then bishop of rome ; who thereupon explained that , which he took to be the true sense of the christian church in this matter . which is still preserved in athanasius : therein he disowns the sabellian doctrine , which confounded the father , son and holy ghost , and made them to be the same ; and withal , he rejected those who held three distinct and separate hypostases ; as the platonists , and after them the marcionists did . dionysius of alexandria , when he came to explain himself , agreed with the others and asserted the son to be of the same substance with the father ; as athanasius hath proved at large : but yet he said , that if a distinction of hypostases were not kept up , the doctrine of the trinity would be lost ; as appears by an epistle of his in s. basil. athanasius saith , that the heresie of sabellius lay in making the father and son to be only different names of the same person ; so that in one respect he is the father , and in another the son. gregory nazianzen in opposition to sabellianism , saith , we must believe one god , and three hypostases ; and commends athanasius for preserving the true mean , in asserting the vnity of nature , and the distinction of properties . s. basil saith , that the sabellians made but one person of the father and son : that in name they confessed the son ; but in reality they denied him . in another place , that the sabellians asserted but one hypostasis in the divine nature ; but that god took several persons upon him , as occasion required : sometimes that of a father , at other times of a son ; and so of the holy ghost . and to the same purpose , in other places he saith , that there are distinct hypostases with their peculiar properties ; which being joyned with the vnity of nature make up the true confession of faith. there were some who would have but one hypostasis ; whom he opposes with great vehemency ; and the reason he gives , is , that then they must make the persons to be meer names ; which is , sabellianisn . and , he saith , that if our notions of distinct persons have no certain foundation they are meer names , such as sabellius called persons . but by this foundation he doth not mean any distinct essences , but the incommunicable properties belonging to them , as father , son and holy ghost . it is plain from hence , that the necessity of asserting three hypostases , came from thence , that otherwise they could not so well distinguish themselves from the sabellians whose doctrine they utterly disowned ; as well as arianism and iudaism ; and it appears by the testimonies of athanasius , gregory nazianzen and s. basil , that they look'd on one as bad as the other ; and they commonly joyn iudaism , and sabellianism together . but yet there arose difficulties , whether they were to hold one hypostasis or three . the former insisted on the generally received sense of hypostasis for substance or essence ; and therefore they could not hold three hypostases without three distinct essences , as the platonists and marcionists held . upon this a synod was called at alexandria to adjust this matter , where both parties were desired to explain themselves . those who held three hypostases were asked , whether they maintained three hypostases as the arians did , of different substances and separate subsistences , as mankind and other creatures are ? or as other hereticks , three principles or three gods ? all which they stedfastly denied . then they were asked , why they used those terms ? they answered , because they believed the holy trinity to be more than mere names ; and that the father , and son , and holy ghost had a real subsistence belonging to them ; but still they held but one godhead , one principle , and the son of the same substance with the father ; and the holy ghost not to be a creature , but to bear the same proper and inseparable essence with the father and the son. then the other side were asked , when they asserted but one hypostasis , whether they held with sabellius or not ; and that the son and holy ghost had no essence or subsistence ? which they utterly denied ; but said , that their meaning was , that hypostasis was the same with substance ; and by one hypostasis , they intended no more , but that the father , son and holy ghost were of the same individual substance ; ( for the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so they held but one godhead and one divine nature : and upon these terms they agreed . from whence it follows , that the notion of three hypostases , as it was received in the christian church , was to be under●●ood so as to be consistent with the individual vnity of the divine essence . and the great rule of the christian church was to keep in the middle , between the doctrines of sabellius and arius ; and so by degrees , the notion of three hypostases and one essence was look'd on in the eastern church , as the most proper discrimination of the orthodox from the sabellians and arians . but the latin church was not so easily brought to the use of three hypostases , because they knew no other sense of it , but for substance or essence ; and they all denied that there was any more than one divine substance , and therefore they rather embraced the word persona ; and did agree in the name of persons , as most proper to signifie their meaning , which was , that there were three which had distinct subsistences , and incommunicable properties , and one and the same divine essence . and since the notion of it is so well understood , to signifie such a peculiar sense , i see no reason why any should scruple the use of it . as to it s not being used in scripture , socinus himself despises it , and allows it to be no good reason . for when franciscus davides objected , that the terms of essence and person were not in scripture ; socinus tells him , that they exposed their cause who went upon such grounds ; and that if the sense of them were in scripture , it was no matter whether the terms were or not . h●ving thus clear'd the notion of three persons , i return to the sense of scripture about these matters . and our vnitarians tell us , that we ought to interpret scripture otherwise . how doth that appear ? they give us very little encouragement to follow their interpretations , which are so new , so forced , so different from the general sense of the christian world , and which i may say , reflect so highly on the honour of christ and his apostles , i. e. by making use of such expressions , which if they do not mean , what to honest and sincere minds they appear to do , must be intended ( according to them ) to set up christ a meer man to be a god. and if such a thought as this could enter into the mind of a thinking man , it would tempt him to suspect much more as to those writings than there is the least colour or reason for . therefore these bold inconsiderate writers ought to reflect on the consequence of such sort of arguments , and if they have any regard to christianity , not to trifle with scripture as they do . but say they , the question only is , whether we ought to interpret scripture when it speaks of god , according to reason or not , that is like fools or like wise men ? like wise men no doubt , if they can hit upon it , but they go about it as untowardly as ever men did . for is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to take up some novel interpretations , against the general sense of the christian church from the apostles times ? is this to act like wise men , to raise objections against the authority of the books , they cannot answer : and to cry out of false copies and translations without reason , and to render all places suspicious , which make against them ? is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to make our saviour affect to be thought a god , when he knew himself to be a mere man , and by their own confession had not his divine authority and power conferr'd upon him ? and to make his apostles set up the worship of a creature , when their design was to take away the worship of all such , who by nature are not gods ? is this like wise men , to tell the world , that these were only such gods , whom they had set up , and god had not appointed ; as though there were no real idolatry but in giving divine worship without god's command . chap. viii . the socinian sense of scripture examined . but they must not think to escape so easily for such a groundless and presumptuous saying ; that they interpret the scripture not like fools , but like wise men : because the true sense of scripture is really the main point between us ; and therefore i shall more carefully examine the wise sense they give of the chief places which relate to the matter in hand . 1. is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to make the author to the hebrews in one chapter , and that but a short one , to bring no less than four places out of the old testament , and according to their sense , not one of them proves that which he aimed at ? viz. that christ was superiour to angels , heb. 1.5 . as will appear by the sense they give of them . for unto which of the angels said he at any time , thou art my son , this day have i begotten thee ? these words , say they , in their original and primary sense are spoken of david , but in their mystical sense are a prophecy concerning christ. was this mystical sense primarily intended or not ? if not , they are only an accommodation and no proof . but they say , even in that mystical sense , they were intended not of the lord christ's supposed eternal generation from the essence of the father , but of his resurrection from the dead . but if that be not taken as an evidence of his being the eternal son of god , how doth this prove him above angels ? heb. 1.6 . and again , when he bringeth his first begotten into the world , he saith , and let all the angels of god worship him . this , one would think home to the business . but our wise interpreters tell us plainly , that the words were used by the psalmist on another occasion , i. e. they are nothing to the purpose . but being told of this , instead of mending the matter , they have made it far worse ; for upon second thoughts , ( but not wiser ) they say , the words are not taken out of the psalm , but out of deut. 32.43 . where the words are not spoken of god , but of god's people ; and if this be said of god's people , they hope it may be said of christ too , without concluding from thence , that christ is the supreme god. but we must conclude from hence , that these are far from being wise interpreters ; for what consequence is this , the angels worship god's people , therefore christ is superiour to angels ? heb. 1.8 . thy throne o god is for ever and ever , i. e. say they , god is thy throne for ever . and so they relate not to christ but to god. and to what purpose then are they brought ? heb. 1.10 . thou lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth , and the heavens are the work of thy hands . these words , say they , are to be understood not of christ , but of god. which is to charge the apostle with arguing out of the old testament very impertinently . is this interpreting the scriptures like wise men ? is it not rather exposing and ridiculing them ? is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to give such a forced sense of the beginning of s. john's gospel , as was never thought of from the writing of it , till some in the last age thought it necessary to avoid the proof of christ's divinity from it . for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was never taken , in the sense they put upon it , for him that was to preach the word , in s. iohn's time ; but the signification of it was then well understood from the alexandrian school ( as appears by philo ) whence it was brought by cerinthus into those parts of asia , where s. iohn lived when he wrote his gospel : and one of themselves confesses , that cerinthus did by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mean something divine , which rested upon , and inhabited the person of iesus , and was that power by which god created original matter and made the world , but as the christ or the word descended on iesus at his baptism , so it left him at his crucifixion . that which i observe from hence is , that there was a known and current sense of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the time of s. iohn's writing his gospel , very different from that of a preacher of the word of god ; and therefore i cannot but think it the wisest way of interpreting s. john , to understand him in a sense then commonly known ; and so he affirms the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have been in the beginning , i. e. before the creation ( for he saith afterwards , all things were made by him ) and that he was with god , and was god ; and this word did not inhabit iesus , as cerinthus held , but was made flesh and dwelt among us . and so s. iohn clearly asserted the divinity and incarnation of the son of god. and in all the disputes afterwards with paulus samosatenus , and photinus , it appears , that they understood the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not for any meer man , but for some divine power , which rested upon the person of iesus . so that this was a very late , and i think no very wise interpretation of s. iohn . and even sandius confesses , that socinus his sense was wholly new and unheard of in the ancient church ; not only among the fathers , but the hereticks , as i have before observed . for they agreed ( except their good friends the alogi who went the surest way to work ) that by the word no meer man was understood . let them produce one if they can , saith sandius ( even the learned and judicious sandius . ) did they all interpret the scriptures like fools , and not like wise men ? but if the christian interpreters were such fools ; what think they of the deists , whom they seem to have a better opinion of , as to their wisdom ? what , if men without biass of interest , or education think ours the more proper and agreeable sense ? the late archbishop to this purpose had mentioned amelius the platonist , as an indifferent iudge . but what say our wise interpreters to this ? truly they say , that the credit of the trinitarian cause runs very low , when an uncertain tale of an obscure platonist of no reputation for learning or wit , is made to be a good part of the proof , which is alledged for these doctrines . if a man happen to stand in their way , he must be content with such a character , as they will be pleased to give him . if he had despised s. iohn's gospel , and manner of expression , he had been as wise as the alogi ; but notwithstanding the extraordinary character given of friend amelius ( as they call him ) by eusebius , by porphyrius , by proclus , and by damascenus , this very saying of his sinks his reputation for ever with them . what would iulian have given for such a wise interpretation of s. iohn ? when he cannot deny , but that he did set up the divinity of christ by these expressions ; and upbraids the christians of alexandria , for giving worship to iesus as the word and god ? with what satisfaction would he have received such a sense of his words ; when he complemented photinus for denying the divinity of christ ; while other chrians asserted it ? but they do not by any means deal fairly with the late archbishop as to the story of amelius ; for they bring it in , as if he had laid the weight of the cause upon it ; whereas he only mentions it , as a confirmation , of a probable conjecture , that plato had the notion of the word of god from the jews ; because that was a title which the jews did commonly give to the messias , as he proves from philo , and the chaldee paraphrast . to which they give no manner of answer . but they affirm in answer to my sermon , p. 9. that socinus his sense was , that christ was called the word , because he was the bringer or messenger of gods word . but were not the iews to understand it in the sense it was known among them ? and if the chaldee paraphrast had used it in that sense , he would never have applied it to a divine subsistance , as upon examination it will appear that he doth . of which rittangel gives a very good account , who had been a iew , and was very well skilled in their ancient learning . he tells us , that he had a discourse with a learned vnitarian upon this subject , who was particularly acquainted with the eastern languages ; and he endeavoured to prove , that there was nothing in the chaldee paraphrasts use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because it was promiscuously used by him for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it was applied to god. this rittangel denied ; and offer'd to prove , that the chaldee paraphrast did never use that word in a common manner , but as it was appropriated to a divine subsistance . he produces several places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put , and nothing answering to word in the hebrew , as gen. 20.21 . the chaldee hath it , the word of iehovah shall be my god. exod. 2.25 . and iehovah said , he would redeem them by his word , exod. 6.8 . your murmurings are not against us , but against the word of iehovah , exod. 19.17 . and moses brought the people out to meet the word of iehovah , levit. 26.46 . these are the statutes and iudgments , and laws , which iehovah gave between his word and the children of israel by the hand of moses , numb . 11.20 . ye have despised the word of iehovah whose divinity dwelt among you , numb . 23.21 . the word of iehovah is with him , and the divinity of their king is among them , deut 1.30 . the word of iehovah shall fight for you , deut. 2.7 . these forty years the word of iehovah hath been with thee , deut. 1.32 . ye did not believe in the word of iehovah your god , deut 4.24 . iehovah thy god , his word is a consuming fire , deut. 5.5 . i stood between the word of iehovah and you , to shew you the word of the lord , deut. 32.6.8 . iehovah thy god , his word shall go with thee , with many other places , which he brings out of moses his writings ; and there are multitudes to the same purpose in the other books of scripture ; which shews , saith he , that this term the word of god , was so appointed for many ages ; as appears by all the chaldee paraphrasts and the ancient doctors of the iews . and he shews by several places , that the chaldee paraphrast did not once render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when there was occasion for it ; no , not when the word of god is spoken of with respect to a prophet ; as he proves by many testimonies ; which are particularly enumerated by him . the result of the conference was , that the vnitarian had so much ingenuity to confess , that unless those words had another sense , their cause was lost ; and our faith had a sure foundation . but it may be objected that morinus hath since taken a great deal of pains to prove the chaldee paraphrasts , not to have been of that antiquity , which they have been supposed by the iews to be of . in answer to this , we may say in general , that morinus his great proofs are against another chaldee paraphrast of very small reputation , viz. of ionathan upon the law ; and not that of onkelos , which rittangel relied upon in this matter . and none can deny this to have been very ancient ; but the iews have so little knowledge of their own history , but what is in scripture , that very little certainty can be had from them . but we must compare the circumstances of things , if we would come to any resolution in this matter . now it is certain , that philo the alexandrian iew , who lived so very near our saviours time , had the same notion of the word of god , which is in the chaldee paraphrast : whose testimonies have been produced by so many already , that i need not to repeat them . and eusebius saith , the jews and christians had the same opinion as to christ , till the former fell off from it in opposition to the christians ; and he particula●ly instances in his divinity . but if morinus his opinion be embraced , as to the lateness of these chaldee paraphrases , this inconvenience will necessarily follow , viz. that the iews when they had changed so much their opinions , should insert those passages themselves which assert the divinity of the word . and it can hardly enter into any mans head that considers the humour of the jewish nation , to think , that after they knew what s. iohn had written concerning the word ; and what use the christians made of it to prove the divinity of christ , they should purposely insert such passages in that paraphrase of the law which was in such esteem among them , that elias levita saith , they were under obligation to read two parascha●s out of it every week , together with the hebrew text. now , who can imagine that the iews would do this upon any other account , than that it was deliver'd down to them , by so ancient a tradition , that they durst not discontinue it . and it is observed in the place of scripture which our saviour read in the synagogue , that he follow'd neither the hebrew nor the greek , but in probability the chaldee paraphrase ; and the words he used upon the cross , were in the chaldee dialect . the later iews have argued against the trinity , and the divinity of christ like any vnitarians , as appears by the collection out of ioseph albo , david kimchi , &c. published by genebrard , with his answers to them . and is it any ways likely , that those who were so much set against these doctrines , should themselves put in such expressions , which justifie what the evangelist saith about the vvord , being in the beginning , being with god , and being god ? the substance of what i have said , as to s. iohn's notion of the word is this ; that there is no colour for the sense which socinus hath put upon it ; either from the use of it among other authors , or any interpretation among the jews . but that there was in his time a current sense of it , which from the jews of alexandria , was dispersed by cerinthus in those parts where he lived . that for such a notion there was a very ancient tradition among the jews , which appears in the most ancient paraphrase of the law , which is read in their synagogues . and therefore according to all reasonable ways of interpreting scripture , the word cannot be understood in s. iohn , for one whose office it was to preach the word , but for that word which was with god before any thing was made , and by whom all things were made . 3. is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to give a new sense of several places of scripture from a matter of fact of which there is no proof , the better to avoid the proof of the divinity of the son of god ? this relates to the same beginning of s. iohn's gospel , the word was with god ; and several other places , making mention of his descent from heaven . the sense which these wise interpreters put upon them is , that christ was rapt up into heaven , before he entred upon his preaching . but where is this said ? what proof , what evidence , what credible witnesses of it , as there were of his transfiguration , resurrection and ascension ? nothing like any proof is offer'd for it ; but it is a wise way they think of avoiding a pressing difficulty . but they have a farther reach in it , viz. to shew how christ , being a mere man , should be qualified for so great an undertaking as the founding the christian church ; and therefore they say , that before our lord entred upon his office of the messias ▪ he was taken up to heaven to be instructed in the mind and will of god ( as moses was into the mount , exod. 24.1 , 2 , 12. ) and from thence descended to execute his office , and declare the said will of god. in another place , that when it is said , the word was with god ; that is , the lord christ was taken up into heaven to be instructed in all points relating to his ambassage or ministry . in a third , they say , that our saviour before he entred upon his ministry , ascended into heaven , as moses did into the mount , to be instructed in all things belonging to the gospel doctrine and polity which he was to establish and administer . now considering what sort of person they make christ to have been , viz. a mere man ; this was not ill thought of by them ; to suppose him taken up into heaven and there instructed in what he was to teach and to do , as moses was into the mount before he gave the law. but here lies a mighty difference ; when moses was called up into the mount , the people had publick notice given of it ; and he took aaron and his sons , and seventy elders of israel with him ; who saw the glory of god , v. 10. and all israel beheld the glory of the lord as a devouring fire on the top of the mount , v. 17. and after the 40 days were over , it is said , that moses came down from the mount , and the children of israel saw him with his face shining , exod. 34.40 . now if christ were taken up into heaven , as moses was into the mount , why was it not made publick at that time ? why no witnesses ? why no appearance of the glory to satisfie mankind of the truth of it ? and yet we find , that when he was transfigured on the holy mount , he took peter , and james , and john with him ; which circumstance is carefully mention'd by the evangelists . and peter , who was one of the witnesses then present , lays great weight upon this being done in the presence of witnesses . for we have not follow'd cunningly devised fables , when we made known unto you the power and coming of our lord iesus christ , but were eye-witnesses of his majesty . for he received from god the father , honour and glory , when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory — . and this voice which came from heaven we heard , when we were with him in the holy mount. now let any one compare this with the account which they give of christ's ascension into heaven . the transfiguration was intended only for a particular testimony of god's favour , before his suffering ; but even in that , he took care there should be very credible witnesses of it . and is it then possible to believe , there should be such an ascension of christ into heaven , for no less a purpose , than to be instructed in his ambassage , and to understand the mind and will of god as to his office ; and yet not one of the evangelists give any account of the circumstances of it ? they are very particular , as to his birth , fasting , baptism , preaching , miracles , sufferings , resurrection and ascension ; but not one word among them all as to the circumstances of this being taken up into heaven for so great a purpose ? if it were necessary to be believed , why is it not more plainly revealed ? why not the time and place mention'd in scripture , as well as of his fasting and temptation ? who can imagine it consistent with that sincerity and faithfulness of the writers of the new testament , to conceal so material a part of christ's instructions and qualifications ; and to wrap it up in such doubtfull expressions , that none ever found out this meaning till the days of socinus ? enjedinus mentions it only as a possible sense ; b●t he confesses , that the new testament saith nothing at all of it ; but , saith he , neither doth it mention other things before he entred upon his office. but this is a very weak evasion , for this was of greatest importance with respect to his office , more than his baptism , fasting and temptation ; yet these are very fully set down . and after all , our vnitarians themselves seem to mistrust their own interpretations ; for in their answer to my sermon , they say , it is not the doctrine of all the unitarians , and refer me to another account given of these texts in the history of the unitarians . there indeed i find grotius his interpretation ( as they call it ) prefer●d before that of socinus . but they say , grotius was socinian all over , and that his annotations are a compleat system of socinianism ; and his notes on the first of s. john are written artificially , but the sense at the bottom is theirs . in short , that the word , according to grotius , is not an eternal son of god , but the power a●d wisdom of god ; which abiding without measure on the lord christ , is therefore spoken of as a person and as one with christ , and he with that . and this notion of the word leads a man through all the difficulties of this chapter , with far more ease than any hitherto offer'd . but these wise interpreters have as much misinterpreted grotius , as they have done the scriptures , as i shall make it appear . ( 1. ) grotius on iohn 6.62 . interprets christ's ascension into heaven , of his corporal ascent thither after his resurrection , where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or word was before , of whom it is said , that the word was with god. but how comes christ to assume that to himself which belong'd to the word ? he answers , why not , since we call body and soul by the name of the man ? but if no more were meant by the word , but a divine attribute of wisdom and power , what colour could there be for the son of man taking that to himself , which belonged to an attribute of god ? what strange way of arguing would this have been ? what , and if ye shall see the son of man ascending where he was before ? for according to this sense , how comes a divine attribute to be called the son of man ? how could the son of man be said to ascend thither , where a divine attribute was before ? the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , must relate to him spoken of before ; and how could the power and wisdom of god be ever said to be the son of man ? but if we suppose a personal union of the word with the human nature in christ , then we have a very reasonable sense of the words ; for then no more is imply'd , but that christ , as consisting of both natures , should ascend thither , where the word was before ; when it is said , that the word was with god ; and so grotius understands it . ( 2. ) grotius doth not make the word in the beginning of s. john 's gospel to be a mere attribute of wisdom and power , but the eternal son of god. this i shall prove from his own words . 1. he asserts in his preface to s. iohn's gospel , that the chief cause of his writing was universally agreed to have been to prevent the spreading of that venom which had been then dispersed in the church ; which he understands of the heresies about christ and the word . now among these , the heresie of cerinthus was this very opinion which they fasten upon grotius ; viz. that the word was the divine wisdom and power inhabiting in the person of iesus , as i have shew'd before from themselves . and besides , grotius saith , that the other evangelists had only intimated the divine nature of christ from his miraculous conception , miracles , knowing mens hearts , perpetual presence , promise of the spirit , remission of sins , &c. but s. john , as the time required , attributed the name and power of god to him from the beginning . so that by the name and power of god , he means the same which he called the divine nature before . 2. he saith , that when it is said , the word was with god ; it ought to be understood as ignatius explains it , with the father ; what can this mean , unless he understood the word to be the eternal son of god ? and he quotes tertullian , saying , that he is the son of god , and god ex unitate substantiae ; and that there was a prolation of the word without separation . now what prolation can there be of a meer attribute ? how can that be said to be the son of god begotten of the father , without division , before all worlds , as he quotes it from iustin martyr ? and that he is the word , and god of god , from theophilus antiochenus ? and in the next verse , when it is said , the same was in the beginning with god ; it is repeated on purpose , saith he , that we might consider , that god is so to be understood , that a distinction is to be made between god , with whom he was , and the word who was with god ; so that the word doth not comprehend all that is god. but our wise interpreters put a ridiculous sense upon it ; as though all that grotius meant was , that gods attributes are the same with himself ( which although true in it self , is very impertinent to grotius his purpose ) and that the reason why he saith , that the word is not all that god is , was , because there were other attributes of god besides . but where doth grotius say any thing like this ? is this wise interpreting ? or honest and fair dealing ? for grotius immediately takes notice from thence of the difference of hypostases ; which he saith was taken from the platonists , but with a change of the sense . 3. when it is said , v. 3. that all things were made by him ; grotius understands it of the old creation , and of the son of god. for , he quotes a passage of barnabas , where he saith , the sun is the work of his hands ; and several passages of the fathers to prove , that the world and all things in it were created by him ; and he adds , that nothing but god himself is excepted . what say our wise interpreters to all this ? nothing at all to the purpose ; but they cite the english geneva translation ( when they pretend to give grotius his sense ) and add , that the word now begins to be spoken of as a person by the same figure of speech , that solomon saith , wisdom hath builded her house , &c. doth grotius say any thing like this ? and yet they say , let us hear grotius interpreting this sublime proeme of s. john 's gospel . but they leave out what he saith , and put in what he doth not say ; is not this interpreting like wise men ? 4. the vvord was made flesh , v. 14. i. e. say the vnitarians as from grotius ; it did abode on , and inhabit a humane person , the person of iesus christ ; and so was in appearance made flesh or man. but what saith grotius himself ? the word that he might bring us to god , shew'd himself in the weakness of humane nature ; and he quotes the words of s. paul for it , 1 tim. 3.16 . god was manifest in the flesh : and then produces several passages of the fathers to the same purpose . is not this a rare specimen of wise interpreting , and fair dealing with so considerable a person , and so well known , as grotius ? who , after all , in a letter to his intimate friend ger. i. vossius , declares that he owned the doctrine of the trinity ; both in his poems and his catechism ; after his reviewing them ; which epistle is printed before the last edition of his book about christ's satisfaction ; as an account to the world of his faith as to the trinity . and in the last edition of his poems , but little before his death , he gives a very different account of the son of god from what these vnitarians fasten upon him . and now let the world judge , how wisely they have interpreted both s. iohn , and his commentator grotius ? iv. is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to make our saviour's meaning to be expressly contrary to his words ? for when he said : before abraham was , i am ; they make the sense to be that really he was not , but only in gods decree , as any other man may be said to be . this place the late archbishop ( who was very far from being a socinian , however his memory hath been very unworthily reproached in that , as well as other respects , since his death ) urged against the socinians , saying , that the obvious sense of the words is , that he had a real existence , before abraham was actually in being , and that their interpretation about the decree is so very flat , that he can hardly abstain from saying it is ridiculous and the wise answer they give is , that the words cannot be true in any other sense , being spoken of one who was a son , and descendant of abraham . which is as ridiculous as the interpretation ; for it is to take it for granted , he was no more than a son of abraham . v. is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to say , that when our saviour said in his conference with the iews , i am the son of god , his chief meaning was , that he was the son of god in such a sense , as all the faithful are called gods children ? is not this doing great honour to our saviour ? especially when they say , that he never said of himself any higher thing than this , which is true of every good man , i am the son of god. and yet the iews accused him of blasphemy , for making himself the son of god ; and the high priest adjured him to tell , whether he were the christ the son of god. did they mean no more , but as any good man is ? but mr. selden saith , that by the son of god the jews meant , the word of god ( as he is called in the chaldee para●hrast ) which was all one , as to profess himself god : and our learned dr. pocock saith , that according to the sense of the ancient iews , the son of god spoken of , psal. 2. was the eternal son of god , of the same substance with the father . and by this we may understand s. peter's confession , thou art the christ , the son of the living god ; and nathanael's , thou art the son of god. but it is plain the iews in the conference thought he made himself god , by saying , i and my father are one. not one god , say our wise interpreters , but as friends are said to be one. and what must they think of our saviour the mean time , who knew the iews understood him quite otherwise , and would not undeceive them ? but they say , the jews put a malicious construction upon his words . how doth that appear ? do they think the iews had not heard what passed before in some former conferences , when they thought he had made himself equal with god ; and that he said , that all men should honour the son , even as they honoured the father ? these sayings no doubt stuck with them ; and therefore from them , they had reason to think that he meant something extraordinary , by his saying , i and my father are one. and if they were so wise in interpreting scripture , as they pretend , they would have considered , that if these things did not imply his being really the son of god , according to the old jewish notion , he would have severely checked any such mis-constructions of his meaning , and have plainly told them , he was but the son of man but s. paul's character of him doth plainly shew , that he was far from any thing like vanity or ostentation , although he was in the form of god , and thought it no robbery to be equal with god ; which must imply that he was very far from assuming any thing to himself ; which he must do in a very high measure , if he were not really the son of god , so as to be equal with god. the meaning whereof , say our wise interpreters , is , he did not rob god of his honour by arrogating to himself to be god , or equal with god. but what then do they think of these passages in his conferences with the iews ? was he not bound to undeceive them , when he knew they did so grossly mis-understand him , if he knew himself to be a meer man at the same time ? this can never go down with me , for they must either charge him with affecting divine honour , which is the highest degree of pride and vanity , or they must own him to be , as he was , the eternal son of god. vi. is this interpreting scripture like wise men , to deny divine worship to be given to our saviour when the scripture so plainly requires it ? when i had urged them in my sermon with the argument from divine worship being given to christ ; they do utterly deny it , and say , i may as well charge them with the blackest crimes . this i was not a little surprized at , knowing how warmly socinus had disputed for it . but that i might not misunderstand them , i look'd into other places in their late books , and from them i gather these things . 1. they make no question but some worship is due to the lord christ , but the question is concerning the kind or sort of worship . 2. they distinguish three sorts of worship . 1. civil worship from men to one another . 2. religious worship given on the account of a persons holiness , or relation to god ; which is more or less , according to their sanctity or nearer relation to god 3. divine worship which belongs only to god ; which consists in a resignation of our vnderstandings , wills and affections , and some peculiar acts of reverence and love towards him . the two former may be given to christ , they say , but not the last . from whence it follows , that they cannot according to their own principles , resign their vnderstandings , wills , and affections to christ ; because this is proper divine worship . are not these very good christians the mean while ? how can they believe sincerely , and heartily what he hath revealed , unless they resign their vnderstandings to him ; how can they love and esteem him , and place their happiness in him , if they cannot resign their wills and affections to him ? i think never any who pretended to be christians , durst venture to say such things before and all for fear they should be thought to give divine worship to christ. but they confess , that they are divided among themselves about the invocation of christ. those who are for it , say , that he may be the object of prayer , without making him god , or a person of god , and without ascribing to him the properties of the divine nature , omnipresence , omniscience , or omnipotence . those who deny it , they say , do only refuse it , because they suppose he hath forbidden it , which makes it a meer error . and in the new testament , they say , the charge is frequently renewed , that they are to worship god only . and as great writers as they have been these last seven years , they affirm that , they have wrote no book in that time in which they have not been careful to profess to all the world , that a like honour or vvorship ( much less the same ) is not to be given to christ as to god. and now i hope we understand their opinion right as to this matter . the question is , whether this be interpreting those scriptures which speak of the honour and worship due to christ , like wise men ? and for that i shall consider , 1. that herein they are gone off from the opinion of socinus and his followers , as to the sense of scripture in those places . 2. that they have done it in such a way , as will justifie the pagan and popish idolatry ; and therefore have not interpreted scripture like wise men. 1. that they are gone off from the opinion of socinus and his followers , who did allow divine worship to christ. this appears by the disputes he had with franciscus davidis and christianus francken about it . the former was about the sense of scripture . socinus produced all those places which mention the invocation of christ , and all those wherein s. paul saith , the grace of our lord iesus christ be with you all ; and the lord iesus christ direct our way , &c. and all those wherein a divine power and authority is given to christ as head of the church , for the support of the faith and hope of all those who believe in him in order to salvation . and this socinus truly judged to be proper divine worship . georg. blandrata was unsatisfied , that socinus did not say enough to prove the necessity of the invocation of christ , which he said he could do from his priesthood and his power , from the examples of the apostles , and the very nature of adoration . and blandrata was a man of great authority among the vnitarians ; and he thought socinus ought to assert the necessity of it ; or else he would do injury both to christ and to his cause . in the dispute with francken , socinus went upon this ground , that divine authority was a sufficient ground for divine worship , although there were not those essential attributes of omnisciency and omnipotency . but i observe , that socinus did not look on this as a matter of liberty , as our vnitarians now seem to do ; for in the preface to the former dispute , he calls the error of denying the invocation of christ , not , as they now do , a simple error or a mere mistake ; but a most filthy and pernicious error , an error that leads to iudaism , and is in effect the denying of christ ; and in the latter dispute he saith , that it tends to epicurism and atheism . and smalcius saith , that they are no christians who refuse giving divine worship to christ. 2. is it like wise men , to go upon such grounds as will justifie both pagan and popish idolatry ? this they have been charged with , and we shall see what wise men they are , by the defences they make for themselves . 1. as to pagan idolatry , they say , 1. they had no divine command for such a worship . this was well thought of , when they confess , that some among themselves deny that there is any command for invocating christ , and therefore they must charge all those who do it with idolatry . but this is no very wise notion of idolatry , which depends upon the nature of the worship , and not the meer positive will of god. 2. they set up the creatures more than the creator , as s. paul saith . s. paul doth not think them such fools , that they took the creatures to be above the creator , which was impossible , while they owned one to be the creator and the other the creatures ; but that they g●ve such acts of worship to them , as belonged only to the creator , and exceeded in the worship of them those bounds which ought to be between them . 3. they set up an infinite number of gods who had been mere men. this is , as if the question were only , whether one , or a great many were to have such worship given them : as if it were a dispute about a monarchy or a common-wealth of gods. but if it be lawfull to give divine worship to one creature , it is to a hundred . 4. their worship was terminated on them , and so they made true gods of men. suppose they asserted one supreme god , and made the rest subordinate to him , and appointed by him to be the immediate directors of humane affairs . i desire to know , whether the adoration of such were idolatry or not ? if it were , they cannot be excused who give adoration to christ , while they esteem him a mere creature ; if not , all the wiser pagans must be excused . 2. as to the papists , the difference they make , is not like wise interpreters of scripture ; for they say , 1. they have no text of scripture , which commands them to worship s. peter , s. paul and s. francis. so some among them say , there is none for the invocation of christ , and with them the case is parallel . but if socinus his principle be true , that communicated excellency is a sufficient foundation for worship , because it is relative to the giver , then the papists must be justified in all their relative acts of worship without any text to command it . 2. they exceed the bounds of honour and respect due to glorified saints . but who is to set these bounds but themselves in all acts of relative worship , because they depend upon the intention of the persons ? and they hold the very same things concerning communicated knowledge and power from god , which our vnitarians make use of to justifie their notion of the invocation of christ. vii . is this interpreting scripture like wise men , to turn s. paul's words , of whom as concerning the flesh christ came , who is over all , god blessed for ever , into a thanksgiving to god for the exaltation of christ , i. e. god who is over all be blessed for ever . but what reason do they give for such a forced and unusual sense , besides the avoiding the difficulty of having the name of god given here to christ ? a very substantial one . if the words had been intended of christ , it would have been in the greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which they have taken up from erasmus and curcellaeus . but beza , who understood greek as well as either , ( and curcellaeus owned him for his master in that tongue ) saith , he could not sufficiently wonder at this criticism of erasmus , and thinks it a violent and far-fetched interpretation , and not agreeable to the greek idiom , and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same there with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . and which may signifie more to our vnitarians , one of the learnedst men they have had among them , utterly disowns this interpretation , and saith , that the whole verse belongs to christ. but if that will not do , they have another fetch in the case , viz. that it is very probable that the word god was not originally in the text. how doth this appear to be very probable ? of that , we have this account : grotius observes , that the greek copies , used by the author of the syriac , had not the word god , and that erasmus had noted , that the copies of s. cyprian , s. hilary and s. chrysostom had only blessed over all , or above all , without the word god ; upon which he charges his adversary with no less than impiety in concealing this ; and calls it , cheating his reader . but how if all this prove a gross mistake in him ; unless it be only , that grotius and erasmus come in for their shares . it 's true , that grotius saith , that the word god was left out in the syriac version . but f. simon , whose authority they sometimes magnifie as to critical learning , saith plainly , that grotius was mistaken , and that the word god is in all the old copies , and in all the old versions . and upon his bringing erasmus to prove that it was not in s. cyprian , s. hilary , and s. chrysostome , he cries out , where is sincerity ? erasmus had met with one faulty edition which had it not , but he saith , all the rest of the mss. have it . and the learned oxford annotators , both on s. cyprian , and the greek testament compar'd with mss. ( which excellent work we hope will shortly appear more publickly ) declare , that they found it in all the mss. they could meet with ; and even erasmus himself saith , that the omission in s. hilary might be only by the negligence of the transcribers ; and so it appears by the late edition out of the best mss. where the words are , ex quibus christus qui est super omnia deus . and for s. chrysostom , all that is said , is , that it doth not appear that he read it , but he thinks it might be added afterwards . but what a sort of proof is this against the general consent of mss. for s. chrysostom doth not say he thought so . erasmus very plainly saith , that it is clearer than the sun , that christ is called god in other places of scripture ; but grotius can by no means be excused , nor those that rely upon him as to this place . viii . is this interpreting scripture like wise men , to take advantage of all omissions in copies , when those which are entire ought to be preferr'd ? this i mention for the sake of another noted place , 1 tim. 3.16 . god was manifest in the flesh. here our wise interpreters triumph unreasonably ; viz for , they say , it appears by the syriac , latin , aethiopick , armenian , arabick , and most ancient greek bibles , that the word god was not originally in this text but added to it . but the arabick in all the polyglotts hath god in ; the syriac and aethiopick , if we believe their versions , read it in the masculine gender , and therefore in the king of spain's bible , guido fabricius boderianus puts in deus . as to the armenian , i have nothing to say , but what f. simon tells us from vscan an armenian bishop ; that there was great variety in their copies , and that their first translation was out of syriac and not out of greek . and the main point is , as to the old greek copies ; and we are assured , that there is but one , viz. the clermont copy which leaves out god , but that it is in the alexandrian , the vatican and all others ; and curcellaeus mentions no more than the clermont copy . it is therefore necessary to examine in this place , the authority of this clermont copy , ( as it is called ) whose reading is set up against all other ancient greek copies . beza affirms it with great confidence , that all the greek copies have god with one consent . but how comes he to take no notice of this difference of the clermont copy ? for that he had a sight of that part of it , which hath the epistles of s. paul , appears by his notes in which he refers to it . for he mentions it three times in his notes on rom. 1. v. 13.29.32 . and in one he calls it a very ancient manuscript written in large letters . what should make beza pass it over here ? it seems by morinus that in the clermont copy , there was a correction made by another hand ; which is put into the various lections of the polyglott in morinus his words . but how doth it appear , that beza's clermont copy was the very same which morinus had ? morinus saith , he had it from the f. f. puteani ; ( and is the same i suppose with that in the king of france's library ; of which they were then the keepers ) but morinus intimates that it was an old copy , which fell into their hands ; and so might come into the french king's library , when they gave their own manuscripts to it . this seems to have been the same which p. pithaeus speaks of ; for the description exactly agrees with it ; but pithaeus , who was a person of great integrity and learning , affirms , that this volume of the epistles in great letters came out of the monastery of corbey ; and so it could not be the clermont copy which beza had . and i shall make it appear from the very places mention'd by morinus , that beza's copy did differ from that which morinus perused , as rom. 4.9 . morinus his copy had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; beza takes notice of it only in the vulgar latin ; which he would never have done , if it had been in the clermont copy , rom 5.6 . for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 morinus reads in that copy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and saith it is the true reading : but beza condemns it , and never intimates that his copy had it , rom. 7.25 . morinus saith , the reading of his copy is the true , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : beza saith , it is against all the greek copies but one , and that hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; whether beza were mistaken as to other copies is not our business to enquire ; but if the reading had been in his copy as morinus found it ; he could never have said , that but one copy had that different reading . rom. 8.13 , morinus his copy had it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; beza takes no notice of any difference . rom. 10.8 , morinus reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . beza saith , it is not in the greek copies ; and he had then the clermont by him : but it is both in that of the french king's library , and of s. germain's ; which agree with each other , where beza's copy differs ; and beza upon rom. 7.6 . and 11.6 observes , that his clermont copy differs from the rest ; by which we see how careful he was to observe the variuos readings in it ; and so upon rom. 15.24 , 33 , 16 , 27. rom. 14.6 . beza observes , that the vulgar latine leaves out part of the verse , but that it is found in all the greek copies ; here morinus charges beza with negligence , or dis-ingenuity ; because it was left out in the clermont copy ; but how doth he prove he had the same copy ? he saith indeed , that the ancient copy , which he had was lent to beza ; but he tells not by whom , nor in whose possession it was afterwards . but if beza were a man of any ordinary care or honesty , he would never have concealed those things , which morinus found in it . 1 cor. 6.20 , beza saith , that those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are in all the greek copies ; morinus saith , that they were wanting in that which he made use of . it 's true , they are wanting in the alexandrian , and some others ; but in none that beza had the sight of ▪ if he may be believed . these are sufficient to shew , that there is no good proof , that the ●opy which beza had was the same which morinus borrow'd ; and therefore his authority is not to be slighted in this matter , when he affirms , that all the greek copies agreed in reading god manifest in the flesh ; and i cannot imagine beza so intolerably careless as he must have been , if morinus his copy and beza's were the same . but whether it were in beza's copy or not , it 's certain , they say , that it is not in that ancient manuscript , which is called the clermont copy ; which is affirmed by morinus , and taken for granted by others , therefore we must enquire a little farther into the authority of this ancient copy . it appears by those who have view'd and considered them , that there are two very ancient copies of s. paul's epistles , so exactly agreeing , that one is supposed to be the transcript of the other ; one is in the king's library , the other in the monastery of s. germains . which mabillon saith is a thousand years old . these two copies are in effect but one , agreeing so much where they differ from others ; and having the old latin version opposite to the greek . monsieur arnauld had so bad an opinion of both parts of this clermont copy , ( as it is called ) that he charges it with manifest forgery , and imposture ; inserting things into the text without ground . f. simon who defends them cannot deny several things to be inserted , but he saith , it was through carelessness and not design . but he confesses , that those who transcribed both those ancient copies of s. paul 's epistles did not understand greek , and hardly latin . and now let us consider , of what just authority this different reading of the clermont copy ought to be against the consent of all other ancient copies . we find some good rules laid down by the roman criticks , when they had a design under vrban 8th . to compare the greek text of the new testament , with their ancient manuscripts in the vatican , and elewhere , and to publish an exact edition of it ( which collation was preserved in the barberin library , and from thence published by pet. possinus . ) and the main rules as to the various lections of manuscripts were these , 1. that the text was not to be alter'd but a concurrence of all , or the greatest part of the manuscripts . 2. that if one manuscript agreed with the vulgar latin , the text was not to be alter'd , but the difference to be set down at the end of the chapter . but it is observable in that collation of twenty two manuscripts , there is no one copy produced , wherein there is any variety as to this place . i know they had not twenty two manuscripts of s. paul's epistles , ( they mention but eight ancient manuscripts ) but they found no difference in those they had . and now i leave any reasonable man to judge , whether this clermont copy ought to be relied upon in this matter . but i have something more to say about the greek copies . 1. that god is in the complutensian polyglott , which was the first of the kind , and carried on by the wonderful care and expence of that truly grea● man cardinal ximenes , who spared for no cost or pains in procuring the best ancient copies both hebrew and greek ; and the fittest men to judge of both languages . and in pursuit of this noble design , he had the best vatican manuscripts sent to him ( as is expressed in the epistle before his greek testament , ) and what others he could get out of other places , among which he had the codex britannicus mention'd by erasmus . but after all these copies made use of by the editors , there is no intimation of any variety as to this place ; although the vulgar latin be there as it was . but erasmus mentions the great consent of the old copies as to the vulgar latin , and whence should that come , but from a variety in the old greek copies . to that i answer , 2. that the greek copies , where they were best understood had no variety in them ; i. e. among the greeks themselves . as appears by gregory nyssen , s. chrysostom , theodoret , oecumenius and theophylact. but doth not monsieur amelote say , that the marquiss of velez had sixteen old manuscripts , out of which he gathered various readings , and he reads it o! i cannot but observe , how he commends fabricius and walton , for rendring the syriac version according to the vulgar latin ; but that will appear to be false , to any one that looks into them ; the former is mentioned already ; and the latter translates it , quod manifestatus sit in carne . but as to the marquiss of velez his copies , there is a secret in it , which ought to be understood , and is discover'd by mariana . he confesses , he had so may manuscripts , eight of them out of the escurial , but that he never set down whence he had his readings . and in another place , he ingenuously confesses , that his design was to justifie the vulgar latin ; and therefore collected readings on purpose , and he suspects some , out of such greek copies , as after the council of florence were made comfortable to the latin . which readings were published by la cerda , whose authority amelote follows . and now what reason can there be , that any such late copies should be prefer'd before those which were used by the greek fathers ? 3. that the latin fathers did not concern themselves about changing their version , because they understood it still to relate to the person of christ. so do s. ierom , leo , hilary , fulgentius , and others . as to the objections about liberatus , macedonius and hincmarus , i refer them to the learned oxford annotations . ix . it is not wisely done of these interpreters , to charge our church so much for retaining a verse in s. iohn's first epistle , when they had so good authority to do it ? the verse is , there are three that bear record in heaven , the father , son , and holy ghost , &c. from hence they charge us with corrupted copies and false translations ; as an instance of the former , they produce this text , which they say , was not originally in the bible , but is added to it , and is not found in the most ancient copies of the greek , nor in the syriac , arabick , ethiopick , or armenian bibles , nor in the most ancient latin bibles . notwithstanding all which , i hope to be able to shew , that our church had reason to retain it . for which end we are to consider these things ; 1. that erasmus first began to raise any scruple about it . for , however it might not be in some mss. which were not look'd into , this verse was constantly and solemnly read as a part of scripture both in the greek and latin churches , as mr. selden confesses , and that it was in wickliff's bible . so that here was a general consent of the eastern and western churches for the receiving it ; and although there might be a variety in the copies , yet there was none in the publick service , and no objections against it that we find . but erasmus his authority sway'd so much here , that in the bibles in the time of h. 8. and e. 6. it was retained in a different letter . as in tyndell's bible printed by the king's printer , a. d. 1540. and in the church bible of king e. 6. in both which they are read , but not in the same character . yet erasmus his authority was not great enough to cast it out , if he had a mind to have done it . which doth not appear , for he saith himself , that finding it in the codex britannicus , as he calls it , he restored it in his translation as well as the greek testament , out of which he had expunged it befo●e in two editions . and the complutensian bible coming out with it , added greater authority to the keeping of it in , and so it was preserved in the greek testaments of hervagius , plautin and r. stephens and others , after the mss. had been more diligently searched . morinus saith , it was in seven of rob. stephens his mss. but f. simon will not allow that it was in any but the complutensian , which is a strange piece of boldness in him . for beza saith , he had the use of them all from him ; and h. stephens let him have his father's copy compared with 25 mss. and he affirms , that he found it in several of r. stephens his old mss. besides the codex britannicus and the complutensian copy , and therefore he concludes , that it ought to be retained . ( and so it was , after these copies were come abroad in the bishop's bible , under queen elizabeth , without any distinction of character , as likewise in our last translation . ) and it is observable , that amelote affirms , that he found it in the most ancient greek copy in the vatican library ; but the roman criticks confess , it was not in their 8 mss. yet they thought it fit to be retained from the common greek copies , and the testimonies of the fathers agreeing with the vulgar latin. 2. this verse was in the copies of the african churches from s. cyprian's time , as appears by the testimonies of s. cyprian , fulgentius , facundus , victor vitensis , and vigilius tapsensis , which are produced by others . f. simon hath a bold conjecture , of which he is not sparing , that victor vitensis is the first who produced it as s. john 's saying ; and that it was s. cyprian 's own assertion and not made use of by him as a testimony of scripture . but they who can say such things as these , are not much to be trusted . for s. cyprian's words are , speaking of s. iohn before , et iterum de patre & filio scriptum est , & hi tres unum sunt . and it was not victor vitensis , but the african bishops and eugenius in the head of them , who made that address to huneric , wherein they say , that it is clearer than light , that father , son and holy ghost are one god , and prove it by the testimony of s. john. tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in caelo , pater , verbum & spiritus sanctus , & hi tres unum sunt . 3. in the former testimony , the authority of the vulgar latin was made use of : and why , is it rejected here ? when morinus confesses there is no variety in the copies of it . vulgata versio hunc versum constanter habet . and he observes , that those of the fathers , who seem to omit it ( as s. augustin against maximinus ) did not follow the old latin version . lucas brugensis , saith only , that in 35 old copies , they found it wanting but in five . as to s. ierom's prologue , i am not concerned to defend it ; but erasmus thought it had too much of s. jerom in it , and others think it hath too little . f. simon confesses , that p. pithaeus and mabillon think it was s. ierom's , and that it was in the mss. but i conclude with saying , that whoever was the author , at the time when it was written , the greek copies had this verse , or else he was a notorious impostor . x. the next thing i shall ask these wise interpreters of scripture , is , whether , when the scripture so often affirms , that the world was made by the son , and that all things were created by him in heaven and in earth , it be reasonable to understand them of creating nothing ? for after all their shifts and evasions it comes to nothing at last . but that we may see , how much they are confounded with these places , we may observe , 1. they sometimes say , that where the creation of all things is spoken of , it is not meant of christ but of god. for in the answer they give to the place of the epistle to the colossians , they have these words : for by him all things were created , are not spoken of christ , but of god : the sense of the whole context is this , the lord christ is the most perfect image of the invisible god , the first born from the dead of every creature ; for , o colossians , by him , even by the invisible god were all things created ; they were not from all eternity , nor rose from the concourse of atoms , but all of them , whether things in heaven , or things in earth ; whether thrones , or dominions , or principalities , or powers , are creatures , and were by god created , who is before them all , and by him they all consist . this is a very fair concession , that of whomsoever these words are spoken he must be god. 2. but in the defence of this very book they go about to prove , that the creation of the world is not meant by these words . is not this interpreting like wise men indeed ? and they tell us , they cannot but wonder , that men should attribute the old or first creation to christ. wise men do not use to wonder at plain things . for what is the old or first creation , but the making the world , and creating all things in heaven and earth ? and these things are attribu●ed to the word , to the son to christ. but say they , the scripture does never say in express words ▪ that christ hath created the heaven and the earth . what would these wise interpreters have ? doth not by whom all things were created in heaven and earth imply , that heaven and earth were created by him ? but they have a notable observation from the language of the new testament , viz that christ is never said to have created the heaven , the earth , and the sea , and all that therein is ; but we are apt to think , that creating all things takes in ●he sea too , and that in the scripture language heaven and earth are the same with the world , and i hope the world takes in the sea ; and the world is said to be made by him , and do not all things take in all ? no , say they , all things are limited to all thrones , principalities and powers , visible and invisible . then , however the making of these is attributed to christ. and if he made all powers , visible and invisible , he must be god. not so neither . what then is the meaning of the words , by him were all things created that are in heaven and in earth , visible and invisible ; whether they be thrones , or dominions , or principalities , or powers , all things were created by him and for him ? surely then , these dominions and powers were created by him . no , say they , that which we render created , ought to be rendred , modelled , disposed , or reformed into a new order . were ever wise men driven to such miserable shifts ? one while these words are very strong and good proof of the creation of the world against atheists and epicureans , and by and by they prove nothing of all this , but only a new modelling of some things called dominions and powers . do they hope ever to convince men at this rate of wise interpreting ? well , but what is this creating or disposing things into a new order ? and who are these dominions and powers ? they answer , men and angels . how are the angels created by him and for him ? did he die to reform them , as well as mankind ? no , but they are put under him . and so they were created by him , that is , they were not created by him , but only made subject to him . but who made them subject to him ? the man christ iesus ? no , god appointed him to be the lord of every creature . then they were not created by christ , but by god ; but the apostle saith , they were created by christ. but god made him head of the church , and as head of the body he rules over all . this we do not at all question ; but how this comes to be creating dominions and powers , visible and invisible . did god make the earth and all the living creatures in it , when he made man lord over them ? or rather was man said to create them , because he was made their head ? if this be their interpreting scripture like wise men , i shall be content with a less measure of understanding , and thank god for it . xi . lastly , is this to interpret scripture like wise men , to leave the form of baptism doubtful , whether it were not inserted into s. matthew's gospel ; or to understand it in another sense than the christian church hath done from the apostles times ? i say first , leave it doubtful , because they say , that learned criticks have given very strong reasons why they believe these words . in the name of the father , and of the son , and of the holy ghost , were not spoke by our saviour , but have been added to the gospel of s. matthew , from the common form and practise of the church . why are these strong reasons of learned criticks mentioned , but to raise doubts in peoples minds about them ? but they declare afterwards against them . not too much of that . for they say , only , that they are not without their weight , but they have observed several things that make them think , that this text is a genuine part of scripture . very wisely and discreetly spoken ! the reasons are strong and weighty ; but they think otherwise . i wish they had told the world , who these learned criticks were ; lest it should be suspected that they were their own inventions . but i find a certain nameless socinian was the author of them ; and his words are produced by sandius ( a person highly commended by them for his industry and learning , but as much condemned by others , for want of skill or ingenuity . ) the reason of writing these reasons sandius freely confesses was , because this place clearly proved a trinity of persons against the socinians . but what are these very strong and weighty reasons ? for it is great pity , but they should be known . in the first place he observes , that s. matthew's gospel was written in hebrew , and the original he saith is lost ; and he suspects that either s. jerom was himself the translator into greek and latin ( who was a corrupter of scripture , and origen ) or some unknow person : from whence it follows , that our gospel of s. matthew is not of such authority , that an article of such moment should depend upon it . is not this a very strong and weighty reason ? must not this be a very learned critick who could mention s. ierom , as translator of s. matthews gospel into greek ? but then one would think this interpreter might have been wise enough to have added this of himself . no ; he dares not say that , but that it was added by transcribers . but whence or how ? to that he saith , that they seem to be taken out of the gospel according to the egyptians . this is great news indeed . but comes it from a good hand ? yes , from epiphanius . and what saith he to this purpose ? he saith , that the sabellians made use of the counterfeit egyptian gospel , and there it was declared that father , son and holy ghost were the same . and what then ? doth he say they borrowed the form of baptism from thence ? nothing like it . but on the contrary , epiphanius urges this very form in that place against the sabellians : and quotes s. matthew's authority for it . but this worthy author produces other reasons , which sandius himself laughs at , and despises ? and therefore i pass them over . the most material seems to be if it hold , that the most ancient writers on s. matthew take no notice of them , and he mentions origen , hilary , and s. chrysostom , but these negative arguments sandius thinks of no force . origen and s. chrysostom , he saith , reach not that chapter ; the opus imperfectum , which was none of his , doth not ; but his own commentaries do , and there he not only mentions the form , but takes notice of the compendious doctrine delivered by it , which can be nothing else but that of the trinity . in the greek catena on s. matthew there is more mentioned , viz. that christ had not then first his power given him ; for he was with god before , and was himself by nature god. and there gregory nazianzen saith , the form of baptism was in the name of the holy trinity ; and he there speaks more fully . remember , saith he , the faith into which thou wert baptized . into the father ? that is well , but that is no farther than the jews go ( for they own one god , and one person . ) into the son ? that is beyound them , but not yet perfect . into the holy ghost ? yes , saith he , this is perfect baptism . but what is the common name of these three , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . plainly , that of god. but this learned critick observes , that hilary in some copies takes no notice of this form. that is truly observed , for the very conclusion is not hilary's , but taken out of s. ierom ; but if he had look'd into hilary's works , he would have found the form of baptism owned , and asserted by him . for he not only sets it down as the form of faith , as well as our baptism appointed by christ ; but argues from it , against the sabellians and ebionites , as well as others . thus we see how very strong and weighty the arguments of this learned critick were . chap. ix . the general sense of the christian church , proved from the form of baptism , as it was understood in the first ages . but our vnitarians pretend , that they are satisfied , that the form of baptism is found in all copies , and all the ancient translations ; and that it was used before the council of nice , as appears by several places of tertullian . but how then ? there are two things stick with them . ( 1. ) that the ante-nicene fathers do not alledge it to prove the divinity of the son , or holy ghost . ( 2. ) that the form of words here used , doth not prove the doctrine of the trinity . both which must be strictly examined . 1. as to the former . it cannot but seem strange to any one conversant in the writings of those fathers ; when s. cyprian saith expressly , that the form of baptism is prescribed by christ , that it should be in plenâ & aduna●â trinitate : i. e. in the full confession of the holy trinity ; and therefore , he denied the baptism of the marcionites , because the faith of the trinity was not sincere among them , as appears at large in that epistle . and this , as far as i can find , was the general sense of the ante-nicene fathers , as well as others . and it is no improbable opinion of erasmus , and vossius , two learned criticks indeed , that the most ancient creed went no further than the form of baptism , viz. to believe in the father , son and holy ghost ; and the other articles were added as heresies gave occasion . s. ierom saith , that in the traditional creed , which they received from the apostles , the main article was , the confession of the trinity ; to which he joyns the vnity of the church , and resurrection of the flesh ; and then adds , that herein is contained , omne christiani dogmatis sacramentum , the whole faith into which christians were baptized . and he saith , it was the custom among them to instruct those who were to be baptized for forty days in the doctrine of the holy trinity . so that there was then no question but the form of baptism had a particular respect to ●t ; and therefore , so much weight is laid upon the use of it , as well by the ante-nicene fathers , as others . for , tertullian saith , that the form of baptism was prescribed by our saviour himself as a law to his church . s. cyprian to the same purpose , that he commanded it to be used s. augustin calls them , the words of the gospel , without which there is no baptism . the reason given by s. ambrose is , because the faith of the trinity is in this form. but how if any one person were left out ? he thinks , that if the rest be not denied , the baptism is good ; but otherwise , vacuum est omne mysterium , the whole baptism is void . so that the faith of the trinity was that which was required in order to true baptism , more than the bare form of words . if there were no reason to question the former , s. ambrose seems of opinion that the baptism was good , although every person were not named , and therein he was followed by beda , hugo de sancto victore , peter lombard and others . and s basil in the greek church , asserted that baptism in the name of the holy ghost was sufficient , because he is hereby owned to be of equal dignity with the father and son ; but it is still supposing that the whole and undivided trinity be not denied . and he elsewhere saith , that baptizing in the name of the father , son and holy ghost is a most solemn profession of the trinity in vnity , because they are all joyned together in this publick act of devotion . but others thought that the baptism was not good , unless every person were named ; which opinion generally obtained both in the greek and latin church . and the late editors of s. ambrose observe , that in other places he makes the whole form of words necessary as well as the faith in the holy trinity . the baptism of the eunomians was rejected , because they alter'd the form and the faith too , saying , that the father was uncreate , the son created by the father , and the holy ghost created by the son. the baptism of the samosatenians was rejected by the council of nice . s. augustin thinks it was because they had not the right form , but the true reason was , they rejected the doctrine of the trinity . and so the council of arles i. doth in express words refuse their baptism who refused to own that doctrine . that council was held a. d. 314. and therefore bellarmin , and others after him , are very much mistaken , when they interpret this canon of the arians , concerning whose baptism there could be no dispute till many years after . but this canon is de afris ; among whom the custom of baptizing prevailed ; but this council propounds an expedient as most agreeable to the general sense of the christian church , viz. that if any relinquished their heresie and came back to the church , they should ask them the creed , and if they found that they were baptized in the name of the father , son and holy ghost , they should have only imposition of hands , but if they did not confess the trinity , their baptism was declared void . now this i look on as an impregnable testimony of the sense of the ante-nicene fathers , viz. that they did not allow that baptism which was not in the name of the father , son and holy ghost ; or ( which they understood to be the same ) in the confession of the faith of the trinity . how then can our vnitarians pretend , that the ante-nicene fathers did not alledge the form of baptism to prove the trinity ? for the words are , if they do n●t answer to this trinity let them be baptized , saith this plenary cou●cil , as s. augustin often calls it . what trinity do they mean ? of mere names or cyphers , or of one god and two creatures joyned in the same form of words , as our vnitarians understand it ? but they affirm , that the ancients of 400 years do not insist on this text of s. matthew to prove the divinity or personality of the son or spirit . therefore to give a clear account of this matter , i shall prove , that the ante-nicene fathers did understand these words , so as not to be taken , either for mere names , or for creatures joyned with god ; but that they did maintain the divinity of the son and holy ghost , from the general sense , in which these words were taken among them . and this i shall do from these arguments ; 1. that those who took them in another sense , were opposed and condemned by the christian church . 2. that the christian church did own this sense in publick acts of divine worship as well as private . 3. that it was owned and defended by those who appeared for the christian faith against infidels . and i do not know any better means than these , to prove such a matter of fact as this . 1. the sense of the christian church may be known by its behaviour towards those , who took these words only for different names or appearances of one person . and of this we have full evidence , as to praxeas , noëtus and sabellius , all long before the council of nice . praxeas was the first , at least in the western church , who made father , son and holy ghost , to be only several names of the same person , and he was with great warmth and vigor opposed by tertullian , who charges him with introducing a new opinion into the church , as will presently appear . and his testimony is the more considerable , because our vnitarians confess , that he lived 120 years before the nicene council , and that he particularly insists upon the form of baptism against praxeas . but to what purpose ? was not his whole design in that book to prove three distinct persons of father , son and holy ghost , and yet but one god ? doth he not say expresly , that christ commanded that his disciples should baptize into the father , son and holy ghost , not into one of them ; ad singula nomina in personas singulas tingimur . in baptism we are dipped once at every name , to shew that we are baptized into three persons . it is certain then , that tertullian could not mistake the sense of the church so grosly , as to take three persons to be only three several names . he grants to praxeas , that father , son and holy ghost are one , but how ? per unitatem substantiae , because there is but one divine essence : but yet he saith , there are three , not with respect to essential attributes , for so they are unius substantiae , & unius status , & unius potestatis , quia unus deus . and therefore the difference can be only as to personal properties and distinct capacities , which he calls gradus , forma , species , not merely as to internal relations , but as to external dispensations , which he calls their oeconomy . for his great business is to prove against praxeas , that the son and holy ghost had those things attributed to them in scripture , which could not be attributed to the father . for praxeas asserted , that the father suffer'd ; and thence his followers were called patripassians and monarchici , i. e. vnitarians . the main ground which praxeas went upon , was the vnity of the godhead , so often mention'd in scripture , from hence tertullian saith , that he took advantage of the weakness of the common sort of christians , and represented to them , that whereas the doctrine of christ made but one god , those who held the trinity according to the form of baptism , must make more gods than one . tertullian answers , that they held a monarchy , i. e. unicum imperium , one supreme godhead , and a supreme power may be lodged in distinct persons and administred in several manners ; that nothing overthrew the divine monarchy , but a different power and authority , which they did by no means assert . they held a son , but of the substance of the father , and a holy ghost from the father by the son : he still keeps to the distinction of persons , and the vnity of substance . and he utterly denies any division of essences or separate substances ; for therein , he saith , lay the heresie of valentinus , in making a prolation of a separate being . but although he saith , the gospel hath declared to us , that the father is god , the son god , and the holy ghost god , yet we are taught that there is still but one god : redactum est jam nomen dei & domini in unione , c. 13. whereby the christians are distinguished from the heathens who had many gods this is the force of what tertullian saith upon this matter . and what say our vnitarians to it ? they cannot deny that he was an ante-nicene father ; and it is plain that he did understand the form of baptism so as to imply a trinity of persons in an vnity of essence : to which they give no answer . but i find three things objected against tertullian by their friends : 1. that tertullian brought this doctrine into the church from montanus , whose disciple he then was . so schlichtingius in his preface against meisner , grants , that he was very near the apostolical times , and by his wit and learning promoted this new doctrine about the trinity , especially in his book against praxeas . but how doth it appear , that he brought in any new doctrine ? yes , saith schlichtingius , he confesses , that he was more instructed by the paraclete . but if he had dealt ingenuously , he would have owned that in that very place , he confesses , he was always of that opinion , although more fully instructed by the paraclete ? this only shews that montanus himself innovated nothing in this matter , but endeavoured to improve it . and it is possible , that tertullian might borrow his similitudes and illustrations from him , which have added no ●●rength to it . but as to the main of the doctrine he saith , it came from the rule of faith delivered by the apostles , before praxeas , or any hereticks his predecessors . which shews , that those who rejected this doctrine were always esteemed hereticks in the christian church . and this is a very early testimony of the antiquity and general reception of it , because as one was received the other was rejected , so that the assertors of it were accounted hereticks . and the sense of the church is much better known by such publick acts , than by mere particular testimonies of the learned men of those times . for when they deliver the sense of the church in such publick acts , all persons are judges of the truth and falshood of them at the time when they are deliver●d ; and the nearer they came to the apostolical times , the greater is the strength of their evidence ; this i ground on tertullian's appealing to the ancient rule of faith , which was universally known and received in the christian church , and that such persons were look'd on as hereticks who differ'd from it . which being so very near the apostles times , it 's hardly possible to suppose , that the whole christian church should be mistaken as to what they received as the rule of faith , which was deliver'd and explained at baptism , and therefore the general sense of the form of baptism must be understood by all who were admitted to it . so that the members of the christian church cannot be supposed better acquainted with any thing than the doctrine they were baptized into . here then we have a concurrence of several publick acts of the church . 1. the form of baptism . 2. the rule of faith relating to that form , and explained at baptism . 3. the churches rejecting those as hereticks who differ'd from it : which tertullian applies to those who rejected the trinity . and praxeas his doctrine was then condemned , not by a particular sentence , but by the general sense of the church at that time . for optatus milevitanus reckons him among the condemned hereticks , and joyns him with marcian and valentinus , as well as sabellius , who follow'd him in the same heresie . how was this possible , if praxeas deliver'd the true doctrine , and tertullian brought in a new opinion as schlichtingius fansies . tertullian was at that time a declared montanist ; and if he had introduc'd a new doctrine about the trinity , can we imagine those would have been silent about it , who were sharp enough upon tertullian for the sake of his paraclete ? some of the followers of montanus afterwards fell into the same opinions with praxeas , as theodoret tells us , and tertullian saith as much of those cataphrygians who follow'd aeschines : but these montanists are distinguished from the rest . and rigaltius observes , that tertullian follow'd montanus chiefly in what related to discipline , and that himself was not so corrupted in point of doctrine as some of his followers were . 2. it 's objected , that tertullian's doctrine is inconsistent with the doctrine of the trinity ; for he denies the eternal generation of the son ; and only asserts an emission of him before the creation . but my business is not to justifie all tertullian's expressions or similitudes ; for men of wit and fancy love to go out of the road , and sometimes involve things more by attempts to explain them ; but i keep only to that which he saith , was the faith of the church from the beginning ; and i see no reason to call in question his fidelity in reporting , however he might be unhappy in his explications . 3. tertullian himself saith , schlichtingius , in other places , where he speaks of the rule of faith , doth not mention the holy ghost ; and therefore this seems added by him for the sake of the paraclete . but this can be of no force to any one that considers , that tertullian grounds his doctrine not on any new revelation by the paraclete , but on the rule of faith received in the church long before ; and upon the form of baptism prescribed by our saviour . will they say , the holy ghost was there added for the sake of montanus his paraclete ? and in another of his books , he owns the father , son and holy ghost to make up the trinity in vnity . wherein petavius himself confesses , that he asserted the doctrine of the church in a catholick manner ; although he otherwise speaks hardly enough of him . the next i shall mention , is novatian , whom schlichtingius allows , to have been before the nicene-council ; and our modern vnitarians call him a great man , whoever he was , and very ancient . and there are two things i observe in him . 1. that he opposes sabellianism ; for , before his time praxeas and noetus were little talked of , especially in the western church ; but sabellius his name and doctrine were very well known by the opposition to him , by the bishops of alexandria and rome . he sticks not , at the calling it heresie several times ; and disputes against it , and answers the objection about the vnity of the godhead . 2. that he owns , that the rule of faith requires our believing in father , son and holy ghost ; and asserts the divine eternity of it , and therefore must hold the doctrine of the trinity to be the faith of the church contained in the form of baptism . for he saith , the authority of faith , and the holy scriptures admonish us to believe not only in the father and son , but in the holy ghost . therefore the holy ghost must be considered , as an object of faith joyned in the scripture with the other two , which is no where more express , than in the form of baptism , which as s. cyprian saith , was to be administred in the full confession of the trinity , in the place already mention●d . and it is observable that s. cyprian rejects the baptism of those who denied the trinity at that time , among whom he instances in the patripassians , who it seems were then spread into africa . the dispute about the marcionites baptism was upon another ground , for they held a real trinity , as appears by dionysius romanus in athanasius , and epiphanius , &c. but the question was , whether they held the same trinity or not . s. cyprian saith , that our saviour appointed his apostles to baptize in the name of father , son and holy ghost , and in the sacrament of this trinity they were to baptize . doth marcion hold this trinity ? so that s. cyprian supposed the validity of baptism to depend on the faith of the trinity . and if he had gone no farther , i do not see how he had transgressed the rules of the church ; but his error was , that he made void baptism upon difference of communion , and therein he was justly opposed . but the marcionites baptism was rejected in the eastern church , because of their doctrine about the trinity . in the parts of asia about ephesus , noetus had broached the same doctrine , which praxeas had done elsewhere . for which he was called to an account , and himself with his followers we cast out of the churches communion , as epiphanius reports , which is another considerable testimony of the sense of the church at that time . epiphanius saith , he was the first who broached that blasphemy ; but theodoret mentions epigonus and cleomenes before him ; it seems , that he was the first who was publickly taken notice of for it ; and therefore underwent the censure of the church with his disciples . when he was first summon'd to answer , he denied that he asserted any such doctrine ; because no man before him saith epiphanius , had vented such poison . and in the beginning he saith , that noetus out of a spirit of contradiction had utter'd such things , as neither the prophets , nor the apostles , nor the church of god ever thought or declared . now what was this unheard of doctrine of noetus ? that appears best by noetus his answer upon his second appearance which was , that he worshipped one god , and knew of no other , who was born and suffer'd , and died for us ; and for this he produced the several places which assert the vnity of the godhead , and among the rest one very observable , rom. 9.5 . of whom as concerning the flesh christ came , who is over all god blessed for ever . from whence he inferr'd that the son and the father were the same , and the same he affirmed of the holy ghost . but from hence we have an evident proof that the most ancient greek copies in noetus his time , which was long before the council of nice , had god in the text. epiphanius brings many places of scripture to prove the distinction of persons in the unity of the godhead ; but that is not my present business , but to shew the general sense of the church at that time . i do not say that noetus was condemned by a general council ; but it is sufficient , to shew that he was cast out of the church , where he broached his doctrine , and no other church received him , or condemned that church which cast him out , which shews an after consent to it . now what was this doctrine of noetus ? the very same with that of praxeas at rome . theodoret saith , this his opinon was , that there was but one god the father , who was himself impassible , but as he took our nature , so he was passible and called the son. epiphanius more fully , that the same person was father , son and holy ghost ; wherein he saith , he plainly contradicts the scriptures , which attribute distinct personalities to them ; and yet assert but one godhead . the father hath an hypostasis of his own , and so have the son and holy ghost ; but yet there is but one divinity , one power , and one dominion ; for these distinct persons are , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; of the same individual essence and power . but epiphanius was no ante-nicene father : however in matters of antiquity , where there is no incongruity in the thing , we may make use of his authority ; and i think no one will question , that noetus was condemned ; which was the thing i produced him to prove . but although noetus was condemned , yet this doctrine did spread in the eastern parts ; for origen mentions those who confounded the notion of father and son , and made them but one hypostasis , and distinguished only by thought , and denomination . this doctrine was opposed not only by origen , but he had the sense of the church concurring with him , as appears in the case of beryllus bishop of bostra , who fell into this opinion , and was reclaimed by origen ; and eusebius gives this account of it , that there was a concurrence of others with him in it , and that this doctrine was look'd on as an innovation in the faith. for his opinion was that our saviour had no proper subsistence of his own before the incarnation ; and that the deity of the father alone was in him . he did not mean that the son had no separate divinity from the father , but that the deity of the father only appeared in the son ; so that he was not really god , but only one in whom the deity of the father was made manifest . which was one of the oldest heresies in the church , and the most early condemned and opposed by it . but those heresies , which before had differenced persons from the church , were now spread by some at first within the communion of it ; as it was not only in the case of noetus and beryllus , but of sabellius himself , who made the greatest noise about this doctrine ; and his disciples , epiphanius tells us , spread very much both in the eastern and western parts ; in mesopotamia and at rome . their doctrine , he saith , was , that father , son and holy ghost were but one hypostasis , with three different denominations . they compared god to the sun , the father to the substance , the son to the light , and the holy ghost to the heat which comes from it ; and these two latter were only distinct operations of the same substance . epiphanius thinks that sabellius therein differ'd from noetus , because he denied that the father suffer'd ; but s. augustin can find no difference between them . all that can be conceived is , that a different denomination did arise from the different appearance and operation ; which our vnitarians call three relative persons , and one subsisting person . sabellius did spread his heresie most in his own country ; which was in pentapolis of the cyrenaick province , being born in ptolemais one of the five cities there . of this dionysius bishop of alexandria gives an account in his epistle to xystus then bishop of rome , wherein he takes notice of the wicked and blasphemous heresie , lately broached there against the persons of the father , son and holy ghost . letters on both sides were brought to him , on which occasion he wrote several epistles , among which there was one to ammonius bishop of bernice , another of the cities of pentapolis . in this , he disputed with great warmth against this doctrine of sabellius , insomuch , that he was afterwards accused to dionysius of rome , that he had gone too far the other way ; and lessen'd the divinity of the son by his similitudes ; of which he clear'd himself , as appears by what remains of his defence in athanasius . but as to his zeal against sabellianism it was never question'd . dionysius of rome declares his sense at large in this matter against both extremes , viz. of those who asserted three separate and independent principles , and of those who confounded the divine persons ; and he charges the doctrine of sabellius too with blasphemy , as well as those who set up three different principles , and so made three gods. but he declares the christian doctrine to be , that there were father , son and holy ghost ; but that there is an indivisible vnion in one and the same godhead . it seems dionysius of alexandria was accused for dividing and separating the persons , to which he answers , that it was impossible he should do it , because they are indivisible from each other ; and the name of each person did imply the inseparable relation to the other , as the father to the son , and the son to the father , and the holy ghost to both . and this judgment of these two great men in the church concerning sabellianism , was universally receiv'd in the christian church . and this happen'd long before the nicene council . 2. another argument of the general sense of the christian church is from the hymns and doxologies publickly received ; which were in the most solemn acts of religious worship made to father , son and holy ghost . the force of this argument appears hereby , that divine worship cannot be given to mere names , and an equality of worship doth imply an equality of dignity in the object of worship , and therefore , if the same acts of adoration be performed to father , son and holy ghost , it is plain , that the christian church did esteem them to have the same divine nature , although they were distinct persons . and if they were not so , there could not be distinct acts of divine worship performed to them . s. basil mentions this doxology of africanus , ( that ancient writer of the christian church ) in the fifth book of his chronicon , we render thanks to him who gave our lord iesus christ to be a saviour , to whom with the holy ghost be glory and majesty for ever . and another of dionysius alexandrinus in his 2d . epistle to dionysius of rome . to god the father and his son our lord iesus christ with the holy ghost , be glory and power for ever and ever , amen . and this is the more considerable , because he saith he did herein follow the ancient custom and rule of the church ; and he joyned with it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , praising god in the same voice with those who have gone before us , which shews how early these doxologies to father , son and holy ghost , had been used in the christian church . but to let us the better understand the true sense of them , s. basil hath preserved some passages of dionysius alexandrinus which do explain it , viz. that either the sabellians must allow three distinct hypostases , or they must wholly take away the trinity . by which it is evident , that by father , son and holy ghost he did understand three distinct hypostases , but not divided ; for that appears to have been the sabellians argument , that if there were three , they must be divided : no saith dionysius , they are three whether the sabellians will or not ; or else there is no trinity : which he look'd on as a great absurdity to take away , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the divine trinity . of what ? of mere names or energies ? that is no trinity ; for there is but one subsisting person of separate and divided substances : that the sabellians thought must follow but both the dionysius's denied it . and in another passage there mention'd , dionysius of alexandria asserts the trinity in vnity . but before dionysius , he quotes a passage of clemens romanus concerning father , son and holy ghost , which attributes life distinctly to them . now life cannot belong to a name or energy , and therefore must imply a person . but that which is most material to our purpose , is the publick doxology in the church of neo-caesarea , brought in by gregory thaumaturgus . s. basil gives a very high character of him , as of a person of extraordinary piety and exactness of life , and a great promoter of christianity in those parts , and by him the form of doxology was introduced into that church , being chiefly formed by him ( there being but seventeen christians when he was first made bishop there ) which was , glory to god the father , and son with the holy ghost , which ought to be understood according to the sense of the maker of it . and gregory hath deliver'd his sense plainly enough in this matter : for in that confession of faith , which was preserved in the church of neo-caesarea , he owns a perfect trinity in glory , eternity and power , without separation or diversity of nature , on which doctrine his form of doxology was grounded . which s. basil following , exceptions were taken against it , by some as varying from the form used in some other places . for the followers of aetius took advantage from the expression used in those doxologies , glory be to the father , by the son , and in the holy ghost , to infer a dissimilitude in the son and holy ghost to the father , and to make the son the instrument of the father , and the holy ghost only to relate to time and place . but s. basil takes a great deal of pains to shew the impertinency of these exceptions . they would fain have charged this doxology as an innovation on s. basil , because it attributed equal honour to father , son and holy ghost , which the aetians would not endure ; but they said , that the son was to be honoured only in subordination to the father , and the holy ghost as inferiour to both . but s. basil proves from scripture an equality of honour to be due to them : and particularly from the form of baptism , c. 10. wherein the son and holy ghost are joyned with the father , without any note of distinction . and what more proper token of a conjunction in the same dignity , than being put together in such a manner . especially considering these two things . 1. the extream jealousie of the jewish nation , as to joyning the creatures with god in any thing that related to divine honour . but as s. basil argues , if the son were a creature , then we must believe in the creator , and the creature together ; and by the same reason that one creature is joyned , the whole creation may be joyned with him ; but saith he , we are not to imagine the least disunion or separation between father , son and holy ghost ; nor that they are three distinct parts of one inseparable being , but that there is an indivisible conjunction of three in the same essence ; so that where one is , there is the other also . for where the holy ghost is , there is the son , and where the son is , there is the father . and so athanasius urges the argument from these words , that a creature could not be joyned with the creator in such a manner , as in the form of baptism ; and it might have been as well said , baptize in the name of the father , and any other creature . and for all that i see , our vnitarians would have liked such a form very well ; for they parallel it with those in scripture ; and they worshipped the lord , and the king ; and they feared the lord and samuel . but the iews understood the different occasion of such expressions too well , to have born such a conjunction of creatures with the creator in the most solemn act of initiation into a profession of religion . 2. the iews had a notion among them of three distinct subsistences in the deity sutable to these of father , son and holy ghost . this hath been shew'd by many as to the son , or the divine word ; and rittangel makes out the same as to the holy ghost . among the three subsistences in the mercavah ( which rittangel had proved from their most ancient writings ) those which are added to the first are wisdom and intelligence , and this last is by the old chaldee paraphrast rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and he proves it to be applied to god in many places of the pentateuch , where such things are attributed to him , as belong to the holy ghost . and he particularly shews by many places , that the schecinah is not taken for the divine glory , but that is rendred by other words ( however the interpreters of the chaldee paraphrast have rendred it so ) but he produces ten places where the chaldee paraphrast uses it in another sense ; and he leaves , he saith , many more to the readers observation . if the iews did of old own three subsistences in the same divine essence , there was then great reason to joyn father , son and holy ghost in the solemn act of initiation : but if it be denied , that they did own any such thing ; they must deny their most ancient books , and the chaldee paraphrast , which they esteem next to the text , and rittangel saith , they believe it written by inspiration . that which i chiefly urge , is this , that if these things be not very ancient , they must be put in by the later iews , to gratifie the christians in the doctrine of the trinity ; which i do not believe any iew will assent to . and no one else can imagine this , when our vnitarians say , that the doctrine of the trinity is the chief offence which the iews take at the christian religion . how then can we suppose the iews should forge these books on purpose to put in such notions , as were most grateful to their enemies , and hateful to themselves ? morinus hath endeavoured to run down the credit of the most ancient books of the iews ; and among the rest the book iezirah , the most ancient cabbalistical book among the iews , which he learnedly proves was not written by abraham , ( as the iews think . ) i will not stand with morinus about this ; however the book cosri saith , it was made by abraham before god spake to him , and magnifies it to the king of cosar , as containing an admirable account of the first principles above the philosophers . buxtorf saith , that the book cosri hath been extant nine hundred years , and in the beginning of it , it is said , that the conference was four hundred years before , and therein the book iezirah is alledged as a book of antiquity : and there the three subsistences of the deity are represented by mind , word , and hand . so that this can be no late invention of cabbalistical iews . but our vnitarians utterly deny that the jews had any cabbala concerning the trinity . and they prove it , because the jews in origen , and justin martyr deny the messias to be god. they might as well have brought their testimony to prove jesus not to be the messias ; for the iews of those times , being hard pressed by the christians , found they could not otherwise avoid several places of the old testament . but this doth not hinder , but that they might have notions of three subsistences in their ancient books : which contained neither late invention , nor divine revelations ; but a traditional notion about the divine being , and the subsistences in it : and i can find no arguments against it , that deserve mentioning . for when they say the iewish cabbala was a pharisaical figment , &c. it needs no answer . but what do they say to the old paraphrases , whereon the main weight as to this matter lies ? all that i can find is , that they do not speak of distinct persons ; but they confess that philo speaks home , and therefore they make him a christian . but philo had the same notion with the paraphrasts ; and their best way will be to declare , that they look upon them all as christians ; and they might as well affirm it of onkelos , as they do of philo ; but i doubt the world will not take their word for either . but to proceed with the christian doxologies . n●●hing , saith s. basil , shall make me forsake the doctrine i received in my baptism , when i was first entred into the christian church ; and i advise all others to keep firm to that profession of the holy trinity , which they made in their baptism ; that is , of the indivisible vnion of father , son and holy ghost . and , as he saith afterwards , by the order of the words in baptism , it appears that as the son is to the father , so the holy ghost is to the son. for they are all put without any distinction or number , wh●ch he observes agrees only to a multitude . for by their properties they are one and one ; yet by the community of essence the two are but one : and he makes it his business to prove the holy ghost to be a proper object of adoration , as well as the father and son , and therefore there was no reason to find fault with the doxology used in that church : and that , firmilian , meletius and the eastern christians agreed with them in the use of it , and so did all the western churches from illyricum to the worlds end : and this , he saith , was by an immemorial custom of all churches , and of the greatest men in them . nay , more he saith , it had been continued in the churches , from the time the gospel had been receive'd among them . and nothing can be fuller than the authority of his testimony , if s. basil may be believed . to these i shall add the doxology of polycarp at this martyrdom , mentioned by eusebius , which is very full to our purpose ; i glorifie thee by our eternal high-priest iesus christ thy beloved son , by whom be glory to thee , with him in the holy ghost . what can we imagine polycarp meant by this , but to render the same glory to father , son and holy ghost ; but with such a difference as to the particles , which s. basil at large proves come to the same thing ? and to the same purpose , not only the church of smyrna , but pionius the martyr , who transcribed the acts , speaking of iesus christ , with whom be glory to god the father , and the holy ghost . these suffer'd martyrdom for christianity , and owned the same divine honour to the father , son and holy ghost . what could they mean , if they did not believe them to have the same divine nature ? can we suppose them guilty of such stupidity to lose their lives , for not giving divine honour to creatures , and at the same time to do it themselves ? so that , if the father , son and holy ghost were not then believed to be three persons and one god , the christian church was mightily deceived ; and the martyrs acted inconsistently with their own principles . which no good christian will dare to affirm . but some have adventured to say , that polycarp did not mean the same divine honour to father , son and holy ghost . but if he had so meant it , how could he have expressed it otherwise ? it was certainly a worship distinct from what he gave to creatures ; as appears by the church of smyrna's disowning any worship but of love and repect to their fellow creatures ; and own the giving adoration to the son of god ; with whom they joyn both father and holy ghost . which it is impossible to conceive , that in their circumstances , they should have done , unless they had believed the same divine honour to belong to them . s. basil's testimony makes it out of dispute , that the doxology to father , son and holy ghost , was universally receiv'd in the publick offices of the church , and that from the time of greatest antiquity : so that we have no need of the te●timonies from the apostolical constitutions ( as they are called ) to prove it . but i avoid all disputable authorities . and i shall only add that it appears from s. basil , that this doxology had been long used not only in publick offices , but in occasional ejaculations , as at the bringing in of light in the evening , the people , he saith , were wont to say , glory be to the father , and to the son , and to the holy ghost , &c. this , he saith , had been an ancient custom among the people , and none can tell who brought it in . but prudentius shews , that it was continued to his time ; as appea●s by his hymn on that occasion , which concludes with this doxology , and s. hilary ends his hymn written to his daughter , in the same manner . 3. i come therefore to the last proof , which i shall produce of the sense of the christian church , which is , from the testimony of those who wrote in defence of our religion against infidels . in which i shall be the shorter , since the particular testimonies of the fathers , have been so fully produced , and defended by others , especially by dr. bull. iustin martyr in his apology for the christians , gives an account of the form of baptism , as it was administred among christians , which he saith , was in the name of god the father of all , and of our saviour iesus christ , and of the holy ghost . and that he spake of them as of distinct persons , as appears by his words afterwards . they who take the son to be the father , neither know the father nor the son , who being the word and first begotten is god. and when he speaks of the eucharist , he saith , that it is offer'd to the father of all , by the name of the son , and the holy ghost : and of other solemn acts of devotion , he saith , that in all of them they praise god the father of all , by his son iesus christ , and the holy ghost . and in other places , he mentions the worship they give to father , son and holy ghost . indeed he mentions a difference of order between them ; but makes no difference as to the worship given to them . and all this in no long apology for the christian faith. what can be the meaning of this if he did not take it for granted , that the christian church embraced the doctrine of the trinity in baptism ? iustin martyr was no such weak man to go about to expose the christian religion instead of defending it ; and he must have done so , if he did not believe this not only to be a true , but a necessary part of the christian faith for , why did he at all mention such a mysterious and dark point ? why did he not conceal it , ( as some would have done ) and only represent to the emperours , the fair and plausible part of christianity ? no , he was a man of great sincerity , and a through christian himself ; and therefore thought he could not honestly conceal so fundamental a point of the christian faith , and which related to their being entred into the christian church . for if the profession of this faith had not been look'd on as a necessary condition of being a member of the church of christ ; it is hard to imagine , that iustin martyr should so much insist upon it , not only here , but in his other treatises : of which an account hath been given by others . athenagoras had been a philosopher , as well as iustin martyr , before he professed himself a christian ; and therefore , must be supposed to understand his religion before he embraced it . and in his defence he asserts , that the christians do believe in father , son and holy ghost ; in god the father , god the son , and the holy ghost . and he mentions both the vnity and order which is among them . which can signifie nothing unless they be owned to be distinct persons in the same divine nature . and in the next page , he looks on it , as thing which all christians aspire after in another life , that they shall then know the vnion of the father , and the communication of the father to the son , what the holy ghost is , and what the vnion and distinction there is between the holy ghost , the son and the father . no man who had ever had the name of a philosopher would have said such things , unless he had believed the doctrine of the trinity a● we do , i. e. that there are three distinct persons in the same divine nature , but that the manner of the union , and distinction between them , is above our reach and comprehension . but our vnitarians have an answer ready for these men , viz. that they came out of plato 's school , with the tincture of his three principles ; and they sadly complain , that platonism had very early corrupted the christian faith as to these matters . in answer to which exception , i have only one postulatum to make ; which is , that these were honest men , and knew their own minds be●t , and i shall make it appear , that none can more positively declare , than they do , that they did not take up these notions from plato , but from the holy scriptures ; iustin martyr saith he took the foundation of his faith from thence , and that he could find no certainty as to god and religion any where else : that he thinks , plato took his three principles from moses ; and in his dialogue with trypho , he at large proves the eternity of the son of god from the scriptures ; and said , he would use no other arguments , for he pretended to no skill but in the scriptures , which god had enabled him to understand . athenagoras declares , that where the philosophers agreed with them , their faith did not depend on them , but on the testimony of the prophets , who were inspired by the holy ghost . to the same purpose speaks theophilus bishop of antioch , who asserts the coeternity of the son with the father , from the beginning of s. john's gospel ; and saith , their faith is built on the scriptures . clemens alexandrinus owns not only , the essential attributes of god to belong to the son ; but that there is one father of all , and one word over all , and one holy ghost who is every where . and he thinks , plato borrowed his three principles from moses ; that his second was the son , and his third the holy spirit . even origen hims●l● highly commends moses above plato , in his most undoubted writings , and saith , that numen●us went beyond plato , and that he borrowed out of the scriptures ; and so he saith , plato did in other places ; but he adds , that the doctrines were better deliver'd in scripture , than in his artificial dialogues . can any one that hath the least reverence for writers of such authority and z●al for the christian doctrine , imagine that they wilfully corrupted it in one of the chief articles of it ; and brought in new speculations against the sense of those books , which at the same time , they professed to be the only rule of their faith ? even where they speak most favourably of the platonick trinity , they suppose it to be borrowed from moses . and therefore numenius said , that moses and plato did not differ about the first principles ; and theodoret mentions numenius as one of those , who said , plato understood the hebrew doctrine in egypt ; and during his thirteen years ●ay there , it is hardly possible to suppose , he should be ignorant of the hebrew doctrine , about the first principles , which he was so inquisitive after , especially among nations , who pretended to antiquity . and the platonick notion of the divine essence inlarging it self to three hypostases , is considerable on these accounts : 1. that it is deliver'd with so much assurance by the opposers of christianity ; such as plotinus , porphyrius , proclus and others were known to be , and they speak with no manner of doubt concerning it ; as may be seen in the passage of porphyrie preserved by s. cyril and others . 2. that they took it up from no revelation ; but as a notion in it self agreeable enough ; as appears by the passages in plato and others concerning it . they never suspected it to be liable to the charge of non-sense , and contradictions , as our modern vnitarians charge the trinity with ; although their notion as represented by porphyrie be as liable to it . how came these men of wit and sense , to hit upon , and be so fond of such absurd principles which lead to the belief of mysterious non-sense , and impossibilities ; if these men may be trusted ? 3. that the nations most renowned for antiquity and deep speculations , did light upon the same doctrine , about a trinity of hypostases in the divine essence . to prove this i shall not refer to the trismegistick books , or the chaldee oracles , or any doubtful authorities ; but plutarch asserts the three hypostases to have been receiv●d among the persians , and porphyry , and iamblicus , say the same of the egyptians . 4. that this hypostasis did maintain its reputation so long in the world. for we find it continued to the time of macrobius ; who ment●ons it as a reasonable notion , viz. of one supreme being , father of all , and a mind proceeding from it , and soul from mind . some have thought that the platonists made two created beings , to be two of the divine hypostases ; but this is contrary to what plotinus and porphyry affirm concerning it , and it is hard to give an account , how they should then be essentially different from creatures , and be hypostases in the divine essence . but this is no part of my business , being concerned no farther , than to clear the sense of the christian church , as to the form of baptism in the name of the father , son and holy ghost ; which according to the sense of the ante-nicene fathers , i have proved , doth manifest the doctrine of the trinity , to have been generally receiv'd in the christian church . 2. let us now see what our vnitarians object again●t the proof of the trinity from these words . 1. they say , that there is a note of distinction and superiority . for christ owns ▪ that his power was given to him by the father . there is no question , but that the person who suffer'd on the cross , had power given to him , after his resurrection ; but the true question is , whether his sonship were then given to him . he was then declared to be the son of god with power , and had a name or authority given him above every name ; being exalted to be a prince and a saviour , to give repentance , and remission of sins : in order to which he now appointed his apostles to teach all nations ; baptizing them in the name of the father , the son and the holy ghost . he doth not say in the name of iesus , who suffer'd on the cross ; nor in the name of iesus the christ now exalted ; but in the name of father , son and holy ghost : and although there were a double gift with respect to the son and holy ghost ; the one , as to his royal authority over the church ; the other , as to his extraordinary effusion on the apostles , yet neither of these are so much as intimated ; but the office of baptism is required to be performed in the name of these three as distinct and yet equal ; without any relation to any gift , either as to the son or holy ghost . but if the ancient iews were in the right , as we think they were , then we have a plain account , how these came to be thus mention'd in the form of baptism , viz. that these three distinct subsistences in the divine essence , were not now to be kept up as a secret mystery from the world ; but that the christian church was to be formed upon the belief of it . 2. they bring several places of scripture , where god and his creatures are joyned , without any note of distinction or superiority ; as , the people feared the lord , and samuel , 1 sam. 12.18 . they worshipped the lord , and the king , 1 chron. 29.20 . i charge thee before god the lord iesus christ , and his elect angels , 1 tim. 5.21 . the spirit and the bride say come , revel . 22.17 . but can any man of sense imagine , these places contain a parallel with a form of words , wherein men are entred into the profession of a new religion , and by which they were to be distinguished from all other religions ? in the former places , the circumstances were so notorious as to god , and the civil magistrate , that it shews no more than that the same external acts may be used to both , but with such a different intention as all men understood it . what if s. paul name the elect angels in a solemn obtestation to timothy , together with god , and the lord iesus christ ? what can this prove , but that we may call god and his creatures to be witnesses together of the same thing ? and so heaven and earth are called to bear witness against obstinate sinners : may men therefore be baptized in the name of god and his creatures ? the spirit and bride may say come without any incongruity ; but it would have been strange indeed , if they had said , come be baptized in the name of the spirit and the bride . so that these instances are very remote from the purpose . but they say farther , that the ancients of the first four hundred years do not insist on this place , to prove the divinity or personality of the son or spirit . as to the first three hundred years , i have given an account already ; and as to the fourth century , i could not have thought , that they would have mention'd it : since there is scarce a father of the church in that time , who had occasion to do it , but makes use of the argument from this place to prove the divinity and personality of the son and spirit . athanasius saith , that christ founded his church on the doctrine of the trinity contained in these words ; and if the holy ghost had been of a different nature , from the father and son , he would never have been joyned with them in a form of baptism , no more than an angel , or any other creature . for the trinity must be eternal and indivisible , which it could not be , if any created being were in it , and therefore he disputes against the arian baptism , although performed with the same words , because they joyned god and a creature together in baptism . to the same purpose argue didymus , gregory nazianzen , s. basil and others , within the compass of four hundred years , whose testimonies are produced by petavius ; to whom i refer the reader , if he hath a mind to be satisfied in so clear a point , that i cannot but think our vnitarians never intended to take in the fathers after the council of nice , who are so expressly against them ; and therefore i pass it over as a slip . 4. they object , that the form of baptism implies no more , than being admitted into that religion which proceeds from god the father , and deliver'd by his son , and confirmed by the testimony of the holy ghost . so much we grant is implied , but the question still remains , whether the son and holy ghost are here to be consider'd only in order to their operations , or whether the persons of the son and holy ghost , from whom those effects came , are not here chiefly intended ? for if no more had been meant , but these effects , then the right form of admission had not been , into the name of father , son and holy ghost ; but in the name of the father alone , as revealing himself by his son , and confirming it by the miraculous works of the holy ghost . for these are only subservient acts to the design of god the father , as the only subsisting person . 5. they tell us , that it is in vain , not to say ridiculously pretended , that a person or thing is god , because we are baptized into it ; for some were baptized into moses , and others into john's baptism , and so moses and john baptist would be gods ; and to be baptized into a person or persons , and in the name of such a person is the same thing . grant this ; yet there is a great difference between being baptized in the name of a minister of baptism , and of the author of a religion , into which they are baptized . the israelites were baptized unto moses ; but how ? the syriac and arabic versions render it per mosen ; and so s. augustin reads it . and this seems to be the most natural sense of the word , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is , act. 7.53 . compared with gal. 3.19 . and the force of the apostle's argument , doth not lie in the parallel between being baptized into moses , and into christ ; but in the privileges they had under the ministery of moses with those which christians enjoyed . the other place implies no more , than being enter'd into that profession , which john baptized his disciples into . but doth any one imagine , that because iohn baptist did enter his disciples by baptism , therefore they must believe him to be god ? i know none that lay the force of the argument upon any thing parallel to those places . but it depends upon laying the circumstances together . here was a new religion to be taught mankind , and they were to be entred into it , not by a bare verbal profession , but by a solemn rite of baptism ; and this baptism is declar'd to be in the name of the father , son and holy ghost : which cannot be understood of their ministery , and therefore must relate to that faith , which they were baptized into , which was concerning the father , son and holy ghost . and so the christian church understood it , from the beginning , as i have proved in the foregoing discourse . and from hence came the instruction of catechumens , who were to be baptized about the trinity ; and the first creeds which related only to them , as i have already observed . and so much our vnitarians grant in one of their latest pamphlets , that a creed was an institution , or instruction what we are to believe in the main , and fundamental articles , especially concerning the persons of father , son and holy ghost . but they contend , that the creed which bears the name of the apostles , was the original creed framed by the apostles themselves , because they suppose this creed doth not assert the son and holy ghost , to be eternal and divine persons , and therefore they conclude , that the makers of this creed , either did not know , that any other person but the father is god , or almighty , or maker of heaven and earth , or they have negligently , or wickedly concealed it . this is a matter so necessary to be clear'd , that i shall examine these two things before i put an end to this discourse . 1. what proofs they bring that this creed was framed by the apostles . 2. what evidence they produce , that this creed excludes the divinity of the son and holy ghost . 1. as to the proofs they bring , that this creed was framed by the apostles . we believe the creed to be apostolical in the true sense of it ; but that it was so in that frame of words , and enumeration of articles , as it is now receiv'd , hath been called in question by some criticks of great judgment and learning , whom i have already mentioned . erasmus saith , he doth not question the articles being apostolical ; but whether the apostles put it thus into writing . and his chief argument is from the variety of the ancient creeds ; of which no account can be given so probable , as that they were added occasionally in opposition to a growing heresie . as for instance , the word impassible was inserted with respect to the father in the ancient eastern creed , against the doctrine of sabellius ; but it was not in the old western creed . and he argues , that the apostolical creed ended with the holy ghost ; because the nicene creed did so . and vossius thinks the other articles which are in cyril , were added after the nicene council ; which would not have omitted them , if they had been in the former creed . and when there were so many creeds made afterwards , it is observable , that they do all end with the article of the holy ghost ; which they would never have done , in so jealous a time about creeds , if they had left out any articles of what was then receiv'd for the apostolical creed . the first creed after the nicene , which made great noise in the world , was that framed at antioch ; and that creed not only ends with the article of the holy ghost ; but mentions the form of baptism ; and our saviours commanding his apostles to baptize in the name of the father , son and holy ghost ; as the foundation of the creed . for it hereby appears , that the father is true father , and the son true son , and the holy ghost true holy ghost ; not bare names , but such as import three distinct subsistences . for hilary observes , that this council chiefly intended to overthrow sabellianism , and therefore asserted tres subsistentium personas , as hilary interprets their meaning , and so doth epiphanius ; which was to remove the suspition , that they asserted only triplicis vocabuli vnionem ; as hilary speaks . the next creed is of the eastern bishops at sardica , and that ends wi●h the holy ghost , and so do both the creeds at sirmium ▪ and the latter calls the article of the trinity , the close of our faith ; which is always to be kept according to our saviour's command , go teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the father , son and holy ghost . so that in all these creeds , about which there was so much heat in the christian church , there was not the least objection , that any articles of the apostolical creed were omitted . it is no argument , that there was then no contest about these articles ; for they were bound to give in an entire creed ; and so the council of antioch declares , that they would publish the confession of the faith of the church : and how could this be , if they left out such articles which had been always receiv●d from the apostles times ? but certainly our vnitarians would not attack such men , as erasmus , and vossius in a matter relating to antiquity , if they had not some good arguments on their side . their first business , is to shew , that some of vossius his arguments are not conclusive ; such as they are , i leave them to any one that will compare them with the answers . but there are two things they lay weight upon . 1. that the whole christian church east and west , could not have agreed in the same creed , as to number and order of articles , and manner of expression , if this creed had not come from the same persons , from whom they receiv'd the gospel and the scriptures ; namely , from the apostles and preachers of christianity . 2. that it was receiv'd by a constant tradition to have been the apostles ; not a bare oral tradition , but the tradition of the ancient commentators upon it . now these i confess to be as good arguments , as the matters will bear ; and i will no longer contest this point with them , provided , that we be allowed to make use of the same arguments ; as to the second point ; wherein they undertake to prove , that the apostles creed doth exclude the divinity of the son and holy ghost . what is now become of the general consent of the christian church , east and west ? and of the commentators upon this creed ? if the argument hold good in one case , i hope it will be allowed to do so in the other also . and what greater testimony can be given of such a consent of the christian church ; than that those who opposed it , have been condemned by it , and that the church hath expressed her sense of it in publick , and private acts of devotion , and divine worship , and have defended it as a necessary part of the christian faith , against the assaults of infidels and hereticks ? so that although the apostles creed do not in express words declare , the divinity of the three persons in the vnity of the divine essence ; yet taking the sense of those articles , as the christian church understood them from the apostles times , then we have as full , and clear evidence of this doctrine , as we have that we receiv'd the scriptures from them . chap. x. the objections against the trinity in point of reason answer'd . having in the foregoing chapters endeavour'd to clear the doctrine of the trinity from the charge of contradictions , and to prove it agreeable to the sense of scripture , and the primitive church ; i now come in the last place to examine the remaining objections , in point of reason ; and those are , 1. that this doctrine is said to be a mystery , and therefore above reason , and we cannot in reason be obliged to believe any such thing . 2. that if we allow any such mysteries of faith as are above reason , there can be no stop put to any absurd doctrines , but they may be receiv'd on the same grounds 1. as to this doctrine being said to be above reason , and therefore not to be believ'd ; we must consider two things ; 1. what we understand by reason ; 2. what ground in reason there is , to reject any doctrine above it , when it is proposed as a matter of faith. 1. what we understand by reason . i do not find that our vnitarians have explained the nature and bounds of reason in such manner , as those ought to have done , who make it the rule and standard of what they are to believe . but sometimes they speak of clear and distinct perceptions , sometimes of natural ideas , sometimes of congenit notions , &c. but a late author hath endeavour'd to make amends for this , and takes upon him to make this matter clear ; and to be sure to do so , he begins with telling us , that reason is not the soul abstractedly consider'd ; ( no doubt of it ) but the soul acting in a peculiar manner is reason . ( and this is a ver● peculiar way of explaining it ) but farther we are told , it is not the order or report ( respect i suppose ) which is naturally between all things . ( but that implies a reason in things . ) but the thoughts which the soul forms of things according to it , may properly claim that title , i. e. such thoughts which are agreeable to the reason of things are reasonable thoughts . this is clear and distinct . and i perfectly agree with him , that our own inclinations , or the bare authority of others is not reason . but what is it ? every one experiences in himself a power , or faculty of form●ng various ideas , or perceptions of things ; of affirming , or denying according as he sees them to agree or disagree , and this is reason in general it is not the bare receiving ideas into the mind , that is strictly reason , ( who ever thought it was ? ) but the perception of the agreement , or disagreement of our ideas in a greater of lesser number ; wherein soever this agreement or disagreement may consist . if the perception be immediate without the assistance of any other idea , this is not call'd reason , but self-evidence : but when the mind makes use of intermediate ideas to discover that agreement or disagreement , this method of knowledge is properly call'd reason or demonstration . and so reason is defined to be that faculty of the soul , which discovers the certainty of any thing dubious , or obscure by comparing it with something evidently known . this is offer'd to the world , as an account of reason ; but to shew how very loose , and unsatisfactory it is , i desire it may be consider'd , that this doctrine supposes , that we must have clear and distinct ideas of whatever we pretend to any certainty of in our minds , and that the only way to attain this certainty , is by comparing these ideas together . which excludes all certainty of faith or reason , where we cannot have such clear and distinct ideas . but if there are many things of which we may be certain , and yet can have no clear and distinct ideas of them ; if those ideas we have , are too imperfect and obscure to form our judgments by ; if we cannot find out sufficient intermediate ideas ; then this cannot be the means of certainty , or the foundation of reason . but i shall keep to our present subject ; and our certainty of it in point of reason , depends upon our knowledge of the the nature of substance , and person and the distinction between them : but if we can have no such clear ideas in our minds concerning these things , as are required from sensation , or reflection ; then , either we have no use of reason about them , or it is in sufficient to pass any judgment concerning them . 1. i begin with the notion of substance . and i have great reason to begin with it ; for , according to this man's principles there can be no certainty of reason at all about it . and so our new way of reason is advanced to very good purpose . for we may talk and dispute about substance , as long as we please , but , if his principles of reason be true , we can come to no certainty ; since we can have no clear idea in our minds concerning it , as will appear from his own words ; and the method he proceeds in . ( 1. ) he saith , that the mind receives in ideas two ways . 1. by intermission of the senses , as colours , figures , sounds , smells , &c. 2. by the souls considering its own operations about what it thus gets from without , as knowing , doubting , affirming , denying , &c. ( 2. ) that these simple and distinct ideas , thus laid up in the great repository of the vnderstanding , are the sole matter and foundation of all our reasoning . then it follows , that we can have no foundation of reasoning , where there can can be no such ideas from sensation , or reflection . now this is the case of substance ; it is not intromitted by the senses , nor depends upon the operations of the mind ; and so it cannot be within the compass of our reason . and therefore i do not wonder , that the gentlemen of this new way of reasoning , have almost discarded substance out of the reasonable part of the world. for they not only tell us . that we can have no idea of it by sensation or reflection ; but that nothing is signified by it , only an uncertain supposition of we know not what . and therefore it is parallel'd , more than once , with the indian philosophers , he knew not what ; which supported the torto●se , that supported the elephant , that supported the earth ; so substance was found out only to support accidents . and , that when we talk of substances we talk like children , who being ask'd a question , about somewhat which they know not , readily give this satisfactory answer , that it is something . if this be the truth of the case , we must still talk like children , and i know not how it can be remedied . for , if we cannot come at a rational idea of substance , we can have no principle of certainty to go upon in this debate . i do not say , that we can have a clear idea of substance , either by sensation or reflection ; but from hence i argue , that this is a very insufficient distribution of the ideas necessary to reason . for besides these , there must be some general ideas , which the mind doth form , not by meer comparing those ideas it has got from sense or reflection ; but by forming distinct general notions , of things from particular ideas . and among these general notions , or rational ideas , substance is one of the first ; because we find that we can have no true conceptions of any modes or accidents ( no matter which ) but we must conceive a substratum , or subject wherein they are . since it is a repugnancy to our first conceptions of things , that modes or accidents should subsist by themselves , and therefore the rational idea of substance is one of the first , and most natural ideas in our minds . but we are still told , that our vnderstanding can have no other ideas , but either from sensation or reflection . and that , herein chiefly lies the excellency of mankind , above brutes , that these cannot abstract , and inlarge their ideas as men do . but how comes the general idea of substance , to be framed in our minds ? is this by abstracting and inlarging simple ideas ? no , but it is by a complication of many simple ideas together : because not imagining how these simple ideas can subsist by themselves , we accustom our selves to suppose some substratum wherein they do subsist , and from which they do result , which therefore we call substance . and is this all indeed , that is to be said for the being of substance , that we accustom our selves to suppose a substratum ? is that custom grounded upon true reason or not ? if not , then accidents or modes , must subsist of themselves , and these simple ideas need no tortoise to support them : for figures and colours , &c. would do well enough of themselves , but for some fancies men have accustomed themselves to . if it be grounded on plain and evident reason , then we must allow an idea of substance , which comes not in by sensation or reflection ; and so we may be certain of some things which we have not by those ideas . the idea of substance , we are told again , is nothing but the supposed , but unknown support of those qualities we find existing , which we imagine cannot subsist , sine re substante , which according to the true import of the word , is in plain english , standing under , or upholding . but very little weight is to be laid upon a bare grammatical etymology , when the word is used in another sense by the best authors , such as cicero and quintilian , who take substance for the same with essence ; as valla hath proved ; and so the greek word imports ; but boethius in translating aristotle's predicaments , rather chose the word substance as more proper , to ●xpress a compound being , and reserved essence , for what was more simple and immaterial . and in this sense , substance was not applied to god but only essence , as s. augustine observes , but afterwards , the names of substance , and essence were promiscuously used , with respect to god and his creatures . and do imply , that which makes the real being , as distinguished from modes and properties . and so the substance , and essence of a man are the same ; not being taken for the individual substance , which cannot be understood without particular modes and properties ; but the general substance , or nature of man abstractly from all the circum●●ances of persons . and i desire to know , whether according to true reason , that be not a clear idea of a man ; not of peter , iames or iohn , but of a man as such . this is not a meer universal name , or mark , or sign ; but there is as clear and distinct a conception of this in our minds , as we can have from any such simple ideas , as are convey'd by our senses . i do not deny that the distinction of particular substances , is by the several modes and properties of them , ( which they may call a complication of simple ideas if they please ) but i do assert , that the general idea , which relates to the essence without these is so just , and true an idea , that without it the complication of simple ideas , will never give us a right notion of it . i must do that right to the ingenious author of the essay of humane vnderstanding ( from whence these notions are borrowed to serve other purposes than he intended them ) that he makes the case of spiritual , and corporeal substances to be alike , as to their idea's , and that we have as clear a notion of a spirit , as we have of a body , the one being supposed to be the substratum to those simple ideas we have from without , and the other of those operations we find within our selves . and that it is as rational to affirm , there is no body , because we cannot know its essence , as 't is called , or have no idea of the substance of matter ; as to say , there is no spirit , because we know not its essence , or have no idea of a spiritual substance . from hence it follows , that we may be certain , that there are both spiritual and bodily substances , although we can have no clear and distinct ideas of them . but , if our reason depend upon our clear and distinct idea's ; how is this possible ? we cannot reason without clear ideas , and yet we may be certain without them : can we be certain without reason ? or doth our reason give us true notions of things , without these idea's ? if it be so , this new hypothesis about reason must appear to be very unreasonable . let us suppose this principle to be true , that the simple ideas by sensation or reflection , are the sole matter and foundation of all our reasoning : i ask then , how we come to be certain , that there are spiritual substances in the world , since we can have no clear and distinct ideas concerning them ? can we be certain without any foundation of reason ? this is a new sort of certainty , for which we do not envy these pretenders to reason . but methinks , they should not at the same time assert the absolute necessity of these ideas to our knowledge , and declare that we may have certain knowledge without them . if there be any other method , they overthrow their own principle ; if there be none , how come they to any certainty , that there are both bodily and spiritual substances ? as to these latter ( which is my business ) i must enquire farther , how they come to know that there are such . the answer is by self-reflection , on those powers we find in our selves , which cannot come from a mere bodily substance . i allow he reason to be very good , but the question i ask is , whether this argument be from the clear and distinct idea or not ? we have ideas in our selves of the several operations of our minds of knowing , willing , considering , &c. which cannot come from a bodily substance . very true ; but is all this contained in the simple idea of these operations ? how can that be , when the same persons say , that notwithstanding their ideas it is possible for matter to think . for it is said , that we have the ideas of matter and thinking , but possibly shall never be able to know , whether any mere material being thinks or not ; it being impossible for us by the contemplation of our own ideas , without revelation to discover whether omnipotency hath not given to some systems of matter , fitly disposed , a power to perceive or think . if this be true , then for all that we can know by our ideas of matter and thinking ; matter may have a power of thinking : and if this hold , then it is impossible to prove a spiritual substance in us , from the idea of thinking : for how can we be assured by our ideas , that god hath not given such a power of thinking , to matter so disposed as our bodies are ? especially since it is said , that in respect of our notions , it is not much more remote from our comprehension to conceive that god can , if he pleases , super-add to our idea of matter a faculty of thinking , than that he should super-add to it another substance , with a faculty of thinking . whoever asserts this , can never prove a spiritual substance in us , from a faculty of thinking ; because he cannot know from the idea of matter and thinking , that matter so disposed cannot think . and he cannot be certain that god hath not framed the matter of our bodies , so as to be capable of it . it is said indeed elsewhere , that it is repugnant to the idea of sensless matter , that it should put into it self sense , perception and knowledge : but this doth not reach the present case ; which is not what matter can do of it self , but what matter prepared by an omnipotent hand can do . and what certainty can we have that he hath not done it ? we can have none from the ideas ; for those are given up in this case ; and consequently , we can have no certainty upon these principles , whether we have any spiritual substance within us or not . but we are told , that from the operations of our minds , we are able to frame the complex idea of a spirit . how can that be , when we cannot from those ideas be assured , but that those operations may come from a material substance . if we frame an idea on such grounds , it is at most but a possible idea ; for it may be otherwise ; and we can have no assurance from our ideas , that it is not : so that the most men may come to in this way of idea's is , that it is possible it may be so , and it is possible it may not ; but that it is impossible for us from our ideas , to determine either way . and is not this an admirable way to bring us to a certainty of reason ? i am very glad to find the idea of a spiritual substance made as consistent , and intelligible , as that of a corporeal ; for as the one consists of a cohesion of solid parts , and the power of communicating motion by impulse , so the other consists in a power of thinking , and willing , and moving the body ; and that the cohesion of solid parts , is as hard to be conceived as thinking ; and we are as much in the dark about the power of communicating motion by impulse , as in the power of exciting motion by thought . we have by daily experience clear evidence of motion produced , both by impulse and by thought ; but the manner how , hardly comes within our comprehension ; we are equally at a loss in both . from whence if follows , that we may be certain of the being of a spiritual substance , although we have no clear and distinct idea of it , nor are able to comprehend the manner of its operations : and therefore it is a vain thing in any to pretend , that all our reason and certainty is founded on clear and distinct ideas ; and that they have reason to reject any doctrine which relates to spiritual substances , because they cannot comprehend the manner of it . for the same thing is confessed by the most inquisitive men , about the manner of operation , both in material , and immaterial substances . it is affirmed , that the very notion of body , implies , something very hard , if not impossible to be explained , or understood by us ; and that the natural consequence of it , viz. divisibility ; involves us in difficulties impossible to be explicated , or made consistent . that we have but some few superficial ideas of things ; that we are destitute of faculties , to attain to the true nature of them ; and that when we do that , we fall presently into darkness and obscurity ; and can discover nothing farther , but our own blindness and ignorance . these are very fair and ingenuous confessions of the shortness of humane understanding , with respect to the nature and manner of such things , which we are most certain of the being of , by constant and undoubted experience . i appeal now to the reason of mankind , whether it can be any reasonable foundation for rejecting a doctrine proposed to us , as of divine revelation , because we cannot comprehend the manner of it ; especially , when it relates to the divine essence . for as the same author observes , our idea of god is framed from the complex ideas of those perfections we find in our selves , but inlarging them so , as to make them suitable to an infinite being , as knowledge , power , duration , &c. and the degrees or extent of these which we ascribe to the soveraign being , are all boundless and infinite . for it is infinity , which joyned to our ideas of existence , power , knowledge , &c. makes that complex idea , whereby we represent to our selves the best we can , the supreme being . now , when our knowledge of gross material substances is so dark ; when the notion of spiritual substances is above all ideas of sensation ; when the higher any substance is , the more remote from our knowledge ; but especially when the very idea of a supreme being implies its being infinite , and incomprehensible , i know not whether it argues more stupidity , or arrogance to expose a doctrine relating to the divine essence , because they cannot comprehend the manner of it . but of this more afterwards . i am yet upon the certainty of our reason , from clear and distinct ideas : and if we can attain to certainty without them , and where it is confessed we cannot have them ; as about substances : then these cannot be the sole matter and foundation of our reasoning , which is so peremptorily asserted by this late author . but i go yet farther : and as i have already shew'd , we can have no certainty of an immaterial substance within us , from these simple ideas ; so i shall now shew , that there can be no sufficient evidence , brought from them by their own confession , concerning the existence of the most spiritual and infinite substance , even god himself . we are told , that the evidence of it is equal to mathematical certainty ; and very good arguments are brought to prove it , in a chapter on purpose : but that which i take notice of is , that the argument from the clear and distinct idea of god is passed over . how can this be consistent with deducing our certainty of knowledge from clear and simple ideas ? i do not go about to justifie those , who lay the whole stress upon that foundation ; which i grant to be too weak to support so important a truth ; and that those are very much to blame , who go about to invalidate other arguments for the sake of that ; but i doubt all this talk about clear and distinct ideas , being made the foundation of certainty , came originally from those discourses , or meditations , which are aimed at . the author of them was an ingenious , thinking man , and he endeavour'd to lay the foundations of certainty , as well as he could . the first thing he found any certainty in , was his own existence ; which he founded upon the perception of the acts of his mind , which some call an internal , infallible perception that we are . from hence he proceeded , to enquire , how he came by this certainty , and he resolved it into this , that he had a clear and distinct perception of it ; and from hence he formed his general rule , that what he had a clear and distinct perception of was true . which in reason ought to go no farther , than where there is the like degree of evidence : for the certainty here , was not grounded on the clearness of the perception , but on the plainness of the evidence which is of that nature , that the very doubting of it proves it ; since it is impossible , that any thing should doubt or question its own being , that had it not . so that here it is not the clearness of the idea , but an immediate act of perception , which is the true ground of certainty . and this cannot extend to things without our selves ; of which we can have no other perception , than what is caused by the impressions of outward objects . but whether we are to judge according to those impressions , doth not depend on the ideas themselves , but upon the exercise of our judgment and reason about them , which put the difference between true and false , and adequate , and inadequate ideas . so that our certainty is not from the ideas themselves , but from the evidence of reason , that those ideas are true , and just , and consequently that we may build our certainty upon them . but the idea of an infinite being hath this peculiar to it , that necessary existence is implied in it . this is a clear and distinct idea , and yet it is denied , that this doth prove the existence of god. how then can the grounds of our certainty arise from clear and distinct ideas ; when in one of the clearest ideas of our minds we can come to no certainty by it ? i do not say , that it is denied to prove it ; but this is said , that it is a doubtful thing from the different make of mens tempers and application of their thoughts . what can this mean , unless it be to let us know , that even clear and distinct ideas , may lose their effect by the difference of mens tempers and studies ; so that besides ideas , in order to a right judgment , a due temper and application of the mind is required . and wherein is this different , from what all men of understanding have said ? why then should these clear and simple ideas be made the sole foundation of reason ? one would think by this , that these ideas would presently satisfie mens minds , if they attended to them . but even this will not do , as to the idea of an infinite being . it is not enough to say , they will not examine how far it will hold : for they ought either to say , that it doth hold , or give up this ground of certainty from clear and distinct ideas . but instead of the proper argument from ideas , we are told , that from the consideration of our selves , and what we find in our own constitutions , our reason leads us to the knowledge of this certain and evident truth ; that there is an eternal , most powerful , and most knowing being . all which i readily yield ; but we see plainly , the certainty is not placed in the idea , but in good and sound reason from the consideration of our selves and our constitutions . what! in the idea of our selves ? no certainly ; for let our idea be taken which way we please , by sensation or reflection , yet it is not the idea that makes us certain , but the argument from that which we perceive in , and about our selves . but we find in our selves perception and knowledge . it 's very true ; but how doth this prove that there is a god ? it is from the clear and distinct idea of it . no , but from this argument : that either there must have been a knowing being from eternity , or an unknowing ; for something must have been from eternity : but if an unknowing , then it was impossible there ever should have been any knowledge ; it being as impossible , that a thing without knowledge should produce it , as that a triangle should make it self three angles bigger than two right ones . allowing the argument to be good , yet it is not taken from the idea , but from principles of true reason ; as that no man can doubt his own perception ; that every thing must have a cause ; that this cause must either have knowledge or not : if it have , the point is gained ; if it hath not , nothing can produce nothing ; and consequently , a not knowing being cannot produce a knowing . again , if we suppose nothing to be first , matter can never begin to be ; if bare matter without motion eternal , motion can never begin to be ; if matter and motion be supposed eternal , thought can never begin to be . for , if matter could produce thought , then thought must be in the power of matter ; and if it be in matter as such , it must be the inseparable property of all matter ; which is contrary to the sense and experience of mankind . if only some parts of matter have a power of thinking , how comes so great a difference in the properties of the same matter ? what disposition of matter is required to thinking ? and from whence comes it ? of which no account can be given in reason . this is the substance of the argument used , to prove an infinite spiritual being , which i am far from weakning the force of ; but that which i design , is to shew ▪ that the certainty of it is not placed upon any clear and distinct ideas , but upon the force of reason distinct from it , which was the thing i intended to prove . 2. the next thing necessary to be clear'd in this dispute is , the distinction between nature and person , and of this we can have no clear and distinct idea from sensation or reflection . and yet all our notions of the doctrine of the trinity , depend upon the right understanding of it . for we must talk unintelligibly about this point , unless we have clear and distinct apprehensions concerning nature and person , and the grounds of identity and distinction . but that these come not into our minds by these simple ideas of sensation and reflection , i shall now make it appear ; 1. as to nature , that is sometimes taken for the essential property of a thing , as when we say , that such a thing is of a different nature from another , we mean no more than that it is differenced by such properties as come to our knowledge . sometimes nature is taken for the thing it self in which those properties are ; and so aristotle took nature for a corporeal substance , which had the principles of motion in it self : but nature and substance are of an equal extent ; and so that which is the subject of powers , and properties is the nature , whether it be meant of bodily or spiritual substances . i grant , that by sensation and reflection we come to know the powers and properties of things ; but our reason is satisfied , that there must be something beyond these ; because it is impossible that they should subsist by themselves . so that the nature of things propery belongs to our reason , and not to meer ideas . but we must yet proceed farther . for , nature may be consider'd two ways . 1. as it is in distinct individuals , as the nature of a man is equally in peter , iames , and iohn ; and this is the common nature with a particular subsistence proper to each of them . for the nature of man , as in peter , is distinct from that same nature , as it is in iames and iohn ; otherwise , they would be but one person , as well as have the same nature . and this distinction of persons in them is discerned both by our senses , as to their different accidents ; and by our reason , because they have a separate existence ; not coming into it at once and in the same manner . 2. nature may be consider'd abstractly , without respect to individual persons , and then it makes an entire notion of it self . for however , the same nature may be in different individuals , yet the nature in it self remains one and the same : which appears from this evident reason ; that otherwise every individual must make a different kind . let us now see , how far these things can come from our simple ideas , by reflection and sensation . and i shall lay down the hypothesis of those , who resolve our certainty into ideas , as plainly , and intelligibly , as i can . 1. we are told , that all simple ideas are true and adequate . not , that they are the true representation of things without us ; by that they are the true effects of such powers in them , as produce such sensations within us . so that really we can understand nothing certainly by them , but the effects they have upon us . 2. all our ideas of substances are imperfect and inadequate ; because they refer to the real essences of things , of which we are ignorant , and no man knows what substance is in it self : and they are all false , when look'd on as the representations of the unknown essences of things . 3. abstract ideas are only general names , made by separating circumstances of time and place , &c. from them , which are only the inventions , and creatures of the vnderstanding . 4. essence may be taken two ways . 1. for the real , internal , unknown constitutions of things , and in this sense it is understood as to particular things . 2. for the abstract idea , and one is said to be the nominal , the other the real essence . and the nominal essences only are immutable ; and are helps to enable men to consider things , and to discourse of them . but two things are granted , which tend to clear this matter . 1. that there is a real essence , which is the foundation of powers and properties . 2. that we may know these powers and properties , although we are ignorant of of the real essence . from whence i inferr . 1. that from those true and adequate ideas , which we have of the modes and properties of things , we have sufficient certainty of the real essence of them : for these ideas are allow'd to be true ; and either by them we may judge of the truth of things ; or we can make no judgment at all of any thing without our selves . if our ideas be only the effects we feel of the powers of things without us ; yet our reason must be satisfied , that there could be no such powers , unless there were some real beings which had them . so that either we may be certain by those effects of the real being of things ; or it is not possible , as we are framed , to have any certainty at all of any thing without our selves . 2. that from the powers and properties of things which are knowable by us , we may know as much of the internal essence of things , as those powers and properties discover . i do not say , that we can know all essences of things alike ; nor that we can attain to a perfect understanding of all that belong to them : but if we can know so much , as that there are certain beings in the world , endued with such distinct powers and properties , what is it we complain of the want of , in order to our certainty of things ? but we do not see the bare essence of things . what is that bare essence without the powers and properties belonging to it ? it is that internal constitution of things from whence those powers and properties flow . suppose we be ignorant of this ( as we are like to be , for any discoveries that have been yet made , that is a good argument to prove the uncertainty of philosophical speculations about the real essences of things ; but it is no prejudice to us , who enquire after the certainty of such essences . for although we cannot comprehend the internal frame , or constitution of things , nor in what manner they do flow from the substance ; yet by them we certainly know that there are such essences , and that they are distinguished from each other by their powers and properties . 3. the essences of things as they are knowable by us , have a reality in them : for they are founded on the natural constitution of things . and however the abstract ideas are the work of the mind ; yet they are not meer creatures of the mind ; as appears by an instance produced of the essence of the sun , being in one single individual ; in which case it is granted , that the idea may be so abstracted , that more suns might agree in it , and it is as much a sort as if there were as many suns as there are stars . so that here we have a real essence subsisting in one individual , but capable of being multiplied into more , and the same essence remaining . but in this one sun there is a real essence , and not a meer nominal or abstracted essence : but suppose there were more suns ; would not each of them have the real essence of the sun ? for what is it makes the second sun to be a true sun , but having the same real essence with the first ? if it were but a nominal essence , then the second would have nothing but the name . therefore there must be a real essence in every individual of the same kind ; for that alone is it , which makes it to be what it is . peter , and iames , and iohn , are all true and real men ; but what is it which makes them so ? is it the attributing a general name to them ? no certainly , but that the true and real essence of a man is in every one of them . and we must be as certain of this , as we are that they are men ; they take their denomination of being men from that common nature , or essence which is in them . 4. that the general idea is not made from the simple ideas by the meer act of the mind abstracting from circumstances , but from reason and consideration of the true nature of things . for , when we see so many individuals , that have the same powers and properties , we thence infer , that there must be something common to all , which makes them of one kind : and if the difference of kinds be real , that which makes them of one kind and not of another , must not be a nominal , but real essence . and this difference doth not depend upon the complex ideas of substance , whereby men arbitrarily joyn modes together in their minds ; for let them mistake in the complication of their ideas , either in leaving out , or putting in what doth not belong to them , and let their ideas be what they please ; the real essence of a man , and a horse , and a tree , are just what they were : and let their nominal essences differ never so much , the real common essence , or nature of the several kinds are not at all alter'd by them . and these real essences are unchangeable : for , however there may happen some variety in individuals , by particular accidents , yet the essences of men , and horses , and trees remain always the same ; because they do not depend on the ideas of men , but on the will of the creator , who hath made several sorts of beings . 2. let us now come to the idea of a person . for , although the common nature in mankind be the same , yet we see a difference in the several individuals from one another : so that peter and iames , and iohn are all of the same kind ; yet peter is not iames , and iames is not iohn . but what is this distinction founded upon ? they may be distinguished from each other by our senses , as to difference of features , distance of place , &c. but that is not all ; for supposing there were no such external difference ; yet there is a difference between them , as several individuals in the same common nature . and here lies the true idea of a person , which arises from that manner of subsistence which is in one individual , and is not communicable to another . an individual , intelligent substance , is rather supposed to the making of a person , than the proper definition of it ; for a person relates to something which doth distinguish it from another intelligent substance in the same nature ; and therefore the foundation of it lies in the peculiar manner of subsistence , which agrees to one , and to none else of the kind ; and this is it which is called personality . but how do our simple ideas help us out in this matter ? can we learn from them , the difference of nature and person ? we may understand the difference between abstracted ideas , and particular beings , by the impressions of outward objects ; and we may find an intelligent substance in our selves by inward perception ; ●ut whether that make a person or not , must be understood some other way ; for , if the meer intelligent substance makes a person , then there cannot be the union of two natures , but there must be two persons . therefore a person is a compleat intelligent substance , with a peculiar manner of subsistence ; so that if it be a part of another substance , it is no person ; and on this account the soul is no person , because it makes up an entire being by its union with the body . but when we speak of finite substances and persons , we are certain that distinct persons do imply distinct substances , because they have a distinct and separate existence ; but this will not hold in an infinite substance , where necessary existence doth belong to the idea of it . and although the argument from the idea of god , may not be sufficient of it self to prove his being ; yet it will hold as to the excluding any thing from him , which is inconsistent with necessary existence ; therefore , if we suppose a distinction of persons in the same divine nature , it must be in a way agreeable to the infinite perfections of it . and no objection can be taken from the idea of god , to overthrow a trinity of co-existing persons in the same divine essence . for necessary existence doth imply a co-existence of the divine persons ; and the unity of the divine essence , that there cannot be such a difference of individual substances , as there is among mankind . but these things are said to be above our reason , if not contrary to it , and even such are said to be repugnant to our religion . 2. that therefore is the next thing to be carefully examin'd , whether mysteries of faith , or matters of revelation above our reason , are to be rejected by us . and a thing is said to be above our reason , when we can have no clear and distinct idea of it in our minds : and , that if we have no ideas of a thing , it is certainly but lost labour for us to trouble our selves about it ; and that , if such doctrines be proposed which we cannot understand , we must have new powers , and organs for the perception of them . we are far from defending contradictions to our natural notions ( of which i have spoken already ) but that which we are now upon is , whether any doctrine may be rejected , when it is offer'd as a matter of faith upon this account , that it is above our comprehension , or that we can have no clear idea of it in our minds . and this late author hath undertaken to prove , that there is nothing so mysterious , or above reason in the gospel . to be above reason , he saith , may be understood two ways . 1. for a thing intelligible in it self , but cover'd with figurative and mystical words . 2. for a thing in its own nature unconceivable , and not to be judged of by our faculties , tho' it be never so clearly revealed . this in either sense is the same with mystery . and from thence he takes occasion to shew his learning about the gentile mysteries , and ecclesiastical mysteries , which might have been spared in this debate , but only for the parallel aimed at between them , as to priest-craft and mysteries ; without which a work of this nature would want its due relish with his good christian readers . others we see have their mysteries too ; but the comfort is , that they are so easily understood , and seen through ; as when the heathen mysteries , are said , to have been instituted at first in commemoration of some remarkable accidents , or to the honour of some great persons that obliged the world by their vertues and useful inventions to pay them such acknowledgments . he must be very dull that doth not understand the meaning of this ; and yet this man pretends to vindicate christianity from being mysterious . but there are some , he saith , that being strongly inclined out of ignorance , or passion to maintain what was first introduced by the craft or superstition of their forefathers , will have some christian doctrines to be still mysteries in the second sense of the word ; that is , unconceiveable in themselves , however clearly revealed . i hope there are still some , who are so throughly perswaded of the christian doctrine , that they dare own and defend it , notwithstanding all the flouts and taunts of a sort of men , whose learning and reason lies most in exposing priest-craft , and mysteries . suppose there are such still in the world , who own their assent to some doctrines of faith , which they confess to be above their comprehension , what mighty reason , and invincible demonstration is brought against them ? he pretends to demonstrate ; but what i pray ? the point in hand ? no. but he will demonstrate something instead of it ? what is that ? why truly , that in the new testament mystery is always used in the first sense of the word . and what then ? doth it therefore follow , that there are no doctrines in the gospel above the reach and comprehension of our reason ? but how doth it appear , that the word mystery is always used in that sense ? when s. paul saith in his first epistle to timothy , chap. 3. v. 9. that the deacons must hold the mystery of faith in a pure conscience ; doth he not mean thereby the same with the form of sound words , which timothy had heard of him , 2 tim. 1.13 . and are not all the main articles of the christian faith comprehended under it ? especially that whereinto they were baptized , in the name of the father , son and holy ghost : and if the doctrine of the trinity were understood by this form , as i have already proved , then this must be a part of the mystery of faith. and in the same chapter , v. 16. he makes god manifest in the flesh ; the first part of the mystery of godliness . if it extends to all the other things , doth it exclude this , which is the first mention'd ? ( and that our copies are true , is already made to appear . ) there is no reason therefore to quarrel with our use of the word mystery in this sense ; but the debate doth not depend upon the word , but upon the sense of it . and therefore i pass over all that relates to the bare use of the word , as not coming up to the main point ; which is , whether any point of doctrine , which contains in it something above our comprehension can be made a matter of faith ? for our author concludes from his observations , that faith is so far from being an implicit assent to any thing above reason , that this notion directly contradicts the end of religion , the nature of man , and the goodness and wisdom of god. but we must not be frighted with this bold conclusion , till we have examin'd his premises ; and then we shall find , that some who are not great readers , are no deep reasoners . the first thing he premises is , that nothing can be said to be a mystery , because we have not an adequate idea of it , or a distinct view of all its properties at once , for then every thing would be a mystery . what is the meaning of this , but that we cannot have an adequate idea of any thing ? and yet all our reason depends upon our ideas according to him , and our clear and distinct ideas are by him made the sole foundation of reason . all our simple ideas are said to be adequate , because they are said to be only the effects of powers in things which produce sensations in us . but this doth not prove them adequate as to the things , but only as to our perceptions . but as to substances we are told , that all our ideas of them are inadequate . so that the short of this is , that we have no true knowledge or comprehension of any thing ; but we may understand matters of faith , as well as we understand any thing else , for in truth we understand nothing . is not this a method of true reasoning to make us reject doctrines of faith , because we do not comprehend them , and at the same time to say we comprehend nothing ? for i appeal to the common sense of mankind , whether we can be said to comprehend that , which we can have no adequate idea of ? but he appeals to the learned ; for he saith , that to comprehend in all correct authors is nothing else but to know . but what is to know ? is it not to have adequate ideas of the things we know ? how then can we know , that of which we can have no adequate idea ? for if our knowledge be limited to our ideas , our knowledge must be imperfect and inadequate where our ideas are so . but let us lay these things together . whatever we can have no adequate idea of is above our knowledge , and consequently above our reason ; and so all substances are above our reason ; and yet he saith , with great confidence , that to assent to any thing , above reason , destroys religion , and the nature of man , and the wisdom and goodness of god. how is it possible for the same man to say this , and to say w●thal , that it is very consistent with that nature of man , and the goodness and wisdom of god , to leave us without adequate ideas of any substance ? how come the mysteries of faith to require more knowledge than the nature of man is capable of ? in natural things we can have no adequate ideas ; but the things are confessed to be above our reason ; but in divine and spiritual things , to assent to things above our reason is against the nature of man. how can these things consist ? but these are not mysteries . yes , whatever is of that nature that we can have no idea of it , is certainly a mystery to us . for what is more unknown than it is known is a mystery . the true notion of a mystery being something that is hidden from our knowledge . of which there may be several kinds . for a mystery may be taken for , 1. something kept secret , but fully understood as soon as it is discover'd ; thus tully in his epistles speaks of mysteries which he had to tell his friend , but he would not let his amanuensis know ; no doubt such things might be very well understood as soon as discover'd . 2. something kept from common knowledge , although there might be great difficulties about them when discover'd . thus tully speaks of mysteries among the philosophers , particularly among the academicks , who kept up their doctrine of the criterion as a secret , which , when it was known , had many difficulties about it . 3. something that persons were not admitted to know , but with great preparation for it . such were the athenian mysteries which tully mentions with respect , although they deserved it not : but because they were not communicated to any but with difficulty , they were called mysteries . and this is so obvious a piece of learning , that no great reading , or deep reasoning is required about it . only it may be observed , that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so the mysteries related to those who were initiated and not made epoptoe ; i. e. to those who did not throughly understand them , although they had more knowledge of them than such as were not initiated . olympiodorus , in reckoning up the degrees of admissions , mentions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . so that they were properly mysteries to such , who knew something ; though there were other things farther to be discover'd , but they did not yet know what they were , as the epoptoe did . from hence the ancient christian writers did not only call the sacraments , but more abstruse points of faith by the name of mysteries ; so s. chrysostom calls the resurrection , a great and ineffable mystery . and isidore pelusiota in his epistle to lampetius saith , that s. paul , when he speaks of the great mystery of godliness , doth not mean that it is wholly unknown to us , but that it is impossible to comprehend it . theophylact saith , it is therefore called the great mystery of godliness ; because although it be now revealed to all , yet the manner of it is hidden from us , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for this reason it is called a mystery . but this is in the way of reading ; let us now come to deep reasoning ; and see how strongly he argues against this sense of the word mysteries : his words are these ; they trifle then exceedingly , and discover a mighty scarcity of better arguments , who defend their mysteries , by this pitiful shift of drawing inferences from what is unknown to what is known , or of insisting upon adequate ideas ; except they will agree as some do , to call every spire of grass , sitting and standing , fish and flesh to be mysteries . and if out of a pertinacious or worse humour , they will be still fooling , and call these things mysteries , i 'm willing to admit as many as they please in religion , if they will allow me likewise to make mine as intelligible to others , as these are to me . it is easie to guess whom these kind words were intended for : and are not these very modest and civil expressions ? trifling , fooling ; out of a pertinacious , or worse humour ; but why , fooling about mysteries , to call such things by that name , which are in some measure known , but in a greater measure unknown to us ? and if these are real mysteries in nature , why may not the same term be used for matters of faith ? and i think in so plain a case , no great store of arguments need to be used . but in these natural things , he saith , we have distinct ideas of the properties which make the nominal essence , but we are absolutely ignorant of the real essence , or intrinsick constitution of a thing , which is the ground or support of all its properties . are not then ( without trifling and fooling ) these real essences mysteries to them ? they know there are such by the ideas of their properties , but know nothing of their real essence ; and yet they will not allow them to be mysteries ? if they do understand them , why do they say , they do not , nor cannot ? and if this be true , let them call them what they please , they must be inexplicable mysteries to them . so that all this is mere quarrelling about a word , which they would fain be rid of , if they knew how ; but they involve and perplex themselves more by their own deep reasonings against the trifling and fooling of others . but he saith , that some would have the most palpable absurdities and gross contradictions to go down , or words that signifie nothing , because men cannot comprehend the essence of their own souls , nor the essence of god , and other spiritual substances . we utterly deny , that any article of our faith contains in it any palpable absurdities , or gross contradictions ( as i hope hath been proved already as to the doctrine of the trinity which is chiefly struck at ) but surely your deep reasoners may find a difference between gross contradictions to our reason , and barely being above it , or not having any distinct conception of the nature of it . and that is all that we assert , and which they grant as to all substances . if this be their way of arguing , they may even return to transubstantiation again , without any great lessening of their understandings . but none are so bold in attacking the mysteries of the christian faith ; as the smatterers in ideas , and new terms of philosophy , without any true understanding of them . for these ideas are become but another sort of canting with such men ; and they would reason as well upon genus and species , or upon occult qualities , and substantial forms , but only that they are terms out of fashion . but we find that the change of terms doth neither improve nor alter mens understandings ; but only their ways of speaking ; and ill gamesters will not manage their game one jot the better , for having new cards in their hands . however , we must see what work they make of it . although we do not know the nature of the soul , yet we know as much of it , as we do of any thing else , if not more , i. e. we really know nothing by any adequate idea of it , but we must believe nothing , but what we have a clear distinct idea of . is not this a rare way of fixing the boundaries of faith and reason ? as to god and his attributes , it is said , that they are not mysteries to us for want of an adequate idea ; no not eternity . and in another place , as to god , we comprehend nothing better than his attributes . let us try this , by the attribute pitched on by himself ; viz. eternity . we see he pretends to comprehend nothing better than the divine attributes ; and eternity as well as any ; ( which i am very apt to believe ) but how doth he comprehend eternity ? even by finding , that it cannot be comprehended . is not this subtle and deep reasoning ? but reason he saith , performs its part in finding out the true nature of things ; and if such be the nature of the thing , that it cannot be comprehended , then reason can do no more , and so it is not above reason . was there ever such trifling that pretended to reason ; and that about the highest matters , and twith scorn and contempt of others whom he calls mysterious wits ? the question is , whether any thing ought to be rejected as an article of faith , because we cannot comprehend it , or have a clear and distinct perception of it ? he concludes it must be so , or else we overthrow religion , and the nature of man , and the wisdom and goodness of god. here is an essential attribute of god , viz. his eternity . am i bound to believe it or not ? yes , doubtless . but how can i comprehend this attribute of eternity ? very easily . how so ? do not you comprehend that it is incomprehensible ? what then ? doth this reach the nature of the thing , or only the manner of our conception ? if the nature of the thing be , that it cannot be comprehended , then you rightly understand the nature of the thing , and so it is not above your reason . let the case be now put as to the trinity ; do you believe the doctrine of it , as of divine revelation ? no , god hath given me the nature , and faculties of a man ; and i can believe nothing , which i cannot have a distinct and clear idea of ; otherwise i must have new faculties . will you hold to this principle ? then you must believe nothing , which you cannot have a clear and distinct idea of . very true : but can you have a clear and distinct idea of what you cannot comprehend ? a clear idea , is that whereof the mind hath a full and evident perception . a distinct idea , is that whereby the mind perceives the difference of it from all others . is this right ? yes . but can you have a full and evident perception of a thing , so as to difference it from all others , when you grant it to be incomprehensible ? if you have a full perception of it , you comprehend its nature , and especially if you can difference it from all other things ; but when you say , its nature is incomprehensible , and yet believe it , you must deny it to be necessary to faith , to have a clear and distinct idea of the thing proposed . and if it be repugnant to your faculties to reject the trinity , because you cannot have a clear and distinct idea of it , for the same reason , you must unavoidably reject his eternity , and all other attributes which have infinity joyned with them . but we must stop here , because this admirable undertaker hath said , that he despairs not of rendring eternity , and infinity as little mysterious , as that three and two make five . and till then i take my leave of him . and so i return to our professed vnitarians , who in answer to my sermon fell upon the same subject , and it is necessary that i consider so much , as tends to the clearing of it . in my sermon i had urged this argument to prove , that we may be bound to believe some things that are incomprehensible to us , because the divine nature , and attributes are acknowledged to be so ; and i had said , ( 1. ) that there is no greater difficulty in the conception of the trinity , and incarnation , than there is of eternity . not but that there is great reason to believe it , but from hence it appears , that our reason may oblige us to believe some things , which it is not possible for us to comprehend . and what say our vnitarians to this ? they charge my notion of eternity ( as they call it ) with a contradiction . the best way of proceeding will be to set down my own words which are these . we know that either god must have been for ever , or it is impossible he ever should be , for if he should come into being when he was not , he must have some cause of his being , and that which was the first cause would be god. but if he was for ever , he must be from himself , and what notion , or conception can we have in our minds concerning it ? to this say they , to say a person , or thing is from it self is a contradiction ; it implies this contradiction , it was before it was . and they are sorry an eternal god must be a contradiction . what a false and spiteful inference is this ? but it had look'd like very deep reasoning , if i had said , that god was the cause of himself . for , that would have implied the contradiction he had charged it with : but i had expressly excluded his being from any cause ; and the thing i urged was only the impossibility , of our having a clear and distinct conception of eternity . for , if he could have no cause , what could we think of his being eternal ? if to be from himself as a cause , be unconceivable , ( as i grant it is ) then it proves what i designed , that we cannot have any distinct idea of eternity . but to be from himself in the sense generally understood , is a meer negative expression ; for no men were such fools to imagine any thing could be before it self , and in this sense only , learned men have told us , that it is to be understood by those ancient and modern writers , who have used that expression . as when s. ierom saith , that god is self originated ; and s. augustin , that god is the cause of his own wisdom ; and lactantius , that god made himself ; all these and such like expressions are only to be negatively understood . but i confess i aimed at shewing , that it was impossible for us to have any clear and distinct idea of eternity , and therefore i took in all possible ways of conceiing it , either by gods being from himself , or his co-existing with all differences of time , without any succession in his own being ; or his having a successive duration . from all which i argued the impossibility of a clear notion of eternity . and now what do these men do ? they dispute against one of these notions , and very triumphantly expose , as they think , the absurdities of it . and what then ? why then this notion will not do . but i say none will do . i prove there can be no successive duration in a being of necessary existence ; and that it is not to be conceived , how without succession god should be present with the being , and not being , the promise and performance of the same thing ; and yet one of these ways we must make use of . from whence i concluded , that all we can attain to is , a full satisfaction of our reason concerning god's eternity , although we can form no distinct conception of it in our minds . but when these men instead of answering the argument from all the notions of eternity , only dispute against one notion of it , they apparently shew the weakness of their cause , if it will bear no other defences , but such as this . for i take it , that the main debate in point of reason depends upon this , whether we can be certain of the being of a thing , of which we can have no clear and distinct idea ? if we may , then it can be no objection in point of revelation , that we can have no clear and distinct idea of the matter revealed ; since there can be no reason to tie us up stricter in point of revelation , than we are without it . if we can be certain in reason of many things , we can have no such ideas of , what imaginable reason can there be , that a point of faith should be rejected on that account . 2. i urged another attribute of god , viz. his spirituality for the same reason ; viz. that we are satisfied in point of reason that god must be a spirit ; and yet we cannot have a clear distinct positive notion of a spirit . and what answer do they give to this ? as wise as the former . why truly , i had no cause to object this against them , because they own the spirituality of god's nature , and none since biddle have denied it . very well ! but doth my argument proceed upon that , or upon the not having a distinct and clear idea of a spirit ? it was hardly possible for men so to mistake my meaning , unless they did it , because they had no other answer to give . 3. i argued from god's prescience , which i do expresly assert , and prove that they cannot have a distinct notion of it , nay that socinus denied it , because he could not understand it . 〈…〉 they tell me , i cannot defend our 〈…〉 against theirs without finding contra●●●tions in god●s eternity and foreknowledge . if this be the ingenuity and justice and charity of the vnitarians ; commend me to the honest-hearted deists , if there be any such , as they assure us there are . one had better be charged with trifling and fooling with mysteries , than with undermining the main foundations of religion , by charging them with contradictions . but nothing could be farther from my thoughts , than any thing tending that way . and such a base calumny is too much honoured with a confutation . but do they offer to clear the difficulty and give us a clear and distinct idea of god●s fore-knowing future events without a certain cause to make them future . nothing like it . for the question is not , whether a thing be necessary because god foresees it as certain , ( as they suppose . ) but how of a thing merely possible it comes to be certain without a certain cause ; and how a thing which hath no certain cause can be certainly foreknown , and what clear and distinct notion we can have of this in our minds . if they had answer'd this , they had said something to the purpose . to resolve all into god's infinite wisdom is a good answer from us , but not from them . for we think it our duty to satisfie our selves with what god hath revealed , without prying into the manner of things above our comprehension ; but these men who will receive nothing but what they have clear and distinct ideas of , ought to shew the manner of this , or else we must be excused on the same reason , if we allow the manner of the divine subsistences in the same essence to be above our comprehension . 4. i shew'd how unreasonable their demands were , when the nature of god is owned to be incomprehensible , and his perfections infinite . and now of a sudden they are quite turned about ; for before they were only for fencing and warding off blows , but at last they come to the point , and own the being of god to be comprehensible by them ; and that they have clear and distinct ideas of god's infinite attributes . this is indeed to the purpose , if they can make these things out . but fencers have many tricks , and i wish we find none here . i had said , that in consequence to the assertion , that nothing is to be believ'd , but what may be comprehended , the very being of god must be rejected too , because his being is incomprehensible , and so they must reject one god as well three persons . to this they reply , that to comprehend the being or existence of god , is only this , to comprehend that god is , and if we cannot comprehend that , all religion ceases . is not this a fine turn ? what i said of god as to the perfections of his nature , they will have it understood of his bare existence , which i do not mention . when god is said to be an incomprehensible being ; who before them did understand the meaning to be , that we cannot comprehend that there is a god ? this is not mere trifling , for it looks like something worse ; and yet they presently after say , that to comprehend a thing is to have a clear adequate conception of it . and will they pretend to have such a one of the divine essence , when they confess but a little before , that we converse every day with very many things , none of which we comprehend , and that i might have spared my pains in proving it ? but what can be the meaning of these sayings , they cannot comprehend the common natures of things , nor have a clear and distinct idea of them , but they can comprehend an infinite being , whom all mankind own to be incomprehensible . but as to divine attributes , they say , they have clear distinct and adequate conceptions of them ; and instance in eternity , power , wisdom and iustice. we do not deny that in such attributes which we apply to god , because we find them to be perfections in us , we have a distinct and clear perception of them , as they are consider'd in themselves , for that is the reason why we attribute them to god. but for such as peculiarly belong to god as eternity doth ; and for the degrees of other attributes as they belong to him , as they are infinite , so they are above our comprehension . ( 1. ) as to eternity , say they , it is a clear and distinct notion of eternity , to say , it is a duration without beginning and without end . but we can have no clear and distinct notion of duration , when applied to a being that hath necessary existence . for duration , they say , consists in a succession . and what succession can there be in a being which always is the same , if there were no difference of times , i. e. god was the same being before time was , and is the very same being under all the differences of times ; he hath not any other duration now than he had before , and what succession could there be where there was no time ? but we make use of duration with respect to things done in time , and for the help of our und●●standings apply the measure of time to divine acts. but in a necessary existence , there can be no past , present , or to come ; and in a successive duration , there must be conceived a longer continuance from time to time ; which is repugnant to the notion of a being , which always is . so that , if we cannot conceive eternity wi●hout duration , nor duration without succession ; nor can apply succession to a being which hath necessary existence , then we can have no clear and distinct notion of god's eternity . ( 2. ) as to the infiniteness of god's perfections , they say , that although the mind be in it self finite , yet it hath an infinite comprehension , for what is finite with respect to its extension of parts may be infinite in other respects , and with respect to some of its powers . but how doth it appear that we have any power to comprehend what is infinite ? all the power we have extends only to adding and enlarging our ideas without bounds , i. e. we can put no stop to our apprehensions , but still they may go farther than we can possibly think , but is this an infinite comprehension ? so far from it , that this shews our capacities to be finite , because our ideas cannot go so far as our reason . for our reason tells us , we can never go so far , but we may still go farther : but it is impossible for our understanding to have distinct ideas of the infinite moments in an eternal succession of the utmost bounds of immensity , or of the extent of infinite power and knowledge , since the very notion of infinite implies , that we can set no bounds to our thoughts ; and therefore although the infinity of the divine attributes be evident to our reason , yet it is likewise evident to our reason , that what is infinite must be above our comprehension . ii. i come now to the last enquiry which is that if we allow things above our reason , what stop can be put to any absurd doctrine , which we may be required to believe ? and this is that which our vnitarians object in all their late pamphlets . in answer to my sermon they say , that on our principles , our reason would be in vain , and all science and certainty would be destroy'd , which they repeat several times . and from hence they do so frequently insist on the parallel between the doctrine of the trinity and transubstantiation : they say , that all the defence we have made for one will serve for the other , or any other absurd and impossible doctrine . that what we say , will equally serve all the nonsense , and impossible doctrines that are to be found among men ; and they particularly instance in transubstantiation . i need mention no more . but i did not expect to have found this parallel so often insisted upon , without an answer to two dialogues purposely written on that subject , at a time when the doctrine of the trinity was used as an argument to bring in transubstantiation , as that is now alledged for casting off the other . but i must do them that right to tell the world , that at that time a socinian answer was written to those dialogues , which i saw , and wish'd might be printed , that the world might be satisfied about it and them . but they thought fit to forbear ; and in all their late pamphlets where this parallel is so often repeated , there is but once , that i can find , any notice taken of those dialogues , and that in a very superficial manner . for the main design and scope of them is past over , and only one particular mention'd , which shall be answer'd in its due order . but in answer to the general enquiry , i shall endeavour to state the due bounds between faith and reason , and thereby to shew , that by those grounds on which we receive the doctrine of the trinity , we do not give way to the entertainment of any absurd opinion , nor overthrow the certainty of reason . 1. we have no difference with them about the vse of our reason as to the certainty of a revelation . for in this case , we are as much as they , for searching into the grounds of our faith ; for we look on it as a reasonable act of our minds , and if we did not allow this , we must declare our selves to believe without grounds . and if we have grounds for our faith , we can express them in words that are intelligible ; and if we can give an account of our faith in an intelligible manner , and with a design to give others satisfaction about it , i think this is making use of our reason in matters of faith. 2. we have no difference with them about the use of our reason , as to the true sense of revelation . we never say , that men are bound to believe upon the bare sound of words without examining the sense of them . we allow all the best and most reasonable ways of attaining to it , by copies , languages , versions , comparing of places , and especially the sense of the christian church in the best and purest ages , nearest the apostolical times and express'd in solemn and publick acts. by these rules of reason we are willing to proceed , and not by any late and uncertain methods of interpreting scripture . 3. we differ not with them about the right use of the faculties which god hath given us , of right vnderstanding such matters as are offer'd to our assent . for it is to no purpose to require them to believe , who cannot use the faculties which are necessary in order to it . which would be like giving the benefit of the clergy to a man with a cataract in both his eyes . and it would be very unreasonable to put his life upon that issue , whether he could read or not , because he had the same organs of seeing that other men had ; for in this case the whole matter depended not on the organ but the vse of it : this needs no application . 4. we differ not with them about rejecting some matters proposed to our belief which are contradictory to the principles of sense and reason . it is no great argument of some mens reason , whatever they pretend to talk against admitting seeming contradictions in religion ; for who can hinder seeming contradictions ? which arise from the shallowness of mens capacities , and not from the repugnancy of things : and who can help mens understandings ? but where there is evident proof of a contradiction to the principles of sense and reason ; we are very far from owning any such thing to be an article of faith , as in the case of transubstantiation . which we reject , not only , as having no foundation in scripture , but as repugnant to the common principles of sense and reason ; as is made to appear in the two dialogues before-mention'd . but our vnitarians find fault with the author of them , for laying the force of his argument upon this , that there are a great many more texts for the trinity than are pretended for transubstantiation ; whereas many other arguments are insisted on , and particularly the great absurdity of it in point of reason , dial. 2. from p. 33. to the end . and it is not the bare number of texts , which he relies upon , but upon the greater evidence and clearness of the tex●s on one side than on the other , which depends upon figurative words , not capable of a literal sense without overthrowing the doctrine designed to be proved by it . see with what ingenuity these men treat the defenders of the trinity , and the enemies to transubstantiation , which they call only a philosophical error or folly ; but the doctrine of the trinity is charged with nonsense , contradiction , and impossibilities . but wherein then lies the difference in point of reason ? for thus far i have shew'd , that we are far from overthrowing reason , or giving way to any absurd doctrines . it comes at last to the point already treated of in this chapter , how far we may be obliged to believe a doctrine which carries in it something above our reason ; or of which we cannot have any clear and distinct ideas . and of this i hope i have given a sufficient account in the foregoing discourse . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a61548-e160 consideraton the ezplications of the doctrine of the trinity , by dr. w. &c. p. 10. p. 9. p. 13. discourse concerning the real and nominal trinitarians , a. d. 1695 , p. 3. letter to the universities , p. 15. discourse of nominal and real trinit . p. 7. p. 10. p. 11. p. 13. tritheism charged , &c. p. 157. animadvers p. 245. animadv . &c. p. 243. ibid p. 240. basil ep. 64. considerat . on the explication , p. 23. animadv . p. 291. tritheism charged , p. 306. chap. vii . letter to the university , p. 15. discourse of nominal and real trinitarians , p. 10. tritheism charged , &c. p. 157. discourse of nominal and real unitarians , p. 18. discourse of nom. &c. p. 19. p. 32. consideraton the explication of the trinity , p. 12. tritheism charged , &c. p. 309. direct . inquisit . part ii. quaest . 2. p. 226. modest examin p. 19. p. 27 , 28. notes on athanasius his creed , edit . 2. p. 19. modest examin p 15. p. 17. p. 29. p. 30. remarks upon the examinat . p. 33. remarks p. 34. p. 36. ibid. animadv . p. 36. modest examin p. 30. tritheism charged , p. 262. p. 264. more nevoch , par . ii. c. 1. modest examin . p. 30. considerat . on the explication of the trinity , &c. p. 12. leont . de sectis act. 5. niceph. callist l. 18. c. 46 , 47. anselm . epist. l. 2. ep . 41. de fide trinit . &c. c. 3. c. 48. c 49. phot. biblioth . cod. 24. phot cod. 23. isid. orig. l. 7. de haeret de trinit . aug. de haeres●● 74. modest examin . p. 19. discourse of real and nominal trinit p 4 greg de laur apol . joachim abb●t , c. 66. decret . greg. l. 1. c. 2. comment . in decret . opusc . 24. bri●f account of valentin . gentilis , p. 132. ibid. modest examin . p. 20. brief account , &c. p. 40. brief account , &c. p. 41 , 42 , 43 , 45. modest examin . p. 29. genebrard de trinit l. 2. p. 91. l 2 p 159. p. 153. od●●at rixas & jurgia , p●aesertimque inter eruditos ; ac turpe esse diceb●t viros indubitatè doctos canina rabie famam vicissim suam rodere ac lacerare scriptis trucibus , tanquam vilissimos de plebe cerdones in angiportis sese luto ac stercore conspurcan●●● . nic rigalt . vit . p. 〈◊〉 , p. 48. considerat . on the explication by dr. w. &c. p. 12. p. 13. p. 22. p. 23. p. 25. p. 19. p. 13. defence of the notes on athanasius his creed . p. 24. p. 31. vindication of the archbishop's sermons . p. 5. answer to dr. bull , p. 47. history of the unitarians , p. 10. considerat . on the explication by the archbishop , &c. p. 13. answ●r to the archbish . serm. p. 43. p. 44. answer to the archbishop p. 65. some thoughts upon dr. sh. vindication , p. 21. letter of resol . concerning the trinity and incarn . p. 18. letter of resol . p. 5. letter of resol . concerning the trinity and incarn . p. 18. elmacin hist. sarac . p. 4. levin . warner . de alcoran . acts of athanasius , p. 5. ricard . confut . legis saracen . c. 10. letter of resol . p. 19. answer to the archbishop p. 44. p. 66. notes for div a61548-e10340 considerat . on the explications of the trinity , by dr. w. &c. p. 22 , 32. defence of the history of the unit . p. 5. answer to the archbishop's sermon , p. 4. answer to the archb. serm. p 50. explic●● of the t●●nity , p. 29. answer to milbourn , p. 15 , 23. history of the unit. p. 43. answer to the archb. p. 29 , 30. answer to my sermon p. 4. ans. to dr. wallis 's four letters , p. 4. theodoret haeret . l. 1. & 11. epiphan . haeres . 19. n. 5.29 . n. 17. tertull de praescript . haeret c 52. euseb. hist. eccl. l. 5. c. 28. hist. of the unit. p. 10. edit . ii. euseb. l. 3. c. 27. ante-nicenism . p. 37. answer to milb . p. 20. euseb. l. 4. c. 5. resp. ad judic . eccles . p. 176. answer to dr. bull , part i. p. 41. euseb. l. 4 , c. 22. act. 24.5 . epiphan . haer . 29 n. 7. euseb. l. 3. c. 5. l. 4. c. 8. l. 4 c. 6. oros. l. 7. c. 13. answer to dr. bull , p. 42. answer to dr. bull , p. 39. euseb. l. 3. c. 24 , 39. l 5. c. 8.10 . l. 6. c. 25. hieron . c. pelag. l. 3. hieron . de script . in matth. comment . in matth. c. 12. in isa. c. 11. in ezek. c. 18. erasm. advers . stunic . c. 1. answer to dr. bull , p. 35. p. 40. p. 39. origen c. cels. l. 5. p. 274. theodor haeret . l. 2. c. 1. hieron in matth. c. 12. euseb. l. 5. c. 8. epiph. de ponder . & mens . n. 16. euseb. l. 6. c. 17. august . c. crescon . l. 1. c. 31. hier. in heb. c. 3. advers . ruffin . answer to the archb. sermon p. 44 , 66. euseb. l. 7. c. 30. reflect . on dr. bull , p 35. answer to milbourn , p. 20. athan. ad solit . vit . agent p. 857. euseb. l. 3. c. 27. respons . ad judicium ecclesiae p●r i● . bull , p. 150 restaurans pauli samosatensis artes & dolos . decret . conc. sardin . apud hilar. fragment . p. 1310. ed. par. 1693. euseb l. 7. c. 27. theodor. haer . fab . l. 2. c. 8. athanas. desentent . dionysii , p. 558. euseb. l. 7. c. 30. athan. de incarn . to i. p. 591. p. 635. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . epiph. haer . 65. n. 1. concil . ephesin . part i. supplicatio basilii , &c. phot. epist . 35. marius mercat . de 12 anath . nestorii , n. 16. leontius de sectis p. 436. edit . basil. euseb. l. 7. c. 30. leont . c. nestor . l. 3. hilar. fragment . p. 1321. theod. l. 1. c. 4. pagi critica in bar. a. 272. n. 2. answer to the archbishop , p. 54. euseb l. 8 , 13 , 9. c. 6. theod. l. 1. c. 4. petav. de trinit . l. 1. c. 4. n. 13. h. valesius in theod . l. 1. c. 4. baron . a. 318. n. 75 , &c. soz. l. 3 c. 5. philost . l. 2. c. 15 , 16. athanas. tom. 1. p. 898. socr. l. 2. c. 19. athan. de synodis arim. &c. p. 897. epiph haeret . 71. sulpit . sever. l. 2. p. 397. prudent . apoth . epiph. n. 2. n. 1 , 2. n. 4. epiph. haeret . 71. socr. l. 2. ● . 30. soz. l. 4 c. 6. hist. tripart . l. 5. c. 8. hist. of the unit. p. 10. concil general . to. ii. p. 888. ib. p. 989. ambros. apol. david . c. 4. ans. to the archbish. serm p. 53. theodor. haer●t . fab. l. 2. in photino . sand. hist. enucl . l. 3. p. 357. p. 372. blond . dec. 2. l. 2. sand. hist. eccles. l. 1. p. 64.93 . socr. l. 2. c. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . hilar. de synod . p. 1175. ed. paris . hilar. de trinit . l. 10. n. 50. hilar. de trin. l. 7. n. 7. august . ep. 193. ma●ii mercat . oper . par. 2. p. 17. 〈◊〉 12. a●●th . n●s●orii p. 128. euseb. l. 5. c. 28. answer to the serm. about the trinity , p. 4 , 5 , 8. history of the unitar . p. 9. n. 7. d●fence of the history of the unitarians , p. 7. a●t o● athanasiu● , p. 13. interrogant enim nos aliquando infideles , & dicunt , patrem quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum . filium quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum spiritum sanctum quem dicitis , deum dicitis ? respondemus deum . ergo inquiunt , pater & filius & spiritus sanctus tres sunt dei. respondemus , non. turbantur , quia non illuminantur , cor clausum habent quia clavem fidei non habent aug. in ioh. tr. 39. nos ergo fratres , fide praecedente , quae sanat oculum cordis nostri , quod intelligimus sine obscuritate capiamus , quod non intelligimus sine dubitatione credamus . ibid. answ. to serm. p. 5. a fundamento fidei non recedamus , ut ad culmen perfectionis veniamus . deus est pater . deus est filius , deus est spiritus sanctus , & ramen pater non est qui filius : nec filius est qui pater , nec spiritu● sanctus . patris & filii spiritus , pater est aut filius . ibid. trinitas unus deus , trinitas una aeternitas , una potestas , una majestas , tres personae sed non tres dii . non audemus dicere unam essentiam tres substantias , sed unam essentiam vel substantiam , tres autem personas , quemadmodum multi latini ista tractantes & digni auctoritate dixerunt , cum alium modum aptiorem non invenirent , quo enunciarent verbis , quod sine verbis intelligebant . aug. de trinit . l. 5. c. 8. nunc mihi calumniator respondeat , quid ergo tres ? ecce inquit tres dixisti , sed quid tres exprime ? immo tu numera . nam ego compleo tres , cum dico , pater & filius & spiritus sanctus . id. ubi supra . id enim quod pater ad se est , deus est , quod ad filium est , pater est : quod filius ad seipsum est , deus est ; quod ad patrem est , filius est . sed non quomodo illi duo homines sunt sic isti duo dii . quare hoc non est ita ibi ? quia illud aliud , hoc autem aliud est , quia illa divini●● est , haec humanitas . ubi cogitare coeperis , incipis numerare ; ubi numeraveris , quid numeraveris , non potes respondere . pater , pater est ; filius , filius ; spiritus sanctus , spiritus sanctus est . quid sunt isti tres ? non tres dii ? non. non tres omnipotentes ? non , sed unus omnipotens . hoc solo numerum insinuant , quod ad invicem sunt , non quod ad se sunt . boëth . oper . p. ● 121. numerus enim duplex est , unus quidem , quo numeramus , alter verò qui in rebus numerabilibus constat ; ergo in numero quo numeramus , repetitio unitatum facit pluritatem ; in rerum vero numero non facit pluralitatem unitatum repetitio . ita igitur substantia continet unitatem , relatio verò multiplicat trinitatem . nam idem pater qui filius non est ; nec idem uterque qui spiritus sanctus . idem tamen deus est , pater filius & spiritus sanctus . answer to milb . p. 52. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . porphyr . isag. c. 2. ●6 . niceph. callist . l. 18. c. 47. discourse concerning the nominal and real trinitarian , p. 16. petav. de trinit . l. 4. c. 4. defence of the history of the unit . p. 5. ib. ib. answer to la moth. p. 5. explic. p. 13. letter to the university , p. 13. curcell . devocibus trinit . sect. 70. athanas. de sentent . dionys . p. 558 , 567. orat. 4. de arian . p. 456. de communi essent . &c. p. 214. expos. fidei , p. 25● . in illud omnia mihi trad p. 154. ep. ad serap . p. 259. orat. 4. c. arian . p. 554 , 456 , 459. &c. curcell . sect. iii. petav. de trinit . l. 4. c. 16. de decret . synod . nic. p. 259.269 , 274 , 276. orat. 5. c. arian . p. 514. de decret . synod p. 275. curcell . dissert . n. 106. curcell . n. 82. athanas. de synod . arim & seluc . p. 916 , 920 , 928. p. 919. curcell . n. 84. maxim. oper. t. ii. p. 384. t. i. p 413. curcell . sect. 73. a discourse conc●rn●●g no●●●●l and real unitar . p 26. basil hom. ●7 . p. 60● , 604. epist. 141 , 391 , 64. t. i. p. 605. t. ii. p. 9●6 . cyril alex . dialog . de trinit . 3. p. 498 , 500. curcell . n. 74. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 810. b. phot. cod. 24. cod. 234. discourse conce●ning the nominal and real unitar . p. 26 , 27. basil. ep. 141. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . basil. t. ii. p. 926. petav. de trinit . l. 4 c. 13. n. 10. cur. n 106. basil. t. i. p. 604. cur n. 113. n. 105. t. ii. p. 30. cur. n. 106. greg. nyssen . t. iii. p. 17. petav. de trin. l. 4. ● 9 n. 2 , 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 niceph. calist. hist. l. 18. c. 47. athan. t. ii. p. 280. caesar. quaest. 3. p. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . greg. nyssen , tom. iii. p. cur. n. 48. n. 107. cur. n. 89. hilar. de synod . n. 67. hilar. de trinit . l. 4. n. 6. hilar. de synod . n. 18. hilar. de trinit . l. 6. n. 12. lumen ex lumine , quod sine detrimento suo naturam suam praestat ex sese , & quod dat habet , & quod dederit habeat , nascaturque quod sit . petav. de trinit . l. 5. c. 8. n. 9 , 12. curcell . n. 96. ambros. de fide l. 5. c. 3. ed. nov. curcell . n. 97. aug. de trinit . l. 7. c. 6. c maxim l. 1. curcell . n. 114. august . de trinit . l. 4. c. 21. l. 5. c. 3 , 5 , 8. l. 6. c. 1. de ago●e christ. c. 16. c. maxim. l 3. c. 10. curcell . n. 114. notes on athanasius his creed , p. 11. basil. ep. 141. notes on athanas . his creed , p. 13. facund . l 1. p. 19. ed. serm. theod. haeret . fab. l. 2. c. 3. athan. de sent. dionys . p. 558. athanas. de decret . fidei nicen . p. 275. athanas. de sent. dionys. basil de sp. sancto c. 29. athan. orat . 4. c. arian . p. 456. greg. nazian . or. i. p. 16 , 17. or. xxi p. 380. basil. hom. 27. p. 602 , 604. basil. epist 141. ●pist . 64.391 . athanas. ● . 567. greg. naz. p. 16. basil. hom. 27. ruffin . p. 211. hist. l. 1. athan. ep. ad antioch , p. 577. socin . vol. l. p. 778. notes on athanas . his creed , p. 13. answer to my sermon , p. 14. hist. of the unit. p. 15. edit . 2. hist of the unit. p. 17. defence of of the hist. of unitar . p. 35. hist. of the unit. p. 16. ibid p. 17. answer to dr. wallis his letter , p. 9. answer to my sermon , p. 9. reflections no dr. bull , p. 39 , 46. sand. p. 93. answ. to the archbishop , p. 54. eus●b . pra●p . evang . l. 11. c. 18. cyril . c. julian , l. 10. p. 427.335 . julian ep . 51. facund . l. 4. p. 163. rittangel in jezirah p. 96. morinus exerc. biblic . l. 3. exerc. 8. c. 6. eusebius dem. evang . l. 4. c. 1. bichin . happerasch p. 21. paris , a. d. 1566. joh. 1.1.3.13.6.38 , 62.8.42 . answer to the archbishop's serm. p. 56. answer to my sermon , p. 10. hist. of the unit. p. 29. answer to my sermon , p. 9. ans. to the archbishop , p. 56. matth. 17.1 . mar. 9 2. luk. 9.28 . 2 pet. 1 16. 17. 18. enjed. in joh. 6.62 . answer to my sermon , p. 10. history of the unit. p. 26. p. 11 p. 2● . h. grot. opusc p. 294 t. 3. christe caput rerum vitae melioris origo , immensi mensura patris , quem mente supremâ miratus sese genitor , de lumine lumen fundit , & aequali se spectat imagine totum . h grot. syl. p. 8. ed. 1643 ▪ joh. 8.58 . answer to the archbishop . p. 58. joh. 10.36 . answer to milb . p. 31. ib. p. 30. joh. 19.7 . matt. 26.63 . selden de jure nat. & gent. l. 2. c. 12. pocock not. miscel . ad maim . p. 307. &c. matt. 16.16 s. joh. 6.69 . 1.49 . 10.30.33 . hist. of unitar . p. 29. answer to milb . p. 29. joh. 5.18.23 . phil. 2.6 , 7. hist. of unitar . p. 38. answer to serm. p. 13. answer to milb . p. 49. ib. col. 1. answer to archbish. serm p. 25. p. 59. de divin . christi , c. ●4 . defence of the hist. of the unit. p. 54. rom. 9.5 . hist. of the unit. p 35. answer to milb p 35. ante-nicen . p. 29 , 78. answer to milb p 34. ans. to the archbishop , p. 29. answer to milb p. 3. histoir critique du nov. test. to. iii. c. 54. p. 813. annot. in cypr. advers . judaeos . hilar. in psal. 122. hist. of the unit. p. 40. hist. critique du nov. to. ii. c. 17. verum repugnant perpetuo consensu omnes graeci codices . bez. motinus exercit. bibl. l. 1. ex. 2. c. 4. simon . dissert . sur le ms. du nov , test p. 14 rigalt . vit . p. puteani , p. 62. p. pithae de latino interpret . p. ii. mabil . de re deplomat . l. 5. p. 346. dissert . surless ms. du nov. test. p. 17. alavarez gomez de rebus gestis fr. ximenii , l. 2. & 3. amelote in loc. marian. edit . vulg . c. 17. praef. ad schol. hier. in loc. leo epist. 34. ad fl. hilar de trinit . l. 11. fulg. ad thra. c. 4. 1 joh. 5.7 . consider on the explic. p. 29. history of unit. p. 43. ans. to the archbishop , p. 29. selden de syned . l. 2. c. 4. morin exercit bibl. l. 1 , 2 , ex. 2. simon dissert . de mss p. 14. bez epist. ad nov . testam . critique in nov . test. c. 18. morin . exercit . bibl. l 1. ex. 2. c. 1. n. 9. critique to. i. c. 9. joh. 1.3 . heb. 1.2 , 10. col. 1.16 . hist. of the unit. p. 38. defence of the history of unitar . p. 13 , 14. p. 10. answer to milb . p. 15. p. 16. sand. interp . et paradox . p. 115. epiph. haer . 62. n. 2. n. 4. hilar. l. 2. de trinit . p. 17. cypri●n . ad jul. ep. 73. erasm. ad cens. paris . tit. ii. vossi . de symb. diss . i. n. 38. hierom. ep. 61. tertul. de bap●ism . ● 13. de praescript . haeret . c. 20. cyprian . ep. 27.73 . ed. ox. aug. de baptism . c. donat. l. 6. c. 25. ambros. de sp. sanct. l. 1. c 3. bed. in act. 19. hugo de s vict. de sacr. l. 1. c. 13. lomb. 4. sent. dist. ● . c. sed qd . basil c eunom . l. 5. c. 3. c. 10. epiph. haer. 76. ad fin . concil . nicaen . c. 19. aug. de haeres c. 44. concil . arel . i. c. 8. bellarm. de bap. l. 1. c. 3. answer to mi●b p. 18. p. 17. advers . prax. c. 26. c 2. tertul. de praescr . haeret . c. ult . con. prax. ● . 3. c. 4. alium autem quomodo accipere debes jam professus sum , personae non substantiae nomine , ad distinctionem , non ad divisionem , caeterum ubique teneo unam substantiam in tribus cohaerentibus . advers . prax. c. 12. et sermo erat apud deum & nunquam separatus à patre aut alius à patre , quia ego & pater unum sumus . haec erat probola veritatis , custos unitatis qua prolatum dicimus filium à patre , sed non separatum . c. 8. schlicht . ad m●isn . de trinit . p. 13 , 14.17 . advers . prax. 2. nos vero ut semper nunc magi● ut instructiores per paracletum , &c. hanc regulam ab initio evangelii decueurrisse etiam ante priores haereticos , n●dum praxean hesternum . optat. mil. l. 1. theodor. haer l. 3 c. 2. tertul. de praefer . c. 5. rigalt . in tertul. ad praxean . ante-nicen . p. 27. p. 12. in quo est trinitas unius divinitatis , pater , filius & spiritus sanctus . de pudicit . c. 21. petav. t. 2. l. 1. c. 5. sect. 4. schlichting . praef p. 30. ante-nicen . p. 27. novatian . de trinit . c. 12.21 , 31. c. 29. et cum spiritus sancti divina aeternitate sociari . cypr. ep. 37. basil epist. canon , 47. epiph haeres . 57. n. 1. n. 2. theod. haer . l. 3. c. 3. epiph. 57. n. 2. comment . in matth. p. 470. euseb. l. 6. c. 33. epiph. haer . 62. aug. in joh. tract . 36. discourse of nominal . and real unit. p. 1● euseb. l. 7. c. 6.26 . athan. de decret . synodi nicaenae , p. 275. athanas. de sentent . dionysii , p. 561. basil de sp. sancto c. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . greg. thaumat . p. 1. athanas. c. serap . p. 10. answer to milb . p. 18. rittang . p. 81. p. 113. p. 117. answer to dr. bull , p. 59. morin . exercit. l. 2. l. 10. c. 8. cosri part. 4. p. 316. p. 302. p. 61. de sp. sancto , c. 10. c. 17. c. 18. c. 29. euseb. l. 4. c. 15. vales. ad euseb. p. 73. coteler vii . p. 1●27 . c. 29. prudent . cath. hymn . 5. hilar. op. n. e. p. 1214. apol. 2. p. 94. p. 26. p. 97. p. 98. p. 56. p. 60. athenag . p. 11. defence of the hist. of the unit. p. 5. resp. ad judic . eccles p. 174.178 . just. apol. 2. paraei . ad graec. p. 18 , 22 , 24. dial. cum trypho , p. 274 , &c. athenag . p. 8 , 9. theophil . ad autolyc . p. 100. clemens paed. l. 3. c. 7. str. l. 4. p. 517. prof. p. 68. paed l. 1. c 6. str. l 5 p. 598. orig. c. celf l 1. p. 16. l 4. p. 198 l. 6. p. 275 , 2●9 , &c. 308. l 7. p. 351 , 371. clem alex . str. 1. euseb. praep. l. 8. theod. serm. 1. cyril . c. jul. l. 1. & l. 8. plutarch de isid. & osirld . p. 369. ed. fr. eusebius praep. e. l. 3. c. 11. jamb . de myst. sect. 8. c. 2. macrob. in som. scipion . l. 1. c. 14. answer to milb p. 17. athan. ep. ad serapion , p. 14. tom. 2. ad serap . tom. 1. p. 186 , 179. or. 3. c. arian p. 413. petavius t. ii. l. 2. c. 12. sect . 8. hist. of the unitar . p. 25. aug. in psal. 77. answ. to dr. bull , p. 17. eras. ad cens. paris . tit. ii. voss de tribus symb. dissert . 1. sect. 47. hilar. de synod . p. 1169. epiphaninius haer . 73. n. 17. clausula fidei in edit . nuperâ paris . ex mss. p. 27. p. 28. answer to my sermon p. 4. letter of resolution , p. 3. christianity not mysterious , p. 8 , 9. chap. i. human understanding , l. 1. chap. 4. sect . 18. l. 2. c. 13. sect . 19. chap. 23. sect . 2. l. 2. ch . 1. sect . 5. l 2. ch . 23. sect . 1. valla disput . dial. l. 1. c. 6. chap. 23. sect . 5. humane underst . i. 4. ch . 3. sect. 6. 2d . ed. p. 310 book . iv. chap. 10. sect . 5. book . ii. chap. 23. sect . 15. sect. 27. sect. 28. sect. 31. sect. 32. sect. 33 , 34 , 35. sect. 36. book iv. chap. 10. sect . 1. sect. 7. sect. 6. sect. 5. sect. 10. humane underst . l. 2. ch . 30 , 31. chap. 32. sect . 18. book 3. chap. 3. sect . 6. ib. sect . 15. sect. 19 , 20. book chap. sect. 1. christianity not myst. p. 28. p. 67. p. 71. p. 73. p. 145. p. 75. ad. attic. 4.87 . ed. r s. acad. 4.18 . de leg. l. 2. c. 14. chrys. hom. de resurrect . isidor . pelus . l. 2. ep. 192. christianity not myst. p. 80 , 81. p. 84. p. 86. p. 81. p. 88. p. 82. p. 8● . answer 1● serm. p. 5. possevin . appar . in genebrard . p. 6. p. 7. p. 7. p. 5. p. 8. answer to the archbishop , &c. p. 4. p. 17. p. 67. letter of resolut p. 3. considerat . on the explication , &c. by dr. w. p. 30. considerat . on the explication by dr. w. p. 30. answer to the archbishop , p. 21. an answer to several late treatises, occasioned by a book entituled a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome, and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it. the first part by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. 1673 approx. 510 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 189 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2004-05 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a71070 wing s5559 estc r564 11873436 ocm 11873436 50175 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a71070) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 50175) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 751:41 or 826:11) an answer to several late treatises, occasioned by a book entituled a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome, and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it. the first part by edward stillingfleet ... stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. [86], 291 p. printed by r.w. for henry mortlock, london : 1673. errata: prelim. p. [87]. a second part with title, a second discourse in vindication of the protestant grounds of faith ... london, 1673, was published during trinity term. reproduction of original in duke university library and huntington library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng stillingfleet, edward, 1635-1699. -discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome. catholic church -controversial literature. church of england -relations -catholic church. idols and images. 2004-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2004-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-03 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2004-03 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion imprimatur , sam. parker r. in christo patri ac d no. d no. gilberto , arch. episc. cantuar. à sac . dom. april 15. 1673. an answer to several late treatises , occasioned by a book entituled a discourse concerning the idolatry practised in the church of rome , and the hazard of salvation in the communion of it . by edward stillingfleet d. d. chaplain in ordinary to his majesty . the first part. london , printed by r. w. for henry mortlock , and are to be sold at his shop , at the sign of the phoenix in st. paul's church-yard . 1673. the general preface . it is not for any pleasure i take in controversie , nor out of a resolution to maintain what i have once written , that i expose my self again to the censures of some , and the rage of others , in defence of our church against the church of rome : but out of a just sense of the weight and goodness of the cause i have undertaken ; which ( if my affection to it hath not strangely blinded my judgement ) doth highly concern us as men , as english men , and as christians . for it is the cause of sense and reason , against the absurd doctrines they impose on both ; it is the cause of our nation against the usurpation and tyranny of a forrain power ; it is the cause of the true faith and christianity , against the errors and corruptions of the roman church . to abandon such a cause as this , were to betray the things which ought to be most dear to us : for we cannot be reconciled to that church on any easier terms , than renouncing our sense and reason , enslaving our country , and hazarding our salvation . and what can they give us in exchange for these ? it was the last of those three heads , which gave occasion to the late so much railed at , and so little confuted book : which no sooner appeared , but as if some dreadful monster had risen out of the earth , some crossed themselves and kept as far out of the sight of it , as they could ; others made hideous out-crys and grievous complaints ; and the more fearful sort were forbidden either looking on it , or entertaining any discourse about it . upon which i pleased my self that i had not added another chapter to the book ; for if that number had agreed with the ten particulars , it had passed among them for the beast with seven heads and ten horns ; and they would have been glad their city upon seven hills could have been so excused . but this unusual noise and clamour awakened the curiosity of many who love to see strange sights ; and that which otherwise might have been wholly neglected as a book , was enquired after and looked into , being represented as a monster . but when they found that this evil spirit ( as they accounted it ) which themselves had raised , was not to be laid again by hard words and ill language ; they began to consider what other course was to be taken to suppress it . and forthwith there starts up a young sophister among them , and bids them be of good heart ; for by letting flie at him some squibs and crackers he did not question , but he should put this monster into such a rage , as to make him fall upon himself ; which design being highly approved ; in a short time came forth that dapper piece , called doct. stillingfleet against doct. stillingfleet . it was a notable plot , and cunningly managed , as the reader may see by the following answer to it . after him a graver person undertakes the service ; but as hasenmullerus tells us , when ignatius loyola sent one of his brethren at rome to dispossess a person , he gave him this instruction , that he should be sure to come behind the devil , if he would drive him out ; accordingly this n. o. steals quite behind my book , and began to confute it at the wrong end , hoping by that means to drive out the evil spirit which he supposed to lodge in the body of it . which he hath performed with great dexterity and success , as the reader may be fully satisfied in the reply here following . these two i undertook , before any other appeared , and intended to have published these two answers by themselves ; but finding others that had written against me on the same argument i was willing to bring as much as i could together to prevent confusion or repetition . all which relating to the principles of faith , and the rosolution , and rule of it , i made account to have dispatched at once ; but finding the book begin to swell into too great a bulk , i have respited some parts of it to another opportunity . when those two men had done their feats , an ancient and experienced exorcist ; ( and yet for all that no conjurer ) saw plainly this spirit must be conjured down ; and thefore knowing the great efficacy of charms , he gives his book the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stillingfleeton . which words put me almost in as great a fright as the holy chair would have done ; i began to consider , whether mengus or any other of their skilful men had ever used those emphatical words before ; but i am willing to believe it was the sole invention of j. v. c. and i doubt not but they will do well hereafter in exorcisms , especially after the holy potion , when the person to be dispossessed is made sufficiently sick with rue and sallet-oyl and other excellent physick for devils . i find by some of their authors , it is a great matter to get the right name of the spirit ; this j. v. c. hath hit unluckily , in calling this monster the leviathan sporting in the waters , since they have thrown out so many empty vessels for him to play with . and his three books of charms , have been no unpleasant entertainment ; but he is gone ; and i love not to tread hard on the graves of my enemies . what there appears material in him ( if anything do so ) i shall consider it in its proper place ; chiefly for the sake of my iudicious adversary dr. t. g. who was the first and i think the only person that hath discovered his book to be a learned treatise . but my generous adversaries , finding so little success in single attempts , they next fall upon me with chain-shot ; viz. a collection of several treatises against doct. stillingfleet . to make up the number , they bring in one before published , to try an experiment what force that can have in conjunction which had none of it self . the first undertaker therein , is , the very calm and ( according to his new christian name ) serene mr. cressy , the man that hath learnt to mortifie passions by mystical divinity ; but is so far from being sublimed and rectified , by that chymical way of devotion , that he seems yet to remain in the very dregs of them : the man , that hath so accustomed him-self to legends , that he cannot write against an adversary , without making one of him . and although there be many very pleasant ones in his church-history , yet i hardly think there are many more wonderful , than ( if his insinuations had any colour of truth in them ) the first part of my life had been . for by making me so active in those times , when i was uncapable of understanding what they were , he seems to represent me as one that had so passionate a zeal for presbytery in my cradle , that i would suck of none but a scottish nurse ; that the first word i pronounced was covenant ; that i would go to school to none but lay-elders ; and was cursing meroz before the parliament at eight years old . is not this a hopeful beginning for a good legend ? will he , saith he , or they damn the execrable covenant ? as though , i had ever any thing to do with it but when i renounced it ! if i should tell him , that as great a friend as he takes me to have been to presbytery and the late times , even then i was entred into episcopal orders by a most worthy and learned prelate of our church ; that , i never subscribed any address to the usurpers , as some in the world have done , and those who would now be thought the kings most loyal subjects ; that i never drew off any one person from their allegiance to the king to submit to to the popes nuncio , ( let those who did it clear themselves ) even such an apology would give too much countenance to so pitiful a calumniator . i thank him that he hath not charged me with laying the first platform of presbytery at geneva , or having a hand in the first and second admonitions in the days of queen elizabeth ; and i might as will charge him with the gunpowder treason , as he doth me with any thing about the covenant . by this we may guess what ecclesiastical history we are to expect from him , who writes so at random about the matters of our own times . but the man is to be pitied ; he was under one of mother juliana's fits , he writ with a good mind , but he knew not what . some vent must be given to a violent fermentation , else the vessel might burst asunder ; and i hope the good man is somewhat more at ease , since he purged away so much choler . i assure him i can with pleasure read what he wrote with rage ; and laugh at the violence of such passions , which like a gun ill charged may give fire and make a great noise , but doth the greatest mischief to him that holds it . if i would pursue him through all his heats , i must undergo the ordeal-tryal , touch firebrands without hurting my self : which although i might do , yet i know my adversaries are so implacable , that even that would not convince them of my innocence . i leave him therefore to grow cooler and wiser ; but i beseech him for his own sake , that he would attempt no more the justifying the union of nothing with nothing , and for the sake of religion , that he would not call god any more an incomprehensible nothing ; a description fit only for the atheists catechism . if there were any thing in his railing book which looked like reason or argument i might perhaps at my leisure be perswaded to answer it ; though i do not love to have to do with mad men , no not in their lucid intervals . the next that follows is one that goes about to vindicate the roman churches devotions and doctrine of repentance and indulgencies , he is a meer pattern of meekness , compared with s. c. , he writes pertinently and without the others bitterness and passion . his great endeavour is to clear the honour of his church , from the absurd doctrines and practices charged upon it . and the force of all , he saith lies in this , that where the church hath defined nothing in her councils , it is to no purpose to object that such doctrines are taught by some in it ; for those who defend their separation from the communion of a church by reason of its erroneous or corrupt doctrines must make it appear that those are taught by it , and the belief of them also exacted from its subjects . to this purpose s. c. likewise speaks ( in some of his lucid intervalls ) and i perceive this is become a common topick among them , to take off the odium of such opinions and practices as they are willing enough , but ashamed to defend , which i shall in this place briefly remove . the thing i was to prove was , that persons in the communion of the roman church do run great hazard of their salvation : for which i instanced particularly in several opinions and practices which are very apt to hinder a good life which is necessary to salvation . now a twofold question here arises . 1. whether the church may justly be charged with those doctrines and practices ? 2. whether , although the church may not directly be charged to have decreed them in her councils , yet so much countenance and encouragement be not commonly given to them in that church , that particular persons do run great hazard of their salvation by reason of them ? for which we are to consider , that it hath been the method of the roman church to allow many more things in common belief and practice than it hath dared for very shame to decree in councils , especially when such things have been objected by her enemies . in this case it hath been thought the most prudent course for the councils to speak deceitfully and in general terms , so as to give as little advantage as may be to their enemies , and yet to retain ground enough to uphold their former opinions and practices : which still continuing in vogue and reputation , become so much the more dangerous to mens souls , because their councils having had opportunity to have declared effectually against them were so far from it , that by their doubtful expressions they have left ground enough for the continuance of them . now from hence the directors of conscience among them frame their opinions , and the people think it their duty blindly to follow them ; and supposing any one among them should scruple any such doctrine or practice , to whom must he resort but to his confessors , and will any such dare to condemn what is generally received although not decreed by councils ? or if he should , dare any person rely on his private judgement when it is contrary to the most received doctrine or practice ? besides , the promises of infallibility are supposed by them to be primarily made to the church , and only by way of representation to the council ; and therefore doctrines or practices generally received and allowed by the teachers of the church and the guides of conscience , must be received by them as true and good ; for otherwise those promises would fail to the church in its diffusive capacity , and consequently , supposing no general council , it were possible for the most erroneous and pernicious doctrines and practices to prevail in the church , which must utterly overthrow all pretence to infallibility . but in our present case we need not run so far , for i shall here prove that in the most material points insisted on by n. o. viz. the doctrine of the efficacy of the sacraments ex opere operato , and of indulgences , we do justly charge the church of rome even in the decrees of her councils with laying such a foundation , as doth overthrow the necessity of a good life . the way he takes to vindicate those points from this consequence is this , that the sacramenta mortuorum , viz. baptism and penance which confer justifying grace do require a subject rightly disposed ; and the sacramenta vivorum , viz. confirmation , eucharist and extreme unction , do require the receiver to be actually in a state of grace ; the same , he saith of indulgences , that the benefit of them doth suppose a man put into a state of grace by the sacrament of penance ; so that the whole matter is put upon this issue , whether their doctrine concerning the conditions by which a man may be put into a state of grace , be not such as doth overthrow the necessity of a good life ? and it being acknowledged that the sacrament of penance doth confer the grace of justification on all persons rightly disposed for it , our only business is to enquire what necessary conditions their church requires in order to it . for which we appeal to the words of the council of trent , for session 14. c. 4. that plainly determins , that imperfect contrition or attrition although it cannot bring men to justification without the sacrament of penance , yet it doth dispose men for obtaining the grace of god by the sacrament of penance . if we joyn this now with another decree of the same council , viz. * that the sacraments do conferr grace on all those who are disposed to receive it ; i leave it now to any one to judge , whether from hence it doth not necessarily follow , that all those that have but imperfect contrition , or bare attrition for their sins , are by the sacrament of penance put into a state of grace , according to the doctrine of the council of trent ? and how far this overthrows the necessity of a good life , will appear from the explication of contrition and attrition given by the same council . contrition is defined , to be , a grief of mind and detestation of sin committed , with a purpose of sinning no more ; therefore imperfect contrition or attrition must be such a grief and detestation of sin past , as implies but an imperfect purpose of sinning no more . from which it evidently follows , that by the doctrine of this council a man may be put into a state of grace without so much as a firm or perfect purpose of sinning no more . and can there be a doctrine invented by men that doth more effectually destroy the necessity of a good life than this doth ? for the state of grace puts a man actually into the favour of god ; and supposing him to fall into mortal sin afterwards , all he needs to do , is only to repeat the same kind of attrition and receive the sacrament of penance and he is perfectly sound again and recovers the favour of god. i know the council there saith , that this attrition must exclude voluntatem peccandi , as o. n. observes ; but that implies no more than a man 's not having at that time a purpose to sin again ; and the council distinguishes it from the propositum non peccandi de caetero , or the purpose not to sin again , which the council applies to contrition as the other to attrition . and cajetan himself quoted by o. n. calls it an imperfect purpose of not sinning . so that after all the evasions which have been yet , or can be produced , the roman churches doctrine of repentance and indulgences doth most dangerously obstruct devotion and a good life . i desire therefore o. n. and his brethren to be a little more sparing in their censures of us as unfaithfully representing the doctrine of their church , for we understand it much better , and represent it more truly , than they desire . but supposing the words of the council were ambiguous in this matter , what better help can we have to understand it , than the sense of their most eminent and learned instructours of conscience ? and those not of the single order of jesuits , as some would have it believed , but of all sorts among them . melchior canus who was far enough from being a friend of the jesuits , saith expresly , although a man knows he hath not contrition but bare attrition , he may come to the sacrament and receive grace by it ; for which he gives this reason , because baptism and penance , are sacramenta mortuorum ; and therefore those who are under mortal sin if they have attrition whereby the impediment is removed may not only come to them , but go away with the grace conferred , because the sacraments always conferr grace , where the impediment is removed . and he is followed herein , saith morinus , not only by lopez , pesantius , nicol. isambertus professor of divinity at paris , but by the fargreatest number of their modern divines . i shall not so much as mention the jesuitical casuists whose testimonies are produced in the jesuits morals , or provincial letters , such as filliutius , amicus , sa , escobar , bauny , &c. but i shall name some of far greater authority among them . o. n. frequently cites paul layman with expressions of esteem , and he determins that true contrition is not necessary to the sacrament of penance after the commission of mortal sin , but attrition is sufficient although a man know it to be only attrition . if they had made attrition only necessary to the sacrament of baptism , they might have pleaded , that they had not destroyed the necessity of a good life afterwards to preserve the grace conveyed in baptism ; but we see in the case of mortal sin afterwards toties quoties no more is necessary but a new act of attrition , and that not only when a man mistakes it to be contrition ; but though a man knows it to be bare attrition . i confess cardinal tolet , although he asserts the substance of the doctrine , yet he saith attrition only serves when it is mistaken for contrition ; but this morinus tells us the later divines laugh at and explode . cardinal lugo not only contends for the doctrine , but asserts it to be the doctrine of the council of trent , viz. that attrition with the sacrament of penance is sufficient for the grace of justification ; and quotes suarez , vasquez and maeratius , as sufficiently proving from the words of the council , that attrition is the next disposition to the grace of justification conveyed by the sacrament ; and this attrition he there shews against sylvius , doth not imply an imperfect love of god above all ; which is directly contrary to o. n. and in another place he proves , that a man is not bound always to contrition for his sins although they be mortal ; for saith he , if he were , then a man having attrition cannot be excused but only by invincible ignorance from a new mortal sin in coming to the sacrament of penance without contrition , because some time is commonly supposed to intervene between a mans attrition and his justification by the sacrament , in which time he would sin mortally by omitting contrition , if he were obliged to it ; but this , saith he , is against the common opinion of divines , that a man contracts any new guilt by omitting contrition . nay he afterwards determins , that a man that hath received the sacrament of penance with bare attrition is not bound , under the guilt of mortal sin , for omitting it , to an act of contrition at the point of death ; which is , he saith , the commonly received opinion among them , and he quotes diana , coninch , becanus , layman , fagundez , faber , turrianus , salas and others for it . the great argument he brings , is , because confessors do not think themselves obliged to put men in mind of an act of contrition at that time as necessary , as common experience shews . and are not such confessors excellent guides to heaven the mean while ? if they be , they have found out a much broader way and wider gate than ever christ intended . what not one single act of contrition necessary ! no , not at the point of death ! what pity it is for sinners , you have not the keeping of heaven-gates ? how do they want the sacrament of penance in hell , for no doubt there is attrition good store there ! but above all of them commend me to honest gregor . de valentiâ , who not only makes contrition unnecessary , but saith it is rather a hindrance to the effect of the sacraments . from whence morinus justly infers , that a confessor ought not to perswade the penitent to contrition ; nor the penitent to endeavour after it . nay morinus shews , that grave men and famous in their church do assert that a penitent having received the sacrament of penance , is not bound to so much as one act of contrition or the love of god in order to his reconciliation with god. yea , although a man hath hated god to the last act of his life if he receives the sacrament of penance , they deny that it is necessary for him to be contrite for his sins or to love god. nothing could go beyond this but what follows in him , that the excellency of the evangelical sacraments above the legal consists in this , that the evangelical sacraments have freed us from the most heavy yoke 〈◊〉 of contrition and the love of god. o admirable guides of conscience ! i do not at all question but jews , turks and heathens have a much better and truer notion of repentance , than these men ; the pagan philosophers were christians to them . and what injury have i done them now , in charging such things upon them which obstruct devotion and overthrow the necessity of a good life ? for i hardly think it possible to contrive a doctrine more effectual for that end , than to tell men that the sacraments of the gospel do free men from that heavy yoke contrition and the love of god. but supposing there were no such foundation for this doctrine in the council of trent , as we see there is would there be no danger to mens salvation , if their confessors generally told then these things , and they knew it to be th● current opinion among them ? is there 〈◊〉 danger of falling into the ditch whe● the blind lead the blind , unless general council expresly allow of it ? 〈◊〉 there no danger by empericks a●● mountebanks , unless the whole co●ledge of physicians approve them ? an● of all sorts of empericks , the worst a●● such casuists and confessors . is ther● no way to magnify the sacerdotal office unless they have a power to trepan soul into eternal flames for want of true repentance ; by making them believe th● priests absolution with bare attritio● will make all even with god ? or 〈◊〉 this doctrine only a decoy to draw great sinners into your nets ? and all this while is your church innocent , which at least sees and will not reform these things ? in a. d. 1665. 24. of september and 18. may , 1666. the congregation of the inquisition at rome under alexander . 7. took upon them to censure 45. several propositions of the late casuists , as scandalous and pernicious to the souls of men , but not one of them relates to this doctrine of repentance , although the jansenists in france had complained of it . whence could this arise but from looking on it as the doctrine of their church ? indeed i find that on may 5. 1667. the pope caused a decree to be published straitly forbidding all persons in their debates about attrition , to condemn each other ; but it is worth our while to understand , what this controversie was , viz. whether bare attrition doth require an act of the love of god ; and although the negative be there said to be the more common opinion , yet the pope would not have the others that affirmed it to be censured . but not the least word against the sufficiency of bare attrition . are any of the books censured which assert this doctrine ? nay , they are published with great approbations . are any of the defenders of it discountenanced ? nay , they are persons in the highest esteem , dignity , and authority among them . are any cautions given to confessors to beware of these doctrines ? nay , these very books are purposely written and approved for their instruction and use . and if their church be innocent after all this , so was the iewish church in our saviours time ; for the corruptions that were then among them had no decree of the sanhedrin , that i find , for them ; it was only their schoolmen and casuists , the scribes and pharisees which introduced them . and yet our saviour thought mens souls in danger , when he bid them beware of the leaven of the pharisees . i confess when we debate the causes of separation from their communion , we think it then reasonable to alledge no more , than what they impose on all to believe and practice ( and we have enough of all conscience in that kind without going farther ) but when we represent the hazard of salvation to particular persons , we may then justly charge them with the pernicious doctrines and practices which are received and allowed among them , although not decreed by the church in councils . for otherwise it would be just , as if one should say to a man , that asked him , whether he might safely travel through such a country ? yes , without doubt you may , for although there be abundance of thieves and high-waymen , yet the prince or the state never approved them , or gave them licence to rob travellers . do you think any man would venture his person or his purse , on no better security ? yet such security as this , if it were true is all that such moderate men as o. n. or his brethren can give as to the roman church ; for they dare not deny the bad consequence of the doctrines and practices charged upon them , but only say , the church hath not decreed them . so much i thought necessary to say to this newest and most plausible pretence , which is made use of by the best advocates for the roman church . and now farewel to moderation ; for the two next which appeared on the stage against me , were two jesuits ; the one sent over a book , which if we look only at the bulk and thickness was a very substantial one , called by an odd antiphrasis , reason and religion : i have endeavoured to draw off all the spirit i could find in it , in the following discourses , but i am forced to leave a vast quantity of phlegm and caput mortuum behind . i shall say no more of him here , having occasion to speak so much of him in the discourses about the principles of faith , which will in a little time be ready to appear . the other is the stout defender of lgnatius loyola and the whole order of jesuits ; what , one man undertake to defend the jesuits as to their principles and practices ! and that in this age , which so well understands their maxims and conduct ! and in england too , where those of other orders and the secular priests love them so dearly ! but nothing is too brave or difficult , for a jesuit to attempt , however he comes off in it . as to ignatius loyola , i will come to terms with him ; if what he confesses as to his ignorant zeal , pious simplicity , frequent visions and extasies , extravagant preaching , unmannerly contempt of superiours do not prove him a fanatick , i am content to let him go . but what if ignatius himself being grown old , did suspect such frequent extasies and visions for illusions ? i desire him to look ribadineira , in his larger life to that purpose . but this matter of fanaticism must be referred to another place . i shall now only give a tast of the jesuits excellent way of defending the principles destructive to government which i charged his order with . the first was , that government was so originally in the people , that they by their representatives may call their soveraign to an account and alter the form of government . now mark this answer . this principle ( whatsoever truth it may have in speculation ) is by no means to be preached to the people , who are apt enough of themselves to stretch cases and pick quarrels with their best governours , yet was it taught many ages before the jesuits were so much as thought of . welfare the man for his plain-dealing ; the doctrine it seems is true enough , but the people are not fit to be trusted with the management of it , no , not in their places and callings ; no , no , let the jesuits alone with these things , they know just the very nick of time , when to be iudges and executioners too . the next principle is , the popes power of deposing princes , to which he again answers roundly . you are then to know , sir , that the doctrine was long ago taught by almost all orders and professions , seculars , regulars , divines , lawyers , before the jesuits were in being . a very catholick doctrine it seems it is ! what a stirr do other people make with mincing this matter , i know not how ; give me a man that speaks out , and lets princes understand what their general doctrine is in this matter , lest they may possibly be deceived , as though it were only the bold assertion of some few persons among them . what wonder then saith he , if bellarmin and 3. or 4. more jesuits were carried away with such a torrent of doctors who went before them ? nay , in my opinion the only wonder is , how any persons among them dare think otherwise , this doctrin having as he tells us , so catholick a consent to the truth of it . but in earnest sir , is the doctrine true , or false nay , sir , i beseech you to excuse me in that : for as he saith , afterwards about the popes power 〈◊〉 absolving subjects , i beg leave to wave such curious controversie● : what , a jesuit beg leave to wave curious controversies ! what is become 〈◊〉 all their vast tomes of scholastical an● casuistical divinity ? are no curious controversies handled in them ? an● were you bred up among them and yet ha●● controversies meerly because curious ▪ no , no , we understand you better than so that is only a curious controversies with you which endangers your safety , if you speak out , for it is a needless kind of curiosity for a man to betray himself . here in these practical countries it is sometimes dangerous speaking truth in their sense ; but at such a speculative place as rome is , there those may be wholesome and catholick truths , which ●ere are but niceties and curiosities . but doth he not say , the jesuits have solemnly renounced the doctrine ? yes , but have a care how far you believe him : we poor simple islanders might understand by this , that they had declared it to be false and pernicious . there is no such matter i will assure you , but upon the stirrs in france they renounced the publishing it , they renounced it as they were in france , but thought it good doctrine at rome : they are forbidden to treat any more of it , because of the odiousness of it to princes , and that is all the renouncing they ever meant . the third principle is , the lawfulness of killing kings , as to which , he saith , he cannot name the person that ever taught it in those terms : a good reason for that , because when they would have them killed they call them tyrants . and so grants dominicus soto and marian have asserted it , he might have namse more if he had pleased . i could not des● a more pleasant task than to pursue 〈◊〉 through the remainder of his discourse wherein he undertakes to vindicate the jesuits practices , but these have been much exposed by men of their own region , that i may spare my pains in th● preface ; and we may easily guess h● hard he was put to it , when he mak● the letter of the bishop of angelopol to be forged at port-royal by the ja● senists . and thus he hath shifted 〈◊〉 fault from the indies to europe , 〈◊〉 to vindicate some papists there fre● idolatry , he charges others here with forge● ▪ and ●et to this as a full answer , the 〈◊〉 ans●erer of the seasonable discour● doth referr us . and out of his admiral learning and skill in history desires 〈◊〉 adversary , for his satisfaction that the can be no danger of resuming abby lan● of popery should return , to go into germany where there are so many papist and protestant princes , noble men and gentlemen , that have ( especially since the treaty at munster ) either bishopricks , abbeys or the like confirmed to them by the pope . how ! confirmed to them by the pope ! what will not these men dare to say ? i perceive ignorance serves them for other purposes than meerly to be the mother of devotion . if at least this worthy author could be ignorant of so notorious a thing as pope innocents bull published on purpose to null the treaty at munster , as prejudicial to the catholick religion , to the apostolical see , to churches and other holy places and persons and ecclesiastical rights . in the body of the bull he saith , that his nuncio there ( who was afterwards pope alexander the seveth ) did protest against these articles , as void , null , unjust , and agreed upon by persons that had no power , and that they were to be so looked on by all . but the pope did not think this sufficient , but declares all those articles that related to liberty of religion , church-lands , or any ecclesiastical rights , or brought any the least prejudice to them or might be thought or pretended so to do , to be null , void , invalid , unjust , damned , reprobate , vain , and without any force or power , and that they shall remain so for ever ; and that no person , though never so much sworn to observe those articles shall be bound by such oath ; no right , title , plea , prescription , shall accrue to any by vertue of them : and therefore out of the plenitude of apostolical power he doth absolutely damn , reprobate , null and cassate all those articles and protests before god of the nullity of them ; and restores all persons and places to their ancient possessions notwithstanding them , with very much more to the same purpose . this was dated at rome apud sanctam mariam majorem sub annulo piscatoris die 26 novemb. and solemnly published there the third of jan. 1651. in the eighth year of his pontificat . call you this , sir , the popes confirming them ! is it credible that he who in the beginning of his answer had charged the late protestant books , ( which he most ingeniously calls libels ) to be crammed with nothing else but what we know to be false , should within a few pages have the confidence to affirm in the face of the world so notorious an untruth ? but i leave this ingenious author , to be chastised for this and other his extravagancies , by his worthy adversary , and return to my own . after all these unsuccessful attempts at last the knight himself resolves to encounter the dragon ; and accordingly he buckles on his armour , mounts his stead , and , according to all ancient and modern pictures of the combat , directs his lance into the very mouth of it ; wisely considering , if the head were mortally wounded , the whole body would fall to the ground . after him at a convenient distance follows his squire i. s. who had a particular spight at the dragons tayl , and without fear or wit falls unmercifully upon it , and in his own opinion , hath chopt it into a thousand pieces . but such mischievous creatures whose strength lies scattered in all their parts , do often rise up when they are triumphed over as dead , and give their most deadly wounds , when they are thought to lye gasping for breath . it happened that when t. g's . answer to the first part of my book came out , i was before engaged in the defence of the protestant principles of faith against the guide in controversies and e. w. ( the author of those two learned treatises as t. g. calls them , protestancy without principles , and religion and reason ) part of which being then in the press , i was forced to go through with that , before i could take his book into consideration . and thereupon i resolved to dispatch all those which relate to the principles of faith together ; and then to proceed to the principles of worship in answer to him , which ( god willing ) i intend as soon as the former part is finished . all that i shall take notice of him here , is to represent the ingenuity of his dealing with me in his preface , wherein he charges me with dissenting from the doctrine of the church of england in accusing the church of rome of idolatry . and by this one instance i desire the reader to judge what candour and sincerity he is to expect in his book . for the sense of the church of england i appealed to the book of homilies : not to any doubtful , or general or single passage therein , but to the design of one of the largest and most elaborat● homilies in the whole book ; consisting of three several parts , the last of which i● said not to be meerly for the people but for the instruction of those who were t● teach them . the design of that last part is thus set down . 1. that popish images and the idols of the gentils are all one concerning themselves . 2. that they have been and be worshipped in our time in like form and manner as were the idols of the gentils . and for that idolatry standeth chiefly in the mind , it shall in this part first be proved that our image-maintainers , have had and have the same opinions and judgement of saints whose images they have made and worshipped as the gentils idolaters had of their gods ; and afterwards shall be declared that our image-maintainers and worshippers have used and use the same outward rites , and manner of honouring , and worshipping their images , as the gentils did use before their idols , and that therefore they commit idolatry , as well inwardly as outwardly , as did the wicked gentils idolaters ; and this that homily is intended for the proof of : which it doth very fully . but , saith t. g. , why did i not appeal for the sense of our church to the 39. articles ? as though the approbation of the book of homilies were not one of them , viz the 35. the second book of homilies the several titles whereof we have joyned under this article ( among which titles the second is this of the peril of idolatry ) doth contain a godly and wholesome doctrine and necessary for these times . which articles were not only allowed and approved by the queen , but confirmed by the subscription of the hand of the arch-bishop and bishops of the upper house , and by the subscription of the whole clergy in the nether house of convocation a. d. 1571. now i desire t. g. to resolve me whether men of any common understanding would have subscribed to this book of homilies in this manner , if they had believed the main doctrine and design of one of them had been false and pernicious ? as they must have done if they had thought the practice of the roman church to be free from idolatry . i will put th● case that any of the bishops then had thought the charge of idolatry had been unjust , and that it had subverted the foundation of ecclesiastical authority , that there could have been no church , or right ordination if the roman church had been guilty of idolatry ; would they have inserted this into the articles , when it was in their power to have left it out ? and that the homilies contained a wholesome and godly doctrine , which in their consciences they believed to be false and pernicious ? i might as well think that the council of trent would have allowed calvins institutions , as containing a wholesome and godly doctrine ; as that men so perswaded would have allowed it the homily against the peril of idolatry . and how is it possible to understand the sense of our church better , than by such publick and authentick acts of it , which all persons who are in any place of trust in the church must subscribe , and d●clare their approbation of them ? this homily hath still continued the same , the article the very same , and if so they must acknowledge this hath been , and is to this day the sense of our church . but saith t. c. the subscribing the book of homilies , as containing a godly and wholesome doctrine , doth not evince that every particular doctrine contained in it is such . be it so : but i hope it doth evince that the subscribers did not think the main doctrine of any one homily to be false ? surely there is a great deal of difference between some particular passages and expressions in these homilies , and that which is the main design and foundation of any one of them . but in this case we are to observe , that they who deny the church of rome to be guilty of idolatry , do not only look on the charge as false , but as of dangerous consequence ; and therefore although men may subscribe to a book in general as containing wholesome and godly doctrine , though they be not so certain of the truth of every passage in it , yet they can never do it with a good conscience if they believe any great and considerable part of the doctrine therein contained to be false and dangerous . such a subscription would be as apparently shuffling and dishonest as is the evasion of this testimony which t. g. makes use of for want of a better . i shall in the next place shew the current doctrine of the church ever since the reformation to have been agreeable to this homily of the peril of idolatry . in the injunctions published by k. edward vi. a. d. 1547. the extirpation of popery is called the suppression of idolatry and superstition . in the second year of edward vi. arch-bishop cranmer published his articles of visitation , whereof the 6. and the last are about the taking away images , pictures , and all other monuments of feigned miracles , pilgrimages , idolatry and superstition . in the second liturgy by edward vi. after the communion , was a rubrick annexed , in which the adoration of the host is expresly called idolatry . this is that very rubrick , of which t. g. , according to his excellent skill in the offices of our church , saith it is not yet more then a dozen years since it was inserted into the communion book ; which he might have found above a 100. years before in the book of edward vi. in the injunctions of queen elizabeth , a. d. 1559. art. 2. and 23. all shrines , tables , pictures , &c. are commanded to be taken away and destroyed and all other monuments of feigned miracles , idolatry and superstition . and that 〈◊〉 may not think it was only a sudden hea● at the first reformation which made the● charge the church of rome with idolatry , long after in a form of thanksgiving in the 37. of queen elizabeth a. d. 1594. popery is called that idolatrous religion : as it was in the beginning of her reign in the excellen● apology for the church of england and i desire him , or any one else , 〈◊〉 produce any one bishop or divine of not● in the church of england , who during all h●r reign did deny the church of rome to be guilty of idolatry . but why then was it not inserted in the 39. articles ? in which t. g. observes , the adoration of images is not rejected as idolatry , but only as a fond thing , vainly invented , nor as repugnant to the plain words of scripture , but as being rather repugnant to the word of god , which plainly gives us to understand , that they had done their endeavours to find a command but could not . a most ingenious criticism ! when himself and all others of their divines yield that adoration of images , which our church charges them with , art. 22. ( viz. not barely worshipping but adoration of images ) to be idolatry and plainly repugnant to scripture . were the composers of our articles so sensless as not to think idolatry repugnant to scripture ; or not to think adoration of images to be idolatry ; or not to think the church of rome guilty of it , when the article saith the romish doctrine concerning worshipping and adoration as well of images as of reliques , & c ? it is not meerly the practice used in the church of rome , but their very doctrine concerning adoration of images which is here charged ; and can any church teach adoration of images and not be guilty of idolatry ? and for his criticism about being rather repugnant , it had been utterly lost if he had looked into the latin articles where the words are , immo verbo dei contradicit ; whereby it appears that rather is not used as a term of diminution , but of a more vehement affirmation . i now come to the exceptions he takes to the particular testimonies i produced of the most eminent bishops and divines of our church , ever since the reformation , who have all concurred in this charge of idolatry . two parts in three he excepts against as incompetent witnesses in the case : how few of the iury would any malefactor allow if such frivolous exceptions might serve his turn ? the two first he excepts against are the two arch-bishops whitgift and abbot as puritanically inclined . but as it unhappily falls out , one of them was never mentioned by me , and the other never till now suspected for a puritan . the abbot i mentioned was not george abbot arch-bishop of canterbury , but robert abbot bishop of salisbury ; and it is the first time we ever heard that a bishop of salisbury was suspended from his metropolitical jurisdiction . but they of the church of rome have a faculty of doing greater wonders with five words , than changing a bishop into an arch-bishop . i hope he understands the church he is of , better than that he hath left , or else we are like to have a sad account of history from him . but why i beseech you , after all his zeal and indefatigable pains for the church of england , must arch-bishop whitgift be thrown away to the puritans ? if he had proved t. c. at the same time arch-bishop of canterbury , there might have been some reason to suspect whitgift to have been of the puritan side ; for all the world know they were grea● adversaries on that very account of th● puritan cause . but was not whitgi●● for the lambeth articles ? and wh● then ? are the dominicans puritans and no papists ? if your church may hav● liberty not to determin those nice points why may not ours ? and so both parties remain of our church , as long as they contradict no received articles among us . but the lambeth-articles were neve● intended for any more than as respons● prudentum to silence disputes in the university . and i believe none of the puritan party after that , took arch-bishop whitgift to be a patron of thei● cause . but if these will not serve his turn , 〈◊〉 have others ready , whom for meer sham● he will not say were puritans , or puritanically inclined . and the first of these is an arch-bishop too , and that is arch-bishop bancroft ; and if he be cast out for a puritan , surely there never was any bishop of the church of england . in his sermon preached at pauls cross on 1 john 4. 1. he hath these words speaking of the papists . the popish false prophets will suffer the people to try nothing , but do teach them wholly to depend on them ; and to that purpose they have indeed three notable sleights . first they forbid them the reading of the scriptures . and the better to be obeyed therein they will not permit the scriptures to be translated into the vulgar tongue . whereof it came to pass that the people were so easily seduced , and drawn from christ to the pope ; from his merits to the saints , and their own merits ; from his bloody sacrifice , whereby only sins are remitted , to their most dry and fruitless sacrifice ; from the spiritual food of his body and blood , unto a carnal and capernaitical transubstantiation ; from the calling upon his name to an invocation of saints : and from their sure trust and confidence in his death to a vain imagination of the vertue of their masses , pilgrimages , pardons , and i know not what intolerable superstition and idolatry . i hope arch-bishop bancroft may for once pass for no puritan with t. g. but what will he say , if the only persons he produces as most partial of his side , do give in evidence against him ? bishop mountague is the first , whose words are these in the book cited by him . our predecessors and fathers coming late out of popery , living near unto papists and popish times , conversing with them , having been nuzzled and brought up amongst them and knowing that images used to be crept unto , incensed , worshipped , and adored among them , &c. what thinks he , is not this all one as to charge them with idolatry ? and more plainly in his former book , but whatsoever you say , however you qualify the thing with gentle words , we say in your practice you far exceed ; and give them that honour which is latria a part of divine respect and worship . and afterwards saith , the people go to it with downright adoration , and your new schools defend that the same respect is due to the representer , as must be given to the representee . so that the crucifix is to be reverenced with the the self-same honour that christ jesus is . ablasphemy not heard of till thomas aquinas set it on foot . clear these enormities , and others like these , then come and we may talk and soon agree concerning honour and respect unto reliques or images of saints , or christ ; till then we cannot answer it unto our maker , to give his honour unto a creature . his next is pet. heylin ; and now i hope we have at last hit upon a man far enough from being a puritan ; yet this very person gives plain evidence against him . for i● his 4th . sermon on the tares preached a● white-hall ianuary 27. 1638. h● hath these words . so it is also in the point of images , first introduced into the church for ornament , history , and imitation . had they staid there it had been well , and no faul● found with them . — but when the schools began to state it , that the same veneration was to be afforded to the type and prototype , then came the doctrine to the growth . when and by whom , and where it was first so stated is not easie to determine , and indeed not necessary . it is enough that we behold it in the fruits . and what fruits think you could it bear , but most gross idolatry , greater than which was never known among the gentils ? witness their praying not before , but to the crucifix , and calling on the very cross , the wooden and material cross , both to increase their righteousness and remit their sins . and for the images of the saints , they that observe with what laborious pilgrimages , magnificent processions , solemn offerings , and in a word , with what affections , prayers , and humble bendings of the body , they have been and are worshipped in the church of rome , might very easily conceive that she was once again relapsed into her ancient paganism . with much more to the same purpose . his only person remaining , is mr. thorndike , a man of excellent learning and great piety , but if we should grant , that he held some thing singular in this matter ; what is that to the constant opinion of our church ? and yet even mr. thorndike himself in a paper sent by him 〈◊〉 some whom t. g. know's , not long before his death , saith , that , to pray to saints for those things which only god can give ( as all papist do is by the proper sense of the word● down-right idolatry . if they say ▪ their meaning is by a figure only to desire them to procure their requests of god : how dare any christian trust his soul with that church which teaches that which must needs be idolatry in all that understand not the figure ? so that upon the whole matter t. g. cannot produce any on● person of our church that hath clearly an● wholly acquitted the church of rome from the charge of idolatry . it seems then 〈◊〉 church hath been made up of puritans i● t. g's . sense of them . but if these do no● satisfy him what doth he think of the arch-bishop and bishops and clergy of the convocation . a. d. 1640. were 〈◊〉 these puritans too ? and yet in the sevent● canon they have these words . and albeit at the time or reforming this church from that gross superstition of popery , it was carefully provided that all means should be used to root out of the minds of the people , both the inclination thereto and memory thereof ; especially of the idolatry committed in the mass , for which cause all popish altars were demolished , &c. what can more express the sense of our church , than the concurrent opinion of arch-bishops , bishops and clergy of both provinces met in convocation ? when we see they so lately , charged the church of rome with idolatry . let us now consider what exceptions he takes against the other witnesses produced by me . jewel , bilson , davenant , all eminent bishops of our church and of great learning , are cast away at once , as incompetent persons . but why so ? why , saith t. g. they were all excepted against by our late soveraign k. charcles i. in his third paper to henderson . that is a shrewd prejudice indeed to their authority to be rejected by a prince of so excellent a judgement and so cordial a friend to the church of england . but it is good to be sure whether it be so or no. all that he saith of bishop iewel is this , and though i much reverence bishop iewel ' s memory , i never thought him infallible . so then , he must he puritanically inclined ; but whence does that follow ? not surely from the kings reverencing his memory , for that were to reflect upon the king himself ; not from his not thinking him infallible . for i dare say , the king never thought the pope infallible ; must be needs therefore think him a puritan ? surely never man was such a friend to the puritans as this t. g. who without any ground gives them away some of the greatest honours of our church , and ( if the testimony last cited be of any force to prove one a puritan , ) all mankind , and himself too : for i plainly perceive by this preface that he is not infallible . yet for all this we will not let go jewel , no nor bilson , davenant , white , usher , downam , what ever t. g. saith against them . indeed k. charles excepts against bilson for his principles of civil government , but not a word of his disaffection to the church of england : for bishop davenant , the king saith he is none of those to whom he appealed , or would submit unto , and with very good reason , for the king had appealed to the practice of the primitive church , and the universal consent of fathers ; therefore bishop davenant was a puritan . it seems they have been all puritans since the primitive times ; and i hope the church of rome then hath good store of them , for that is far enough from the fathers or the primitive church . but how comes bishop white in for a puritan , being so great a friend of arch-bishop laud ; why , forsooth , heylin reports that for licensing bishop mountagu's appello caesarem , it was said , that white was turned black. and canst thou for thy heart , good reader , expect a more pregnant proof ? it was a notable saying , and it is great pity , the historian did not preserve the memory of the author of it ; but by whom was it said ? that must be supposed by the puritans ; and could none but they be the authors of so witty a saying ? but suppose they were the puritans that said it ? it is plain then , they thought him no sound puritan , for they hold no falling from grace . all then that can be inferred from this witty saying is , that white sunk in his esteem among them by this act. and is it not possible for them to have an esteem for those who are not of their own party ? concerning arch-bishop usher , dr. heylin was known to be too much his enemy , to be allowed to give a character of him : and his name will not want a due veneration as long as learning and piety have any esteem among us . but he is most troubled what to do with six that remain , viz. king james , bishop andrews , arch-bishop laud , isaac casaubon , doct. field , and doct. jackson ; these he could not for shame fasten the name of puritans upon ( as he doth with scorn on bishop downam , reynolds , whitaker , and fulk ; whose testimonies i said to prevent cavils , i need not to produce although they are all capable of sufficient vindication . ) for king james , he saith , that in the place cited by me he saith expresly , that what he condemns is adoring of images , praying to them , and imagining a kind of sanctity in them , all which are detested by catholicks . was ever man put to such miserable shifts ? are not these king james his words . but for worshipping either them , ( reliques ) or images , i must account it damnable idolatry . and doth not king james a little after take off their distinctions and evasions in these words , and they worship ( forsooth ) the images of things in being , and the image of the true god. but scripture forbiddeth to worship the image of any thing that god created . yea the image of god himself is not only expresly forbidden to be worshipped but even to be made . let them therefore that maintain this doctrine , answer it to christ at the latter day , when he shall accuse them of idolatry ; and then i doubt if he will be paid with such nice sophistical distinctions . is all this nothing but to charge them with such practices which they detest ? doth he not mention their doctrine , and their distinctions ? did not king james understand what he said , and what they did ? it is plain he charges them with idolatry in what they did , which was that i brought his testimony for . the like answer he gives to the rest of them , viz. that they charged them , with what they thought they did , but the papists deny that they do any such thing : i. e. in plain terms , they charge them with idolatry , but the papists deny they commit it . and so they do when i charge them with it ; so that t. g. by the very same reason might have acquitted me from charging them with it , and have spared his book . is not this now an admirable way of proving , that they do not charge them with idolatry , because the papists deny they commit it ? who meddles with what they profess they do , or do not ? i was to shew what these persons charged them with . and do any of these excuse them by saying any doctrine of theirs was contrary to these particulars ? do they not expresly set themselves to disprove their distinctions upon which their doctrine is founded ? and shew the vanity of them because their open and allowed practices do plainly contradict them ; and shew that they do give divine honour to images however in words they deny it . but this way of defending them is , as if those whom st. paul charges that they professed that they knew god but in works they denied him , should reply to him , how can we deny him in our works , since we profess him in our words ? iust so saith t. g. how can they be charged with idolatry , since they profess to do no such thing ? a●though such persons , as those i mentioned , did not understand both what the papists said for themselves and what they did notwithstanding . and now i joy● with t. g. in desiring the reader may be judge between us , whether i have betrayed my trust in pretending to defend the church of england ; and whether in charging the church of rome with idolatry i have contradicted the sense of it ? since i have made it appear that her most true and genuin sons , the most remote from all suspicion of disaffection to her , or inclination to puritanism , have concurred in the same charge which i undertook to make good . but there is one blow yet remaining in his preface , which i must endeavour to ward off , otherwise it will be a terrible one to the church of england ; for by this charge of idolatry , he makes me to subvert the very foundation of ecclesiastical authority in it . this it is to charge home . for , saith he , it being a received maxime and not being denyable by any man of common sense , that no man can give to another that which he hath not himself , it lies open to the conscience of every man , that if the church of rome be guilty of heresie , much more if guilty of idolatry , it falls under the apostles excommunication . ( gal. 1. 8. ) and so remains deprived of the lawful authority to use and exercise the power of orders ; and consequently the authority of governing , preaching and administring the sacraments , which those of the church of england challenge to themselves , as deriv'd from the church of rome , can be no true and lawful jurisdiction , but usurped and anti-christian . and so farewel to the church of england , if the church of rome were not more kind in this case than t. g. is . hitherto we have seen his skill in the affairs of our church , and now we shall see just as much in the doctrine of his own . for doth not the council of trent make orders a sacrament ? and one of those which doth imprint an indelible character ? and doth not that council pronounce an anathema against those , that denyed the validity of the sacrament administred by one in mortal sin , in case he observes the essentials of it ▪ how then can t. g ▪ ●scape excommunication from his own church , that denies the validity of the sacrament of orders in case of the sin of the givers of it ? if the validity of the sacrament doth not d●pend on the worth or quality of the ministers of it but upon the essentials and the institution of christ , how can the fault of the persons hinder the conveyance of that authority , which they are only the bare instruments to convey ? doth t. g. think so in all other sacraments ? as in case of baptism ; that supposing the ministers of it have been guilty of heresie or idolatry , the sacrament loses its effect ? well fare then the donatists , whose opinion this was , and in whom it hath been condemned by the church . if it be not so in other sacraments how comes it to be thus in orders ? which he must acknowledge , to be as much a sacrament as baptism ; or else he must renounce the council of trent . and it is observable , that the very argument used by the donatists and others , was the same which t. g. here produces , viz. his common maxim of reason , and not denyable by any man of common sense that no man can give to another , that which he hath not himself ; to which this answer was given , that the instrument was not the giver , but the first institutor , and in case the minister keep to the institution , the grace of the sacrament may be conveyed by him though he hath it not himself . but , methinks , if t. g. had forgotten the doctrine of the council of trent , he might have looked into some one or other of their own authors to have informed himself better of their doctrine in this matter . vasquez hath a chapter on purpose to prove that an heretical , excommunicated , suspended bishop is a sufficient minister of ordination ; and saith that all the schoolmen and summists are agreed in it , and that there can be no doubt at all made of it . and did none of these men understand the principle that is undenyable by any man of common sense ? what a back-blow is this to those of his own church ? for vasquez saith this is determined as a matter of faith among them , that the validity of a sacrament doth not depend on the probity or faith of the minister . and he denies it to be in the power of the church to hinder the effect of ordination in an excommunicated bishop , because it cannot blot out his character , or take away his power . estius saith , that no crime how great soever , whether haeresie , schism , or apostasie , no censure how heavy soever , as excommunication , can hinder the validity of ordination by a bishop , although it be of those who are not subject to his jurisdiction , in case he observes the lawful rites of ordination as to the essence of the sacrament ; for this reason , because ordination belongs to the power of order , which being once received can never be lost ; but those things which belong to jurisdiction , as absolution and excommunication , have no effect , where that jurisdiction is taken away . and this doctrine they all ground upon st augustins discourse against the donatists ; and upon the practice of the church at that time which did receive those who were ordained among the donatists , without scrupling their orders ; as not only appears by the testimony of st. augustin but by the decree of an african council to that purpose ; and that not only at first , but when the schism was grown inveterate . and yet francis hallier a late doctor of the sorbon , tells us , that the donatists were not barely schismaticks , but they were adjudged hereticks , for asserting that the efficacy of sacraments did depend upon the quality of the persons , and not upon the merits of christ. the same author vehemently disputes against those , who assert that the power of order can be lost by the sin of the person , and shews that doctrine hath been condemned by several councils before that of trent ; as of arles , of orleans and constance : and undertakes to answer all the instances brought from antiquity to the contrary ; as either understood of such hereticks , which did not retain the essentials of the sacrament or only implying the fault committed in giving or receiving them at the hands of such persons , but not any invalidity in the sacrament it self . and afterwards he proves that hereticks are capable of ordination . but if these , and many others of their later writers will not satisfy him , i desire him to consult their more ancient authors , thom. aquinas determins that hereticks and those who are cut off from the church , may give orders as well as administer other sacraments , the reason he gives is , that a power in consecration is given to a bishop , which can never be taken from him , although he will not allow it to be called a character . for several , especially of the ancient schoolmen would not have consecration to imprint a new character ; but they were never able to give an intelligible account of what they meant by the character as distinct from that sacramental power which was conveyed by consecration and they granted to be indelible as the other was , some making it an extension of the character of priesthood , others a bare extrinsecal denomination added to it ; but however they held it such as could no more be taken away than the character of priesthood . cardinal bonaventure saith , that the validity of sacraments among hereticks , was a question much in dispute among the ancient doctors , but that it hath been determined by st. augustin , that they are valid if they preserve the essentials of them : and in the matter of ordination he saith , that the power of orders , although it be not a distinct character , yet because it is built upon , it can no more be taken away than the character it self : but whatever is founded upon jurisdiction as the power of excommunication and absolution may be taken away . but i need not mention any more particular writers , since morinus acknowledges , that for 400. years the opinion of the validity of orders conferred by hereticks , hath only obtained in the roman church . before that time , he proves at large that it was more disputable , as appears by the master of the sentences , who accounts it a perplexed and almost insoluble difficulty because of the different opinions of doctors about it ; but afterwards st. augustins opinion was generally received both among the schoolmen and canonists ; and is now become a matter of faith in the roman church at least by consequence , since the decrees of councils . and although morinus will not allow that any decree of their church hath passed in this matter , yet he saith , there hath been so long and so universal a consent of doctors in this point , that it ought to be instead of a law , which they ought not to violate . by this we may judge of the learning and skill of t. g. in the doctrine of his own church . but if he would not look into the controversal writers of their church , yet if he had but searched into the practice of the church either in ancient or modern times he would have been ashamed to have made use of such an argument to overthrow all ecclesiastical authority among us . i grant that in some tumultuous ages of the church , ordinations have been adjudged null through the defaults of the persons , but then it was meerly for breaking the canons of the church ; so it was in the case of formosus , for breaking the canons against the translations of bishops ; in the case of ebbo arch-bishop of rhemes , whose ordinations were nulled by hincmarus and the council of soissons , for not being canonically restored after deposition but upon appeal to the pope they were pronounced valid : in the case of pope constantine for precepitating orders to secure the popedom ; in the famous case of photius , whose ordination was declared null by the opposite faction on the same grounds ; but all these things were done in troublesome times , when one party sought a pretence against the other . but if we regard the more general practice of the church , we shall find when far greater objections than these were made , yet ordinations have been allowed ; although made by hereticks . i shall offer him the fairest terms he can desire , and for the practice of the church referr him to his own dear second council of nice , and the modern practice of the roman church . the question of the validity of ordination by hereticks was at large debated in the first action of the second council of nice , upon the submission of basilius , theodorus , and theodosius , hypatius and others who had been bishops of the opposite party , which john the vicar of the orient there declared to be worse than any former heresie : upon which the question was proposed , whether upon renouncing their heresie they might be received as bishops , and the orders be allowed of those who were ordained by them during their heresie ? hypatius appealed to the custom of the church ; then the canons of councils and writings of the fathers were brought into council : tarasius produced the canon of the council of nice , allowing the ordinations of the cathari , and the imposition of hands there mentioned he understands only for benediction , and not for ordination : and the council of ephesus making no distinction between those ordained by nestorians and others ; ( for therein the force of that third canon must lye which tarasius thought so plain ) from st. basil , allowing those bishops which communicated with isoes or zoius and saturninus ; from the council of ephesus allowing the orders of the messaliani or euchitae ; from the council of chalcedon allowing the bishops upon their repentance , which had joyned with dioscorus : and more particularly , for those which had been ordained by heretical bishops , it was there shewed , that anatolius the president of the fourth council was ordained by dioscorus in the presence of eutyches ; that john bishop of hierusalem after he had renounced the acephalists by whom he was ordained , was received and submitted to as bishop by the orthodox ; that many of those who sat in the sixth council were ordained by sergius , pyrrhus , paulus , and petrus , who were in that council declared to be hereticks ; and for 50. years together tarasius saith , they had no other ordinations : upon these evidences of the practice of the church , this council of nice declared likewise , that the ordination of heretical bishops was valid . for the modern practice of the church of rome , i appeal to the allowance therein given to the ordinations of the greek church , although the greek church be charged with heresie ; and that ever since the notorious schism in the time of michael cerularius a. d. 1053. in the time of innocent the third some greek clergy-men living in the dioceses of latin bishops , yet received ordination from greek bishops , which made the latin bishops suspend them from the execution of their office , the pope , hearing of it , sends to his legat , wherein he consents to the suspension in case it were done without leave from the latin bishop ; but if leave were obtained he takes off the suspension ; because this custom is allowed in the church ▪ i need not produce more particular instances in this kind , which may be seen at large in morinus ; because in all the attempts of reconciliation in the several councils held to that purpose , as at lyons , and florence , where all the matters in difference were most fully handed , there was never any objection made to the greek ordinations . but most remarkable to this purpose is the bull of clement the seventh containing in it a former bull of leo the tenth , published by leo allatius , by isaacius habertus , and by morinus , wherein their ordinations and other rites and customs are expresly allowed . and to this day saith morinus they are allowed in rome not only to perform other parts of divine service according to their customs in the church of st. athanasius , but to ordain priests after their own manner ; for which they had a bull of urban the eighth . and now i desire t. g. to consider a little his undeniable maxim , that no man can give to another that which he hath not himself , whether he doth in earnest think that his own church is so bereft of all common sense , as not to understand the force of this maxim ? and if it thought it of any weight in this matter , how it could ever approve the ordinations of hereticks , or decree that the sacraments retain their efficacy , where the essentials of them are observed , whatever the faith or manners of the instruments be ? and this was all i intended in this preface ; of the rest of his book , the reader may expect an account as god gives health and opportunity . the contents . preface to the two first answers . p. 1. a particular examination of the pamphlet entitled doct. stillingfleet against doct. stillingfleet . of the insufficiency of j. w.'s way of answering . p. 13. no contradiction about the charge of idolatry . p. 18. a distinct answer to his propositions . p. 26. in what sense the church of rome is owned by us as a true church . p. 29. his appendix about idolatry considered . p. 34. the second contradiction examined . p. 39. the charge of fanaticism defended . p. 50. no contradiction in the charge of divisions p. 65. the conclusion . p. 71. an answer to the book entitled doct. stillingfleets principles considered . the occasion of annexing those principles . p. 75. of the notion of infallibility . p. 79. n. o's concessions . p. 85. his principles laid down . p. 95. his exceptions answered . p. 98. his proofs of infallibility examined . p. 110. of the arguments from scripture for infallibility . p. 116. of the argument from tradition for it . p. 123. of the argument from parity of reason . p. 137. of the authority of the guides of the church in ten propositions . p. 142. the case of vigilius and honorius at large discussed p. 154 , 159. the different case of the separation of dissenters from our church , and our separation from the church of rome . p. 180. of the means to attain the sense of scripture without an infallible guide . p. 186. of the necessity of a iudge in controversies . p. 191. the way used in the primitive church for finding the sense of scripture through several ages of the christian church from the most authentick writers of them . p. 198. church authority not destroyed by my principles . p. 260. what authority we allow to governors of the church . p. 267. the roman churches way of suppressing sects compared with ours . p. 286. errata . page 20. line 13. read the church . p. 26. l. 14 for and r. that p. 49. l. ● for here r. wh●re p 176 ▪ l ▪ 23. r. eutychianism . p. 177. l. 8. r. followed . p. 17. l. 5. r. patriarchal . p. 182. l. 14. for by r. ●e . p. 189. l. 22. r. apocalyptic● p. 209. l. 30. for boo r. book . p. 225. marg r. vales. not . ad eusch. p. 273. 〈◊〉 r. euclid . p. 271. l. 7. for he makes this , r. this is made . p. 280. l. 5. blot ● . one the. the preface . when i published the late book , which hath so much enraged those of the church of rome against me , i thought i had reason to expect that a just answer should be made to it ; but they have taken an effectual course to undeceive me ; for by this new way i perceive , their utmost ambition is to have something abroad which among themselves may pass for an answer . which put me in mind of what i have heard a great person said , when he had undertaken to manage an ill cause before a publick audience , and one of his friends asked him what he meant by it , trouble not your self , said he , our own side will be sure to believe me . it was surely some such presumption as this , which made the learned authors of these two elaborate pamphlets to appear in such a manner in print , as if it were no great matter what they said , so their people might have this to say , and ( if they can ) believe it too , that my book is answered . if this be all their cause will afford , it deserves rather to be pittied than confuted ; if it will bear more , they are as bad managers of it as their enemies could wish . for however i was threatned before hand that such answers were coming abroad , every line of which would fetch blood ; yet , as cruel as they are when we are under their lash , i found that which they designed for my punishment to give me no small pleasure : and i never had so good an opinion of the mercifulness of their church as when i saw with what feeble hands they chastised me . i had heard so much of their rage , that i expected their greatest strength would be employ'd upon me ; and i could not tell what zamzummims they might hitherto keep in the dark , whose arms were not to be made use of , but upon some special occasion when an adversary was to be dispatch'd all at once and so perfectly subdued as never to appear more . while i was preparing my self for this kind of martyrdome , out come these mighty men of valour , who have beaten nothing that i know of , but the air and themselves ; for they have neither tyed my tongue , nor broke my heart , nor fetched one drop of blood that i can yet find ; all which were things i was told would be done , when these answers came abroad ; which threatnings made so loud a noise , that i heard the report of them not only nearer home , but from very distant persons and places . but lest i should be thought only to despise my adversaries ( which i confess they have given me no small occasion to do ) i shall bestow a particular examination upon what they have offered by way of answer to my book . only i think it reasonable in the first place to take notice of their present way and method of answering , wherein they make use of as many artifices , as they do in gaining proselytes . when we set our selves to answer their books , we endeavour to state the controversie plainly , to examine their proofs , to apply distinct answers to their arguments fairly represented in their own words , and to render the whole discourse as clear and perspicuous as may be , that all persons may be capable of judging on which side the greatest strength and evidence lyes . this is the mighty advantage which a good cause gives us ; we make use of no tricks to deceive men , nor sophistical cavils to confound and perplex things ; we dare appeal to the judgement of any impartial person , who will take the pains to examin the matters in difference between us . but in their late dealings with us , they seek to avoid the main things in dispute , and abhor any methodical proceeding ; one man picks out a sentence here and there to answer , another a page or two together , a third leaps from one thing to another , as if resolv'd to pass by the greatest difficulties ; but he is a man of courage indeed , that dares fall upon the reer , and begin to confute a book at the end of it , so that if he lives long enough , and get heart , he may in time come to the beginning : and if we observe them all , they look for nothing so much as some cleanly way of escape , and if they can but raise such a dust as to fly away without being openly discerned to do so , this they hope those of their own side will be so kind and partial as to call a victory . these are no general accusations , but such as are easie to observe in their dealings with me as to my former book , and that lately published . but to judicious men , all these little arts and shifts are either plain acknowledgements of a baffled cause , or an argument of a weak and unskilful management . if the book it self be a little too troublesome to be medled with , it is best to fall upon the author , and it is a hard case if by false and ridiculous stories , or open calumnies , or at least base and ugly insinuations , they cannot diminish his reputation ; and then they hope the book will sink with its author . but we are not ignorant whose cause is wont to be managed by such devices as these are , and from whom they have learnt this method of confuting adversaries . as for all their railing accusations against me ; i shall not so much as desire god to rebuke them , but only pray that he would pardon them ; and if i must thank them for any thing , it is for giving me the occasion for exercising so great a charity . i have learnt of him who when he was reviled , reviled not again , not only to forbear reproaching them in the same manner , but to return them good for evil , and to pray for them while they calumniate me . i have so much the less reason to wonder that my book should be charged by them with no less than blasphemy , since the author of our religion himself was so , and suffered under that accusation . but wherein i pray doth this blasphemy lye ? have i uttered any thing that tends to the reproach of god or true religion ? have i the least word which malice it self can stretch to the dishonour of iesus christ , the prophets and apostles , or the holy scriptures written by divine inspiration ? no ; i challenge the boldest of them , and most malicious , to produce any thing i ever said or writ that doth but seem to look that way . have i made the practice of true devotion ridiculous , and the real expressions of piety the subject of scorn and derision ? no , so far from it , that it was only a just zeal for the honour and practise of true religion made me willing to lay open the ridiculous fanaticisms of some pretended saints in the roman church . and must they be allowed to charge fanaticism on us , and think it far from blasphemy to represent the enthusiastick follies of the sectaries among us ; and when they are guilty of the very same , or greater , may not we shew their unjustice and partiality , without being accused of blasphemy ? but some of these are canonized saints , as s. brigitt , s. catharine , s. francis , and s. ignatius ; which is so far from making the cause of their church better , that to my understanding it makes it much worse . for although fanaticism be disowned by our church , it seems it is not barely countenanced and allowed in the church of rome , but canonized and adored . that which i insist upon , is this ; either we have no fanaticks , or theirs are so ; for by the very same rule that ours are so , theirs must be too ; for our fanaticks do pretend as high to the spirit and divine revelation as any of theirs ; only there is this remarkable difference between their fanaticks and ours , that ours are among us but not of us , but theirs are both . now if any one who pretends to inspiration and enthusiasm cannot be charged with fanaticism without blasphemy , we must be exposed to all follies and contradictions imaginable ; and to what purpose are we bid to try the spirits whether they be of god or no , i. e. whether their pretence to divine revelation be true or false ? if there may be false pretences to inspiration , we are to examine the grounds of them , and to judge accordingly ; and all false pretenders to inspiration , let them be canonized by whom they will , are the highest sort of fanaticks ; and the greater honour is given them , the greater dishonour it is to the christian religion . but these things shall be more largely discussed in their proper place : i now only take notice of the injustice of their calumny with which they have made so much noise among injudicious people : and i should not have been so much concerned about it , had i not found suggestions to the same purpose in the authors of the two pamphlets . the one of them very kindly makes no difference between lucian , porphyrius and me , but only some interest which doth byass me another way ; and verily believes , good man , that were it not for that , i could flurt with as much piquancy and railery at christian religion , as i do at the roman . in which base suggestion there is no colour of truth , but only that he very honestly distinguisheth the christian , religion and the roman from each other ; as indeed they are in many things as different from each other as truth from falshood , wisdom from folly , and true piety from gross superstition . if he had called me an atheist in plain terms , the grossness of the calumny might have abated the force of it ; but there is no such way to do a man mischief , as by fly insinuations and shrewd suggestions introduced with i verily believe , and expressed with some gravity and zeal . but you who are so good at resolving faith , what is this verily believe of yours founded upon ? have you the authority of your church for it ? have you any evidence of reason ? or rather , have you it by some vision or revelation made by some of those saints , whose fanaticism is exposed ? or do you verily believe it , as you verily believe many other things , for no reason in the world ? if i should tell you i have made it my business to assert the truth of the scriptures , and christian religion therein contained , in a large discourse several years since published ; such is your charity , that you would tell me , so did vaninus write for providence , when he denyed a deity . if i should make large apologies for my innocency , and publish a confession of my faith , with protestations that no interest in the world could remove me from it ; you might tell me , where there is no guilt what need so much ado ? in plain terms , i know but one way to satisfie such as you are , but i will keep from it as long as i can , and that is to go to rome and be burnt for my faith ; for that is the kindness there shewed to those who contend for the purity of the christian religion against the corruptions of the roman . but such calumnies as these , as they are not fit to be passed by , so are they too gross to need any further answer . i shall however declare my mind freely to you ; if i had no other notion of the christian doctrine , than what i have from the doctrines of your church as contrary to ours ; no other measures of christian piety than from your mystical theology ; no better way to worship god than what is practised among you ; no greater certainty of inspiration from god than of the visions and revelations of your late saints ; no other miracles to confirm the christian doctrine than what are wrought by your images and saints , i should sooner choose to be a philosopher , than a christian upon those terms . and i verily believe ( to answer yours with another ) that the frauds and impostures of the roman church have made more atheists in christendom , than any one cause whatsoever besides : for when men resolve all their faith into the testimony of a church whose frauds are so manifest , and confessed by your best writers , such as melchior canus , and ludov. vives ; what can they who know no better , but suspect the inspirations and miracles of former ages , who see such false pretences to them so much magnified , and the fanatick pretenders canonized on that account ? and i am so far from thinking it any disservice to the christian religion to expose these fanaticisms , that i again verily believe that christianity will never obtain as it ought to do among men , till all those hypocritical cheats be yet more laid open to the view of the world ; which if any one have but the courage and patience to undertake , it would be as great , and a much more useful labour than the cleansing of the augean stable . this is not to make sport and recreation for the atheist and debauched , nor to give occasion to such persons to turn the inspirations of holy-scripture into matter of drollery and buffonry , as the author of the second pamphlet tragically declaims ; any more than our saviours unmasking the hypocrisie of the scribes and pharisees was the destroying the law of moses ; or the discovery of cheats and impostors doth give occasion to suspect the honesty of all mankind : nay so far is it from that , that we think the separating of fanaticism from true inspiration to be one of the best services that can be done to the christian religion , which otherwise is in danger of being despised or rejected by the considerate part of mankind . but i would fain know of these men , whether they do in earnest make no difference between the writings of such as mother iuliana and the books of scripture ; between the revelations of s. brigitt , s. catharine , &c. and those of the prophets ; between the actions of s. francis and ignatius loyola and those of the apostles ? if they do not , i know who they are that expose our religion to purpose ; if they do make a difference , how can the representing their visions and practices reflect dishonour upon the other , so infinitely above them , so much more certainly conveyed down to us with the consent of the whole christian world ? thus much may here suffice to represent the arts our adversaries are driven to , to defend themselves ; i cannot blame them that they would engage religion on their side , but so have all fanaticks in the world as well as they ; and i cannot for my heart see , but this heavy charge of blasphemy and undermining religion does as justly lye on them , who deride the fanaticks among us , as on those who have discovered the fanaticism of the church of rome . an examination of the pamphlet , entituled , dr. stillingfleet against dr. stillingfleet . having thus far laid open their present way of dealing with their adversaries , i now come to a particular consideration of these two pamphlets ; and begin with that called dr. stillingfleet against dr. stillingfleet , &c. the author of which is to be commended for so noble an enterprise ( which few of the champions of former ages could accomplish ) viz. to make his adversary fall by his own sword . but the mischief of it is , these romantick knights do hurt no where but in paper and their own imagination . but i forget his grave admonition , that i would treat these matters seriously , and lay aside drollery . to be then as grave as he can desire , there are these two things which i design to prov●● against him . 1. that on supposition i di●● contradict my self , in the way he insists upo●n it , that were no sufficient answer to my book . 2. that i am far enough from contradicting my self in any one of the things which 〈◊〉 insists upon . 1. supposing what he contends for were true , yet my book remains unanswered ; the design of which was to shew that no man can joyn in the communion of the roman church without great hazard of his salvation . if i had any where said the contrary , this indeed would have made it evident that i had contradicted my self . but what then ? doth the force of all the arguments used by me in this last discourse fall to the ground , because i was formerly of another opinion ? let me ask these revolters from the church of england one question ; whether they do not now more plainly contradict themselves as to their former opinions , than they can pretend that i have ever done ? i desire to know , whether this makes all their present arguments for the roman church of no force ? if they think their present reasons ought to be answered whatever contrary opinion they had before ; why , on supposition i had contradicted in a a former book what i say in this , must this render all that i have said , or can hereafter say in this matter , invalid ? doth the strength of all lye upon my bare affirming or denying ? was it ever true because i said it ? if not , how comes it to be untrue now , because i deny it ? i do not remember i was ever so vain , to make use of my own authority to prove a thing to be true , because i believed it ; and if i had , the world is not so vain to believe a man one jot the sooner for it . if my authority in saying or denying be of no importance to the truth of the thing , then he may prove that i contradict my self , and yet all the arguments of my book be as strong as ever . i do not desire any one to follow my opinion because it is mine , but i offer reason and authority for the proof of what i say ; if those be good in themselves , they do not therefore cease to be so , because they are , or seem to he inconsistent with what i have said elsewhere . so that self-contradiction being proved , overthrows not the reason of the thing , but the authority of the person ; and where things depend meerly upon authority , it is a good argument , and no where else . if a witness in a court contradicts himself , his testimony signifies nothing ; because there is nothing else but his authority that makes his testimony valid ; but if a lawyer at the bar chance to speak inconsistently , if afterwards he speaks plain and evident reason , does that take off the force of it , because he said something before which contradicted that plain reason ? if the pope , or those who pretend to be infallible , contradict themselves , that sufficiently overthrows their pretence of infallibility ; for he that changeth his mind , must be deceived once ; but for us fallible mortals , if we once hit upon reason and truth , and manage the evidence of it clearly , that reason doth not lose its former evidence , because the same persons may afterwards oppose it . suppose i should be able to prove that bellarmine in his recognitions contradicts what he had said in his former books ; doth this presently make all his arguments useless , and him uncapable of ever appearing in controversie more ? doth this make all his authorities false and his reasons unconcluding ? doth it hence follow that he spake no where consistently , because once or twice , or perhaps as often as his neighbours , he contradicted himself ? but my grave adversary , i. w. imagines that we writers of controversies are like witnesses in chancery , and are bound to make affidavits before the masters of this court of controversie ; and that whatever we say is to be taken as upon our oath ; this indeed would be an excellent way of bringing controversies to an issue , if we were to be sworn whether such a thing as transubstantiation were true or false ; and i cannot tell whether this , or laying wagers , or the popes infallibility be the best way to end such controversies ; for any one of them would do it , if people could but agree about it . but now my adversary says , that if a man once contradict himself he is to be looked on as a perjured person , and whatever he saith , his word is not to be taken . this he not only begins with , but very triumphantly concludes with it in these words , and this alone may suffice to annul ▪ whatever he has hitherto , or shall hereafter object against us ; for a witness , who has been once palpably conuinced to have forsworn or contradicted himself in matters of moment , besides the condign punishment he is lyable unto , he does vacate all evidences produced by him , against his adversary , and deserves never more to be heard against him in any tribunal . i see now what it is they would be at , no less than perpetual silence and being set in the pillory with that pamphlet on my forehead dr. still . against dr. still . for being guilty of contradicting my self , would satisfie i. w. and his friends ; this i suppose was the meaning of stopping my mouth for ever , when this answer was to come out . but now i perceive it is so dangerous a thing , i had best stand upon my defence , and utterly deny that i have contradicted my self in any thing , in which i. w. hath charged me . 2. to make it then out that this is a groundless charge , i must go through the several particulars insisted on . the first is in the charge of idolatry ; but how do i contradict my self about this ? had i vindicated the church of rome from idolatry in my defence of arch-bishop laud , this had been indeed to contradict my self : but this is not so much as pretended ; and if it were , nothing could be more easily confuted ; for in that very book , as it falls out very happily , there is a discourse to the same purpose , proving the church of rome guilty of idolatry , in invocation of saints and the worship of images , and that the heathen , in the worship of inferiour deities and images , might be excused on the same grounds that those of the church of rome do excuse themselves . here is then no appearance of a contradiction in terms ; and it is only pretended to be by consequence , viz. from yielding that the church of rome and we do not differ in fundamental points , and that the church of rome is therefore a true church ; from whence he inferrs , that it cannot be guilty of idolatry : because to teach that , would be a fundamental errour , and inconsistent with the being of a true church : and therefore to charge the church of rome with idolatry , and to allow it to be a true church is a contradiction . this is the substance of what he saith upon this head : to which i shall answer by shewing , 1. that this way of answering is very disingenuous . 2. that it is sophistical , and proves not the thing which he intends . 1. that it is a disingenuous way ; because he barely opposes a judgement of charity concerning their church , to a judgement of reason concerning the nature of actions , without at all examining the force of those reasons which are produced in the book he pretends to answer . can i. w. imagine , that any one who enquires into the safest way for his salvation , and hears the church of rome charged with idolatry in her worship , by arguments drawn from the plain law of god , the common sense of mankind , the repugnancy of their way of worship to the conceptions we ought to have of the divine nature , the consent of the ancient christian church , the parity of the case in many respects with the heathen idolaters , should presently conclude , that all these arguments are of no force , meerly because the person who made use of them , had upon another occasion judged so charitably of that church , as to suppose it still to retain the essentials of a true church ? i will put a case paralled to this ; suppose one of the church of iudah should have call'd the church of israel in the time of ieroboam a true church , because they acknowledged the true god , and did believe an agreement in that common acknowledgement to be sufficient to preserve the essentials of a church among them ; and afterwards the same person should go about to convince the ten tribes of their idolatry in worshipping god , by the calves of dan and bethel : would this be thought a sufficient way of answering him , to say , that he contradicted himself , by granting them a true church and yet charging them with idolatry ? whereas the only true consequence would be , that he thought some kind of idolatry consistent with the being of a church . might not such a person justly say , that they made a very ill use of his charity , when he supposed only that kind of idolatry which implyes more gods than one , to unchurch a people ; but however , those persons were more concerned to vindicate themselves from idolatry of any kind , than he was to defend his charitable opinion of them ; and if they could prove to him , that this inferiour sort of idolatry does unchurch them as well as the grosser , the consequence of it would be that his charity must be so much the less , but their danger would be the same . this is just our case with the church of rome ; we acknowledge that they still retain the fundamental articles of the christian faith , that there is no dispute between them and us about the true god and his son iesus christ , as to his death , resurrection , glory , and being the proper object of divine worship ; we yield that they have true baptism among them , in the name of the father , son , and holy ghost ; and we looking upon these as the essentials of a true church , do upon that account own that church to be so : but then we charge the roman church , with gross corrupting that worship which is proper to the divine nature , by her worship of images , adoration of the host , and invocation of saints ; which being done , not in express terms against the worship of the true god , but by consequence , we do not think this doth destroy the being of a church among them ; although it makes the salvation of persons in her communion extreamly hazardous : and after we have gone about to prove this by many and weighty arguments , is it reasonable for any one to tell us that we contradict our selves , and therefore our arguments do signifie nothing ? whereas in truth , here is no appearance of a contradiction to that which is our own sense in this matter . for what shadow of a contradiction is it , to say , that the roman church is a true church , and yet is guilty of idolatry ; supposing that we believe some sort of idolatry which is very sinful , not to be yet of so high a nature as to unchurch those who practise it ; and we choose the instance of the ten tribes for the ground of this charity . if they can prove that all sorts of idolatry do necessarily destroy the essentials of a church , the consequence is , we must have less charity for them , than we had before ; and such a concession from us doth not shew their guilt to be less , but only our charity to be greater . suppose a man should exceed in his charity towards a person guilty of some grievous faults , and say , he believes he may be a pious man for all this ; but withall severely reproves him for his faults , and tells him the danger he continually runs by such actions ; would it be fair for such a man to answer him , that his reproofs were not to be regarded , because he contradicted himself , for he told him he believed him to be a pious man , and yet upbraided him with those faults which were inconsistent with piety ? what would the consequence of this be to the thing it self ? would this make those faults ever the less , because he judged so charitably of the person notwithstanding his committing them ? but when we allow the church of rome to be a true church , we are far from understanding by that a sound or a good church free from corruptions , which would be the most proper sense to found a contradiction upon , in this matter of idolatry ; but we mean no more by it , than as a man is a true man though he hath the plague upon him ; those which we account the essentials of a church we deny not to it , but withall , we contend that it is over-run with such corruptions in worship , as do mightily endanger the salvation of those who live in the communion of it . 2. having thus discovered the disingenuity of making so bad a use of our charity against us , i now come to shew how sophistical this way of answering is , by a closer examination of it . first , the starting of a new objection answers no argument , and all that this amounts to is only raising a new difficulty ; whereas he ought in the first place to have answered all the arguments i had brought to prove them guilty of idolatry ; and when he had done this fairly and plainly ( which for some good reasons he had no mind to do ) he might then have insisted on the inconsistency of it with principles owned by me ; but to do this without giving an answer , so much as to any one argument , is a clear evidence of a sophistical and cavilling humour , rather than of any intention to satisfie an inquisitive mind . 2. the force of this objection lyes in the different sense and meaning of several expressions made use of by him , which being explained , the objection will signifie nothing . for if we rightly understand the notion of idolatry , the manner of teaching it , the sense of fundamental errours and a true church , as it is owned by me , the very appearance of any contradiction vanisheth . i agree in the general , that the true notion of idolatry is , giving the honour due only to god to a meer creature ; and i desire no greater advantage against the church of rome , than from such a concession ; but then we are to understand , that this may be done several ways . 1. when the worship proper to the true god is given to a false god. 2. when the true god is acknowledged and worshipped , but the unity of the god-head is denyed , and many false gods are joyned with him in the same worship . in these two sorts of idolatry , i acknowledge that the true god is rejected , either wholly in the first way , or by consequence in the second . but withall i say , that the giving the worship to a creature which is due only to god may be consistent with the acknowledgement of one supream god , and that these ways . 1. when one supream god is acknowledged , but no difference is put between the external worship of him and creatures . this was the idolatry of the wiser heathen , who did in their consciences acknowledge that there was but one true and supream god , but yet gave the same worship to inferiour deities , that they did to him . these men might have pleaded for themselves , for all that i know , as much to their advantage , as those of the church of rome do against me . 2. when the worship proper to the true god is given to an image : or the supposing of god to be truly honoured by us , by prostrating our selves before any corporeal representation of him . this likewise the heathen were guilty of . st. paul hath long since told us of some , who profess that they know god , but in works they deny him ; so there may be some who may profess a worship due only to god , but in their actions may contradict it . as suppose a company of rebellious men , should declare over and over that they acknowledge but one soveraign power of this nation , invested in the person of the king ; but yet , should take upon themselves to raise forces , to appoint great officers of state , and require that the very same outward reverence and honour be given to them , which is given to the king himself ; would any man in his sense say , that because these men still declared the supream authority to be in the king , that there was no treason in such actions ? or that those persons contradicted themselves , who allowed that their profession was such as became good subjects , but their actions made them guilty of treason . the same we say of the church of rome ; we confess they own the supream power of the world to be in one true god , and we have no controversie with them about the essential doctrines of religion ( which is , that we mean by their being a true church ) but withal we say , they overthrow what they say in their own practice , they rob god of the honour due only to him , by giving it to angels , and saints , and images and other creatures . and what contradiction now is there in all this , and a church agreeing with us in the object of worship in general , should act contrary to its own profession , by requiring those things to be done , which take away from god that honour which is due only to him , and giving it to creatures ? and this , if i understand it , is all that this first contradiction in the charge of idolatry doth amount to . to appply this now to his own propositions , for the greater clearness and satisfaction of all indifferent persons ▪ his first proposition i agree to , viz. that 't is an article of faith , and a fundamental point of religion , that the honour which is due only to god is not to be given to a meer creature . but i desire it may be taken notice of , that this proposition is sophistically expressed ; for although it be no dispute between us , whether that honour which is due only to god , may be given to a creature , yet it is a very great one , and the foundation of the charge of idolatry , what that honour is which is due only to god : and in case we can prove that they do give to meer creatures any part of that honour which is due to god , it cannot at all excuse them to say , that they acknowledge it to be idolatry to give that honour , which they suppose to be due only to god , to a meer creature . this proposition therefore , though in it self true , is captiously set down , and with an intention only to deceive unwary readers , as will appear by the next proposition . 2. to teach idolatry is to err against the formentioned article of faith and fundamental point of religion ; i. e. to teach idolatry , is to teach that the honour which is due only to god is to be given to a meer creature . that this is to teach idolatry , no one questions ; but our question is , whether they who do not teach this proposition , may not teach men to do those things , whereby the worship due only to god will be given to a meer creature ? if he can prove , that they who do not in terms declare that they do not dishonour god cannot dishonour him ; if he can demonstrate , that those who do not teach that the honour which is due only to god is to be given to a creature , cannot possibly by any actions of theirs rob him of that honour which is due to him : this will be much more to his purpose than any thing he hath yet said . and this proposition , if he had proceeded as he ought to have done , should not have been a particular affirmative but an universal negative ; for it is not enough to say , that to teach idolatry is to teach that the honour which is due only to god is to be given to a creature , but that no church which doth not teach this can be guilty of idolatry ; for his design being to clear the roman church , his proposition ought to be so framed that all particulars may be comprehended under it . but because he may say , his immediate intention was , not to clear their church from idolatry , but to accuse me of a contradiction , i proceed to the next proposition . 3. a church that does not err against any article of faith , nor against any fundamental point of religion , does not teach idolatry . this proposition is likewise very sophistical and captious ; for by article of faith and fundamental point of religion is either understood , the main fundamental points of doctrine contained in the apostles creed , and then i affirm , that a church which doth own all the fundamentals of doctrine , may be guilty of idolatry , and teach those things , wherein it lyes ; but if by not erring against any article of faith , be meant , that a church which doth not err at all in matters of religion cannot teach idolatry , the proposition is true , but impertinent . 4. that the church of rome doth teach veneration of images , adoration of the host , and invocation of saints , is agreed on both sides . 5. that the roman church does not err against any article of faith or fundamental point of religion ; this being that concession of ours , from whence all the force of his argument is taken , must be explained according to our own sense of it , and not according to that which he puts upon it ; which that it may be better understood , i shall both shew in what sense this concession is made by us , as to the church of rome , and of what force it is in this present debate . for the clearer understanding in what sense it is made by us , we are to consider the occasion of the controversie about fundamentals between us and the church of rome : which ought to be taken from that book to which he referrs . there we find the occasion of it to be , the romanists contending that all points defined by the church are fundamental , or necessary to salvation , on the account of such a definition ; upon this the controversie about fundamentals was managed against them , with a design to prove that all things defined by the church of rome are not fundamental , or necessary to be believed by all persons in order to their salvation , because they were so defined . to this purpose i enquired . 1. what the grounds are , on which any thing doth become necessary to salvation ? 2. whether any thing whose matter is not necessary , and is not required by an absolute command in scripture , can by any means whatsoever afterwards become necessary ? 3. whether the church hath power , by any proposition or definition , to make anything become necessary to salvation , and to be believed as such , which was not so before ? for the first , i proposed two things . 1. what things are necessary to the salvation of men as such , or considered in their single or private capacities ? 2. what things are necessary to be owned in order to salvation by christian societies , or as the bonds and conditions of ecclesiastical communion ? for the resolving of this i laid down these three propositions . 1. that the very being of a church , doth suppose the necessity of what is required to be believed in order to salvation . 2. whatever church owns those things , which are antecedently necessary to the being of a church , cannot so long cease to be a true church . and here i expresly distinguished between the essentials of a church , and those things which were required to the integrity or soundness of it , among which latter i reckoned the worship of god in the way prescribed by him . 3. that the union of the catholick church depended upon the agreement of it in things antecedently necessary to its being . from hence i proceeded to shew , that nothing ought to be owned as necessary to salvation by christian societies , but such things which by all those societies are acknowledged antecedently necessary to the being of the catholick church . and here i distinguished between necessary articles of faith , and particular agreements for the churches peace . i did not therefore deny , but that it was in the power of particular churches , to require a subscription to articles of religion , opposite to the errours and abuses which they reformed ; but i denyed it to be in the power of any church to make those things necessary articles of faith , which were not so before . and here it was i shewed the moderation of the church of england above that of rome ; in that our church makes no articles of faith , but such as have the testimony and approbation of the whole christian world of all ages , and are acknowledged to be such by rome it self : but the church of rome imposeth new articles of faith , to be believed as necessary to salvation ; as appears by the bull of pius 4. this is my plain meaning , which half-witted men have stretched and abused to several ill purposes : but not to wander from my present subject , what is it that i. w. can hence infer to his purpose ? viz. that from hence it follows that the church of rome does not erre against any article of faith , or any point necessary to salvation ; which if it be only meant of those essential points of faith , which i suppose antecedently necessary to the being of a church , i deny it not , but do not see of what use this concession can be to them in the present debate : since in the following discourse i made the ancient creeds of the catholick church the best measure of those things , which were believed to be necessary to salvation : so that the force of the argument comes to this , whatsoever church does embrace the ancient creeds cannot be guilty of idolatry ; but the church of rome doth embrace all the ancient creeds by my own concession , therefore it is a contradiction for me to grant that they hold the ancient creeds , and yet to charge them with idolatry . and these matters being thus made plain , there is no great difficulty to answer , by denying the major proposition , and asserting that a church which does own all the articles of faith which are contained in them , may yet teach and practise those things , which take away from that worship which is proper only to god , and give it to meer creatures ; as i have proved the church of rome doth in the worship of images , adoration of the host , and invocation of saints . but to make this yet more plain , there are two things we consider in a church , the essence , and the soundness of it ; as in a man , we consider his being a man and his health : when we discourse of his meer being , we enquire into no more than those things which make him a man , whether he be sound or not : so in a church , when we enquire into the essentials of it , we think it not necessary to go any farther than the doctrinal points of faith ; the reason is , because baptism admits men into the church upon the profession of the true faith in the father , son , and holy ghost ; and whatever is sufficient to make a member of the church , that is in it self sufficient , being embraced , to make a church ; but when we enquire farther into the moral integrity , or soundness of a church , then we think our selves bound , not barely to know what is acknowledged and received , but how far it is so ; and whether that church which owns the fundamentals of christian faith , doth not by gross and damnable errours corrupt the worship of god , and debauch those very principles which they profess to own . and in this respect none of us ever said , that the church of rome did not err ; nay we do say and have manifestly proved , that she hath erred against the christian faith , by introducing palpable errours in doctrine , and manifold superstitions and idolatries in practice . from hence it plainly appears , that the concession i. w. urges me with of the church of rome being a true church signifies nothing , in the sense by me intended , which contradicts the charge of idolatry ; unless they can prove that none who own the apostles creed , or their baptism , can so long as they so do , teach idolatry , or be guilty of giving the honour due only to god to meer creatures . these things being thus explained , i hope the sophistry of this way of arguing is made so evident , that no man of understanding , that resolves not before hand what to believe , is capable of being deceived by it . before i come to the next contradiction charged upon me , i shall for the diversion of the reader , and the suitableness of the matter , take notice of his appendix , wherein i. w. goes about so pleasantly to prove me an idolater , by a notable trick , which it seems came into his head a little too late , after he had finisht this worthy treatise . i should have suspected it had been intended only for a piece of drollery , but that the man so severely rebukes me for it , and withall talks of nothing less than demonstration in the case . what ? ( thought i ) is it come to this at last ? and am i become an idolater too , who was never apt to think my self enclined so much as to superstition ? but what can not the controverting wit of man do , upon second and serious thoughts ? all the comfort i found left was towards the conclusion , wherein he confesses that the same argument proves the prophets , evangelists and holy ghost himself to be idolaters ; nay then , i hoped there was no great harm to be feared in so good company ; and by that consideration armed my self against this terrible assault . but at last as he made nearer approaches to me , i found no mischief was like to come , but what i brought upon my self ; for he charged me with nothing but my own artillery , and the train that was laid to blow me up was fetched from my own stores ; only he had disposed it in a way fittest for this deep design . but the best of it was , his plot went no farther than my idolatry , and both lay only in imagination . for there he makes the seat of my idolatry , which he demonstratively proves must be so by my own argument . i shall therefore conside● what that was , and with what great art he imploys it against me . among other arguments to shew that the prohibition of worshipping images was not peculiar to the iews , but of an unalterable nature , i insisted upon gods declaring the unsuitableness of it to his own infinite and incomprehensible nature , which could not be represented to men , but in a way which must be an infinite disparagement to it . to whom will ye liken god ? or what likeness will ye compare to him ? it is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth , &c. and the reason given of the law it self was , because they saw no s●militude of god ; from hence i shewed , that the wisest nations and persons among the heathen looked on the worship of god by images , as unsuitable to a divine and infinite being , and that the gospel still more discovered gods spiritual nature , and the agreeableness of spiritual worship to him ; that the apostles urged this argument against the heathen idolatry ; and the fathers of the church thought the reason of this law did equally oblige us with the iews ; now by what art doth he from hence prove me necessarily to be an idolater , as well as they of the church of rome , who worship god by images against the very words and reason of this law ? the argument is briefly summed up by himself thus : whoever worships god represented in a way far inferiour to his greatness is an idolater ; but whosoever worships god represented to him without the beatifical vision , either by words or by imaginations as well as images , he worships god in a way far inferiour to his greatness ; ergo , whoever worships god represented unto him without the beatifical vision is an idolater : but dr. st. worships god without the beatifical vision ( no doubt of it ) ergo , dr. st. is an idolater : there is no help for it . nay , from hence he proves , that i cannot so much as think of god without idolatry my self , nor preach of him without provoking others to it . o the insuperable force of reason , and the dint of demonstration ! but the mischief is , all this subtilty is used against the law-maker and not against me . did i not cite the words of god himself , who therefore did forbid the making any likeness of him , because nothing could be like him ? is there no difference between having imperfect conceptions of god in our minds , and making unworthy representations of him to our senses , with a design to worship them ? why did not god as well forbid the one as he did the other ? were the israelites then in the beatifical vision ? were their conceptions of god suitable to his incomprehensible nature ? if not , why were they not forbidden as well to think of god as to make any images of him ? is god as much disparaged by the necessary weakness of our understandings , as by voluntarily false and corporeal images of him ? nay doth not god design to prevent the errour of our imaginations by such prohibitions as those are ? and thereby commands us to think worthily of him , and when we pray to him , to consider him only as an infinite being in his nature and attributes ? i do not know what imaginations others have of god ; it may be those in the church of rome measure all by themselves , and god by their images of him , and thence conclude , that no men can think of god , but as they picture him , like an old man sitting in heaven ; but i assure them , i never had such an imagination of him , and if i had , should think it very unworthy of him . i know no other conception of god , but of a being infinitely perfect ; and this is rather an intellectual apprehension , than a material imagination of him . i am assured that he is , by mighty and convincing arguments , but to bring him down to my imagination , is to contradict the evidence that i have of his being ; for the same reasons which convince me that he is , do likewise convince me that he is infinite in power , and wisdom , and goodness . if i thought otherwise of him , i should know no reason to give him the worship of my mind and soul. although my conceptions cannot reach his greatness , yet they do not confine it , nor willfully debase it ; they do not bring him down to the meanness of a corporeal image . but because we cannot think highly enough of god , must we therefore devise ways to expose him to contempt and scorn ? and we cannot but despise a deity to whom any image can be like . but such absurd and silly arguments deserve no farther confutation . they indeed may take more liberty , who write to those who are bound not to judge of what is writ , but only to cry it up . as for us , who think it not fit to have our people in such slavery , we dare not venture such idle stuff among them . i come therefore to the second contradiction he charges me with , which is , concerning the danger of salvation which they are lyable to who communicate with the roman church , when yet i acknowledge that church to be a true church , and therefore to be a true way to salvation : and withall arch b. laud , whom i defend , doth grant a possibility of salvation to those in the church of rome . the force of this contradiction depending on these concessions , i shall , 1. shew in what sense they are granted by us . 2. examin the strength of the propositions he draws from hence , towards the making this a contradiction . 1. concerning the roman church being a true church : the arch-bishops adversary having falsely charged him with granting the roman church to be a right church , he complains of his injustice in it ; and saith , that it is a church and a true church he granted , but not a right church ; for truth only imports the being ; right , perfection in conditions ; thus a thief is a true man , though not an upright man. so a corrupt church may be true , as a church is a company of men which profess the faith of christ , and are baptized into his name ; but it is not therefore a right church either in doctrine or manners ; and again saith , it is true in that sense , as ens and verum , being and true , are convertible one with another ; and every thing that hath a being is truly that being which it is in truth of subtance . the replyer to him , saith , that the notion of a church implyes integrity and perfection of conditions ; upon which i gave him this answer , that he did herein betray his weak or willful mistakes of a church morally for metaphysically true . if he could prove it impossible for a church to retain its being that hath any errours in doctrine , or corruptions in practice , he would therein do something to the purpose ; but when he had done it , all that he would get by it was , that then we should not so much as acknowledge the roman church to be metaphysically a true church ; and therefore the reader is left to judge , whether his lordships charity for , or his testimony against their church was built upon better grounds . by this it is evident in what sense it was granted , that the roman church was a true church . 2. concerning possibility of salvation in that church ; to the question that was asked my lord of canterbury , whether a person might be saved in the roman faith ? he gives this answer , that the ignorant that could not discern the errours of that church , so they held the foundation and conformed themselves to a religious life might be saved : and after explains himself more fully , that might be saved grants but a possibility , no sure or safe way of salvation ; the possibility , i think , saith he , cannot be denyed to the ignorants , especially because they hold the foundation and cannot survey the building . and the foundation can deceive no man that rests upon it : but a secure way they cannot go , that hold with such corruptions when they know them . and again , many protestants indeed confess , there is salvation possible to be attained in the roman church ; but yet they say withall , that the errours of that church are so many , ( and some so great , as weaken the foundation ) that it is very hard to go that way to heaven , especially to them that have had the truth manifested . and in another place , i do indeed for my part ( leaving other men free to their own judgement ) acknowledge a possibility of salvation in the roman church : but so as that which i grant to romanists , is not as they are romanists , but as they are christians , that is , as they believe the creed , and hold the foundation christ himself , not as they associate themselves wittingly and knowingly to the gross superstitions of the roman church . and i am willing to hope there are many among them , which keep within that church , and yet wish the superstitions abolished which they know , and which pray to god to forgive their errours in what they know not , and which hold the foundation firm and live accordingly , and would have all things amended that are amiss , were it in their power . and to such i dare not deny a possibility of salvation , for that which is christs in them , though they hazard themselves extreamly , by keeping so close to that which is superstition , and in the case of images comes too near idolatry . these are my lord of canterburies own words , and laid together in my defence of him , which i. w. ought to have represented , if he had designed any thing but sophistry and trifling . but his game had been then quite spoiled ; the fine sport of making contradictions had been lost , and his cross purposes had come to nothing . i now come to see what contradictions he wire-draws from hence by the help of his propositions . 1. whoever is in a condition , wherein he is certainly saved , is in no danger or probability of being damned . if by he is certainly saved , he speaks of the event , then he were a hard hearted man that would not grant , that he that is actually saved is in no danger or probability of being damned ; if he means it of a certain way to salvation , then it is yet capable of several meanings . for to be in a certain way may imply one of these three things . 1. that the way it self is so plain that a man cannot miss of it . 2. or that the way is in it self certain , but there are so many by-paths and turnings lying hard by it , that it is a very hard matter for any man to keep in it . 3. to be in a certain way , is , when not only the way it self is certain , but a man keeps constantly in that way . according to these several senses this proposition may be understood ; if by it be meant . 1. he that is in a certain way to salvation , is in no danger or probability of being damned , i. e. he that keeps constantly in that way which will certainly lead him to heaven , the proposition is true , but impertinent ; but if by it be meant no more but this , that he is in a way which in it self leads to heaven , but there are so many cross and by-paths near it , that though it be possible for him to hit it , yet it is extreamly hazardous , no one can imagine that such a one is in no probability of miscarrying , for we say he is in very great danger of it , notwithstanding the tendency of the way it self . 2. prop. whoever lives and dyes in a true way to salvation , having conformed to its directions , or whoever has done all that was necessary to attain unto salvation is in a condition , wherein he is certainly saved . the sophistry of this is so palpable , that the weakest eye may discern it ; for it supposes that true way to salvation wherein he lives to be a very safe and secure way , i. e. that it be not only true in it self , but free from such errours and corruptions which may endanger salvation ; and in that sense it is true , but very far from the purpose . for none of us did ever yield that the roman church is a safe way to salvation ; nay it is expresly denyed by my lord of canterbury , as well as by me . but here lyes still another piece of sophistry to be taken notice of , whoever hath done all that was necessary to attain salvation , is in a condition wherein he is certainly saved ; no doubt of it ; but the doing all that is necessary to salvation is not bare believing the necessary articles of faith , contained in the creed , but obeying the will of god ; which cannot be done by those who wilfully adhere to gross and open violations of it ; as i have charged the church of rome to do , in her solemn acts of worship . their cause certainly is at a very low ebb when such pittiful sophistry , must pass for reasoning and demonstration among them . never men had more need of a self-evidencing cause , as well as propositions , than they ; so little help do they contribute to it by their writings . 3 prop. the roman church is a true way to salvation , and teaches all that is necessary to attain unto it . this is granted , he saith , by me and other protestants , when we acknowledge the roman church to be a true church ; but in what sense , i have already explained , so far as to leave no colour of arguing from hence to any contradiction in me . for this true way to salvation in our sense is no more , but that the church of rome doth acknowledge so much of christian faith , as is sufficient to save men , on condition they live accordingly , and do not by gross corruptions in doctrine or practice render that faith ineffectual to them : but withall we assert and maintain , that to these necessary articles of christian faith , the church of rome hath added such errours and corruptions , as make the salvation of any person extreamly hazardous , who lives in the communion of it . and let them have all the comfort from hence which they can , i am sure they have not this , that they have brought me to contradict my self by such concessions as these . by this , his last proposition comes to nothing ; whoever lives and dyes in the communion of the roman church , having conformed to her doctrine , lives and dyes in a true way to salvation having conformed to its directions , and has done all that was necessary to attain to it . which evidently supposes that we yield that the doctrine of the roman church , is a safe way to salvation , which we utterly deny ; all that we assert is , that so much of the common principles of christianity , as is retained in the roman church is sufficient for the salvation of those , who do not wilfully corrupt them by bad opinions and practices , or if they have , do repent sincerely . but for those who conform themselvs to the doctrine and directions of the roman church as such , we are far from ever saying that such live and dye in a true way to salvation ; for this were to make those doctrines and directions to be as holy and innocent as we believe them to be false and pernicious . see now what a contradiction here is ; for me to assert the church of rome to be a true church , because it retains the fundamentals of christianity ; and yet to make the condition of those who live in it so hazardous in point of salvation , by reason of the gross errours , which men are bound to believe as necessary points of faith ; and horrible superstitions which they must conform to , if they follow her directions . surely he could not but know this to be our meaning , and consequently to have no shadow of contradiction in it , no more than is in this plain proposition , that a possible way to salvation may yet be very dangerous . but though iugglers know their own cheats , they would lose their trade if they made them known to the people . something must be said to amuse them , and this seemed the prettiest way , to confound them , by dazeling their eyes with such appearances of contradictions : and thereby to perswade their own party , that they need not fear the the attaque of such an enemy who falls foul upon himself . but it is nothing but the mist he casts before their eyes , can make any have such an imagination ; it is but making things clear , and then nothing but order and agreement appears . but yet he quarrels with me , for making the case of living in willful sin and in the corruptions of the roman church parallel with each other ; 1. because i will not grant that a willful sin , such as adultery , to be a true way to heaven ; and doth he think that i ever imagined idolatry and gross superstition to be so ; if i grant that in the church of rome they have a true way to heaven , it is as other debauched christians have , who own faith enough to save them , but their destruction comes from not living agreeably to it . 2. because i grant more to them than to iews or pagans , yet they may be saved if they do repent . true , but they are not in so great likelyhood of repenting , as those who own the fundamental articles of the christian faith , and have a sincere desire in general to serve god according to his will ; the grace of god being more plentiful , where the christian faith is owned , than where it is rejected ; upon which account iews and heathens are in more danger of not repenting , and consequently of salvation than those that live in the roman church . 3. because i grant a greater capacity of salvation to roman catholicks than they do to protestants ; but they do not d●ny it to protestants if they repent . but the difference lyes in the nature and acts of the rep●●tance required ; we say a 〈◊〉 repentanced and a vertuous sincere mind , which desires to know & do the will of god may be sufficient , together with a particular repentance of all known miscarriages ; but they say such a repentacne is necessary for us , as does imply a disowning our church , as such wherein no salvation is to be had , and a joyning with the communion of the church of rome : therefore the question about their charity and ours , is about the possibility of the salvation of persons living and dying in the communion of either church ; we say on the conditions before mentioned , men may be saved , though they do not in terms renounce their communion , but they say that none who do not return to their communion can be saved ; and in this we justly charge them with horrible uncharitableness , when many of their writers allow a greater possibility of salvation to meer heathens . 4. because arch-bishop laud grants a greater capacity of salvation than other protestants ; but in what sense i have already shewed . 5. that this is in effect to say , that it is a true way to heaven if they go out of it . not if they go out of it so far as it is true , but so far only as it is false and dangerous . if a man were going the right way from london to york , as far as stamford , and there went quite out of his way into the fens , here his life is in danger ; if i should tell this man that the way from london to york was a certain way , that the way he went in as far as stamford was a true way , and if he had kept in it , would have brought him to york , but the way he is now in is very dangerous , and if he does not return , his life is in perpetual hazard ; is this all one as if i should tell him , while you were in the true way , you must go out of it ? no such sense can be put upon such words , by any man that hath sense ; and for others , we give them leave to cry nonsense and contradiction . all his other petty objections run upon the same palpable mistake , and it would be but repeating the same thing to answer the other remaining cavils upon this argument . i come therefore to the sore place indeed , the touching whereof hath made them to kick and wince so much at me ; and that is the fanaticism of the roman church . which made them complain to caesar , that it was a new crime , and never heard of before . what ? they ; the sober , the judicious , the wise people of the church of rome turned fanaticks ! it's false , it 's impossible ; nay , it is absolutely and utterly impossible to be true ; and none but atheists can charge them with it . this hath been their common way of answering to this new charge ; but not one wise word hath been said in a just vindication of themselves , by giving answer to those many plain , and undenyable instances i have produced . i wished for no other tryal than to be bound to bring forth their own authors , and to make good the authorities i had cited , and my fidelity therein ; but they have fairly declined this way of tryal . but how then can they free themselves from this imputation ? we have men of art to deal with , and it is some pleasure to observe the skill they use in warding off a blow they did not look for . but if they have nothing more to say then i. w. can help them to , the charge will stick the faster , for his attempt to clear them of it . he begins with a description of fanaticism , which , he saith , doth necessarily contain a resistance of authority ; and for this , very unhappily quotes my own words . by fanaticism we understand either an enthusiastick way af religion , or resisting authority under pretence of religion ; just as if one should say the true notion of idolatry implyes the renouncing the true god , and to prove it should quote words of mine to this purpose , that idolatry is either renouncing the true god , or worshipping the true god by an image : for as in that case , it is evident , i make two sorts of idolatry ; so it is as plain in this , that i make two branches of fanaticism , whereof the one is , an enthusiastick way of religion , the other resistance of authority under the pretence of religion . but if this be the true notion of fanaticism , why doth he not speak one word in vindication of them , from that very kind of fanaticism , which i had charged them to be so deeply guilty of ? had i not proved by plain testimonies , that the most fanatick principles of rebellion were owned by the jesuitical party among them ? viz. the kings deriving his power from the people , and the peoples authority to call the king to an account , and if they see good to take away his power and change the government : and not only so but to take away his life too ? had i not proved by clear and late instances , that the party which owns these principles is to this day the most countenanced and encouraged at rome ? and any honest men among them , as to these principles , are on that account hated and persecuted , as p. w. and his brethren . but why no answer to this charge ? these are things they cannot deny , and yet dare not confess them to be true . if i. w. answer again , let him speak out like a man , and either confess and detest these principles , or we shall charge them farther with this worst and most dangerous sort of fanaticism . my duty and just zeal for his majesties interest and security , will not suffer me to let go this part of the charge against them , although they would fain have it passed over in silence , as though never a word had been said concerning it . this is one of the best arts i have met with in this pamphlet ; for unwary readers will not remember the charge , when they find no answer : but if i. w. had attempted to answer it , his shuffling and tricks might have made the deeper impression in the readers minds . remember then this charge stands good against them , without so much as their pretending to answer it . to come now to the other part of fanaticism , viz. an enthusiastick way of religion : and here to proceed clearly , i shall lay down the method of his defence , and then examine it . the strength of his defence lyes in these propositions . 1. that fanaticism does necessarily contain a resistance against authority . 2. no particular ways of religion , countenanced by a competent authority , are fanaticism . 3. those things which concern religious orders and method of devotion , which i charge them with , are countenanced by a competent authority , viz. the authority of that church . 4. that church cannot countenance fanatism which obligeth all persons to submit to her judgement . so that here are two principles by which i. w. thinks to vindicate their church from fanaticism ; viz. competent authority , and submission of judgement to the church . to shew the invalidity of this answer , i shall do these things . 1. shew the insufficiency of it . 2. the monstrous absurdities consequent upon it . 1. if this answer were sufficient , he must make it appear , that there have been none charged by me as fanaticks in their church , but such as have submitted themselves and their judgement to the authority of their church . for let us consider the occasion of this charge , and we shall presently discern the insufficiency of this way of answering it . the occasion was , that my adversary made all the sects and fanaticisms among us to be the effect of the reformation ; what answer could be more proper in this case , than to shew , that there were as wild and extravagant fanaticisms before , as have been since ? which is a plain evidence that cannot be the cause of them , to which they imputed them . to make this out , i searched into the several sorts of fanaticism , and gave instances very clear of as great fanaticks in the times before the reformation , as have been since : from the many pretenders to immediate revelations among them , who were persons allowed and approved by their church , and some of them canonized for saints ; but besides these , i gave such other instances of fanaticism among the friers , and others of their church , as were never heard of in the world before ; as the broachers and maintainers of the friers gospel , which was to put out of doors the gospel of christ ; the spiritual brethren of the order of s. francis called by several names , but especially that of fratricelli , who continued long , spread far , and more distrubed the church than any since have done , the dulcinistae in italy , the alumbrado's in spain , &c. what doth he now say concerning all these ? were these countenanced by a competent authority among them ? did they submit their judgement to the church ? if neither of these be pretended in reference to them , then this answer must be very insufficient , because it doth not reach to the matter in charge . 2. for those who were as he saith , countenanced by authority , and did submit themselves to the church , yet this doth not clear them from fanaticism ; but draws after it these monstrous absurdities . 1. that prevailing fanaticism ceases to be fanaticism ; like treason , which when it prospers none dare call it treason ; an excellent way , this , to vindicate the fanaticism of the late times , which because countenanced by an authority , supposed competent enough by some who then writ of obedience and government , it ceased to be fanaticism ; and all the wild and extravagant heats of mens brains , their enthusiasms and revelations were regular and orderly things , because countenanced by such authority as was then over them . 2. by this rule the prophets and apostles , nay our lord himself , were unavoidably fanaticks ; for what competent authority had they to countenance them ? the iewish church was not yet cast off while our saviour lived , but utterly opposed his doctrine and revelation , as coming from a private spirit of his own ; according therefore to these excellent principles , our b. saviour is made a meer fanatick , because he wanted a competent authority of the present church to countenance him ; the same was generally the case of the prophets , and of all the apostles . but what rocks and precipices will a bad cause drive men upon ? if that which makes fanaticism or not fanaticism , be the being countenanced or not countenanced by this competent authority , these horrible absurdities are unavoidable ; and all religion must be resolved into the will and pleasure of this competent authority . but i need not take such pains to prove this , for my brave answerer i. w. sets it down in his own words . moreover , otherwise all the particular manners of preaching or praying practised by the prophets , and all their extraordinary visions and revelations would be flat fanaticism ; but because they were countenanced by a competent authority , they could not deserve that character . excellent doctrine for a popish leviathan ! are you in earnest sir ? do you think the prophets had been fanaticks , in case of no competent authority to countenance them ? what competent authority had the prophet elijah to countenance him , when all the authority that then was , not only opposed him but sought his life ? what competent authority had any of the prophets who were sent to the ten tribes ? what had ieremiah , ezekiel , and the rest of them ? it seems then , all these excellent and inspired persons are cast into the common herd of fanaticks , for want of this competent authority to countenance them . and yet this is the man ( meerly because i lay open the fanaticism of some their pretended saints , such as ignatius loyola and s. francis ) who ranks me with lucian and porphyrie : hath he not himself a great zeal for religion the mean while , resolving all revelation into his competent authority ? and not only so , but paralleling the expressions and practices of s. brigitt , and mother juliana , ( than which scarce any thing was ever printed more ridiculous in the way of revelations ) with those of the holy prophets and apostles ? if a man designed to speak mischievously against the scriptures and divine revelation , he could not do it more to purpose than i. w. hath done in these words ? when he compares things whose folly is so manifest at the first view , with that divine wisdom , which inspired those holy persons , whom god sent upon particular messages to his people , and gave so great assurance that he sent them ; and who delivered matters of great weight and moment , and not such tittle tattle as those two womens books are fraught withall . but if this be the way they have to vindicate them from being fanaticks , it is absolutely the worst that could be thought of ; for it cannot discover so high an opinion of them , as it doth a very mean one of the books of scripture , and the divine revelations therein contained . i could here earnestly intreat the wiser men of that church , for the honour of god , and the christian religion , not to suffer such inconsiderate persons to vindicate their cause , who to defend the extravagant infirmities of some enthusiastical women among them , are so forward to cast dirt and reproach upon our common religion , and those revelations from whence we derive it . but i forbear ; only it is a shrewd sign , if this way be allowed , of a wretched cause , that cannot be maintained without plunging those , who rely upon their word , into the depths of atheism . but these are not things to be so slightly passed over , they deserve a fuller and severer chastisement . for the present , this is enough to shew , what monstrous absurdities this way of vindicating their church from fanaticism hath brought i. w. to . yet in one respect he deserves some pardon , for they are wont to write their answers upon the common themes out of some staunch authors , who considered a little better what they writ ; but this was a new charge , and neither bellarmin , becanus , nor any of their old beaten souldiers , could give them any assistance ; they found not the title of the fanaticism of the roman church in any of their common-place-books ; therefore plain mother-wit must help them , and so it hath bravely . but before they again attempt this matter , i desire them to consider these things , least they should in a desperate humour utterly give up the cause of religion , finding themselves unable to defend that of their church . 1. whether there can be any greater fanaticism , than a false pretence to immediate divine revelation ? for what can more expose men to all the follies and delusions imaginable , than this will do ? what actions can be so wild and extravagant but men may do , under such a pretence of immediate revelation from god ? what bounds of order and government can be preserved ? some may pretend a revelation to take up arms against their prince , or to destroy all they meet ( which is no unheard of thing ) others may not go so far , but may have revelations of the unlawfulness of kingly government ; others may pretend revelations of a new gospel , and a more spiritual dispensation than hath been yet in the world , as the mendicant friers did . 2. whether we are bound to believe all such who say , they have divine revelations ? or whether persons may not be deceived in thinking they have revelations , when they are only delusions of their own fancies or the devil ? if not ; then every one is to be believed who pretends to these things , and then all follies and contradictions must be fwallowed which men say they have by immediate revelation ; and every fanatick must be believed , to have divine revelation who believes himself , though he be only deluded by his own imagination , or become enthusiastical by the power of a disease in his head , or some great heat in his blood . 3. whether there must not be some certain rules established whereby all persons , and even competent authority it self , must proceed in judging these pretences to revelation , whether they be true or false ? for if they proceed without rule , they must either be inspired too , or else , must receive all who pretend to divine revelations : if there be any certain rules , whereby the revelation is to be judged ; then if any persons receive any revelation against those rules , whether are other persons bound to follow their judgement against those rules ? 4. whether there can be any more certain rule of judging , than that two things evidently contradictory to each other , cannot both come from divine revelation ? for then god must contradict himself , which is impossible to be supposed , and would overthrow the faith of any divine revelation . and this is the plain case of the revelations made to two famous saints in the roman church , s. brigitt and s. catharine ; to one it was revealed , that the b. virgin was conceived with original sin ; to the other , that she was not : both these have competent authority , for they were both canonized for saints by the roman church , and their revelations approved , and therefore ( according to i. w. ) neither of them were fanaticks , though it is certain that one of their revelations was false . for , either god must contradict himself , or one of these must be deceived , or go about to deceive , and what greater fanaticism can there be , than that is ? if one of these had only some fanatick enthusiasm , and the other divine revelation , then competent authority and submission to the judgement of the church , is not a rule to judge fanaticism by ; for those were equal in both of them . 5. whether there be an equal reason to look for revelations now , as in the time of the prophets , and our saviour , and his apostles ? or whether god communicates revelations to no other end , but to please and gratifie some enthusiastical tempers ? and what should be the reason he should do it more now , than in the age wherein revelations were more necessary ? in those times god revealed his mind to men , but it was for the benefit of others ; when he sent them upon particular messages , as the prophets , or made known some future events to them of great importance to the church , as the coming of the messias , &c. or inspired them to deliver weighty doctrines to the world , as he did both the prophets and apostles : why should we think , that god now , when the revelations of these holy and inspired persons are upon record , and all things necessary to his church are contained therein , should vary this method of his , and entertain some melancholy and retired women , or other enthusiastical persons with visions and revelations of no use to his church ? 6. whether god doth ever inspire persons with immediate revelations without giving sufficient evidence of such inspiration ? for if he did , it were to leave men under a temptation to infidelity without means to withstand it ; if he doth not , then we have reason to examine the evidence , before we believe the revelation . the evidence god gave of old was either the prophecy of a succession of prophets , by one whose commission was attested by great miracles , as moses , who told the israelites , they were to expect prophets , and laid down rules to judge of them by ; or else by miracles wrought by themselves as by the apostles whom our lord sent abroad to declare his will to the world . and where these are not , what reason is there to receive any new revelations as from god , especially when the main predictions of the new testament are of false prophets , and false miracles ? 7. whether the revelations of their pretended saints being countenanced by the authority of their church , be equally received among them , with the revelations contained in scripture ? if they be , then they ought to have equal reverence paid to them , and they ought to read them as scripture , to cite their authority as divine , and to believe them as infallible as christ and his apostles ; if they be not , than whatever they pretend , they are not looked on as divine revelations by them , as manifestly appears , because they are wholly rejected by some of the wisest of them , doubted of , and disputed by others , as it were easie to prove were it not too large a subject for this discourse , but by none received as writings of divine authority , and equal with the scriptures , which they must be if they came from the same spirit . and since they are not , it is evident that they are no otherwise esteemed among themselves , than as the fanatick heats of some devout persons of disturbed and deluded fancies ; whom notwithstanding they are willing to cherish , partly because they are loth to discountenance any pretence to an infallible spirit in their church , and partly that there may never be wanting matter to make saints of , when the pope thinks fit , and good consideration is offered . this may suffice to make good this charge of fanaticism against the roman church ; and to shew that i am as far from the appearance of any contradiction therein ( although their revelations are not from a real one ) as i. w's vain and sophistical talk is from any appearance of reason . the last contradiction charged upon me , is , about the divisions of the roman church . the occasion of which discourse was , that divisions were objected to me as another consequent of the reformation ; upon which i thought my self obliged to enquire into the vnity of their church , and i have at large proved from undenyable instances , attested by their own authors , that they have no reason to insult over other churches on account of their divisions , nor to boast of their own unity and peace . for i have there proved that there have never been greater disturbances in the christian world , than what they call the means of unity , viz. the popes authority , hath procured , no where greater or more lasting schisms , no where fiercer disputes about matters of order and doctrine , than among them . i considered all their salvo's and from them shew'd , that if they have no divisions among themselves neither have we ; nay the same arguments which prove they do not differ in matters of faith from each other , do likewise prove that they and we do not differ from each other in those things . and what saith i. w. to all this ? instead of healing their own divisions , he only designs to prove me to be divided against my self , that he might make up the full tale of his contradictions . but i. w. had so much forgot himself as to make good the very thing i designed ; and by that very argument he uses to prove that i contradict my self , he manifestly proves that there are no more divisions in matters of faith , between the roman church and us than there are among themselves . this i shall make very evident , but i must proceed as he doth with his propositions . 1. no divisions from the roman church are divisions of the roman church . this is a very subtle principle of unity among them , and by this rule there would be an admirable unity in the roman church , if the pope himself were left alone in it . for all others would only be divided from it , and i would allow the pope to be at a very good agreement with himself , which is more than i. w. will allow me : in this case indeed there would be vnity , but where would be their church ? suppose a shepherd should boast of the excellent government of a great flock he had under his command , and the unity and peace they lived in ; and a by-stander should tell him that he saw others pretend to the same authority over that flock that he did , and part followed one and part another , he saw some of the chief of the leaders set themselves against him disputing his authority , he saw many of the sheep continually fighting with each other , and some had wholly forsaken him ; would it not be a pleasant thing for this shepherd to say that notwithstanding all this they had great peace and unity , because as many as did not quarrel were very quiet , and those that were divided from his government were not under it ? but our question is , whether such authority be the means to preserve the whole flock under government , when we see it prevents no divisions but causes many ? he might have spoken more to the purpose if he had framed his proposition thus , there can be no divisions in the roman church , but such as divide men from it ; and in that case the roman church would have been reduced to a very small number . but if there may be such divisions which are as contrary to unity and peace as divisions in matters of faith are , to what purpose is it to shew that they have none in one kind if they have very great in all others ? but although this be not sufficient to demonstrate their vnity , yet it is enough for his purpose , if it doth shew that i contradict my self . but where lyes the contradiction ? the force of it lyes here . i charge them with divisions in matters of faith , when divisions in matters of faith make them not to be members of the roman church ; therefore there can be no divisions in the roman church in matters of faith . again ( for in these two arguments the substance of his own propositions is couched by himself ) all those who assent unto the ancient creeds are undivided in matters of faith ; but all roman catholicks assent unto the ancient creeds ; ergo , all roman catholicks are undivided in matters of faith , and consequently it is a calumny in me to say they are divided in these matters . now , what an easie matter is it to disposses me of this spirit of contradiction , which he imagines me possessed with ? i need no holy water , or sacred charms and exorcisms to do it with . there needs no more but understanding what is meant by matters of faith ; when matters of faith are spoken of by me in the place he refers to , it is evident to every one that reads it , and by his own words i speak only of the fundamental and necessary articles of faith , which are necessary to the salvation of all and to the very being of a church ; of which kind i say none ought to be esteemed , that were not admitted into the ancient creeds . but when i charge them with divisions in matters of faith , i do not mean that they reject the ancient creeds , but i take matters of faith in their own sense for things defined by the church ; and if i. w. had sought for any thing but words to raise cavils upon , he might have found it so explained in the very place where i speak of this . for that discourse is to answer an objection of theirs , that they do not differ in those things which they esteem matters of faith ; and particularly i insisted upon that , that they cannot be sure whether they differ in matters of faith or no , because they are not agreed what makes things to become matters of faith . can this be understood any other way than of their own sense of matters of faith ? and is not this fair dealing to make me contradict my self because where i argue against them i take matters of faith in their sense , and where i deliver my own opinion , i take them in another sense ? and this being the sense of matters of faith the trifling of his arguing appears ; for do all these cease to be members of their church who dispute any thing which others account matter of faith among them ? are the iesuits all out of the church of rome , because they deny the efficacy of grace which the domini●ans account a matter of faith ? are the iansenists and oral traditionists divided from the church of rome because they deny the popes infallibility which the iesuits account a matter of faith ? if not , then all divisions in matters and articles of faith , are not divisions from the true church and from all her members ; and so his second proposition comes to nothing : and so likewise the third , that all divisions in matters of faith , so esteemed by them , are divisions from the roman church . but the fourth and fifth propositions are the most healing principles that have yet been thought on . fie for shame ! why should we and they of the church of rome quarrel thus long ? we are very well agreed in all matters of faith , and i shall demonstratively prove it from the argument of i. w. drawn from his two last propositions . all who assent unto the ancient creeds are undivided in matters of faith , by prop. 4. but both papists and protestants do assent unto the ancient creeds ; ergo , they are undivided in matters of faith and hath not i. w. now done his business , and very substantially proved the thing he intended ? but i hope we may enjoy the benefit of it , as well as those of the church of rome ; and that they will not hence forward charge us with dividing from their church in any matters of faith , since we are all agreed in owning the ancient creeds ; and seeing , we cannot be divided from the church but by differing in matters of faith according to his propos. it follows that we are still members of the true church , and therefore neither guilty of heresie nor schism . but if those who do own and assent to the ancient creeds may yet be divided in matters of faith , as they charge us by rejecting the definitions of the roman church , then there is no shadow of a contradiction left in my charging them with differences in matters of faith among themselves , though i say , they own the ancient creeds . and now , reader , thou seest what all these pitiful cavils are come to ; and what ground there hath been for them to glory in this pusionello , that with a sheet and a half hath compelled me , as he saith , to be my own executioner . but these great heroes must be allowed to relate their famous adventures , with some advantage to themselves : it might have been enough to have rescued the lady , but not only to destroy the giant ( as any man must be accounted whom such knights encounter ) but to leave him grovelling in the ground and gasping for breath , and that by wounds he forced him to give himself , this is beyond measure glorious . go thy way then for the eighth champion of christendom , enjoy the benefit of thy illustrious fame , sit down at ease , and relate to thy immortal honour thy mighty exploits ; only when thou hast done , remember thou hast encountred nothing but the wind-mills of thy own imagination , and the man whom thou thought'st to have executed by his own hands , stands by and laughs at thy ridiculous attempts . but i forget , that i am so near his conclusion , wherein he doth so gravely advise me that i would be pleased for once to write controvesies , not play-books : his meaning i suppose , is , that i would return to the old beaten road where they know how to find a man , and have something to say because others have said something before them ; and not represent the ridiculous passages of their fanaticks ; for the defence of which they are furnisht with no distinctions out of their usual magazines , their present manuals of controversie . i shall be contented to wait their leisure if they have any thing material to say ; as i. w. gives me some hopes , when he saith , that other more learned pens ( i shall be glad to see them ) will give me a more particular and compleat answer . i hope not in the way of cavilling ; if they do , i shall hereafter only contemn them ; but i am afraid of their good intentions by the books he mentions as such considerable things in answer to my vindication of arch-bishop laud , viz. the guide in controversies , and protestancy without principles ; if others write as they have done , i shall take as little notice of them as i have done of those . cannot a dull book come out with my name in the title , but i must be obliged to answer it ? no , i assure them i know better how to spend my time . i say still , let a just answer come forth , that deals by me as i did by the book i answered , and then let them blame me , if i neglect it . but at last he gives one general reason why no great matter is to be expected to come abroad in print : not , but that they have men of learning among them : no doubt of it : but alas for them ! they are so persecuted in the printing houses that nothing of theirs is suffered to come abroad , only by great good fortune this complaint is in print and comes abroad openly enough . how long i pray have these days of persecution been ? for , whatever you imagine i was so far from having any hand in it , that the first time i ever heard of it , was from your complaints . have you not formerly complained thus , when books too many have been printed and published in england ? and what assurance can you give us that you do not still complain without cause ? but , not to suffer you to deceive the people any longer in this kind ( by pretending that this is the reason why you do not answer our books , because you have no liberty of the press ) i have at this time a catalogue by me of above two hundred popish books printed in our own language ( which i shall produce on a just occasion ) a considerable part whereof have been published within the compass of not many years . and yet all possible efforts are used by us ( saith i. w. ) to hinder their doctors from shewing their learning ; this of late we must needs say , they have very sparingly done ; but all the arts we have , cannot hinder some of them from shewing their weakness , as this i. w. hath very prodigally done in this pamphlet . finis . an answer to the book , entituled , dr. stillingfleet's principles considered . although i write no plays , yet i hope i may have leave to say the scene is changed ; for instead of the former sophister , one now comes forth in the habit of a grave divine , whom i shall treat with the respect due to his appearance of modesty and civility . i pass by therefore all those unhandsome reflections in his preface , which i have not already answered in mine , and come immediately to the main controversie between us , which i acknowledge to be of so great importance as to deserve a sober debate . and the controversie in short is this , whether protestants who reject the roman churches authority and infallibility , can have any sufficient foundation to build their faith upon ? this we affirm , and those of the church of rome confidently deny ; and on this account do charge us with the want of principles , i. e. sufficient grounds for our faith . but this may be understood two ways . 1. that we can have no certainty of our faith as christians without their infallibility . 2. or that we can have no certainty of our faith as protestants , i. e. in the matters in debate between their church and ours . these two ought carefully to be distinguished from each other : and although the principles i laid down , do reach to both these , yet that they were chiefly intended for the former , will appear by the occasion of adding them to the end of the answer there given . the occasion was , my adversaries calling for grounds and principles ; upon which i there say , that i would give an account of the faith of protestants in the way of principles , and of the reason of our rejecting their impositions . the first i undertook on two accounts . 1. to shew that the roman churches authority and infallibility cannot be the foundation of christian faith , and so we may be very good christians without having any thing to do with the church of rome . 2. that this might serve as a sufficient answer to a book entituled protestants without principles . which being in some part of it directed against me i had reason , not only to lay down those principles , b●t to do it in such a manner as did most directly overthrow the principles of that book . which being only intimated there , i must now to make my proceeding more clear and evident , produce those assertions of e. w. for which mine were intended . in the first chapter he designs to prove , that all men must be infallible in the assent they give to matters of faith . for , saith he , if they disown such infallible believers , they must joyntly deny all infallible faith : and a little after , an infallible verity revealed to us forcibly requires an answerable and correspondent infallible faith in us : and therefore he asserts a subjective infallibility in true believers . and from hence he proves the necessity of infallible teachers ; for infallible believers and infallible teachers , he saith , seem neer correlatives . in the second chapter he saith , he that hears an infallible teacher hath the spirit of truth , and he that hears not an infallible teacher wants this spirit of truth ; by which he does not mean an infallible revealer of the doctrine at first ; but the immediate teachers of the revealed doctrine , for , saith he , no man can be a heretick that denies the objective verities revealed in gods word , unless he be sure that his teacher reveals those verities infallibly . he proposes the objection of a simplician , as he calls him , that he builds his faith and religion , not on any preachers talk but on the objective verities revealed in scripture : to which he answers , that unless he first learn of some infallible oracle , the sense of scripture in controverted places , he can never arrive to the depth of gods true meaning , or derive infallible faith from those objective revealed verities . he yet farther asserts , that every catechist , or preacher that hath a lawful mission , and is sent by the infallible church to teach christs sacred doctrine , if he preach that doctrine which christ and his church approves of , is then under that notion of a member conjoyned with an infallible church , infallible in his teaching ▪ and thence concludes , that infallibility doth accompany both teachers and hearers : and from denying this infallibility , he saith , follows an utter ruine of christian religion yea and of scripture too . and afterwards he goes about to prove that no man can have any divine faith without infallibility in the proponent ; for , faith he , as long as the infallibility of a revelation stands remote from me for want of an undoubted application made by an infallible proponent , it can no more transfuse certainty into faith , than fire at a great distance , warm . this is the sum of the principles of that metaphysical wit ; but sure a man must have his brains well confounded by school divinity and hard words , before he can have common sense little enough to think he understands them . but because i never loved to spend time in confuting a man , who thinks himself the wiser for speaking things , which neither he nor any one else can understand ; i rather chose in as short a way as i could , to put together such propositions , as might give an account of christian faith without all this iargon about infallibility . in order to this , i first laid down the principles wherein all parties are agreed ; and then such propositions as i supposed would sufficiently give an account of our faith , without any necessity of such an infallibility as he makes necessary for the foundation of it . but for our clearer proceeding in an argument of this importance , it will be necessary to state and fix the notion of infallibility before i come to particulars . for as it is used it seems to be a rare word for iugglers in divinity to play tricks with ; for sometimes they apply it to the object that is believed , and call that infallibly true ; sometimes to the subject capable of believing , and say persons ought to be infallibly certain that what they believe is infallibly true ; and sometimes to the means of conveying that infallible truth to the faculties of men , and these they say must be infallible , or else there can be no infallible certainty of any thing as infallbly true . but the subtilty of these things lies only in their obscurity ; and the school-man is spoiled when his talk is brought down out of the clouds to common sense : i will therefore trie to bring these things out of their terms to a plain meaning ; and surely we may speak and understand each other in these matters without this doubtful term of infallibility . for if it signifies any thing , we may make use of the thing it signif●es in stead of the word , and by applying the thing signified by it , to that which it is spoken of , we shall soon discern how justly it is attributed to it . infallibile is that which cannot be deceived ; now if no one will say , that a proposition cannot be deceived , it is absurd to say that it is infallibly true ; therefore the matters revealed considered as objective verities , as our schoolman speaks , are not capable of infallibility ; which cannot belong to the truth proposed , but to him that propounds or believes it . for to be deceived or not to be deceived , are proper only to persons ; and the impossibility of being deceived does in truth belong only to an infinitely perfect understanding ; for what ever understanding is imperfect , is of it self liable to errour and mistake . and yet an understanding liable to be deceived may not be deceived , and be sure it is not . the highest assurance of not being deceived , is from gods revealing any thing to men ; for we know it impossible that god should be deceived , or go about to deceive mankind in what he obliges them to believe as true . this then is granted , that whatever any person speaks immediately from god , he cannot be deceived in it ; but men may be deceived in thinking they speak from god when they do not . there is then no difficulty in the first , that what ever persons are inspired by god are infallible in what they speak ; but the main difficulty is about the assurance which god gives to men that they are inspired . two ways it may be conceived that men cannot be deceived in this matter . 1. if god inspires every particular person with the belief of this , and gives him such evidence thereof as cannot be false . 2. or if god shall inspire some persons in every age to assure the world , that those before them were inspired : but notwithstanding this , particular persons may be deceived , in believing those inspired who are not ; and to prevent this , nothing can be sufficient but divine revelation to every particular person that he hath appointed those infallible guides in his church , to assure men that he had at first setled his church by persons that were infallible ; but then , why might not such a particular revelation assure men as well immediately that christ and his holy apostles were infallible , as that the guides of the present church are infallible ? for it is unconceivable that persons should be more infallible in judging the inspiration of the present guides , than of the first founders of the church . and supposing men not inspired , they may be deceived in believing this infallibility of the present church , and if they may be deceived , how can their faith be infallible ? so that nothing can make the faith of particular persons infallible , but private inspiration which must resolve all faith into enthusiasm and immediate revelation . and nothing can be more absurd than to say , that there are infallible believers without infallible inspiration ; or that an infallible proponent can transfuse infallibility into faith , unless the infallibility of that proponent be first made known to the believer in such a way as he cannot be deceived in . for in matters of divine revelation , the main thing we are to enquire after , is the infallibility of those who delivered this doctrine to the world. and although the reason of believing what god saith , be his own infallibility , which is natural and essential to him ; yet the reason of my assenting to this or that doctrine , as coming from god , must be an assurance that god hath secured those persons from mistake whom he hath imployed to make known the doctrine to the world. those persons then whom god inspired , are the proponents of matters of faith to us : and if they give us sufficient reason to believe that they were inspired , we are bound to believe them , otherwise not . but to suppose that we cannot believe the first infallible proponents , unless there be such in every age , is to make more difficulties , and to answer none . for then all my belief of the infallibility of the first proponents , must depend on the evidence which the present guides of the church give of their infallibility , who yet cannot pretend to the same evidence which they had : and here is no difficulty answered , for we are certainly bound as much to enquire into the reason of our believing the present guides of the church infallible , as the apostles : and if men cannot be infallible in believing the apostles , unless there be other infallible proponents in every age , to assure them that the apostles were inspired , why must not the infallibility of these present proponents be likewise so attested as well as of the apostles ? and what undoubted application can be made of the churches infallibility , unless there be some other infallible proponent still to transfuse certainty into my belief of that , by vertue of which , i must believe all other matters of faith , which is the churches infallibility ? so that the last proponent must either be believed for himself without any further evidence , and then the shorter way would be to believe the first so , or else there will be an endless infallibility ; or at last all must be resolved into the enthusiasm of every particular person , if we do not rest satisfied with the rational evidence which those persons , who were inspired by god , did give to the world that they were sent by him : and then let the world judge whether christ and his apostles did not give stronger evidence that they were sent from god , than the pope or the guides of the present church do ? and if so , whether i● be possible for men to do greater disse●vice to christianity , than to suspend our belief of the inspiration of the founders of the christian church , on a thing , at least , far less evident than the thing to be believed by it is ? but in plain english , on a thing notoriously false ; and only the arrogant pretence of an usurping faction , which thinks it easier boldly to say that it cannot be deceived , than to defend it self against the just accusations both of deceiving , and being deceived . these things being premised , i now come to consider how far n. o. hath shewed the invalidity of the principles laid down by me , for the end for which i intended them . the design of them was to shew , that we may have sufficient certainty of our faith , without the infallibility of the roman church ; the answerer hath yielded some things and denied others . i shall therefore first lay down his concessions , and see of what force they are to the issue of this controversie , and then come fairly to debate the matters in difference between us . i. for his concessions . 1. he yields , that there is no necessity at all of infallibility under natural religion : which was implied in the second and third propositions which are granted by him . for in the second proposition i assert , that man being framed a rational creature capable of reflecting upon himself , may antecedently to any external revelation certainly know the being of god , and his dependence upon him ; else there could be no such thing as a law of nature , or any principles of natutural religion : which , he saith , may be granted . all supernatural and external revelation , must suppose the truth of natural religion ; for unless we be antecedently certain that there is a god , and that we are capable of knowing him , it is impossible to be certain , that god hath revealed his will to us by any supernatural means . let this be granted , saith he . from whence it follows that we have sufficient certainty of the principles of natural religion , without any such thing as infallibility . 2. he yields , that reason is to be judge concerning divine revelation ; which appears by the next proposition . nothing ought to be admitted for divine revelation , which overthrows the certainty of those principles which must be antecedently supposed to all divine revelation : for that were to overthrow the means whereby we are to judge concerning the truth of any divine revelation . of which , he saith , let this also be granted . 3. he yields , that the will of god may be sufficiently declared to men by writing , for he grants the tenth proposition , which is this . if the will of god cannot be sufficiently declared to men by writing , it must either be , because no writing can be intelligible enough for that end , or that it can never be known to be written by men infallibly assisted ; the former is repugnant to common sense , for words are equally capable of being understood , spoken or written ; the latter overthrows the possibility of the scriptures being known to be the word of god. this , saith he , is granted . 4. he yields , that the written will of god doth contain all things simply necessary to salvation . for in his consideration of the 14. proposition , these are his words : mean while as touching the perfection of holy scriptures , catholicks now , as the holy fathers anciently , do grant that they contain all points , which are simply necessary to be of all persons believed for attaining salvation . 5. he yields , that no person is infallibly certain of or in his faith , because the proponent thereof is infallible , unless he also certainly know , or have infallible evidence that he is infallible ; only he adds , that for begetting an infallible assent to the thing proposed , it is sufficient if we have an infallible evidence either of the thing proposed , or of the proponent only . which is all i desire as to this matter . but he quarrels with me for saying , proposition 21. it is necessary therefore in order to an infallible assent , that every particular person be infallibly assisted , in judging of the matters proposed to be believed : because , saith he , it is not necessary to have an infallible evidence of the truth of the things proposed , i. e. from the internal principles that prove or demonstrate them ; but it is enough that he have an infallible or sufficiently certain evidence only of the infallibility of the external proponent ▪ where there are two things to be taken notice of . 1. that by the matters proposed to be believed , he would seem to understand me only of the things that are to be believed by vertue of any proponent supposed infallible ; whereas i meant it of all such things to which an infallible assent is required , and chiefly of that by which we are to believe the things revealed ; as for instance , that the church is infallible , is in the first place to be believed upon their principles , and either an infallible assent is required to this or not ; if not , then infallibility is not necessary to faith ; if it be , then this infallible assent must be built on an infallibility antecedent to that of the church ; and then my consequence necessarily follows , that the ground on which a necessity of some external infallible proponent is asserted , must rather make every particular person infallible , if no divine faith can be without an infallible assent , and so renders any other infallibility useless . 2. that he explains infallible evidence by that which is sufficiently certain , which is meer shuffling : for he knows well enough that we contend for sufficiently certain evidence as much as they ; our only question is about infallibility , whether that be necessary or no ? if sufficiently certain evidence will serve for the churches infallibility , why may it not for the scriptures , or any matters of faith contained therein ? if they mean no more by infallibility but sufficient certainty , why do they make so great a noise about it , as though there could be no faith and we no christians without infallibility ? when we all say that the matters of faith have sufficient certainty , nay the highest which such things are capable of . is infallible faith come to be sufficiently certain only ? for all that i know an infallible pope may by such another explication become like one of us . 6. he yields , that a right and saving faith may be without any infallible assurance concerning the churches infallibility . which , he saith , is abundantly declared by catholick writers . i only desire to know , why a like right and saving faith may not be had concerning the scriptures , without their churches infallibility ? for from hence it follows , that an infallible assent is not requisite to saving faith ; directly contrary to my former adversary e. w. for one saith , it is necessary to faith , and the other , that it is not . but above all , how will he ever answer this to mr. i. s. who hath written a whole book purposely against this principle , as impious and atheistical ? methinks this way of defending the main foundation of their faith by principles so directly contradicting one another looks a little scandalously , and brings an odd suspition upon their cause , as if it were very hard to be made good , when our adversaries cannot agree by which of two quite contrary principles it was best be maintained . 7. he yields , that the utmost assurance a man can have of the churches infallibility , is only moral ; but to make it up , he calls it a moral infallibility ; which , how strangely soever it sounds , yet his meaning is good ; for it is such an infallibility , as is not infallibility . hath the dispute been thus long among us , whether infallibility be necessary or no to faith , and now at last one comes and tells us , yes surely , a moral infallibility is necessary . i have heard of a ho● dispute between two gentlemen about transubstantiation , very earnest they were on both sides ; at last another falls into their company and asked them what it was they were about ; they told him transubstantiation : very well , said he , but i pray tell me what you mean by it ; one said it was standing at the eucharist , and the other kneeling . much such another explication is this here of infallibility , only this is somewhat worse , for it is joyning two words together which destroy each other ; for if it be only moral certainty , it is not infallible ; if it be infallible , it cannot be barely moral . i expect to hear shortly of an accidental transubstantiation , a co-ordinate supremacy , as well as a moral infallibility . but we are to suppose that by infallibility he means no more than certainty , because he explains it by the certainty of universal tradition : this were well enough , if in the precedent page he had not said , that a particular person may be infallible in the assent he gives to some matter proposed , viz. to this , that the church is infallible ; i would fain understand what this infallible assent is grounded upon , and if the evidence be only sufficiently or morally infallible , which are his own terms , how the assent which is built upon it , comes to be more than so . it is very pleasant to observe how mr. cressey , and some other late writers of their church are perplexed about this word infallibility , as if they had a wolf by the ears , they cannot tell how to hold it , and they are afraid to let it go . and very loth is is our n. o. to part with the sound of infallibility , although his own concessions perfectly overthrow it , as will yet further appear by this last , viz. 8. that moral certainty is a sufficient foundation for faith. this will appear by my 27. proposition , which is this : the nature of certainty doth receive several names either according to the nature of the proof , or the degrees of the assent . thus moral certainty may be so called , either as it is opposed to mathematical evidence , but implying a firm assent upon the highest evidence that moral things can receive : or as it is opposed to a higher degree of certainty in the same kind , so moral certainty implies only greater probabilities of one side than the other . in the former sense we assert the certainty of christian faith to be moral , but not only in the latter . to which he saith , this principle is granted , if importing only that christians have or may have a sufficiently certain and infallible evidence of the truth of their christianity . whereby it is plain that though he useth the term infallible , yet he means no more than i do , or else he ought not to have brought that as an explication of my principle which is contrary to it , as in this controversie , moral certainty is opposed to strict demonstration and infallibility . but if he by infallibility means only sufficient certainty , i shall be content for quietness sake , that he shall call it infallibility , if he pleases . and that he can mean no more by it , appears not only by what he hath said before , but by what he saith afterwards in these words . a natural or moral certainty ( though not such a one as cannot possibly be false , but which according to the laws of nature and the common manners and experience of men is not false ) is sufficient on which to ground such a faith as god requires of us ; in respect of that certainty which can be derived from humane sense or reason , and which serves for an introductive to the reliance of this our faith upon such revelation as is believed by us divine ; and which if divine , we know is not possibly fallible ; in respect of its relying on which revelation , an infallible object , and not for an infallible certainty as to the subject , it is that this our faith is denominated a divine faith. now this natural or moral certainty is thought sufficient for the first rational introductive and security of our faith , not only by the doctor in his 27. principle , but also by catholick divines in their discourses of the prudential motives . very well said , and i were a very disingenuous man , if i should not heartily thank him for so free a confession , by which , if i understand any thing , he very fairly gives up the cause of infallibility , as to the necessity of it in order to faith : as will easily appear by the managing of it , so far as i have been concerned in it . it is evident to any one that will cast an eye on the controversie of infallibility , between the arch-bishop and his adversaries , that it was raised on this account , because those of the church of rome asserted , that the infallible testimony of the church was necessary in order to the believing the scriptures to be the word of god : and so much is endeavoured to be defended by him who pretended to answer my lord of canterburies book , who goes upon this principle , that this is to be believed with a divine faith , and a divine faith must be built upon an infallible testimony ; the falsehood of which , i at large shewed in the discourse of the resolution of faith. since the publishing whereof , the metaphysical gentleman before mentioned , pretended to answer that part of it which concerns infallibility and moral certainty . some of his assertions i have laid down already , as contrary to this of n. o. as may be ; for he not only asserts the necessity of infallibility for a foundation of christian faith , but spends some chapters in rambling talk against moral certainty . the title of one of which is , faith only morally certain is no faith. i desire n. o. and e. w. to agree better before they goe abo●● to confute me ; and to what purpose should● trouble my self with answering a man who● principles the more ingenuous of their ow● party disown , as well as we ? for not on●● n. o. here makes moral certainty a sufficien● ground for divine faith , but the guide 1● controversies , another of my adversaries , a●serts the same , when he saith , and indee● from what is said formerly , that a divine faith may be had by those who have had 〈◊〉 extrinsecal even morally infallible ( i see now from whom n. o. learnt these terms ) motive thereof , it follows that divine faith doth not resolve into such motives either as the formal cause , or always as the applicative introductive , or condition of this divine faith . and a little after , that it is not necessary that such faith always should have an external rationally infallible ground or motive thereto ( whether church authority or any other ) on his part that so believes . by these concessions it appears that the cause of infallibility , as far as it concerns the necessity of it in order to faith , is clearly given up by these persons ; and if others be still of another mind among them , i leave them to dispute it among themselves . thus far then we are agreed ; i now come to consider where the controversie still remains , and why the rest of my principles may not pass as well as these . in order to this , i must , by taking a view of his several exceptions and answers , draw together a scheme of those principles which he sets up in opposition to mine ; and if i do not very much mistake , they may be reduced to these three . 1. that god hath given an infallible assistance to the guides of the church in all ages of it , for the direction of those who live in it . 2. that without this infallible assistance there can be no certainty of the sense of scripture . 3. that all the arguments which overthrow the churches infallibility ; do destroy the churches authority . these , as far as i can perceive , contain the whole force of his considerations ; and in the examination of these the remaining discourse must be spent ; in which i shall have occasion to take notice of whatever is material in his book . 1. the main controversie is , whether god hath given an infallible assistance to the guides of the church in all ages , for the conduct of those who live in it ? for if he hath not , my adversary cannot deny , but the principles laid down by me must hold . for in case there be no infallibility in the guides of the church , every one must be left to the use of his own understanding , proceeding in the best manner , to find out what the will of god is in order to salvation . we do not now dispute concerning the best helps for a person to make use of in a matter of this nature ; but the q●estion is , whether a man ought to resign his own judgement to that of the church , which pretends to be infallible as to all necessaries for salvation ? or supposing no such infallibility , whether a person using his faculties in the best manner about the sense of scriptures , with the helps of divine grace , may not have sufficient certainty thereby what things are required of him in order to happiness ? hereby i exclude nothing that may tend to the right use of a mans understanding in these things , whether it be the direction of pastors ; the decrees of councils , the sense of the primitive church , or the care , industry , and sincerity of the enquirer ; but supposing all these , whether by not believing the guides of the church to be infallible , the foundation of this persons faith can be nothing else but a trembling quicks and , as n. o. speaks in his preface ; only from the supposing an errability in the guides of gods church . and a little after he lays down that as his fundamental principle , that the only certain way not to be misled , will be the submitting our internal assent and belief to church authority ; or as he elsewhere speaks , to the infallible guideship of church gover●ors . here then two questions necessarily arise : 1. whether there can be no certainty of faith without this infallibility ? 2. what certainty there is of this infallibility ? 1. whether there can be no certainty of faith without infallibility in the guides of the church , and submitting our internal assent and belief to them ? for the clearing of this we must consider what things are agreed upon between us , that by them we may proceed to the resolution of this question . 1. it is i suppose agreed , that every man hath in him a faculty of discerning of truth and falshood . 2. that this faculty must be used at least in the choice of infallible guide ; for otherwise a man must be abused with every pretence of infallibility , and george fox may as well be followed as the pope of rome ; and to what purpose are all prudential motives and arguments for infallibility , if a man must not judge whether they be good or no , i. e. sufficient to prove the thing ? 3. that god is not wanting in necessaries to the salvation of mankind . 4. that the books of scripture received on both sides do contain in them the will of god in order to salvation . 5. that all things simply necessary to salvation are contained therein , which is a concession mentioned before . these things being supposed , the question now is , whether a person not relying on the infallibility of a church , may not be certain of those things which are contained in those books in order to salvation ? for of those ou● present enquiry is , and not about the sense of the more difficult and controverted places ; and if we can make it appear that men may be certain as to matters of salvation without infallibility , let them prove ( if they can ) the necessity of infallibility for things which are not necessary to salvation . but of the sense of scripture in those things afterwards ; i now enquire into the certainty men may attain to , of the necessaries to salvation in scripture : and concerning this , i laid down this proposition . although we cannot argue against any particular way of revelation from the necessary attributes of god , yet such a way as writing being made choice of by him , we may justly say , that it is repugnant to the nature of the design and the wisdom and goodness of god to give infallible assistance to persons in writing his will for the benefit of mankind , if those writings may not be understood by all persons who sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary for their salvation . this principle , he saith , is unsound ; which , if he can prove , i may have more reason to question it than i yet have . and i assure him i expect no mean proofs to shake my belief of a principle of so great importance to the christian religion . for it being granted by him , that all things simply necessary to salvation , are contained in the books of scripture , i desire to know whether things simply necessary ought not to be delivered with greater plainness than things which are not so ? whether god appointing the evangelists and apostles to write these things , did not intend that they should be so expressed as they might most easily be understood ? whether our saviours own sermons vere capable of being understood by those who heard them , without some infallible interpreter ? whether the evangelists did not faithfully deliver our saviours doctrine ? if they did , how that comes to be obscure now , which was plain then ? so that either christ himself must be charged with not speaking the will of god plainly , or the evangelists cannot be charged with not expressing it so . there are no other books in the world that i know of , that need an infallible interpreter : and we can tell certainly enough what any other religion requires , supposing it to be written in the same way that the christian is : is it not possible for a man to be certain what the law of moses required of the people of israel , by reading the books of that law , without some infallible guides ▪ do the ten commandments need an infallible comment ? or can we have now no certainty of the meaning of the levitical law , because there is no high-priest or sanhedrin to explain it ? and if it be possible to understand the necessaries of that dark dispensation in comparison with the gospel , are o●r eyes now blinded with too much light ? is not christianity therefore highly recommended to us in the new testament , because of the clearness and perspicuity wherein the doctrines and precepts thereof are delivered ? and yet after all this , cannot the most necessary parts of it , he understood by those who sincerely endeavour to understand them ? by which sincere endeavour we are so far from excluding any useful helps , that we always suppose them . the s●m then of what he is to confute , is this ▪ that although the apostles and evangelists did deliver the mind of god to the world in their writings , in order to the salvation of mankind , although they were inspired by an infinite wisdom for this end , although all things simply necessary to salvation are contained in their writings , although a person useth his sincere endeavour by all moral helps , and the divine grace assisting him to find out in these writings the things necessary to salvation , yet after all he cannot certainly understand the meaning of them . which to me appears so absurd and monstrous a doctrine , so contrary to the honour of the scriptures and the design of christianity , that if i had a mind to disparage it , i would begin with this and end with transubstantiation . for in earnest sir , did not our saviour speak intelligibly in matte●s of so great importance to the salvation of mankind ? did he not declare all that was necessary for that end , in his many admirable discourses ? did not the evangelists record his words and actions in writing , and that as one of them saith expresly , that we might believe that iesus is the christ , the son of god , and that believing we might have life through his name ? and after all this , cannot we understand so much as the common necessaries to salvation by the greatest and most sincere endeavour for that end ? but it is time now to consider his exceptions against this principle : which are these . 1. that god may reveal his mind so in scripture as that in many things it may be clear only to some persons more versed in the scriptures , and in the churches traditional sense of them , and more assisted from above according to their imployment ; which persons he hath appointed to instruct the rest . but what is all this to our purpose ? our question is not about may be 's , and possibilities of things , but it is taken for granted on both sides , that god hath revealed his mind in writing ; therefore he need not make the supposition of no writings at all , as he doth afterwards : the question is , whether these writings being allowed for divine revelations of the will of god , he hath expressed the necessaries to salvation clearly therein or not ? that god may delivers his mind obscurely in many things , is no question ; nor that he may inspire persons to unfold his mind , where it is obscure ; but our question is , whether or no these writings being acknowledged to contain the will of god , it be agreeable with the nature of the design and the wisdom and goodness of god for such writings not to be capable of being understood in all things necessary to salvation , by those who sincerely endeavour to understand them ? but when i had expresly said , things necessary for salvation , why doth he avoid that which the dispute was about , and only say many things in stead of it ? i do not doubt but there are many difficult places of scripture , as there must be in any ancient writings penned in an idiom so very different from ours . but i never yet saw one difficulty removed by the pretended infallible guides of the church ; all the help we have had , hath been from meer fallible men of excellent skill in languages , history , and chronology , and of a clear understanding ; and we should be very unthankful not to acknowledge the great helps we have had from them , for understanding the difficult places of scripture : but for the infallible guides , they have dealt by the obscurities of scripture , as the priest and the levi●e in our saviours parable , did by the wounded man , they have fairly passed them by , and taken no care of them . if these guides did believe themselves infallible , they have made the least use of their talent that ever men did ; they have laid it up in a napkin , and buried it in the earth , for nothing of it ever appeared above ground . how could they have obliged the world more , ( nay , it had been necessary to have done it for the use of their gift ) than to have given an infallible sense of all controverted places ; and then there had been but one dispute left , whether they were infallible or not ? but now , supposing we believe their infallibility , we are still as far to seek , for the meaning of many difficult places . and supposing god had once bestowed this gift of infallibility upon the guides of the church , he might most justly deprive them of it , because of the no use they have made of it ; and we might have great reason to believe so from our saviours words , to him that hath shall be given , but from him that hath not , shall be taken away even that which he hath . so that not making use of this talent of infallibility , gives us just reason to question , whether god continues it , supposing he had once given it to the guides of the church , since the apostles days : which i see no reason to believe . 2. his next exception is from a saying of dr. fields , who , he saith , seems to advance a contrary principle in his preface to his books of the church . but o the mischief of common-place-books ! which make men write what they find , and not what is to their purpose . for after all , dr. field doth but seem to advance another principle in his opinion , and doth not so much as seem to do it in mine . for that learned and judicious writer sets himself purposely to disprove the infallibility of the church in the beginning of his fourth book ; and is it probable that any man of common understanding would assert that in his preface , which he had disproved in his book ? it is a known distinction in the church of rome of the church virtual , representative and essential ; by the two first are meant popes and councils ; and of these two , dr. field saith , that they may erre in matters of greatest consequence ; yet these are n. o's . infallible guides , whose conduct he supposeth men obliged to follow , and to yield their internal assent to . concerning the essential church , he saith , that it either comprehends all the faithful that are and have been since christ appeared in the flesh ; and then , he saith , it is absolutely free from all errour and ignorance of divine things , that are to be known by revelations ; or as it comprehends only all those believers that are and have been since the apostles times ; and in this sense , he saith , the whole church may be ignorant in sundry things , which are not necessary to salvation ; but he thinks it impossible for the whole church to erre in anything of this nature . but in things that cannot be clearly deduced from the rule of faith , and word of divine and heavenly truth , we think it possible , that all that have written of such things might erre and be deceived . but if the church be taken only as it comprehends the believers that now are , and presently live in the world , he saith , it is certain and agreed upon , that in things necessary to be known and believed expresly and distinctly , it never is ignorant , much less doth erre . yea in things that are not absolutely necessary to be known and believed expresly and distinctly , we constantly believe that this church can never erre , nor doubt pertinaciously , but that there shall ever be some found ready to embrace the truth , if it be manifested to them , and such as shall not wholly neglect the search and enquiry after it , as times and means give leave . but if we mean by a church , any particular church , he determines , that particular men and churches may erre damnably , because notwithstanding others may worship god aright ; but that the whole church at one time cannot so erre , for that then the church should cease utterly for a time , and so not be catholick being not at all times ; and christ should sometimes be without a church ; yet , that errors not prejudicing the salvation of them that erre may be found in the church , that is at one time in the world , we make no doubt ; only the symbolical and catholick which is and was being wholly free from error . which several expressions amount to no more than this , that there will be always some true christians in the world ; but what is this to infallible teachers and guides , in a church that pretends to be catholick against all the sense and reason in the world ? and is it now imaginable after all this , that dr. field should make any particular church infallible ? no , all that he means in his preface , is this , that among all the societies of men , persons who have not leisure or capacity to examine particular controversies , ought diligently to search which is the true church , and having done this , to embrace her communion , follow her directions , and rest in her judgment , i.e. suppose a man by that very book of dr. fields should be convinced that the church of rome is a very corrupt and tyrannical church , and the church of england is a sound and good church ( which was the design of his writing it , ) he being thus far satisfied , ought to embrace the communion of this church , and so follow her directions , and rest in her judgment , so , as not to forsake her communion for any cavils that are raised about particular controversies of which he is not a capable judge . and doth this make the church of england infallible ? if we say that a man being first satisfied of the skill and integrity of a lawyer , ought to follow his directions , and rest in his judgment ; doth this make that lawyer infallible ? so we say here , the resting in the judgment of a church , of whose integrity we have assurance before-hand , implies only the supposition of so much honesty and skill in a church , as may over-rule the judgments of persons who either have not leisure or capacity to understand particular controversies which require skill in languages , search into the fathers and later writers on both sides . if we say , that unlearned persons ought in such things to trust the learned , whose integrity they have no ground to suspect , this doth not certainly make the more learned infallible ? but we may rest in the judgment of those whom we have no reason to suspect , though we believe them not to be infallible : and it was the former dr. field meant , and by no means any infallibility , unless he plainly contradict himself . 3. he excepts , that this brings in an inerrability of every particular christian in all points necessary , if such christians will , that is , ●f only they shall sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them . the force of this argument will be easily discerned if we put another parallel to it , viz. that they who assert from scripture the assistance of divine grace to the sincere endeavours of men , do make all men imp●ccable if they will ; as well as those who assert , that god will not be wanting in necessaries to salvation to those who sincerely endeavour to know them , make all such men so far infallible , if they will. if any one thing be plain in scripture , the goodness of god is ; and who can believe that , and yet think that he will suffer those who sincerely endeavour to know what is necessary to their salvation , not to understand it ? but besides , how often doth the scripture promise a greater degree of knowledge to the meek and humble , to the diligent and industrious ; to those that ask and seek wisdom from him , to those that do the will of god , to whom our saviour hath expresly promised , that they shall know of his doctrine , whether it be of god or no ? and if this be the inerrability he means , he sees what grounds we have to assert it . but we understand not by it , that such persons cannot erre in their judgments about what things are necessary , and what not ; nor that they cannot erre in other things which are not so necessary to salvation ; but that gods goodness is so great , and his promises so plain , and his word so clear in necessary things , that no one who sincerely endeavours to know them , shall ever miss of salvation . and if such an infallibility will satisfie them , we do not deny it to popes themselves , or other guides of the church , on condition they do not think themselves infallible beyond these bounds ; for they are only the meek and humble whom god hath promised to teach his way , and not such who will be infallible whether god will or no. his other exceptions from this principle destroying church-authority , from the parity of reason for church governors , and the controverted places of scripture shall be considered afterwards . 2. i now come to examine what certainty there is for this infallibility ? here i shall lay down some principles of common reason , by which we may better understand the force of his arguments . 1. that the proof ought always to be more evident than the thing that is to be proved by it . for otherwise it is of no advantage to the proof of it , if it have but the same degree of evidence ; but is a great prejudice to it , if it have less : so that if the proofs of infallibility be equally obscure and difficult with those things which are to be believed by virtue of it , this infallibility is of no use ; but if they be less evident , the pretence of it is both very ridiculous and prejudicial to the christian faith. 2. the greater concernment any law is of , and the greater danger in mistaking the meaning of it , the more plain and distinct ought the terms of that law to be . as a law about the succession of the crown ought to be framed with all the clearness and distinctness imaginable , because the peace and security of a nation depends upon it . so in case christ hath appointed any successor in the government of his church , or entailed infallibility upon the guides of it : this being a matter of such infinite concernment to the whole church ; it is most unreasonable to conceive that whatever other parts of his will were obscure , those which relate to the matter of succession and infallibility , should be so ; but rather so plain , that no one can miss of understanding them , because the weight of all the rest depends upon these two ; and it is so horrible a presumption in any to pretend to them , in case they have no right to them , and the danger so great in relying upon them if there be no such thing . 3. a law of such universal concernment to the faith and peace of the christian church being supposed , the practice of the best and purest● ages of the church must be supposed agreeable thereto , i. e. that in all matters of difference they did constantly own these infallible judges , by appealing to them for a final issue of all debates , and resting satisfied with their decisions . but if on the contrary , when great differences have happened in and nearest the first times , no such authority was made use of , but other ways put in practice to make an end of them ; if when it was pretended , it was slighted and rejected ; nay , if the persons pretending it , were proceeded against and condemned , and this not by a popular faction , but by just and legal authority ; we may thence conclude that such judges have arrogated that power to themselves , which was not given them by the supreme legislator . these things being premised , i come to his particular arguments , which lie scattered●up and down ; but to give them the greater strength , i shall bring them nearer together . and they are drawn either from scripture , or tradition , or parity of reason . 1. from scripture . and in truth the only satisfactory argument in a matter of so great concernment to the christian church , ought only to be drawn from thence , unless we will suppose the scripture defective in the most important things . for this being pleaded as a thing necessary for the peace of the church by some , and for the faith of christians by others ; so much greater the necessity of it is , so much clearer ought the evidence of it to be in scripture , supposing that to be intended to reveal the will of god to us in matters of the greatest necessity . but it cannot be denied by our adversaries , that the places produced by them for a constant infallibility in the guides of the church , do not necessarily prove it ; because they are very capable of being understood , as to the infallibility only of the apostles in the first age and foundation of the christian church : is it then to be imagined that if christ had intended such an infallibility as the foundation of the faith and peace of his church , he would not have delivered his mind more plainly and clearly than he is pretended to do in this matter ? how easily might all the contentions of the christian world have been prevented , if christ had caused it to be delivered in terms so clear , as the nature of the thing doth require ? if he had said , i do promise my infallible spirit to the guides of the church in all ages , to give the true sense of scripture in all controversies which shall arise among christians , and i expect an obedience suitably to all their determinations : or , more particularly , i appoint the bishops of rome in all ages for my successors in the government of the church , who shall be the standing and infallible iudges of all controversies among christians ; this dispute might never have happened among us . for we assure them that we account the peace of the church so valuable a thing , and obedience to christs commands so necessary a duty , that we are well enough inclined to embrace the doctrine of infallibility , if we could see any ground in scripture for it . but we cannot make persons infallible by believing them to be so , but we may easily make our selves fools , as others have done , by believing it without reason . the controversie then is not , whether infallibility in the guides of the church be a desirable thing or not , for so we say impeccability is too ; but the question is , whether there be any such thing promised by christ to the guides of his church , and whether all christians on that account are bound to yield their internal assent , as well as external obedience to all their decrees ? which we deny , and desire to see it clearly proved from his words who alone could grant this infallibility . for if an infallible judge be therefore necessary , because the scripture is not sufficiently clear for ending of controversies , and that god hath actually constituted such a judge , cannot be proved but by scripture , surely we have all the reason in the world to expect that the scripture should be abundantly , and beyond all contradiction clear in this point , to make amends for its obscurity in the rest : for if this point be not clearly proved , we are never the nearer an end of controversies : because the business stops at the very head , and they may beg their hearts out , before we shall ever be so good natured as to grant it them without proof . and they who have been so bold ( shall i say ? or blasphemous ) as to charge our lord with want of discretion , in case he have not provided his church with such an infallible judge , do certainly render him much more obnoxious to this imputation , in supposing him to have constituted such a judge , if he have no where plainly declared that he hath done so . and let them , if they can , produce one clear text of scripture to this purpose , which by the unanimous consent of the fathers is so interpreted ; and which , to the common sense of mankind , is more sufficiently clear for the ending this controversie , than the scripture is said by them to be in other necessary points of faith. and till they have done this , according to their own way of arguing , we have as much reason to deny their infallibility , as they have to demand our assent to it , upon the presumed obscurity and insufficiency of scripture . when i came thus prepared to find what the considerator would produce in a matter of such consequence , i soon discerned how little mind he had to insist upon any proofs of that , which is his only engine to overthrow my principles . for after the most diligent search i could make , the only argument from scripture i found produced , was from the old testament , ( where i confess i least looked for it ) but however , this is thought so considerable as to be twice produced ; and yet is so unlucky , that if i understand any thing of the force of it , it p●oves the judges in westminster hall to be infallible , rather than the pope , or any guide of the christian church . for the force of the argument lies in gods appointing iudges under the law , according to whose sentence matters were to be determined , upon penalty of death in case of disobedience . but what then ? doth this imply infallibility ? no , that he dares not stand to , but absolute obedience , ; which we are ready to yield when we see the like absolute command for ecclesiastical judges of controversies of religion , as there was among the iews for their supreme iudges in matters of law. but of this place i have already spoken at large , and shewed how impertinently it is produced for infallibility in the book , he often referrs to , and might , if he had thought fit , have answered what is there said before he had urged it again , without any new strength added to it . but since he produces no other proof for it , i must consider how he goes about to weaken mine against it . two things i insisted upon against such a pretence of infallibility , viz. that such a pretence implying an infallible assistance of the spirit of god , there were but two ways of proving it , either , 1. by such miracles as the apostles wrought to attest their infallibility , or 2. by those scriptures from whence this infallibility is derived . concerning both these i laid down two propositions . 1. concerning the proof by miracles . the proposition was this . there can be no more intollerable usurpation on the faith of christians than for any person or society of men to pretend to an assistance as infallible in what they propose , as was in christ or his apostles , without giving an equal degree of evidence that they are so assisted as christ and his apostles did , viz. by miracles as great , publick , and convincing as theirs were ; by which i mean such as are wrought by those very persons who challenge this infallibility , and with a design for the conviction of those who do not believe it . to this he answers : 1. that i am equally obliged to produce miracles for the churches infallibility in fundamentals , which i had asserted in the defence of the archbishop . but this admits a very easie answer ; for when i speak of infallibility in fundamentals , i there declare that i mean no more by it , than that there shall be always a number of true christians in the world. and what necessity is there now of miracles for men to believe , since they receive the doctrine of the gospel upon those miracles by which it was at first attested . neither is there any need of miracles to shew that any number of men are not guilty of an actual errour in what they believe , supposing they declare to believe only on the account of that divine revelation which is owned by christians ; for in this case the trial of doctrine is to be by scripture . but in case any persons challenge an infallibility to themselves antecedently to the belief of scriptures , and by vertue of which , they say , men must believe the scriptures , then i say such persons are equally bound to prove their infallibility by miracles as the apostles were . 2. not resting in this , he proceeds to another answer , the sum of which is , that the infallibility of the church not being so large or so high as the apostles , but consisting only in the infallible delivery of the same doctrine , there is no necessity of miracles in the present church . to this i answer , that the doctrine of the gospel may be said to be new two ways ; 1. in respect of the matter contained in it , and so it was new only when it was first revealed . 2. in respect of the person who is to believe it : so it is new in every age to those who are first brought to believe it . now the apostles had their infallibility attested by miracles , not barely with a respect to the revelation of new matter , for then none would have needed miracles but christ himself , or the apostles that made the first sermons ; for afterwards the matter was not new , but the necessity of miracles was to give a sufficient motive to believe , to all those to whom the gospel was proposed ; and therefore miracles are said to be a a sign to unbelievers . for by these , unbelievers were convinced that there was sufficient ground for receiving the doctrine of the gospel on the authority of those who delivered it ; god himself bearing them witness with divers miracles and gifts of the holy ghost . suppose then , any of the apostles after their first preaching continued only to inculcate the same doctrine for the conversion of more unbelievers ; in this case the evidence of miracles was the reason of relying on the authority of those persons for the truth of the doctrine delivered by them . from whence it follows , that where the christian faith is to be received on the authority of any persons in any age , those persons ought to confirm that authority by miracles , as the apostles did . for without this , there can be no such authority whereon to rely , antecedently to the embracing the christian faith. now , this is the case of the church of rome they pretend not to deliver any doctrine wholly new , but what was one way or another delivered by christ and his apostles ; ( although we therein charge them with fraud and falshood ) but yielding this , yet they contend that no man can have sufficient ground for believing the word of god , but from their churches infallibility ; in this case it is plain that they make their churches infallibility to be as much the reason of persons believing , as the infallibility of the apostles in their time was ; and therefore i say , they ought to prove this infallibility in the same way , and by miracles , as great , publick , and convincing , as the apostles did . 3. yet he is very loath to let go the miracles of their church , done in later times as well as formerly . it would be too large a task in this place to examine the miracles of the roman church , ( that may be better done on another occasion , ) all that i have here to say is , that all the miracles pretended among them , signifie nothing to our present purpose , unless those miracles give evidence of the authority and infallibility of those by whom they were done ; and they would do well to shew , where ever in scripture god did bestow a gift of miracles upon any but for this end : and what reason there is that god should alter the method and course of his providence , in a matter of so great concernment to the faith of mankind . such miracles as were wrought by christ and his apostles we defie all other religions in the world to produce any like them to confirm their doctrine ; but such as the church of rome pretends , scarce any religion in the world but hath pretended to the same . and for his most credible histories he vouches for them , i hope he doth not mean the church history written by s. c. nor any other such legends among them ; if he doth , i assure him they have a very easie faith that think them credible . and if all miracles that are so called , by those among whom they are done , be an argument , as he saith , of the security of salvation in the communion and faith of that church wherein they are done , i hope he will be so just , to allow the same to the arrians , novatians , donatists , and others , who all pretend to miracles as well as the church of rome , as any one that is versed in church-history may easily see . but of this more at large elsewhere . 2. concerning the proof of infallibility from scripture , i said down this proposition . nothing can be more absurd , than to pretend the necessity of such an infallible commission and assistance to assure us of the truth of those writings , and to interpret them ; and at the same time to prove that commission from those writings from which we are told , nothing can be certainly deduced , such an assistance not being supposed ; or to pretend that infallibility in a body of men , is not as liable to doubts and disputes , as in those books from whence only they derive their infallibility . he grants the former part of this , if by it be intended to prove such commission only , or in the first place from these writings . but , he saith , a christians faith may begin either at the infallible authority of scriptures , or of the church : it seems then , there may be sufficient ground for a christians faith , as to the scriptures , without believing any thing of the churches infallibility ; and for this we have reason to thank him , whatever they of his own church think of it . for , by this concession we may believe the scriptures authority , without ever believing a word of the churches infallibility ; and let them afterwards prove it from scripture if they can . nay he goes yet farther , and saith , that the infallibility of scriptures as well as the church may be proved from its own testimony : but he first supposes , that the infallibility of one of these , be first learnt from tradition . and therefore in the remainder of his discourse on this subject , he shews how the infallibility of the church may be proved from tradition not shewing at all how the infallibility of the church can be proved from scripture . scripture being thus deserted , as to the proof of the churches infallibility , i must pursue him to his other hold of tradition . the method of his discourse is this ; that the infallibility of the guides of the church was antecedent to the scriptures ; that the apostles did not lose their infallibility by committing what they preached to writing ; that their successors were to have this infallibility preserved in them , if there had been no writings ; and cannot be imagined to have lost it because of them , because these give testimony to it ; that this infallibility is preserved by tradition descending from age to age , as we say the canon of scripture is delivered to us ; and lastly , that the governours of the church always held and reputed themselves infallible , appears by their anathematizing dissenters . in this discourse there are some things supposed without reason , and other things asserted without proof . the foundation of all this discourse proceeds upon the supposition that the same infallibility which was in the apostles , must be continued in their successors through all ages of the church , for which i see not the least shadow of reason produced . yes , saith he , supposing there had been no writings , and no infallibility , christian religion would have been no rational and well grounded , no stable and certain religion . two things in answer to this , i desire to be informed of : 1. what he thinks of the religion of the patriarchs , who received their religion by tradition , without any such infallibility ? 2. what he thinks of those christians who receive the scriptures or churches infallibility by vertue of common and universal tradition ( which is certainly the ground of the one , and supposed by him to be of the other ) whether the faith of such persons be rational and well-grounded , stable , and certain , or not ; if it be , then there is no such necessity of infallibility for that purpose ; if it be not , then he doth hereby declare that the faith of christians is irrational and ill-grounded . for whatsoever is received on the account of tradition antecedent to the belief of infallibility , cannot be received on the account of it ; but the belief of either scriptures or churches infallibility , must be first received by vertue of a principle antecedent to the scriptures or churches infallibility , viz. tradition . by this it appears , that his very way of proving , destroys the thing he would prove by it : for if the tradition may be a sufficient ground of faith , how comes infallibility to be necessary ? but if this infallibility be not necessary without the scriptures , much less certainly is it now , since it is acknowledged on both sides , that the apostles were infallible in their writings , and that therein the will of god is contained as to all things simply necessary to salvation . but these successors of the apostles were not deprived of their infallibility by the apostles writings ; no certainly , for none can be deprived of what they never had ; but where are the reasons all this while , to shew that there was the same necessity of infallibility in the apostles successors , as was in them ? two i find rather intimated than insisted upon . 1. that the church would otherwise have failed , if there had been neither writings nor infallibility ; but if this argument hold for any thing , it is for the necessity of the scriptures , and not of infallibility ; for we see god did furnish the church with one , and left no footsteps of the other . we do not dispute how far the church might have been preserved without the scriptures , we find it hath been hard enough to preserve it pure with them : but we always acknowledge the infinite wisdom and goodness of god , that hath not left us in matters of faith and salvation to the determinations of men liable to be corrupted by interest and ambition , but hath appointed men inspired by himself to set down whatever is necessary for us to believe and practise . and upon these writings we fix our faith , as on a firm and unmovable rock ; and on the veracity of god therein contained and expressed , we build all our hopes of a blessed eternity . and one great benefit more we have by these divine books , that by them we can so easily discover the fraud and imposture of the confident pretenders to infallibility . which is the true reason why the patrons of the church of romes infallibility have so little kindness for the scriptures , and take all occasions to disparage them , by insinuating that they are good for nothing but to breed heresies in the heads of the people ; upon pretence of which danger , they hide this candle under a bushel , lest it should give too much light to them that are in the house , and discover some things which it is more convenient to keep in the dark . 2. he saith , the infallibility of the apostles successors , receives a second evidence from the testimony thereof found also in these writings . i confess i have seen nothing like the first evidence yet , to which this should be a second ; but if by the first be meant that which i mentioned before , this is a proper second for it . neither of them , i dare say , intend any mischief to any body ; both first and second are forced into the field , where they stand only for dumb shews , and wonder what they are brought for . but whereabouts i pray doth this second testimony stand ? what are its weapons ? i hope not dic ecclesiae , nor dabo tibi claves , nor any of the old rusty armour which our modern combatants begin to be ashamed to appear with in the field . and to speak truth , n. o. seems to understand his art better than to meddle with such heavy and antique armour , which every one hath been foiled with that hath undertaken to combat with them ; only it seems a little for the credit of their cause to point to such a magazine , which in the days of ignorance and credulity , the romantick age of the church , was in great request . but we must now buckle our selves to a new manner of combat , which is from the tradition of the church , and that of the very same nature with what we have for the canon of scripture . this i confess is bright shining armour , and may do great service if it will hold ; but that must be judged upon trial , which i now set my self to . but we shall find that no weapons formed against truth can prosper : and it hath been long observed of rome that it could never endure a close siege . the question now is , whether they of the roman church have the same universal tradition for the infallibility of the guides of it , w ch we have for the canon of scripture ? w ch he asserts . it is i suppose agreed on both sides , that the tradition on w ch we receive and believe the scriptures to be the word of god was universal as to all ages and times of the church ; that from the beginning all disputes in religion among true christians , were built upon the supposition of it ; that in no age any persons were allowed to be good christians who made doubt of it ; that every age doth afford plentiful testimonies of the belief of it . this is that universal tradition we receive the scriptures upon ; and let any thing like this be produced for the infallibility of the guides of their church , and we yield up the cause to them . can any fairer terms than these be desired ? but we expect proofs , and so i perceive we may do to the worlds end . i commend the ingenuity of n. o. for endeavouring to escape out of the circle any way ; but i believe they think themselves as wise , who still dance within it , knowing the impossibility of doing any good in this other way . the only argument he insists upon is so weak , that i wonder he had not considered how often it had been answered by their own writers . for it is certain that provincial councils as well as general , have anathematized dissenters , and pronounced them hereticks , which is his only argument to prove this tradition of the churches infallibility ; and they had no way to answer it , but by saying , this doth not imply their infallibility . and if it doth not in the case of provincial councils ; why should he think it doth in the case of general ? for the anathema's of provincial councils did not relate to the acceptation of their decrees , either by the pope , or the whole church , as n. o. supposes , but did proceed upon their own assurance of the truth of what they decreed ; otherwise their anathema's would have been only conditional , and not absolute and peremptory as we see they were . but i need give no other answer to this argument than in the words of dr. field whom n. o. appealed to before , viz. that councils denounce anathema not because they think every one that disobeyeth the decree of the council to be accursed , but because they are perswaded in particular , that this is the eternal truth of god which they propose , therefore they accurse them that obstinately shall resist , as st. paul willeth every christian man to anathematize an angel coming from heaven , if he shall teach him any other doctrine than he hath already learned : yet is not every particular christian free from possibility of erring . if the argument then were good from anathematizing dissenters , and calling them hereticks , every particular person must by it be proved infallible ; who are bound to anathematize even angels from heaven in case of delivering any other doctrine from the gospel ; so that this , which is his only argument in stead of proving an universal tradition would prove an universal infallibility . let the reader now judge in his conscience , whether here be any thing offered in the way of tradition for the churches infallibility , that may bear the least proportion with the tradition on which we receive the scriptures ? and yet if this had been true , it had been almost impossible that any one age should have passed without remarkable testimonies of it . for no age of the church hath been so happy as not to have occasion for an infallible judge of controversies , if any such had been appointed by christ : and therefore it cannot be imagined , but that christians must in all controversies arising have appealed to him , and stood to his determinations ; which must have been as well known in the practice of the church , as judges trying causes in westminster hall. but i challenge him to produce any one age since the apostles times to this day , wherein the infallibility of a standing judge of controversies appointed by christ , hath been received by as universal a consent as the authority of scripture hath been in that very age. nay , i except not that age which hath been since the council of trent ; for the scriptures of the new testament have been received of all sides , but the infallibility of a standing judge is utterly denied by one side , and vehemently disputed between several parties on the other . some making only the essential church infallible , others the representative in councils , others again the virtual , viz. the pope . and supposing any infallible judge necessary ; it stands to reason it should be rather in one than in a multitude , and rather in a constant succession of bishops in one see , than in an uncertain number who cannot be convened together as often as the necessities of the church may require . but this is so far from being received as an universal tradition in that very age wherein we live , that onely one busie party in the roman church do maintain it , many others eagerly opposing it , and all the princes and states in christendom do in their actions , if not in words , deny it . and is not this now an universal tradition fit to be matched with that of the scriptures ? i had once thought to have brought testimonies o●t of every age of the christian church manifestly disproving any such tradition of infallibility ; and that not only of private persons when there were no councils , but from the most solemn acts of councils , and the confession of their own writers ; but that would swell this answer to too great a bulk , and is not needful where so very little is offered for the proof of it . and yet i shall be ready to do it , when any thing more important requires it . i now return to his exceptions against the latter part of the former proposition , viz. that infallibility in a body of men , is as liable to doubts and disputes , as in those books from whence only they derive their infallibility . the plain meaning of which is , that it is a foolish thing to make use of a medium as uncertain as the thing which is to be proved by it ; and therefore if the infallibility of the the church be as liable to doubts and disputes as that of the scriptures , it is against all just laws of reasoning to make use of the churches infallibility to prove the scriptures by . and to this no answer can be proper , but either by saying that there is no absurdity in such a way of proving ; or else that the infallibility of the church is more certain and evident than that of the scriptures . which i should be glad to see undertaken by any man who pretends to sense ; which n. o. doth too much to meddle with it ; and therefore fairly shuffles it off , and turns my words quite to another meaning , as though they had been spoken of the doubtful sense of the decrees of councils , which although elsewhere i had sufficient reason to speak of , yet that was not pertinent to this place . but this was a way to escape by saying something , though not at all to the purpose ; and yet he gives no sufficient answer to that sense he puts upon my words , by bringing a commentary upon them out of words used by me in another discourse . wherein i did at large argue against the infallibility of general councils , and after disproving it in general , i undertook to prove , that no man can have any certainty of faith as to the decrees of any council ; because men can have no certainty of faith that this was a general council , that it passed such decrees , that it proceeded lawfully in passing them , and that this is the certain meaning of them ; all which are necessary in order to the believing those decrees to be infallible with such a faith as they call divine . the words produced by him do speak of the doubtful sense and meaning of the decrees of councils , by which i shew that men can have no more certainty of the meaning of them , than of doubtful places of scripture , not as though i supposed it impossible for councils to give a clear decision in matters of controversie , so as that men might understand their meaning ; but i expresly mention such decrees as are purposely framed in general terms , and with ambiguous expressions pressions to give satisfaction to the several dissenting parties ; for which i instanced in some of the council of trent , whose ambiguity is most manifest by the disputes about their meaning raised by some who were present at the making of them . i am far enough from denying that a commentary may make a text plainer , or that a iudges sentence can be clearer than the law ; or that any council can , or hath decided any thing clearer than the thing that is in controversie ; which are his exceptions : but i say , if councils pretend to do more than the scriptures , and to decide controversies for the satisfaction of the world , and that men ought to have that certainty of faith by them , which they cannot have by the scriptures , they ought never to be liable to the same ambiguity and obscurity upon the account of which the scripture is rejected from being a certain rule of faith. for , as he saith well , infallibility alone ends not controversies , but clearness ; clearness in the point controverted : which if councils want , they are as unfit to end controversies as the scriptures can be pretended to be . but this is not the thing intended by me in this proposition and therefore it needs no farther answer ; for the only subject of that proposition , is the infallibility of the church , and not the clearness of the decrees of councils . but i cannot admire the ingenuity of this way of answering me , by putting another sense upon my words than they will bear ; and by drawing words out of another discourse , without shewing the purpose for which they are there used , and leaving out the most material passages which tended to the clearing of them . if n. o. thinks fit to oppose that whole discourse against the infallibility of general councils , and set down fairly the several arguments , i should be then too blame not to return a just answer : but i am not bound to follow him in such strange excursions , from the 17. proposition of this book to a single passage in a larger book , and from that back to another at a mighty distance in the same book ; which being dismembred from the body of the discourse , must needs lose much of their strength . yet with all the disadvantage he takes them ( which is such , that the best book in the world may be confuted in that manner ) he hath no great cause to glory in the execution he hath done upon them . in answer to my lord of canterburies adversary , who boasted of the unity of the roman church : because whatever the private opinions of men are , they are ready to submit their judgments to the censure and determination of the church , i had said , that this will hold as well or better for our unity as theirs , because all men are willing to submit their judgments to scripture , which is agreed on all sides to be infallible . against these words thus taken alone n. o. spends two or three pages ; which might have been spared , if he had but fairly expressed what immediately follows them in these words . if you say it cannot be known what scripture determines , but it may be easily what the church defines : it is easily answered , that the event shews it to be far otherwise , for how many disputes are there concerning the power of determining matters of faith ? to whom it belongs , in what way it must be managed , whether parties ought to be heard in matters of doctrine , what the meaning of the decrees are when they are made , which raise as many divisions as were before them ; as appears by the decrees of the council of trent , and the later of pope innocent relating to the five propositions ; so that upon the whole it appears setting aside force and fraud , which are excellent principles of christian unity , we are upon as fair terms of union as they are among themselves . i do not therefore say , that the church of rome hath no advantage at all in point of unity , but that all the advantage it hath , comes from force and fraud , and setting these aside , we are upon as good terms of union as they ; and we do not envy them the effects of tyranny and deceit . it is the union of christians we contend for , and not of slaves or fools ; we leave the turk and the pope to vie with each other in this kind of unity , ( although i believe the turk hath much the advantage in it ) and i freely yield to n. o. that they have a juster pretence to vnity without truth than we . which is agreeable to what he pleads for , that they are more united in opinion than we ; united in opinion , i say , true or false , saith he , here matters not ; we speak here of vnion not of truth . this and the following of tyranny , which we complain of , are the two fairest pleas for their vnion i ever met with . but this is not a place to examine the pretences to unity on both sides , that i have at large done in a whole chapter in the late book , and if n. o. had intended any thing to purpose against me on this subject , he ought much rather to have fallen on a just discourse than two such lame clauses as he makes these to be by his citation of them . and when he doth that , he may hear more of this subject ; in the mean time infallibility is our business . and therefore i proceed to the third argument made use of by n. o. for the proof of infallibility in the guides of the church , which is from parity of reason . because , i say , that it is repugnant to the nature of the design , and the wisdom and goodness of god to give infallible assurance to persons , in writing his will for the benefit of mankind , if those writings may not be understood by all persons who sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary to their salvation ; from hence he inferrs , that if every christian may become thus infallible in necessaries , from 1. a clear rule . 2. a due industry used ; 3. and a certainty that it is so used ; may not the church-governours still much rather be allowed infallible , and so retain still their infallible guideship ; and the people also , the more clear the rule of faith is proved to be , the more securely be referred to their direction ? and have we not all reason to presume that the chief guides of the church ( even a general council of them , or if it be but a major part of this council , 't is sufficient ) in their consults concerning a point necessary to salvation delivered in scripture , use at least so much endeavour ( for more needs not ) as a plain rustick doth , to understand the meaning of it , and also the like sincerity ? for what they define for others , they define for themselves also , and their salvation is as much concerned as any other mans is , in their mistakes . and next , why may not these governours upon such certainty of a sincere endeavour and clearness of the rule take upon them to define these points and enjoyn an assent to and belief of them to their subjects ; especially since it is affirmed that all those from whom they require such obedience , if they please to use a sincere endeavour may be certain thereof as well as they ? and are we not here again arrived at church-infallibility , if not from extraordinary divine assistance , only sincere endeavour being supposed ? and thus doe not his conditional infallibility of particular persons in necessaries , the condition being so easie , necessarily inferr a moral impossibility of the churches erring in them ; especially those necessaries being contracted to the apostles creed , as it is by some . to lay open the weakness of this discourse , which appears fair and plausible at first view , i shall give an account of these two things . 1. what infallibility i attribute to private persons . 2. how far the parity of reason will extend to the infallibility of the guides of the church . 1. as to the infallibility by me attributed to private persons ; no such thing can be inferred from my words ; and i wish n. o. would have kept to my own expressions , and not foisted in that term of infallibility , without which all his discourse would have betrayed its own weakness . for take the terms which i laid down , and apply them to the guides of the church , and see what a mighty infallibility springs from them . for if it be repugnant to the nature of the design , and to the wisdom and goodness of god to give infallible assurance to persons in writing his will for the benefit of mankind , if those writings may not be understood by all persons who sincerely endeavour to know the meaning of them in all such things as are necessary for their salvation , how doth it hence follow that the guides of the church must be infallible in teaching matters of faith ? if i had asserted that particular persons were infallible in determining what was true , and what not ; then i grant the argument would have much more held for those whose office it is to guide and direct others . but what he means by mens being infallible in necessaries , i do not well understand ; for it is capable of three several meanings : 1. that either men are infallible in judging of necessaries to salvation ; 2. or , that men are infallible in teaching others what art necessaries to salvation . or 3. that men are infallible in believing such things as are necessary to salvation , i. e. that such is the goodness of god , and the clearness of scriptures , that no man who sincerely desires to know what is necessary to salvation shall be deceived therein ; and what is this any more than to assert that god will not be wanting in necessaries to mankind ; and although i know no reason for using the term of infallibility thus applied , yet the thing it self i assert in that sense , but in neither of the other : and what now can be inferred from hence by a parity of reason , but that the guides of the church , supposing the same sincerity shall enjoy the same priviledge , which i know none ever denied them ; but what is this to their infallibility in teaching all matters of faith ? which is the only thing to be proved by him . if he can prove this as necessary for the salvation of mankind as the other is , then he would do something to his purpose , but not otherwise . so that all this discourse proceeds upon a very false way of reasoning from believing to teaching , and from necessaries to salvation , to all matters of faith , which the guides of the church shall propose to men . 2. but may we not inferr , that if god will not be wanting to particular persons in matters necessary to their salvation , much less will he be wanting to the guides of the church in all matters of faith ? no certainly , unless it be proved that their guidance is the only means whereby men can understand what is necessary to salvation ; which is utterly denied by us , god having otherwise provided for that , by giving so clear a rule in matters necessary , that no man who sincerely endeavours to know such things shall fail therein . but will not the same sincerity in the guides of the church , extend to their knowing and declaring all matters of faith ? this is a thing possible , and supposing god had entrusted them with the infallible delivery of all matters of faith , were not to be questioned ; but that is the thing still in dispute , and is not to be supposed , without proving it by plain evidence from those books which are agreed on both sides to contain the will of god. besides , that no man that is acquainted with the proceedings of the council of trent , will see reason to be over-confident of the sincerity of councils so palpably influenced by the court of rome as that was . but however is it not fit in these matters that particular persons should rather yield to the guidance of others , than to the conduct of their own reason ? which is n. o's . farther argument in this matter , viz. that a fallibility being supposed , it is more fitting to follow prudent and experienced , though fallible persons direction rather than our own . to this i answer in these following particulars . 1. that god hath entrusted every man with a faculty of discerning truth and falshood ; supposing that there were no persons in the world to direct or guide him . for without this there were no capacity in mankind to be instructed in matters of religion ; and it were to no purpose , to offer any thing to men to be believed , or to perswade them to embrace any religion . to make this plain , i will suppose a person come to years of understanding , not yet professing any particular religion to whom the several religions in the world are proposed by men perswaded of the truth of them , viz. the christian , the jewish , and the mahumetan : he hears the several arguments brought for each of them , and hath no greater opinion of the teachers of one than of another , i desire to know whether this person may not see so much of the truth and excellency of christian religion , above the rest as to choose that and reject all the rest . i hope no one will deny this ; now if a man does here upon his own judgment and reason choose the christian religion , so as firmly to believe it , then god hath given to men such a faculty of judging , that upon the proposal of truth and falshood , he may embrace the true religion and reject the false , and such a faith is acceptable and pleasing to god ; otherwise no man could embrace christianity at first upon good grounds . 2. this faculty is not taken away , nor men forbidden the exercise of it in the choice of their religion by any principle of the christian religion ; for our saviour himself appealed to the judgement of the persons he endeavored to convince ; he made use of many arguments to perswade them , he directed them in the way of finding out of truth , he reproved those who would not search into the things delivered to them . all which were to no purpose at all , if men were not to continue the exercise of their own judgements about these matters . accordingly we find the apostles appealing to the judgements of private and fallible persons concerning what they said to them , although themselves were infallible , and had the greatest authority over them ; we find them , not bidding the guides of the church p●ove all things and the people held fast that which they delivered them ; but commanding them indifferently to prove all things and hold fast that which is good , i. e. what upon examination they found to be so ; we find those commended , who searched the scriptures daily whether the things proposed to them were so or no. so that we see the christian religion d●th not forbid men the exercise of that faculty of judging , which god hath given to mankind . 3. the exercise of this faculty was not to cease as●oon as men had embraced the christian doctrine . for the precepts given by the apostles do belong to those who are already christians , and that concerning the matters proposed by their guides ; nay they are expressly commended to try and examin all pretences to infallibility and revelation upon this great reason because there should be many false pretenders to them . beloved believe not every spirit , but try the spirits whether they be of god , for many false prophets are gone out into the world . they are commanded not to believe any other gospel though apostles or an angel from heaven should preach it ; and how should they know whether it were another or the same if they were not to examin and compare them ? they are bid to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints ; it might be a new faith for any thing they could know , if they were not competent judges of what was once delivered : they are frequently charged to beware of seducers and false guides , that should come in the name of christ and his apostles ; they are told , that there should come a falling away and departing from the faith ; and that the time will come when men will not endure sound doctrine , and shall turn away their ears from 〈◊〉 truth and believe fables ; that such shall come with all deceivableness of unrighteousness ; with powers and signs and lying wonders . to what end or purpose are all these things said , if men being once christians are no longer to exercise their own judgements , but deliver them up into the hands of their guides ? what is this , but to put them under a necessity of being deluded when their guides please ? and as our saviour saith , when the blind lead the blind both shall fall into the ditch . 4. the authority of guides in the church is not absolute and unlimited but confined within certain bounds . which if they transgress they are no longer to be followed . so st. paul saith , if we or an angel from heaven teach any other gospel let him be accursed , so that the apostles themselves though giving the greatest evidence of infallibility were no longer to be followed than they held to the gospel of christ. and they desired no more of their greatest disciples whom they had converted to the christian faith , than to be followers of them as they were of christ , they told them they had no dominion over their faith , although they were far more assisted with an infallible spirit , than any other guides of the church could pretend to be ever since . therefore no present guides , what ever names they go by , ought to usurp such an authority over the minds of men which the apostles themselves did not challenge ; although there were greater reason for men to yield up their minds wholly to their guidance . we are far from denying all reasonable and just authority to be given to the guides of the church ; but we say that their authority not being absolute is con●ined to some known rule ; and where there is a rule for them to proceed by , there is a rule for others to judge of their proceedings ; and consequently men must exercise their judgements about the matters they determin whether they be agreeable to that r●le or n●t . 5. where the rule by which the guides of the church are to proceed hath determined nothing , there we say the authority of the guides is to be submitted unto . for otherwise , there would be nothing le●t , wherein their authority could be shewn , and others pay obedience to them , on the account of it . therefore we plead for the churches authority in all matters of meer order and decency , in indifferent rites and ceremonies ; and think it an unreasonable thing to 〈◊〉 the govern●u●s of a christian society the priviledge of commanding in things which god hath n●t al● ready determined by his own law. we plead for the respect and reverence which is due to the lawful constituti●ns o● the church whereof we are members ; and 〈◊〉 the just authority of the guides it , in the exercise of that power which is committed to the governours of it ; as the successours of the apostles in their care of the christian church , although not in their infallibility . 6. we allow a very great authority to the guides of the catholick church in the best times of christianity ; and look upon the concurrent sense of antiquity as an excellent means to understand the mind of scripture in places otherwise doubtful and obscure . we prosess a great reverence to the ancient fathers of the church : but especially when assembled in free and general councils ; we reject the ancient heresies condemned in them ; which we the rather believe to be against the scripture , because so ancient , so wise and so great persons did deliver the contrary doctrine , not only to be the sense of the church in their own time but ever since the apostles . nay we reject nothing that can be proved by an universal tradition from the apostolical times downwards ; but we have so great an opinion of the wisdom and piety of those excellent guides of the church in the primitive times , that we see no reason to have those things forced upon us now , which we offer to prove to be contrary to their doctrine and practice . so that the controversy between us is not about the authority of the guides of the church , but whether the guides of the apostolical and primitive times ought not to have greater authority over us , than those of the present church in things wherein they contradict each other ? this is the true state of the controversy between us ; and all the clamours of rejecting the authority of church guides are vain and impertinent . but we profess to yield greater reverence and submission of mind to christ , and his apostles , than to any guides of the church ever since : we are sure they spake by an infallible spirit , and where they have determined matters of faith or practice , we look upon it as arrogance and presumption in any others to alter what they have declared . and for the ages since , we have a much g●eater esteem for those nea●est the apostolical times and so downwards , till ignorance , ambition , and private interests sway'd too much among those who were called the guides of the church . and that by the confession of those who were members of it at the same time ; which makes us not to wonder that such corruptions of doctrine and practice should then come in : but we do justly wonder at the sincerity of those who would not have them reformed and taken away . 7. in matters imposed upon us to believe or practise which are repugnant to plain commands of scripture , or the evidence offense , or the grounds of christian religion ; we assert that no authority of the present guides of a church , is to overrule our faith or practice . for there are some things so plain , that no man will be guided by anothers opinion in them ; if any philosopher did think his authority ought to overrule an ignorant mans opinion , in saying the snow which he saw to be white was not so ; i would fain know whether that man did better to believe his eyes or the prudent , experienc'd philosopher ? i am certain , if i destroy the evidence of sense i must overthrow the grounds of christian religion ; and i am as certain if i believe that not to be bread which my senses tell me is so , i must destroy the greatest evidence of sense ; and which is fitter for me , to reject that evidence which assures my christianity to me , or that authority which by its impositions on my faith overthrows the certainty of sense ? we do not say that we are to reject any doctrine delivered in scripture which concerns a being infinitely above our understanding , because we cannot comprehend all things contained in it ; but in matters lyable to sense and the proper objects of it , we must beg pardon if we prefer the grounds of our common christianity before a novel and monstrous figment , hatched in the times of ignorance and barbarism , foster'd by faction , and imposed by tyranny . we find no command so plain in scripture that we must believe the guides of the church in all they deliver , as there is that we must not worship images , that we must pray with understanding , that we must keep to our saviours institution of the lords supper ; but if any guides of a church pretend to an authority to evacuate the force of these laws , we do not so much reject their authority , as prefer gods above them . doth that man destroy the authority of parents , that refuses to obey them , when they command him to commit treason ? that is our case in this matter , supposing such guides of a church which otherwise we are bound to obey , if they require things contrary to a direct command of god , must we prefer their guidance before gods ? if they can prove us mistaken we yield , but till then the question is not , whether the guides of the church must be submitted to rather than our own reason ? but whether gods authority or theirs must be obeyed ? and i would gladly know whether there be not some points of faith , and some parts of our duty , so plain , that no church-authority determining the contrary ought to be obey'd ? 8. no absolute submission can be due to those guides of a church who have opposed and contradicted each other , and condemned one an●ther for errour and here●y . for then in case of absolute submission a man must yield his assent to contradictions ; and for the same reason that he is to be a catholick at one time , he must be a heretick at another . i hope the guides of the present church pretend to no more infallibility and authority than their predecessours in the same capacity with themselves have had ; and we say they have contradicted the sense of those before them in the matters in dispute between us . yet that is not the thing i now insist upon ; but that these guides of the church have declared each other to be fallible by condemning their opinions and practices ; and by that means have made it necessary for men to believe those not to be infallible , unless both parts of a contradiction may be infallibly true . suppose a man living in the times of the prevalency of arrianism , when almost all the guides of the church declared in favour of it , when several great councils opposed and contradicted that of nice , when pope liberius did subscribe the sirmian confession and communicated with the arrians , what advice would n. o. give such a one if he must not exercise his own judgement , and compare both the doctrines by the rule of scriptures ? must he follow the present guides even the pope himself ? then he must joyn with the the arrians . must he adhere to the nicene council ? but there were more numerous councils which condemned it . what remedy can be supposed in such a case , but that every person must search and examine the several doctrines , according to his best ability , and judge what is best for him to believe and practise ? no answer can be more absurd in this case than that which some give , that liberius only erred in his external profession of faith and not in the belief of it ; for we are now speaking of such as are to be guides to others , and on whose direction they are to rely , which must be something which may be known to them . supposing then , that liberius when he subscribed and joyned with the arrians , was a catholick in his heart this takes as much off from the authority of a guide , as errour would do . for who dare rely upon him who acts against his conscience and believes one way and does another ? would any in the church of rome think it fit to submit themselves to the direction of such persons , whom they were assured , did not believe one word of what they professed ; but joyned in communion with that church only for some temporal ends ? but in truth liberius went so far , that hilary denounces an anathema against him , and all that joyned with him . neither was this the only case of this nature to be supposed ; for the councils of ephesus and chalcedon proving ineffectual for the suppression of the nestorian and eutychian heresies , and rather greater disturbances arising in the church after the later of these , because the writings of theodorus of mopsuestia and theodoret against cyril , and of ibas to maris the p●rsian not being therein condemned which were suppo●ed to favour the nesto●ian heresy , the nestorians increasing their faction under the authority of those writings , and the eutychians making that their plea for rejecting that council because it seemed to favour nestorianism ; the emperour justinian by the perswasion of theodorus of caesarea resolves to have those three chapters ( as they were called ) condemned , hoping by this means to perswade the eutychian faction to accept the council of chalcedon and thereby to settle peace in the church , which was then miserably rent and divided . to this end by the consent of the four eastern patriarchs , he publishes an edict wherein he condemns the three chapters , and anathematizes those who should defend them ; to this edict the guides of the eastern church subscribed ; but vigilius then pope , ( although victor ●ununensis , a writer of that age saith , that he had given it under his hand to theodora the empress , that if he might be made pope he would condemn the three chapters ) yet now being by violent hands thrust into the chair , he changes his mind , and declares against the edict ; and threatens excommunication to those who approved it as being contrary to the catholick faith , established in the council of chalcedon ; and accordingly stephanus his legat withdrew from the communion of the patriarch of constantinople . upon this , the emperour sends for vigilius to constantinople , who being come thither excommunicates the patriarch of constantinople and all who condemned the three chapters , or joyned with those who condemned them ; and the patriarch of constantinople again excommunicates him ; but after 4. or 5. months time , these excommunications were taken off : and pope vigilius after that publishes a decree wherein the three chapters were condemned by him , with a salvo to the authority of the council of chalcedon . which made the bishops of africa , illyricum and dalmatia to fall off from him , and rusticus and seb●stianus t●o deacons of his own church ; whom the pope excommunicated for so doing . yet the emperou● himself was not satisfied with that sa●vo , and the pope not yielding without it , a general council was called at constantin●p●e to put an end to this controversy ; to which the pope being solemnly invited refused to come , the council however proceeds in the examination of the three chapters ; during their session , vigilius publishes his apostolical decree or constitution , to the whole catholick church , with the assistance of 16. bishops of italy , africa , and illyricum , and three roman deacons ; wherein the pope defends the three chapters , and defines in the conclusion of it , that it should be lawful for none to write or teach any thing about these matters , contrary to his present definition ; or to move any farther question about them . notwithstanding which definition of the popes , the council proceeds to the condemning the three chapters , and to the anathematizing those who did not condemn them . that this is the true matter of fact , i am content to appeal to the acts of the council , the edict of iustinian , the popes own decree , or the writers of that age , or the most learned persons of the roman church , such as ●aronius , petavius and petrus de marca , who have all given an account of this controversy . i now desire to know , what a person in that time should do who was bound to yield an internal assent to the guides of the church ? must he believe the pope ? he not only contradicts the council but himself too ; for it now appears by a greek epistle first published by petrus de marcâ out of the king of frances library that vigilius being banished by iustinian did afterwards retract his own decree so solemnly made , and confirmed the council . would not a man now be in a pretty condition that were bound to believe one in all he said that so often contradicted himself ? must he believe the council ? what then becomes of the popes infallibility ? when they were so far from receiving the popes definition ( though done in such a manner , in which bellarmin saith , the pope cannot err , viz. when he teaches the whole church ; ) that they reject his decree and determin the quite contrary . i know but one way of evading this , ( which is that commonly insisted on by those of the roman church , ) viz. that all this was not a controversy about 〈◊〉 but persons . so indeed some of the 〈◊〉 ours of vigilius said , when they endeavo●red to extenuate the matter as much as they could finding that the bishops of africa , and many in italy broke off from the communion of the roman church on the account of this quarrel ; but i desire any one in this matter to look to their judgement who were con●erned in this quarrel ; and if men are bo●nd to believe their guides ▪ they ought to believe them when they tell them what is a matter of faith . and from the beginning of this controversy it was accounted a matter of faith , not only by the emperour , but by the pope , by the council , and by the bishops who opposed the council ; and must we trust them in other things and not in this ? besides , the very proceedings of the council manifest it according to be●larmins own rules ; for saith he , we then know a thing to be matter of faith , when the council declares it to be so , or them to be hereticks who hold the contrary ; or , which is the most common , when they denounce anat●ema , and exclude from the church , those who hold otherwise ; all which agree to this , as will appear by the last collation of that council . and pope vigilius in the greek epistle now published in the tomes of the councils , wherein he approves the 5 th council , not only condemns the three chapters as contrary to saith , but anathematizes all those who should defend them and like an infallible judge very solemnly recants his former apostolical decree , though delivered by him upon great deliberation , an● with an intention to teach the whole church . i wonder who there could be in that age ; that believed the pope to be an infallible guide ? not the eastern bishops ; who excommunicated him , and decreed directly contrary to him ; not the western , for they likewise excommunicated him , and not only forsook his communion , but that of the roman church : but did he believe himself infallible , when he so often changed his mind , and contradicted himself in cathedra ? if he did , he was without doubt a brave man , and did as much as man can do . this controversy was scarce at an end , ( for the bishops of istria continued in their separation from the roman church for 70. years , w ch was till the time of honorius a. d. 626. ) when another was started , which gives us yet a more ample discovery of the more than fallibility of the guides of the church in that age , when a pope was condemned for a heretick by a general council ; in which case , i would fain know whether of them was infallible ? and to which of the guides of the church a man owed his internal assent , and external obedience ? this being an instance of so high a nature , that the truth of it being supposed , the pretence of absolute authority and infallibility in the guides of the roman church must fall to the ground , no wonder , that all imaginable arts have been used by those of the church of rome to take away the force of it ; among whom pighius , baronius , bellarmin , petavius , and petrus de marcâ have laboured hardest in acquitting honorius , but have proceeded in different ways ; and the two last are content the pope should be condemned for simplilicity and negligence , the better to excuse him from heresy ; but one would think these two were as contrary to the office of a trusty guide , as heresy to one that pretends to be infallible . but the better to understand the force of this instance , i shall give a brief account of the matter of fact , as it is agreed on all sides ; and the representing the divisions among the guides of the church at that time , will plainly shew how unreasonable it had been , to have required absolute submission to such who so vehemently contradicted each other . we are therefore to understand , that the late council at constantinople being found unsuccessful , for bringing the eutychians and their off-spring , to a submission to the council of chalcedon , another expedient was found out for that end , viz. that acknowledging two natures in christ they should agree in owning that there was but one will and operation in him after the union of both natures : because will and operation were supposed to flow from the person and not barely from the nature ; and the asserting two wills would imply two contrary principles in christ which were not to be supposed . this expedient was first proposed to heraclius the emperour by athanasius the patriarch of the iacobites , or paulus the s●verian and approved by sergius patriarch of constantinople , and by cyrus of alexandria , and theodorus bishop of pharan near aegypt . cyrus proceeded so far in it as by that means to reconcile the theodosiani , a sort of eutychians in alexandria , to the church , of which he gives an account to sergius of constantinople and sends him the anathema's which he published , among which the 7 th . was against those who asserted , more than one operation in christ. sergius approves what cyrus had done ; but sophronius a learned monk , coming to alexandria vehemently opposed cyrus in this business ; but cyrus persisting he makes his address to sergius at constantantinople , and tells him of the dangerous heresy that was broaching under the pretence of union ; after some heats sergius yielded , that nothing should be farther said of either side . but sophronius being made bishop of ierusalem , he publishes an encyclical epistle wherein he asserts two operations and anathematizes those who held the contrary and were for the union ; and writes to honorius then pope , giving him an account of this new heresy of the monothelites ; the same year sergius writes to him likewise of all transactions that had hitherto been in this matter , and desires to know his judgement in such an affair , wherein the peace of the church was so much concerned . honorius writes a very solemn letter to sergius , wherein he condemns the contentious humour of sophronius , and makes as good a confession of his faith as he could , in which he expresly asserts that there was but one will in christ and agrees with sergius that there should be no more disputing about one or two operations in christ. accordingly heraclius by the advice of sergius publishes his ecthesis or declaration to the same purpose , which was approved by a synod under sergius ; but opposed by iohn 4. bishop of rome , yet still maintained at constinople not only by sergius , but by pyrrhus , and paulus his successours , who were both excommunicated by theodorus succeeding iohn ; after him pope martin calls a council , wherein he condemns all the eastern bishops who favoured this new heresy , and the two edicts of silence published by heraclius and constans : but was for his pains sent for to constantinople and there dyed . these contentions daily increasing , after the death of constans , constantinus pogonatus resolves to try all ways for the peace of the church ; and therefore calls a general council at constantinople a. d. 680. wher● the heresy of the monothelites was condemned ; and the writings of sergius , cyrus , theodorus and honorius in this matter , as repugnant to the doctrine of the apostles , and decrees of councils and the judgement of the fathers ; and agreeable to the false doctrine of hereticks and destructive to souls : and not content meerly to condemn their doctrine , they further proceed to anathamatize , and expunge out of the church the names of sergius , cyrus , pyrrhus , petrus , paulus , and theodorus : and after these , honorius , as agreeing in all things with sergius and confirming his wicked doctrines . here we are now come to the main point ; we see a pope delivering his judgement in a matter of faith concerning the wh●le church condemned for a heretick by a general council for so doing : either he was rightly condemned or not ; if rightly , what becomes of the infallibility of the pope when he pretends to teach the whole church in a matter of faith ? if not rightly , what becomes of the authority and sincerity of general councils , if a council so solemnly proceeding sho●ld condemn one for heresy , that not only did not err ; but if some may be believed , could not ? surely the council never thought of that , when they make no scruple of condemning him with the rest . what ? were pope agatho's legats there present , and could not inform the council of their presumption in judging the infallible see ? but no such thing was heard of in those times ; these latter ages have been only blessed with the knowledge of this unerring priviledge ; and happy had it been if all the records of former times had been burnt , that no instances might have been brought to overthrow it . yet wit and industry have not been wanting to bring poor honorius off , if it had been possible : the sum of all may be reduced to these 3. answers . 1. either that the acts of the council are falsifyed . or. 2. that the pope did not err in faith . or. 3. supposing he did err , it was only as a private person and not as head of the church . 1. that the acts of the council are falsifyed . this is a shrewed sign of a desperate cause , when against the consent of all ancient copies , both greek and latin , and the testimonies of several popes and councils afterwards , learned men are driven to so miserable a shift as this . the first i find , who made this answer was albertus pighius , and after him baronius and bellarmin have embraced it : but the more ingenuous men of their own church have been ashamed of it . melchior canus confesseth that not only this general council , but the seventh , and eighth under adrian , and that several other popes have confessed the truth of the thing ; and therefore he doth not see how pighius can vindicate honorius in this matter . franciscus torrensis ( afterwards better known by the name of turrianus ) a man highly applauded by baronius , hosius , lindanus , and others , writ a book of the 6. 7. and 8. synod , wherein he severely chastises pighius for his ill usage of this sixth council , and saith that in this matter he shewed more prejudice than judgement . for , whereas he suspects that the letter of honorius to sergius was not sufficiently examined and compared with the original , this betray 's saith turrianus , his great negligence in reading the acts of the council ; for in the latter end of the 12. session , it is expresly said that the authentick latin epistle of honorius was produced and compared by the bishop of porto ; besides how comes , saith he , the name of honorius to be no less than 9. times in the council ? and if all this had been by the greeks corrupting the copies , surely they would never have left that passage remaining concerning the corrupting the letters of mennas and vigilius : how comes leo 2. in his epistle to the emperour wherein he confirms the council , to anathematize honorius by name as guilty of heresy ; some indeed , saith he , may say this is counterfeit too , ( so do baronius and binius ) but they have nothing but their bare conjecture for it , no argument , or authority to confirm it . not only the greek writers , but the latin confess he was there condemned , so doth bede , saith he , so doth the pontifical book in the life of leo 2. and in the council under martin at rome the epistle of paulus to theodorus was read , wherein was mentioned the consent of honorius and sergius , and no one there opposed it . humbertus legat of leo 9. in his book against the greeks reckons honorius among the condemned monothelites . how came all the copies to be corrupted at once , as he farther urges , that there are none left sound to correct others by ? but that which he insists upon as the strongest argument of all is , from hadrian 2. who calling a council at rome for the condemning of photius , for anathematizing him , hath these remarkable words ; that no bishop of rome was anathematized before unless it were honorius who after his death was condemned for heresy , in which case alone it is lawful for inferiours to resist the●r superiours and to reject their doctrine ; although even there , they would never have done it if the bishop of the first see had not consented to it . a very considerable testimony ; not only to prove that honorius was comdemned for heresy , but that a pope may be guilty of it and be lawfully proceeded against for it , and that pope agatho did himself consent to the condemnation of honorius . notwithstanding these arguments of torrensis , baronius seeing that no other defence could be made , persists in the same accusation of forgery : and out of his own head frames an improbable story of the corrupting the copies of the council by theodorus , who being , saith he , anathematized as a monothelite , expunged his own name and put in that of honorius . a fiction so groundless and unreasonable , that nothing but meer despair could drive a man of common understanding to it . for there is not the least countenance for it in any author ; not the least colour of probability in the thing . for , that , all the copies of the council should be corrupted by one man , and neither the popes legats present at the council nor any else should take notice of it ; that , no succeeding popes should discover it , when they were concerned to vindicate honorius , but did own the thing to be true ; that theodorus then living should be condemned , before it was known whether he would submit to the council or not ; that , in the seventh and eighth councils this should not be at all suspected , but the condemning honorius expresly mentioned in both ; that , a man at that time deposed from his patriarchat of constantinople should be able to make such a razure and forgery in the copies of the councils ; that the emperour constantine who took so much care about the council should suffer such a thing to be done , do all make this figment of baronius so remote from any likelyhood , that baronius had need to have prayed as once a man upon the rack did , that he might tell probable lyes . but all the miscarriages of baronius in this matter are so fully laid open by one of their own church , that i need not insist any longer upon it ; to whom no answer hath been given but that substantial one of an index expurgatorius . bellarmin likes this way of answering the difficulty about honorius ; but the greatest strength he adds to baronius is only saying , without doubt it is so : and he grants that the seventh and eighth council did believe that pope honorius was condemned , but he saith they were deceived by the false acts of the council . but however they must believe that the pope might fall into heresy and be condemned by a council for it . yet bellarmim hath a fetch in this case beyond baronius viz. that either the acts of the council are falsified , or the council was guilty of intolerable impudence and errour in condemning honorius without reason ; for all the evidence they produce against him is from his epistles in which , saith he , nothing is contained , but what is sound and orthodox ; and this was the second way of defending honorius viz. that he did not err in faith at all ; and this way is taken by petavius , and others ; and was the way intended by petrus de marcâ , as appears by the account given of his design by baluzius ; which was first to prove by most evident arguments , that the acts of the council were never corrupted by the greeks , against the opinion before mentioned , and next that he was truly condemned by the council ; but not for heresy , but only for negligence and remissness . i think there needs nothing to shew the weakness of this , but barely reading the anathema of the council against him , which is not , for bare negligence but for confirming the wicked doctrines of sergius . and i am apt to think , that learned person saw the weakness of his design too much to go on with it : and baronius and bellarmin saw well enough , that whosoever was there anathematized it was upon the account of heresy that he was so ; and therefore baronius would make men believe the anathema belonged to theodorus and not to honorius . petavius thinks that honorius was deceived , but it was only by his simplicity and weakness , not understanding the controversy aright . so of old iohn 4. and maximus in his dispute with pyrrhus defended honorius , that he spake indeed of one will , but that , say they , was to be understood only of one will in his humane nature . which as combesis saith , is a more pious than solid defence of him ; and would as well serve , for sergius and cyrus , for heraclius his ecthesis and constans his type , as honorius his letter . for who ever will peruse them , will find they all proceed on the same argument , that there could not be two wills in christ but one must be contrary to the other . but that which i insist on is this , that it is certain the council approved by the pope did condemn him for heresy ; i desire therefore again to know whether he was rightly condemned or not ; if he was , then the pope must be guilty , and so not infallible ; if not , than the council must be , according to bellarmin , guilty of intolerable impudence and errour ; but in either case , there was no infallibility in the guides of the church which could require our internal assent to what they declared . but another defence is yet be●ind , which is , that though the pope did erre , yet it was in his private capacity , and not as head of the church . but when doth he act as head of the church if not , when he is consulted about important matters of faith , as this was then supposed to be , by two patriarchs ; and when the church was divided about them ; and there upon solemnly delivers his opinion ? this is then a meer subterfuge when men have nothing else to say ; i conclude therefore this instance of honorius with the ingenuous confession of mr. white , that things are so clear in the cause of honorius , that it is unworthy any grave divine to pawn his own honour and that of divinity too , in sowing together fig-leaves to palliate it . thus far i have shewn that those who pretend the most to be infallible guides of the church have opposed and condemned each other ; from whence it necessarily follows that no absolute submission is due to them , unless we can be obliged to believe contradictions . i might pursue this much further , and draw down the history of these contradictions to each other , through the following ages of the church ; wherein bishops have been against bishops , popes against popes , councils against councils , church against church ; especially after the breach between the eastern and greek churches , the greek and the roman , and the roman and those of the reformation ; but a man who is bound to rely only on the authority of his guides , must suppose them to be agreed ; and in case of difference among them , he must first choose his religion and by that his guide . 9. in the present divided state of the christian church , a man that would satisfy his own mind , must make use of his judgement in the choice of his church , and those guides he is to submit to . unless a man will say , that every one is bound to yield himself absolutely to the guidance of that church which he lives in whether eastern or greek , roman or protestant : which i suppose n. o. will never yield to , for a reason he knows because then no revolter from us could be justified . the true state then of the present case concerning the guides of the catholick church is this ; that it hath been now for many ages rent and torn into several distinct communions ; every one of which communions , hath particular guides over it , who pretend it to be the duty of men to live in subjection to them , because every church doth suppose it self to be in the right ; now the question proposed is , whether it be not fitter for me to submit to the guides of the catholick church , than to trust my own judgement ? i should make no scruple in all doubtful matters to resolve the affirmative , supposing that all the guides of the catholick church were agreed ; for i should think it arrogance and presumption in me to set up my own private opinion in opposition to the unanimous consent of all the guides of the catholick church , in such a case ; but that is far from ours , for we find the christian world divided into very different communions . the eastern churches are still as numerous , though not so prosperous as the roman ; the extent of the greek church alone is very great , but besides that , there are two other distinct churches in those parts who break off communion with the greek on the account of the councils of ephesus and chalcedon ; and the latter sort especially are very far spread in those parts , from armenia to the abyssine empire . in the time of iacobus de vitriaco , he saith these two churches were said to be more numerous than the greek and the latin ; and bellonius in these later times assures us , that the rites of the greek church do yet extend farther than the latin. what then makes these churches to be left out in our enquiries after the guides of the catholick church ? are these such inconsiderable parts of the body , that no regard is to be had to them ? i believe upon a strict examination , notwithstanding the reproach of heresy and schism , which those of the church of rome cast upon all but themselves , they will be sound much more sou●d parts of the catholick church , than the roman church is five great bodies or communions of christians are at this day in the world. 1. the most eastern christians , commonly called nestorians whether justly or no i shall not now examine , these are spread over the most eastern parts , and all live in subjection to the patriarch of muzal . 2. the iacobites , who are dispersed through mesopotamia , armenia , aegypt and the abyssine empire , and live under several patriarchs of their own . 3. the greek church , of which , besides the moscovites , are to be reckoned the melchites or suriani , and the georgians ; for though their language be different , they all agree in doctrine . 4. the roman church , taking under it all in the eastern parts who have submitted to the bishop of rome . 5. the protestant churches who have cast off subjection to the pope , and reformed the corruptions they charge the church of rome with . now of these 5. parts , 4. of them are all agreed , that there is no necessity of living in subjection to the guides of the roman church ; but they are all under their own proper guides , w ch they do not question will direct them in the right way to heaven . only those of the church of rome take upon themselves against all sense and reason to be the catholick church , and so exclude 4. parts of 5. out of a capacity of salvation ; and challenge infallibility as belonging to the guides of it alone . in this case , the arrogance of the pretence , the uncharitableness of rejecting so mighty a number of christians from the possibility of salvation , are sufficient to make any man not yield up his faith at the first demand ; but to consider a while , whether there be no other churches , or guides in those churches ? when he finds so many and those not inferiour to the roman church in any thing save only in pomp , pride , and uncharitableness ; and all opposing those arrogant pretences of authority and infallibility in it , what reason can he have , supposing that he is to submit to any guides , that he must submit only to those of the roman church ? why not as well to those of the eastern , greek , or protestant churches ? if any one goes about to assign a reason , by charging them with heresy , or schism , he unavoidably makes him judge of some of the greatest difficulties in religion , before he can submit to his infallible guides . he must know what nestorianism , eutychianism , monothelism mean , how they came to be heresies , whether the churches accused be justly charged with them ? he must understand all the subtilties of personalitie , subsistence , hypostatical union ; whether the union of two natures in christ be substantial , natural , or accidental ? whether it be enough to say that the divine and humane are one by inhabitation , or one by consent , or one by communion of operation , or one by communion of dignity and honour , all which the nestorians acknowledged , only denying the union of two natures to make one person ? supposing a man be come to this , he must then be satisfied that the present eastern christians do hold the doctrine of the old nesiorians , for they acknowledge christ to be perfect god and perfect man ; and that the b. virgin may be called the mother of the son of god , or the mother of the word , but they stick only at calling her the mother of god. then for the other churches which are charged with e●tychianism , he must understand , the exact difference between nature and person , for if there cannot be two natures without two persons , then either the nestorians were in the right who asserted two persons , or the eytychians who denyed two natures ; but this being granted , he must be satisfied , that , those called iacobites are eutychians , although they disown eutyches , and follow dioscorus , asserting that there were two natures before the union , and but one after ; and that dioscorus was rightly condemned in the council of chalce●on ; but supposing they are willing to leave the dispute of two natures , on condition , that the humane nature be only made the instrument of the divine in its operations , whether they are justly charged with heresy in so doing ? all these things a man must fully be satisfied in , before he can pronounce those churches guilty of heresy , and so not to be followe . but supposing those churches be rejected , why must the greek , which embraces all the councils which determined those subtle controversies ? here comes the mystery of the procession of the holy ghost to be examined , whether from the father alone or from the father and the son ? but supposing this to be yielded , why may he not joyn with those churches , which agree with the church of rome in all those points , as the protestant churches do ? here a man must examine the notes of the church , and enquire whether they be true notes , whether they agree only to the roman church ? and one of the greatest of those notes being consent with the primitive church , a man that would be well satisfied , must go through all the disputes between us and the church of rome , and by that time he is well settled in them , he will see little use , and less necessity of an infallible guide . so that a man who would satisfy himself in this divided state of the christian church , what particular communion he ought to embrace and what guides he must follow , must do all that , for the preventing of which an infallible guide is said to be necessary . i.e. he must not only exercise his own judgment in particular controversies , but must proceed according to it , and joyn with that church which upon enquiry he judges to be the best . 10. a prudent submission is due to the guides of that church , with which a person lives in communion . having shewed that absolute submission is not due , all that can be left is a submission within due bounds , which is that i call a prudent submission . and those bounds are these following . 1. not to submit to all those who challenge the authority of guides over us , though pretending to never so much power and infallibility . when n. o. would perswade me to submit my understanding to the infallible guides of the church ; he must think me a very easy man to yield , till i be satisfied first that god hath appointed such to be my guides , and in the next place that he hath promised infallibility to them . and that is the true state of the controversy between us and those of the church of rome in this matter ; they tell us we are bound to submit to the guides of the church ; we desire to know whom they mean by these guides ; and at last we understand them to be the bishop of rome and his clergy . here we demur , and own no authority the bishop of rome hath over us ; we assert that we have all the rights of a patriachal church within our selves , that we owe no account to the bishop of rome of what we believe or practise ; it is no article of our creed that god hath made him iudge either of the quick or the dead ; we have guides of our church among our selves , who have as clear a succession and as good a title as the bishops of any church in the world . to these , who are our lawful guides , we promise a due obedience , and are blame worthy if we give it not ; but for the bishop and clergy of rome , we own none to them , let them challenge it with never so much confidence , and arrogant pretences to infallibility . so that here is a contest of right in the case , antecedent to any duty of submission , which must be better proved than ever it hath yet been , before we can allow any dispute , how far we are to submit to the guides of the roman church ? 2. not to submit to those who are lawful guides in all things they may require . for our dispute is now about guides supposed to be fallible , and they being owned to be such may be supposed to require things to which we are bound not to yield . but the great difficulty now is , so to state these things , as to shew that we had reason not to submit to the guides of the roman church , and that those of the separation have no reason not to submit to the guides of our church . for that is the obvious objection in this case , that the same pretence which was used by our church against the church of rome , will serve to justify all the separations that have been or can be made from our church . so my adversary n. o. in his preface saith , that by the principles we hold , we excuse and justify all sects which have or shall separate from our church . in answer to which calumny i shall not fix upon the perswasion of conscience , for that may equally serve for all parties ; but upon a great difference in the very nature of the case , as will appear in these particulars . 1. we appeal to the doctrine and practice of the truly catholick church in the matters of difference between us and the church of rome : we are as ready as they to stand to the unanimous consent of fathers , and to vincentius lerinensis his rules , of antiquity , universality and consent ; we declare , let the things in dispute be proved to have been the practice of the christian church in all ages , we are ready to submit to them : but those who separate from the church of england make this their fundamental principle as to worship , ( wherein the difference lyes , ) that nothing is lawful in the worship of god , but what he hath expresly commanded ; we say all things are lawful which are not forbidden , and upon this single point stands the whole controversy of separation as to the constitution of our church . we challenge those that separate from us to produce one person for 1500. years together , that held forms of prayer to be unlawful ; or the ceremonies which are used in our church : we defend the government of the church by bishops to be the most ancient and apostolical government , and that no persons can have sufficient reason to cast that off , which hath been so universally received in all ages since the apostles times : if there have been disputes among us about the nature of the difference between the two orders , and the necessity of it in order to the being of a church , such there have been in the church of rome too . here then lyes a very considerable difference , we appeal and are ready to stand to the judgement of the primitive church for interpreting the letter of scripture in any difference between us and the church of rome ; but those who separate from our church will allow nothing to be lawful but what hath an express command in scripture . 2. the guides of our church never challenged any infallibility to themselves ; which those of the church of rome do , and have done ever since the controversy began . which challenge of infallibility makes the breach irreconcileable while that pretence continues ; for there can be no other way but absolute submission where men still pretend to be infallible : it is to no purpose to propose terms of accommodation between those who contend for a reformation , and such who contend that they can never be deceived ; on the one side , errours are supposed ; and on the other , that it is impossible there should by any . until therefore this pretence be quitted , to talk of accomodation is folly , and to design it madness . if the church of rome will allow nothing to be amiss , how can she reform any thing ? and how can they allow any thing to be amiss , who believe they can never be deceived ? so that while this arrogant pretence of infallibility in the roman church continues , it is impossible there should be any reconciliation : but there is no such thing in the least pretended by our church , that declares in her articles , that general councils may err , and sometimes have erred even in things partaining to god ; and that all the proof of things to be believed is to be taken from holy scripture . so that as to the ground of faith there is no difference between our church and those who dissent from her ; and none of them charge our church with any errour in doctrine ; nor plead that as the reason of their separation . 3. the church of rome not only requires the belief of her errours but makes the belief of them necessary to salvation : which is plain by the often objected creed of pius 4. wherein the same necessity is expressed of believing the additional articles , which are proper to the roman church , as of the most fundamental articles of christian faith. and no man who reads that bull can discern the least difference therein made between the necessity of believing one and the other ; but that all together make up that faith , without which no man can be saved ; which though only required of some persons to make profession of , yet that profession is to be esteemed the faith of their church . but nothing of this nature can be objected against our church by dissenters , that excludes none from a possibility of salvation meerly because not in her communion , as the church of rome expresly doth : for it was not only boniface 8. who determined as solemnly as he could , that it was necessary to salvation to be in subjection to the bishop of rome ; but the council of lateran under leo 10. decreed the same thing . 4. the guides of the roman church pretend to as immediate authority of obliging the consciences of men , as christ or his apostles had ; but ours challenge no more than teaching men to do what christ had commanded them , and in other things , not commanded or forbidden , to give rules , which on the account of the general commands of scripture , they look on the members of our church as obliged to observe . so that the authority challenged in the roman church encroaches on the prerogative of christ , being of the same nature with his ; but that which our governours plead for , is only that which belongs to them as governours over a christian society . hence in the church of rome it is accounted as much a mortal sin to disobey their guides in the most indifferent things , as to disobey god in the plain commands of scripture : but that is not all they challenge to themselves , but a power likewise to dispence with the law 's of god , as in matter of marriages , and with the institution of christ as in communion in one kind ; and promise the same spiritual effects to their own institutions as to those of christ , as in the 5. sacraments they have added to the two of christ , and to other ceremonies in use among them . 5. setting aside these considerations , we dare appeal to the judgement of any person of what perswasion soever , whether the reasons we plead for separation from the church of rome be not in themselves far more considerable than those , which are pleaded by such , who separate from our church ? i.e. whether our churches imposing of three ceremonies declared to be indifferent by those who require them , can be thought by any men of common sense so great a burden to their consciences , as all the load of superstitious fopperies in the roman church ? whether praying by a prescribed form of words be as contrary to scripture , as praying in an unknown tongue ? whether there be no difference between kneeling at the sacrament upon protestants principles and the papists adoration of the h●st ? whether transubstantiation , image worship , invocation of saints , indulgences , purgatory , the popes supremacy , be not somewhat harder things to swallow , than the churches power to appoint matters of order and decency ? which particulars make the difference so apparent between the separation of our church from the church of rome , and that of dissenters from our church ; that it seems a very strange thing to me that this should be objected by our enemies on either side . and thus much may suffice to clear this point of submission to the guides of a church , of which i have the more largely discoursed , not for any difficulty objected by n. o. but because the thing it self did deserve to be more amply considered . but some other things relating to church-authority i must handle afterwards , and therefore now return to my adversary . the next thing to be debated is , what assurance we can have of the sense of scripture in doubtful places , if we allow no infallible guides to interpret them ? for that is the second main principle of n. o. that without this infallible assistance of the guides of the church , there can be no certainty of the sense of scripture . and it is chiefely o● this account that n. o. doth assert the necessity of infallible guides of the church : for as appears by his concessions he yields that the churches infallibility is not necessary to the foundation of faith ; for men ▪ faith , he saith , may begin at the infallible authority of scriptures ; but the main groun● on which he contends for the necessity of infallible guides is for the interpretation of controverted places and giving the true sense of scripture : for which he often pleads f●● necessity of an external infallible guide ▪ because god hath referred all in the dubio● sense of scripture to the direction of his ministers their spiritual guides , whom he 〈◊〉 over them to bring them in the vnity of the faith to a perfect man ; and that they may not be tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine , by the sleight of those who lye in wait to deceive . and without which guide st. peter observes , that in his time some persons ( for any thing we know diligent enough ) yet through want of learning , and the instability of adhering to their guides , being unlearned , saith he , and unstable , wrested some places of scripture , hard to be understood , to their own destruction . therefore these scriptures are also in some great and important points hard to be understood . and afterwards , he saith , that christians who have sufficient certainty of the truth of christianity , may be deficient in a right belief of several necessary articles of this christian faith , if destitute of that external infallible guide therein : without which he determines that men must fluctuate and totter , and vary one from another , whilst the scriptures are ambiguous in their sense and drawn with much art to several interests . the force of all which , comes to this , that we can arrive at no certainty of the sense of scripture in controverted places , without an external infallible guide : and therefore we are bound to submit to him . here are two things to be discussed . 1. what necessity there is for the salvation of persons , to have an infallible interpretation of controverted places of scripture ? 2. whether the denying such an infallible interpreter makes men uncapable of attaining any certain sense of doubtful places ? for if either it be not necessary that men should have an infallible interpretation ; or men may attain at a certain sense without it , then there can be no colour of an argument drawn from hence to prove the necessity of an infallible guide . 1. we are to enquire into the necessity o● such an infallible interpretation of doubtf●● places of scripture . there are but three grounds on which it can be thought necessary either that no man should mistake in the sense of scripture , or that the peace of the church cannot be preserved , or that mens souls cannot be saved without it . if i● were necessary on the first account , then every particular person must be infallible ; which being not pleaded for , we must consider the other two grounds of it . but here we are 〈◊〉 take notice , that the matter of our prese●● enquiry is concerning the clearness of scripture in order to the salvation of particul●● persons ; of which the proposition laid dow● by me expresly speaks . if therefore n. o. do any thing to overthrow this , he mu●● prove , not that there are doubtful and controverted places which no one denies , but that the sense of scripture is so doubtful and obscure in the things which are necessary to mens salvation , that persons without an infallible guide cannot know the meaning of them . if he prove not this , he doth not come near that which he ought to prove . we do not therefore deny , that there are places of great difficulty in the books of scripture ; but we assert , that the necessaries to salvation do not lye therein ; but those being plain and clear , men may be saved without knowing the other . as a seaman may safely direct his compass by the stars , although he cannot solve all the difficulties of astronomy . can any man in his senses imagine that christs coming into the world to dye for sinners , and the precepts of a holy life which he hath given , and the motives thereto from his second coming to judge the world , are not more plain than the apocalyphical visions , or the proofs for the church of romes infallibility ? if a person then by reading and considering those things which are plain , may do what christ requires for his salvation ; what necessity hath such a one to trouble himself about an infallible guide ? for either he may go to heaven without him , or not ? if he may , let them shew the necessity he is of to that end , which may be attained without him ; if not , then the things necessary to salvation cannot be known without him . let this be proved , and i will immediately yield the whole cause : and till it be proved my principles remain unshaken . but saith n. o. the scripture is obscure in some great and important points , because s. peter saith , that men unlearned and unstable , ( though it may be diligent enough ) wrested some places of scriptures hard to be understood to their own destruction . but doth s. peter say that the scriptures are so hard to be understood that sober and devout minds cannot learn therein , what is necessary to their salvation ? this had been indeed to their purpose : but it is far enough from st. peters . he only saith that in st. pauls epistles there are some difficult passages , which men that wanted judgement and constancy , and it may be diligence too , were ready to pervert to their own mischief . but if there be such difficulties , is there nothing plain and easy ? if bad men may pervert them , may no● good men make a good use of them ? if some may destroy themselves by their own weakness and folly , may not others be saved by their diligence and care ? if it were proved by n. o. that st. peter charged all this upo● them for want of adhering to their guides , that would approach nearer his business ; but if st. peter had intended any such thing as n. o. insinuates , what fairer opportunity had there been of preventing this instability in others by telling them , that god had appointed infallible guides in his church to prevent such abuses of scripture , and that , so long as they adhered to them , they were safe ; but there is not the least word in st. peter to this purpose , when it had been most necess●ry to have given such advice ; but he only bids them , have a care of imitating the inconstancy of such wicked men , and grow in the grace and knowledge of iesus christ. if on so fair and just an occasion offered , st. peter himself whom they believe to have been head of the church at that time , and at rome at the writing of this epistle , doth wholly omit referring men in the sense of obscure places to infallible guides ; what can we else infer but that st. peter knew of no such appointment of christ , or thought no such thing of necessity for his church . for if he had , such was his care and faithfulness , he would never have omitted so necessary a thing ; if the salvation of mens souls had depended upon it . if it be not then necessary to mens salvation to have an infallible interpretation of doubtful places ; for what other end can it become necessary ? is it , that without this , the churches peace cannot be preserved , because controversies arising in the church , no issue can be put to them , unless there be an infallible iudge to determine which is the true sence of scripture ? for it is impossible that scripture it self should be judge , because the controversy is about the sense of scripture . so that either there is no way left to determine controversies , or there must be an infallible judge to deliver the sense of scripture in ●oubtful places . this is the force of all that i know can be said in this matter ; to which i answer . 1. the strength of this argument depends upon the supposition of the necessity of determining controversies in religion by a living judge , who must pronounce sentence between the parties in 〈◊〉 . which supposition , how plausible soever it seems , is not built on any sufficient fo●ndation of scripture or reason . for the weakness of humane understanding , the power of interest and passion , and the ambi●●ity of words , are as apt to beget disputes in religion as in any other things ; so that we have 〈◊〉 ca●se at all to wonder that there should happen to be controversies among men about there 〈◊〉 ; when we see them daily happen about the laws of every country . the only question now is , whether as the necessities of people have made it necessary that there should not only be laws but judges , who should be as the most equal arbitrators to put an end to such differences as may happen among men about matters of right and law , it be thus in religion too ? and this question is plainly about a matter of fact i.e. whether christ hath appointed such judges in all ages , who are to determine all emergent controversies about the difficult places of his law ? and in this case we think it is all the reason in the world , that they who affirm should prove , especially , when they affirm a matter of their own right , and challenge a submission from others on the account of it . we desire them who challenge to be our infallible guides , that they would shew their commission , and produce their patent : for as we are ready to yield obedience , if they crave it , so we think it treason and tyranny in them to usurp it , if they have it not . and it is to no purpose to talk of the benefits that would come to the world by an infallible judge of controversies , unless they first prove that there is one . but we must not allow men to prove things to be , meerly because they think it fitting they should be ; for that is to make themselves wiser than christ and rather to tell him what he should have done , than prove what he hath done . what if ▪ christ having provided for the necessaries of salvation by a clear revelation should leave other things in the dark , to exercise the wits of some and the charity of others ? what if , he thought it sufficient to oblige men to the greatest honesty and integrity in knowing and doing the will of god , and hath promised to pass by the errours and failings men are subject to barely as men ? what if , he foresaw this matter of ending controversies would be an occasion of raising one of the greatest in the christian world , and become a pretence of the most intolerable tyranny over the minds of men ? and therefore what if , he thought it reasonable to leave the failings of mens understandings and lives upon the same terms , so as to give sufficient means to prevent either , but not effectually to hinder men from falling into either of them ? what if , the nature of religion will not bear such a determination of controversies as civil matters will ? because , civil matters concern the right and wrong of particular persons , in which it is not the sentence of the judge so much as the civil force whereby it is backed which puts an end to the dispute ; but in matters of religion , the ending controversies can be no effect of force and power , but of reason and conviction of conscience ; and all the pretended infallibility in the world can never satisfy my mind , unless i be first assured of that infallibility . in all civil causes , it is agreed on both sides that such judges are appointed to determine cases of law ; and on the supposition of this men proceed to tryal before them ; but in our case this is the main thing in dispute , and he that pretends to be the judge is the most accused partie , and what reason can there be , that only on the pretence of greater peace , if controversies were referred to an infallible judge , we must therefore allow every one that pretends to it to be such an infallible guide ? and we must on the same ground allow every one , if we must not first be satisfied of the grounds on which it is challenged by any one . and withal , since christ is the best judge of what is fittest for his church , we must see by his laws whether he hath made it necessary for all controversies to be ended by a standing judge , that should arise about the sense of scripture ? if he hath not done it , it is to no pu●pose to say , it is fit he should have done it ; for that is to upbraid christ with weakness and not to end differences in his church . 2. supposing it necessary that controversies should be ended , it may as well be done without an infallible judge of the sense of scripture as with one ; for all that is pretended to be done by an infallible judge is to give a certain sense of controverted places ; so that men are either bound to look on that which they give as the certain sense on the account of the infallibility of the interpreter , or that such an infallible interpretation being set aside , there is no way to know the certain sense of scripture . if the first , then no man can be more certain of the sense of any doubtful place , than he is of the infallibility of his interpreter : i desire therefore to be resolved in this case . i am told i can arrive at no certainty of the sense of doubtful places of scripture without an infallible interpreter , i say the places of scripture which are alledged for such an infallible judge are the most doubtful and controverted of any ; i would fain understand by what means i may come to be certain of the meaning of these places , and to find out the sense of them ? must i do it only by an infallible guide ? but that is the thing i am now seeking for , and i must not suppose that which i am to prove . if i may be certain without supposing such an infallible guide of the meaning of these very doubtful and controverted places , than why may i not by the same way of proceeding arrive at the certainty of any other less doubtful and obscure places ? unless there be some private way to come at the sense of those places which will hold for none else besides them , which is not so easy to understand . 2. i come the●efore to the second enquiry , which is about the means of attaining the certain sense of scripture in doubtful places , without the supposition of an infallible guide . it will not i hope be denyed , that the primitive christian church had a certain way of understanding the sense of doubtful places , as far as it was necessary to be understood , and that they wanted no means which christ had appointed for the ending of controversies . but i shall now shew , that they proceeded by no other means than what we use , so that , if they had any means to come to a certain sense of scripture , we have the same ; and it would be a ve●y hard case if by the use of the same means we cannot attain the same end . i shall therefore give an account of the proceeding of the primitive church in this weighty controversy concerning the sense of scripture in doubtful places ; and if no such thing was then heard off as an infallible judge , it is a plain demonstration , they thought there was none appointed ; because the disputes that happened then required as much the authority of such a judge as any that are at this day in the christian church . in the first ages of christianity , there were two sorts of controversies which disturbed the church ; one was concerning the authority of the books of the new testament , and the other concerning the sense of them . for , there was no one book of the new testament whose authority was not called in question , by some hereticks in those first ages . the gnosticks , ( by whom i understand the followers of simon magus menander , saturninus and basilides ) , ha● framed a new religion of their own under the name of christian , and had no regard to the writings either of the old or new testament , but had a book of their own , which they called the gospel of perfection . but as epiphanius well observes , no man that hath understanding , needs scripture to refute such a religion as theirs was ; for right reason alone was sufficient to discover the folly and filthyness of it . the followers of cerinthus and ebion acknowledged no other gospel but that of st. matthew ; and that not entire , but with diverse corruptions and interpolations according to their several fancies . cerdon and marcion allowed no gospel but that of st. luke , which they altered according to their pleasure , cutting off the genealogy and other places , and inserting many things as it served most to their purpose , as may be seen at large in epiphanius . some say , the valentinians received no other gospel but that of st. iohn , ( as the alogi in epiphanius rejected that alone , ) but i do not find that valentinus did reject any , but added more ; for irenaeus chargeth the valentinians only with adding another gospel , which they called the gospel of truth ; and tertullian expresly saith , that valentinus therein differed from marcion , that marcion cut off what he pleased with his sword , but valentinus corrupted it with his pen ; for although he allowed all the books of the new testament , yet he perverted the meaning of them . eusebius tells us that the followers of severus rejected the epistles of s. paul and the acts of the apostles ; and interpreted the law , and the prophets and the gospels after a peculiar sense of their own . so that we see those who undertook to confute these hereticks were not only to vindicate the true sense of scripture , but to dispute with such , who did not own the same books which they did ; and therefore were forced to use such ways of arguing as were proper to them : as may be seen at large by the proceedings of irenaeus , and tertullian against them . but because the valentinians and marcionites did endeavour to suit their extravagant fancies to the scriptures allowed by them , it will be necessary for us , to enquire by what means they went about to clear the true sense of scripture from their false glosses and interpretations . irenaeus in the beginning of his book , relating at large the doctrines of the val●ntinians , saith , that by the perverse interpretations and corrupt expositions of the scripture , they drew away unstable minds from the true faith ; for they pretended to find out deeper and more mysterious things in the scripture , than others were acquainted with , viz. that christ intimated the 30. aeöns by not appearing till the 30. year of his age. that the parable of men called at the first , the third , the sixth , the ninth , the eleventh hour referred to the same thing , for those hours make up the number of 30. that st. paul often mentions these aeöns and the pro●uctions of them ; that the duodecade of aeöns was implyed in our saviours ●isputing with the doctors at 12. years of age , and in the choice of the 12. apostles : and the remaining 18. by his abiding 18. months as they said with his disciples after his resurrection : and where ever in scripture they met with words suitable to the description of their aeöns , they pretended that they did refer to their notions , but were obscurely expressed on purpose : for which end they made use of parables , and the first of st. john and many passages in st. pauls epistles . what course now doth irenaeus take to clear the sense of scripture in these controverted places ? doth he till them that god had appointed infallible guides in his church , to whom appeal was to be made in all such cases ? nothing like it , through his whole book ; but he argues with very good reason that no such thing as they imagined could be intended by the scripture . 1. from the scope and design of the scripture , which ought chiefly to be regarded ; whereas they only took some particular passages which served most to their purpose , without looking to the series of the discourse wherein they were . therefore saith he , they make only a rope of sand , when they apply the parables of our saviour , or the sayings of the prophets or apostles to their opinions ; for they pass over the order and connexion of the scriptures ; and as much as in them lyes loose the members of truth from each other ; and then transform and change them from one thing to another , thereby deceiving men . as if , saith he , a man should take an excellent image of a prince , done with a great deal of art in pretious stones ; and remove those stones out of their proper places and turn them into the shape of a dog or a fox , ill put together , and should then affirm , that because the stones are the same , that this image of a dog or a fox , was the image of the prince made by such an excellent artist : after the very same way , saith he , do they use the scriptures . or as he afterwards expresseth it , they take several words and names here and there , and put them together , much after the way of those who would apply the words of homer to any argument proposed to them ; which some have done so artificially , that unskilful men have been perswaded that homer did mean that very thing when he wrote his poem . as one did the going of hercules to cerberus so exactly in the words of homer , ( put together in the greek fragments of irenaeus , ) that those who did not consider upon what different occasions those words were used by him , some being spoken of vlisses , some of priamus , some of maenelaus , and agamemnon , and some of hercules , might imagine that the poet intended to describe what the other expressed by him . but he that will examine the several places will find that the words indeed are homers , but the sense his that so applyed them . so it is in this case , the words are the scriptures , but applyed quite in another way , than they were intended ; the stones are the same , but yet the image of the fox is not to be taken for that of the prince : and when he hath taken the pains to put every thing in its proper and due place , he will then easily find out the deceit . and by the help of this rule irenaeus vindicates the places of scripture , which the valentinians made use of ; and makes it evident that could not be the sense of them which they put upon them . as he doth particularly prove that st. iohn by the beginning of his gospel could not mean the first ogdoad of the valentinians . to the very same purpose doth tertullian argue against their way of interpreting scripture ; that although it seems to have wit and easiness in it , yet it is no more than is often practised on virgil and homer as well as the scriptures . for we have seen virgil , saith he , with the same words turned quite to another sense ; as hosidius get a made the tragoedy of medea , out of virgil ( some fragments whereof are still extant ) and one had explained cebes his table in virgils words ; and many had applyed the words of homer in their cento's to different purposes , and not only some of late , but isidore ▪ saith , that prob● and pomponius before his time had mad● virgil evangelize . therefore it is n● wonder , saith tertullian , that the scripture should be so abused , it being much more fruitful , and applicable to several purposes than other writings are . nay saith he , i am not afraid to say , that the scriptures were so framed by the will of god , that they might afford matter for hereticks to work upon ; since i read that there must be heresies , which cannot be without the scripture . and surely then , he did not imagine that god had appointed an infallible judge on purpose to prevent the being of heresies , by giving an infallible sense of scripture . 2. from the repugnancy of the sence they gave to other places of scripture . irenaeus observes , that the hereticks delighted most in dark places , and left the plain ones ; whereas we ought most to rely upon the plain places and by them interpret the obscure . for such who loved god and the truth would study most those things which god put under our command and knowledge : and those are things which are plain before our eyes , and are open and without ambiguity laid down in scriptures ; and to these parables and dark places ought to be fitted , and by this means they may be interpreted without danger , and of all alike and the body of truth remains entire with a suitableness of all its parts . but without this every man interprets as he pleases , and there will be no certain rule of truth ; but every interpretation will be according to the opinion of the interpreter , and m●n will contradict each other as the philosophers did . and by this means men will be always seeking and never finding because they cast away the means of finding . seeing therefore , saith he , that all the scriptures both prophetical and evangelical are plain and clear , and may be heard alike of all : they must be very blind that will not see in so great light , but darken themselves in parables , wherein every one of them thinks he hath found a god of his own . and from hence he very much blames the hereticks , since they could not so much as pretend that any thing was plainly said for them in scripture , but only intimated in dark sayings and parables , that they would leave that which is certain and undoubted and true , for that which was uncertain and obscure . which , he saith , is not to build the house upon the firm and strong ro●k ; but upon the uncertainty of the sand ; on which it may be easily overturned . this excellent rule for interpreting scripture irenaeus makes great use of in his following discourse , and in the very next chapter urges this as the consequence of it , that having truth for our rule , and so plain testimony of god , men ought not to perplex themselves with doubtful questions concerning god , but grow in the love of him who hath done and doth so great things for us , and never fall off from that knowledge which is most clearly revealed . and we ought to be content with what is clearly made known in the scriptures , because they are perfect , as coming from the w●rd and spirit of god. and we need 〈◊〉 ●onder if there be many things in religion above our understandings , since there are so in natural things which are daily seen by us : as in the nature of birds , water , air , meteors , &c. of which we may talk much , but only god knows what the truth is . therefore why should we think much if it be so in religion too ? wherein are some things we may understand and others we must leave to god , and if we do so we shall keep our faith without danger . and all scripture being agreeable to it self , the dark places must be understood in a way most suitable to the sense of the plain . 3. the sense they gave of scripture was contrary to the doctrine of faith received by all true christians from the beginning : which he calls the unmoveable rule of faith received in baptism ; and ▪ which the church dispersed over the earth did equally receive in all places ; with a wonderful consent . for although the places and languages be never so distant or different from each other , yet the faith is the very same as there is one sun which inlightens the whole world ; which faith none did enlarge or diminish . and after having shewn the great absurdities of the doctrines of the enemies of this faith , in his first and second books , in the beginning of the third he shews that the apostles did fully understand the mind of christ , that they preached the same doctrine which the church received , and which , after their preaching it , was committed to writing by the will of god in the scriptures , to be the pillar and ground of faith. which was the true reason why the hereticks did go about to disparage the scriptures because they were condemned by them : therefore they would not allow them sufficient authority , and charged them with contradictions , and so great obscurity that the truth could not be found in them without the help of tradition , which they accounted the key to unlock all the difficulties of scripture . and was not to be sought for in writings , but was delivered down from hand to hand ; for which cause st. paul said we speak wisdom among them that are perfect . which wisdom they pretended to be among themselves . on this account the matter of tradition came first into dispute in the christian church : and irenaeus appeals to the most eminent churches and especially that of rome , because of the great resort of christians thither , whether any such tradition was ever received among them and all the churches of asia received the same faith from the apostles , and knew of no such tradition as the valentinians pretended to . and there was no reason to think , that so many churches , founded by the apostles or christ , should be ignorant of such a tradition ; and supposing no scriptures at all had been written by the apostles , we must then have followed the tradition of the most ancient and apostolical churches , and even the most barbarous nations that had embraced christianity without any writings : yet fully agreed with other churches in the doctrine of faith , for that is it he means by the rule of faith , viz. a summary comprehension of the doctrine received among christians , such as the creed is mentioned by irenaeus ; and afterwards he speaks of the rule of the valentinians in opposition to that of the sound christians . from hence irenaeus proceeds to confute the doctrine of the valentinians by scripture and reason in the third , fourth and fifth books : all which ways of finding out the sense of scripture in doubtful places , we allow of and approve ; and are always ready to appeal to them in any of the matters controverted between us and the church of rome . but irenaeus knew nothing of any infallible judge to determine the sense of scripture ; for if he had , it would have been very strange he should have gone so much the farthest way about , when he might so easily have told the valentinians that god had entrusted the guides of his church , especially at rome with the faculty of interpreting scripture , and that all men were bound to believe that to be the sense of it which they declared and no other . but men must be pardoned if they do not write that which never entred into their heads . after irenaeus , tertullian sets himself the most to dispute against those who opposed the faith of the church ; and the method he takes in his boo of praescription of hereticks is this . 1. that there must be a certain unalterable rule of faith. for he that believes , doth not only suppose sufficient grounds for his faith , but bounds that are set to it ; and therefore there is no need of further search since the gospel is revealed . this he speaks to take away the pretence of the seekers of those days , who were always crying , seek and ye shall find : to which he replys , that we are to consider not the bare words , but the reason of them ; and in the first place we are to suppose this , that there is one certain and fixed doctrine delivered by christ which all nations are bound to believe , and therefore to seek , that when they have found they may believe it . therefore all our enquiries are to be confined within that compass ; what that doctrine was , which christ delivered : for otherwise there will be no end of seeking . 2. he shews what this rule of faith is , by repeating the articles of the ancient creed , which he saith was universally , received among true christians and disputed by none but hereticks . which rule of faith being embraced , then he saith , a liberty is allowed for other enquiries in doubtful or obscure matters . for faith lyes in the rule ; but other things were matters of skill and curiosity ; and it is faith which saves men , and not their skill in expounding scriptures : and while men keep themselves within that rule , they are safe enough , for to know nothing beyond it , is to know all . 3. but they pretend scripture for what they deliver , and by that means unsettle the minds of many . to this he answers several ways . 1. that such persons as those were , ought not to be admitted to a dispute concerning the sense of scripture ; because they rather deserved to be censured than disputed , for bringing such new heresies into the church ; but chiefly because it was to no purpose to dispute with them about the sense of scripture , who received what scriptures they pleased themselves , and added and took away as they thought fit . and what can the most skilful men in the scripture , do with such men , who deny or affirm what they please ? therefore such kind of disputes tended to no good at all , where either side charged the other with forging and perverting the scriptures , and so the controversy with them , was not to be managed by the scriptures , by which either none , or an uncertain victory was to be obtained . 2. in this dispute about the sense of scripture , the true ancient faith is first to be enquired after , for among whom that was , there would appear to be the true meaning of scripture . and for finding out the true faith , we are to remember , that , christ sent abroad his apostles to plant churches in every city , from whence other churches did derive the faith , which are called apostolical from their agreement in this common faith at first delivered by the apostles ; that , the way to understand this apostolical faith is to have recourse to the apostolical churches ; for it is unreasonable to suppose that the apostles should not know the doctrine of christ , ( which he at large proves ) or that they did not deliver to the churches planted by them the things which they knew ; or that the churches misunderstood their doctrine because all the christian churches were agreed in one common faith : and therefore there is all the reason to believe that so universal consent must arise from some common cause , which can be supposed to be no other than the common delivery of it by all the apostles . but the doctrines of the hereticks were novel and upstart ; and we must say all the former christians were baptized into a false faith , as not knowing the true god or the true christ if marcion and valentinus did deliver the true doctrine , but that which is first is true and from god , that which comes after is foraign and false . if marcion and valentinus , nigidius or hermogenes broach new opinions and set up other expositions of scripture than the christian church hath received from the apostles times , that without any farther proof , discovers their imposture . 3. two senses directly contrary to each other cannot proceed from the same apostolical persons . this tertullian likewise insists upon to shew that although they might pretend antiquity , and that as far as the apostolical times , yet the contrariety of their doctrine to that of the apostles would sufficiently manifest the falshood of it . for saith he , the apostles would never contradict each other or themselves ; and if the apostolical persons had contradicted them , they had not been joyned together in the communion of the same faith ; which all the apostolical churches were . but the doctrines broached by these men , were in their seeds condemned by the apostles themselves ; so marcion , apelles , and valentinus were confuted in the sadducees , and first corrupters of christianity . but the true christians could not be charged by their adversaries with holding any thing contrary to what the church received from the apostles , the apostles from christ , and christ from god. for the succession of the churches was so evident , and the chairs of the apostles so well known , that any one might satisfy his curiosity about their doctrine , especially since their authentick epistles are still preserved therein . but where a diversity of doctrine was found from the apostles , that was sufficient evidence of a false sense that was put upon the scriptures . thus tertullian lays down the rules of finding out the sense of controverted places of scripture , without the least insinuation of any infallibility placed in the guides of the church for determining the certain sense of them . but lest by this way of prescribing against hereticks , he should seem to decline the merits of the cause out of distrust of being able to manage it against them , he tells us therefore elsewhere he would set aside the ground of prescription , or just exception against their pleading , ( for so prescription signifies in him ) as against marcion and hermogenes and praxeas and refute their opinions upon other grounds . in his books against marcion , he first lays down marcions rule , as he calls it , i.e. the sum of his opinion , which was making the creator of the world , and the father of our lord jesus christ two distinct gods , the one nothing but goodness , and the other , the author of evil : which opinion he overthrows from principles of reason , because there cannot be two infinitely great , and on the same grounds he makes two he may make many more , and because god must be known by his works , and he could not be god that did not create the world ; and so continues arguing against marcion to the end of the first book . in the second he vindicates god the creator from all the objections which marcion had mustered against his goodness . in the third he proves that christ was the son of god the creator ; first by reason and then by scripture , and lays down two rules for understanding the prophetical predictions relating to the manner of expressing future things as past , and the aenigmatical way of representing plain things : afterwards he proves in the same manner from scripture and reason , that christ did truly assume our nature and not meerly in appearance ; which he demonstrates from the death and resurrection of christ and from the evidence of sense ; and makes that sufficient evidence of the truth of a body that it is the object of three senses , of sight , and touch and hearing . which is the same way of arguing we make use of against transubstantiation , and if marcion had been so subtle to have used the evasions those do in the roman church , he might have defended the putative body of christ in the very same manner that they do the being of accidents without a substance ▪ in the fourth book he asserts against marcion the authority of the gospel received in the christian church above that which marcion allowed , by the greater antiquity and the universal reception of the true gospels ; and after refutes the supposition of a twofold christ one for the jews and another for the gentiles from the comparing of scriptures together , which he doth with great diligence and answers all the arguments from thence brought by marcion , to prove that christ was an enemy to the law of moses . in his fifth and last book he proves out of the epistles of st. paul , allowed by marcion , that he preached no other god than the creator , and that christ was the son of god the creator ; which he doth from the scope and circumstances of the places without apprehending the least necessity of calling in any infallible guides to give the certain sense and meaning of them . against hermogenes , he disputes about the eternity of matter ; the controversy between them he tells us was concerning the sense of some places of scripture , which relate to the creation of things ; tertullian proves that all things were made of nothing , because it is not mentioned out of what they were made ; hermogenes proves they were made out of matter ; because it is not said they were made of nothing . to determine therefore the sense of these places tertullian shews from reason the repugnancy of the eternity of matter to the attributes of god : he compares several places of scripture together , he reasons from the manner of the expressions and the idiom of scripture . i adore , saith he , the fulness of the scripture which shews me both the maker and the thing made ; but the gospel likewise discovers by whom all things were made . but the scripture no where saith that all things were made out of matter . let the shop of hermogenes shew where it is written ; and if it be not written let him fear the wo denounced to those who add or take from what is written . he examins the several places in dispute , and by proving that sense which hermogenes put upon them to be repugnant to reason , ( as he shews to the end of that book ) he concludes his sense of scripture to be false and erroneous . against praxeas , he disputes whether god the father took our nature upon him , and the arguments on both sides are drawn from the scriptures ; but tertullian well observes , that they insisted upon two or three places of scripture , and would make all the rest though far more , to yield to them . whereas the fewer places ought to be understood according to the sense of the greater number . but this saith he , is the property of all hereticks because they can find but few places for them , they defend the smaller number against the greater : which is against the nature of a rule , wherein the first and the most , ought to oversway the latter and the fewer . and therefore he sets himself throughout that book to produce the far greater number of places of scripture , which do assert the distinction between the father and the son ; and consequently that it could not be the father who suffered for us . hitherto we find nothing said of an infallible guide to give the certain sense of scripture , when the fairest occasion was offered , by those who disputed the most concerning the sense of scripture in the age wherein they lived viz. by irenaeus and tertullian . i now proceed to clemens of alexandria who in his learned collections , proposes that objection , against christianity , that there were many heresies among christians , and therefore men could believe nothing . to which he answers , that there were heresies among the jews and philosophers ; and that objection was not thought sufficient against iudaism or philosophy , and therefore ought not to be against christianity . besides the coming of heresies was foretold , and what ever is foretold must come to pass . the physitians saith he differ in their opinions , yet men do not neglect to make use of them , when they are sick . heresies should only make men more careful what they choose . men ought thereby to endeavour the more to find out truth from falshood ; as if two sorts of fruit be offered to a man real , and waxen ; will a man abstain from both , because one is counterfeit , or rather find out the true from the apparent ? when several ways offer themselves for a man to go in , he ought not therefore to sit down and not stir a step further ; but he uses the best means to find out the true way and then walks in it . so that they are justly condemned who do not discern the true from the false ; for they who will , saith he , may find out the truth . for either there is demonstration or not ; all grant demonstration , or evidence , who do not destroy our senses ; if there be demonstration there must be search and enquiry made ; and by the scriptures we may demonstratively learn how heresies fell of , and that the exactest knowledge was to be found in the truth and the ancient church . now the true searchers will not leave till they find evidence from the scriptures . to this end , he commends the exercise of mens reason and understanding , impartiality or laying aside opinion , a right disposition of soul , for when men are given over to their lusts they endeavour to wrest the scriptures to them . but he establishes the scripture as the only principle of certainty to christians , and more credible than any demonstration : which who so have tasted are called faithful , but those who are versed in them are the truly knowing men . the great objection now is , that hereticks make use of scripture too : i but they , saith he , reject what they please , and do not follow the body and contexture of prophecy ; but take ambiguous expressions and apply them to their own opinions : and a few scattered phrases without regarding the sense and importance of them . for in the scriptures produced by them , you may find them either making use of meer names , and changing the significations of them ; never attending to the scope and intention of them . but truth , saith he , doth not lye in the change of the signification of words ( for by that means all truth may be overthrown ) but in considering what is proper and perfectly agreeable to our lord and almighty god , and in confirming every thing which is demonstrated by the scripture out of the same scriptures . wherein clemens alexandrinus lays down such rules as he thought necessary to find out the certain sense of scripture , viz. by considering the scope and coherence of the words , the proper sense and importance of them , the comparing of scripture with scripture , and the doctrine drawn from it with the nature and properties of god , all which are excellent rules , without the least intimation of the necessity of any infallible interpreter to give the certain sense of doubtful places . after this time a great dispute arose in the church about the rebaptizing hereticks , managed by the eastern and african bishops against stephen bishop of rome . here the question was about the sense of several places of scripture , and the practice of the apostles ; as appears by the epistles of cyprian and firmilian ; both parties pleading scripture and tradition for themselves . but no such thing as an infallibility in judgement was pleaded by the pope , nor any thing like it in the least acknowledged by his adversaries , who charge him , ( without any respect to his infallible guideship , ) with pride , error , rashness , impertinency , and contradicting himself . which makes baronius very tragically exclaim : and although he makes use of this as a great argument of the prevalency of tradition , because the opinion of stephen obtained in the church ; yet there is no evidence at all that any churches did submit to the opinion of stephen when he declared himself , but as appears by dionystus of alexandria's epistles , the controversy continued after his time ; and if we look into the judgement of the church in following ages , we shall find that neither stephens opinion , nor his adversaries were followed ; ( for stephen was against rebaptizing any hereticks , and the others were for rebaptizing all , because one baptism was only in the true church : ) for in the 19. canon of the council of nice the samosatenian baptism is pronounced null ? and the persons who received it are to be new baptized ; and the first council of arles decrees , that in case of heresy men are to receive new baptism but not otherwise : the second council of arles puts a distinction between hereticks ; decreeing that the photinians and samosatenians should be baptized again ; but not the bonofiaci no● the arians , but they were to be received upon renouncing their heresy without baptism . which seems the harder to understand since the bonosiaci were no other than photinians . the most probable way of solving it is , that these two latter sorts did preserve the form of baptism entire , but the photinians and samosatenians altered it : which st. augustin saith , is a thing to be believed . so gennadius reports it that those who were baptized without invocation of the b. trinity , were to he baptized upon their reception into the church ( not rebaptized because the former was accounted null ) of these he reckons not only the paulianists and photinians , but the bon●s●●ci too and many others . but st. basil determines the case of baptism , not from the form but from the faith which they professed ; a schismatical baptism he faith , was allowed , but not heretical , by which he means such as denyed the trinity ; and therein he saith , s. cyprian and firmilian were to blame , because they would allow no baptism among persons separated from the communion of the church . the council of laodicea decreed that the novatians , photinians , and quarto-decimans were to be received without new baptism , but not the montanists , or cataphryges : but binius saith there was one copy , wherein the photinians were left out ; and then these canons may agree with the rest ; and baronius asserts that the greater number of m. s. copies leave out photinians , and withal he proves , that the church did never allow the baptism of the photinians , though it did of the arians ; by which we see that the church afterwards did not follow that which stephen pretended to be an apostolical tradition , viz. that no hereticks should be rebaptized ; and from hence we may conclude that the pope was far from being thought an infallible guide or interpreter of scripture , either by that , or succeeding ages ; when not only single persons that were eminent guides of the church ( such as the african and eastern bishops were , ) opposed his doctrine , and slighted his excommunications , but several councils called both in the east and africa , and the most eminent councils of the church afterwards ( such as the first of arles and nice ) decreed contrary to what he declared to be an apostolical tradition . in the same age we meet with another great controversy about the sense of scripture , for paulus samosatenus openly denyed the divinity of christ and asserted the doctrine of it to be repugnant to scripture , and the ancient apostolical tradition . for this paulus revived the heresie of artemon ; whose followers , as appears by the fragment of an ancient writer against them in eusebius , ( supposed to be caius ) pleaded that the apostles were of their mind , and that their doctrine continued in the church till the time of victor , and then it began to be corrupted . which saith that writer would seem probable , if the holy scriptures did not first contradict them ; and the books of several christians before victors time . so that we see the main of the controversie did depend upon the sense of scripture which was pleaded on both sides . but what course was taken in this important controversie to find out the certain sense of scripture ? do they appeal to any infallible guides ? nothing like it . but in the councils of antioch , in the writings of dionysius of alexandria and others since , they who opposed the samosatenian doctrine endeavoured with all their strength to prove that to be the true sense of scripture , which asserted the divinity of christ. it is great pity the dispute of malchion with paulus is now lost , which was extant in eusebius his time ; but in the questions and answers between paulus and dionysius ; ( which valesius without reason suspects since st. hierome mentions his epistle against paulus ) the dispute was about the true sense of scripture which both pleaded for themselves . paulus insists on those places , which speak of the humane infirmities of christ , which he saith prove that he was meer man and not god ; the other answers that these things were not inconsistent with the being of the divine nature , since expressions implying humane passions are attributed to god in scripture : but he proves from multitude of scriptures , and reasons drawn from them that the divine nature is attributed to christ , and therefore the other places which seem repugnant to it , are to be interpreted in a sense agreeable thereto . the same course is likewise taken by epiphanius against this heresie : who saith the christians way of answering difficulties was not from their own reasons , but from the scope and consequence of scripture : and particularly adds that the doctrine of the trinity was carefully delivered in the scriptures , because god foresaw the many heresies which would arise about it . but never any controve●sie about the sense of scripture disturbed the church more , than that which the arians raised ; and if ever any had reason to think of some certain and infallible way of finding out the sense of scripture the catholick christians of that age had . i shall therefore give an account of what way the best writers of the church in that time took to find out the sense of scripture in the controverted places . of all the writers against them athanasius hath justly the greatest esteem , and petavius saith that god inspired him with greater skill in this controversie , than any others before him . the principle he goes upon in all his disputes against the arians , is this , that our true faith is built upon the scriptures , so in several places of his conference with the arian and in the beginning of his epistle to iovianus and elsewhere . therefore in the entrance of his disputations against the arians , he adviseth all that would secure themselves from the impostures of hereticks , to study the scriptures ; because those who are versed therein stand firm against all their assaults ; but they who look only at the words , without understanding the meaning of them are easily seduced by them . and this counsel he gives , after the council of nice , had decreed the arian doctrine to be heresie ; and although he saith , other ways may be used to confute it , yet because the holy scripture is more sufficient than all of them , therefore those who would be better instructed in these things , i would advise them to be conversant in the divine oracles . but did not the arians plead scripture as well as they ? how then could the scripture end this controversie , which did arise about the sense of scripture ? this objection , which is now made so much of against the scriptures , was never so much as thought of in those days ; or if it were , was not thought worth answering ; for they di● not in the least desert the proofs of scripture , because their adversaries made use of it too . but they endeavou●ed to shew that their adversaries doctrine had no solid foundation in scripture , but theirs had i.e. that the arians perverted it , because they did not examine and compare places as they ought to do , but run away with a few words without considering the scope and design of them ; or comparing them with places plainer than those were which they brought . thus when the arians objected that place my father is greater than i , athanasius bids them compare that with other places , such as my father and i are one , and who being in the form of god thought it no robbery to be equ●● with god ; and by him all things were made &c. when arius objected , to us there is but one god of whom are all things , he tel●s him , he ought to consider the following words , and one lord iesus christ by whom are all things ; from whence when arius argued that christ was only gods instrument in creating things , athanasius then bids him compare this place with another , where it is said of whom the whole body , &c. not barely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . when the arians objected , christs saying , all things are delivered to me from my father , athanasius opposes that place of st. iohn to it , by him all things were made ; thus when they objected several other places , he constantly hath recourse to iohn 1. 1 , 2 , 3. to phil. 2. 7. 1 iohn 5. 20. and others which he thought the plainest places for christs eternal divinity ; and by these he proves that the other were to be interpreted , with a respect to his humane nature , and the state he was in upon earth . so that the greatest defender of the doctrine of the trinity against the arians saw no necessity at all of calling in the assistance of any infal●ible guides , to give the certain sense of scripture in these doubtful places ; but he thought the scripture plain enough to all those who would impartially examine it ; and for others who wilfully shut their eyes , no light could be great enough for them . indeed , when the arians called in the help of any of the ancient writers to justify their doctrine , then athanasius thought himself concerne● to vind●cate them ; as particularly dionysius of alexandria . but , as he saith , if they can produce scripture or reason for what they say let them do it , but if not , let them hold their peace : thereby implying that these were the only considerable things to be regarded : yet he shews at large that they abused the testimony of dionysius , who although in his letters against sabellius he spake too much the other way , yet in other of his writings he sufficiently cleared himself from being a savou●er of the arian heresie . and although athanasius doth else where say , that the faith which the catholick church then held was the faith of their fore-fathers , and descended from the apostles ; yet , he no where saith , that without the help of that tradition it had been impossible to have known the certain sense of scripture , much less without the infallible interpretation of the guides of the present church . s. hilary in his disputes against the same hereticks , professes in the beginning that his intention was to confound their rage and ignorance out of writings of the prophets and apostles : and to that end desires of his readers that they would conceive of god not according to the laws of their own beings , but according to the greatness of what he had declared of himself . for he is the best reader of scripture , who doth not bring his sense to the scripture , but takes it from it , and doth not resolve before hand to find that there , which he concluded must be the sence before he reads . in things therefore which concern god , we must allow him to know himself best , and give due reverence to his word . for he is the best witness to himself who cannot be known but by himself . in which words he plainly asserts that the foundation of our faith must be in the scriptures , and that a free and impartial mind is necessary to find out the true sense of scripture . and after he had said in the second book , that heresies arise from misunderstanding the scripture , and charged in his fourth book the arians particularly with it , he proceeds to answer all the places produced by them out of the old and new testament , by comparing several places together , and the antecedents and consequents , and by these means proving that they mistook the meaning of scripture . so in the beginning of his ninth book rehearsing the common places , which were made use of by the arians , he saith , they repeated the words alone , without enquiring into the meaning , or contexture of them ; whereas the true sense of scripture is to be taken from the antecedents and consequents : their fundamental mistake being the applying those things to his divine nature , which were spoken of his humane : which he makes good by a particular examination of the several places in controversie . the same course is taken by epiphanius , phaebadius and others of the ancient writers of the church , who asserted the eternal divinity of christ against the arians . epiphanius therefore charges them which mangling and perverting the sense of scripture ; understanding figurative expressions liter●●ly , and those which are intended in a plain sense figuratively . so that it is observable in that great controversie which disturbed the church so many years , which exercised the wits of all men in that time to find out a way to put an end to it , after the guides of the church had in the council of nice declared what was the catholick faith : yet still the controversie was managed about the sense of scripture , and no other ways made use of for finding it , than such as we plead for at this day . it is a most incredible thing , that in a time of so violent contention , so horrible confusion , so scandalous divisions in the christian church , none of the catholick bishops should once suggest this admirable expedient of infallibility . but this palladium was not then fallen down from heaven , or if it were , it was kept so secret , that not one of the writers of the christian church in that busie and disputing age discovered the least knowledge of it . unless it be said that of all times it was then least fit to talk of infallibility in the guides of the church , when they so frequently in councils contr●dicted each other . the synodical book in the new tomes of the councils , reckons up 31. several councils of bishops in the time of the arian controversie , whereof near 20. were for the arians , and the rest against them . if the sense of scripture were in this time to be taken from the guides of the church , what security could any man have against arianism ? since the councils which favoured it , were more numerous than those which opposed and condemned it . yea so mean was the opinion which some of the greatest persons of the church at that time had of the guides of the church met together in councils , that st. gregory nazianzen declares he had not seen a good issue of any of them ; but they rather increased mischief than removed any ; because of the contention and ambition which ruled in them , therefore he resolved to come no more at any of them . what ? had st. gregory so mean an esteem of the guides of the christian church to think that , ambition and contention should sway them in their councils and not the spirit of god , which certainly rules not where the other do ? yet this de declares to be his mind upon consideration and experience in that time , and if he had lived to those blessed days of the councils of latter ages , with what zeal and rhetorick would he have set them forth ? never was any answer more jejune to this testimony than that of bellarmin , viz. that forsooth there could be no lawful councils called in his time ; and why so i pray ? was there not a good authority to call them ? but if that had been the reason , he did not so little understand the way of expressing himself , to assign the cause of it to contention and ambition , if he mean quite another thing which he doth not in the least intimate . and what if he were afterwards present at the council of constantinople ? doth that shew , that his mind was in the least changed ? but in this epistle he declares , how little good was to be exspected from a council , and yet afterwards by the emperours command he might be present at one . st. augustin in dealing with maximinus the arian expresly sets aside all authority of the guides of the church , as to the sense of scripture in the places controverted between them ; for he saith , i will neither bring the authority of the council of nice , neither shall you that of ariminum ; but we will proceed by authorities of scripture that are common to both of us , and by the clearest evidence of reason . it seems then st. augustin was far from thinking that there could be no certainty of the sense of scripture if the authority of the guides of the church be set aside . but by what means doth he then think , that men may come to any certainty about the true meaning of scripture ? of that he is best able to give us an account himself having written purposely in this subject in his books of christian doctrine the substance of what he there says may be comprehended in these rules . 1. that the main scope of the scripture is to perswade men to the love of god and our neighbour , without which , he saith , no man doth truly understand it ; but whosoever interprets scripture to the advancing of that , though he may be mistaken as to the sense of the words , yet his errour is not dangerous . 2. that in order to the right understanding of scripture men must apply themselves to it with minds duly prepared for it ; by a fear of god , humility , prayer , sincerity , and purity of heart . 3. that all those things which are necessary to salvation are plainly laid down in holy scriptures ; this is in terms asserted by him , as a fundamental principle , that in those things which are plainly set down in scripture , all things are to be found which contain our faith and rule of life . i.e. all things which are necessary to the love of god and our neighbour , and consequently to the making us happy . and these things men ought especially to read the scriptures for ; and the more they find of them , the larger their understanding of scripture is . 4. that the obscure places of scripture are to be understood by the plain . for which end he requires frequent reading , and using ones self to the language of scriptures , and drawing examples from plain places to illustrate difficult , and those which are certain to clear the doubtful . for , scarce any thing , saith he , is drawn out of the most difficult places , but what is very plainly set down elsewhere . 5. that in regard of the infinite variety of latin interpreters ( which it seems were in his time ) in matters of doubt it was necessary to have recourse to the original hebrew and greek : the knowledge of which tongues might therefore be necessary to the knowledge of scripture , because several words are preserved untranslated ; but those being few the necessity is not so great on their account , as the diversity of interpreters ; for although those who had translated the hebrew into greek might be reckoned up , the latin interpreters could not . which diversity of translations doth rather help than hinder the understanding of scripture , if the readers of it be not negligent ; for some doubtful places are cleared by the difference of readings . 6. where the ambiguity lyes in proper words , the clearing of it depends on the circumstances of the place ; in so much that he determines , that it is a very rare and difficult thing to find such an ambiguity in the words of scripture , which may not be cleared from the intention of the writer , or comparing places , or searching the original language . 7. men must carefully distinguish between proper and figurative expressions ; for to understand figurative expressions literally is to subject our understanding to carnal conceptions of things ; and that is , saith he , a miserable slavery of mind , to take signs for things ; such signs he tells us under the gospel are the two sacraments of baptism and the lords supper . the great difficulty herein , lyes in the finding out the difference between proper and figurative expressions , for which he lays down this rule , if the words of scripture command what is good and forbid what is evil , it is no figurative expression ; but if it forbids what is good , or command any thing that is evil , it must be figuratively understood . for which he instances in those words of our saviour unless ye eat the flesh , and drink the blood of the son of man ye shall have no life in you . which seeming to command something evil , must be figuratively understood of communicating in the passion of christ , and calling to mind that his flesh was crucified and wounded for us . 8. there is no danger in different senses being given of the same place of scripture , if every one of those senses appear by other places to be agreeable to truth : this being supposed that the person do sincerely enquire after the sense of the author ; for , saith he , that divine spirit might easily foresee how many several senses those words are capable of , which being agreeable to other parts of scripture , though not the particular meaning of those words , the mistake cannot be dangerous therein . 9. where such a sense is given which cannot be proved by other certain testimonies of scripture , it must be made manifest to be the sense by clear evidence of reason . but he rather approves the way of proving the sense of scripture by other places of scripture , where the interpretation is doubtful . so that the way in doubtful places which he prescribes is this , either to draw such a sense from them as hath no dispute concerning its being a true proposition , or if it have , that it be confirmed by other places of scripture . besides these , he lays down the 7. rules of ticonius the donatist which are not of that consequence to be here repeated ; that which i take notice of is , that st. augustin thought the rules he gave sufficient for understanding the meaning of scripture in doubtful places ; but he doth not in the least mention the infallibility of the guides of the church as a necessary means for that end . but he doth assert in as plain terms , as i have done , that scripture is plain in all necessaries to salvation to any sober enquirer , and what ever consequences are charged upon me for making that a fundamental principle , must reflect as much upon st. augustin as me ; and i do not fear all the objections can be made against a principle so evident to reason , and so agreeable not only to st. augustin , but the doctrine of the catholick church both before and after him . the next after st. augustin who hath purposely writ of this argument about the sense of scripture is vincentius lerinensis : about 4. years after st. augustins death and 3. after the council of ephesus , who seems to attribute more to the guides of the church than st. augustin doth , yet far enough short of infallibility . he saith , that every man ought to strengthen his faith against heresie by two things , first by the authoriry of the divine law , and then by the tradition of the catholick church : which tradition he makes necessary , not by way of addition to the scripture , for he allows the perfection and sufficiency of that for all things ; but only to interpret scripture by giving a certain sense of it , there being such different opinions among men about it . for all the hereticks whom he there names had different senses of scripture , as novatianus , sabellius , donatus , arius , macedonius , photinus , &c. but then he bounds this tradition within the compass of the universal consent of antiquity as well as the present church ; or as he expresseth it , within those things which were believed every where , always , and by all persons . that we may therefore consider how far these rules of vincentius will serve for explaining the sense of scripture , we are to take notice of the restrictions he lays upon them 1. that they are to be taken together , and not one of them separate from the rest . as for instance , that of vniversality in any one age of the church , being taken without the consent of antiquity , is no sufficient rule , to interpret scripture by . for vincentius doth suppose that any one age of the church may be so overrun with heresie , that there is no way to confute it , but by recourse to antiquity . for in the case of the arian heresie , he grants that almost the whole church was overspread with it , and there was then no way left but to prefer the consent of antiquity before a prevailing novelty . in some cases the universal consent of the present church is to be relyed upon against the attempts of particular persons , as in that of the donatists ; but then we are to consider , that antiquity was still pleaded on the same side that vniversality was , and supposing that all the ancient church from the apostles times had been of the same mind with the donatists , the greater number of the same age opposing them , would have been no more cogent against them , than it was afterwards for the arians . it is unreasonable to believe that in a thing universally believed by all christians from the apostles times the christian church should be deceived ; but it is quite another thing to say , that the church in any one or more ages since the apostles times may be deceived ; especially if the church be confined to one certain communion excluding all others , and the persons in that church have not liberty to deliver their opinions , for then it is impossible to know what the judgement of the whole church is . and so universality is not thought by vincentius himself to be alone sufficient to determine the sense of scripture ; supposing that universality to be understood according to the honesty of the primitive times for a free and general consent of the christians of that age in which a man lives ; but since the great divisions of the christian world , it is both a very hard matter to know the consent of christendom in most of the controverted places of scripture , and withal the notion of vniversality is debauched and corrupted , and made only to signifie the consent of one great faction , which is called by the name of the catholick church , but truly known by the name of roman . 2. that great care and judgement must be used in the applying those rules ; for 1. the consent of antiquity is not equally evident in all matters in dispute , and therefore cannot be of equal use . 1. there are some things wherein we may be certain of such a consent , and that was in the rule of faith , as vincentius and most of the ancient writers call it i.e. the summary comprehension of a christians duty as to matters of faith , which was not so often called the symbol as the rule of faith , that i mean which was delivered to persons , who were to be baptized and received into the church , this the ancient church universally agreed in as to the substance of it . and as to this vincentius tells us his rule is especially to be understood . for saith he , this consent of antiquity is not to be sought for in all questions that may arise about the sense of scripture , but only or at least chiefly in the rule of faith : or as he elsewhere explains himself , alone or chiefly in those questions which concern the fundamentals of the catholick doctrine : which were those contained in the rule of faith , delivered to all that were to be baptized . suppose men now should stretch this rule beyond the limits assigned it by vincentius , what security can there be from him that it shall be a certain rule , who confined it within such narrow bounds ? not that i think , his rules of no use at all now ; no , i think them to be of admirable use and great importance to christianity , if truly understood and applyed . i.e. when any persons take upon them to impose any thing upon others as a necessary matter of faith to be believed by them , we can have no better rules of judgement in this case than those of vincentius are , viz. antiquity , vniversality and consent ; and whatsoever cannot be proved by these rules ought to be rejected by all christians . to make this plain , the ancient creeds we allow on both sides to have been universally received by the catholick church ; but now the church of rome adds new articles to be believed , we desire to put the whole matter upon this issue : let the popes supremacy , the roman churches infallibility , the doctrines of transubstantiation , purgatory , &c. be proved by as universal consent of antiquity as the articles of the creed are , and then let them charge us with heresie if we reject them . but we say the measure of heresie in the ancient church was the rejecting the rule of faith universally received among christians , this rule of faith , we stand to , and say no other can be made upon any pretence whatsoever , as vincentius at large proves ; but what ever things are obtruded on the belief of christians , which want that vniversal consent of antiquity , which the rule of faith had , we are bound by vincentius , from plain scripture , to shun them as prophane novelties and corruptions of the christian faith. these rules therefore are not barely allowed , but pleaded for by us , in the test of articles of faith , as to which vincentius tells us , if not the only , yet the chief use of them is . 2. but suppose the question be not , concerning the express articles of this rule of faith , but concerning the sense and meaning of them , how then are we to find out the consent of antiquity ? for they might all agree in the words and yet have a different notion of the things . as petavius at large proves , that there was an ancient tradition for the substance of the doctrine of the trinity , and yet he confesses that most of the writers of the ancient church did differ in their explication of it from that , which was only allowed by the council of nice : and he grants , that arius did follow the opinion of many of the ancients in the main of his doctrine , who were guilty of the same error that he was before the matter was throughly discussed . here now arises the greatest difficulty to me in this point of tradition ; the usefulness of it , i am told , is for explaining the sense of scripture : but there begins a great controversie in the church about the explication of the doctrine of the trinity , i desire to know whether vincentius his rules will help us here ? it is pleaded by st. hierome and others , that the writers of the church might err in this matter , or speak unwarily in it before the matter came to be throughly discussed ; if so , how comes the testimony of erroneous or unwary writers to be the certain means of giving the sense of scripture ? and in most of the controversies of the church this way hath been used to take off the testimony of persons , who writ before the controversie began , and spake differently of the matter in debate . i do not deny the truth of the allegation in behalf of those persons ; but to my understanding it plainly shews the incompetency of tradition for giving a certain sense of scripture , when that tradition is to be taken from the writers of the foregoing ages : and if this had been the only way of confuting arius , it is a great question how he could ever have been condemned , if petavius or st. hierome say true ? but since a general council hath determined the contrary to the opinion of these writers before , which council hath been received by the universal church , i will not deny that they had better opportunities of knowing what the sense of the ancient church was , when so many writings were extant which are now lost , than we can have at this distance ; and therefore we yield all submission to a council of that nature and proceeding in that manner which that of nice did ; who did not meerly determine that controversie by the number of writers on their side before them , but by comparing the opinions afterwards with the rule of scriptures ; and in this regard we acknowledge a great reverence due to the decrees of such general councils as that was . therefore next to the rule of faith we allow a great veneration to the determinations of lawful general councils universally received ; which vincentius himself pleads for : but supposing no general councils or such which are not allowed , or received for such ; we are yet to enquire into the ways of finding out catholick tradition , which may interpret scripture . for this end he proposes another means which is , the gathering together the opinions of those fathers alone ; who living holily , wisely and constantly in the faith and communion of the catholick church have died in that faith , or else for it . but still with this reserve , that what either all or many of them manifestly , frequently and constantly , as it were by a council of them , have confirmed by their receiving , holding , and delivering of it , that ought to be held for undoubted , certain and firm ; but whatsoever any one though holy and learned , though a bishop , confessour or martyr , hath held against the opinion of others that ought not to be looked on as the judgement of the church , but as his own private opinion , and therefore not to be followed . which words i shall not examine with all the severity that some have done , for then the proving these conditions to have been observed by any one person would require more pains , and be less capable of resolution than the matter it self is ; but i say , that in most of the controversies this day in the christian world , it may be much more satisfactory to examine the merits of the cause than the integrity of the witnesses , these conditions being supposed . and yet after all this , we must not misunderstand him , as though this way would serve to confute all heresies ; for he tells us yet farther . 2. this course can only hold in some new and upstart heresies i.e. in case of the pretence of some new revelation when men pretend to some special grace without humane industry to discover some divine truth , not known before ; but in case of ancient and inveterate heresies ; he saith we have no way to deal with them , but either only by scripture , or else by plain decrees of general councils , for when heresies have been of long continuance , then , saith he , we may have ground to suspect they have not dealt fairly with the testimonies of ancient times . and thus we see what vincentius hath offered towards the resolution of this great question , how we may be sure of the certain sense of scripture in controverted places ; wherein is nothing contained but what we are willing to stand to ; and very far from the least supposition of any infallibility in the present guides of the church for that end . thus far i have taken the pains to search into the opinion of the primitive church in this important controversie ; which i might carry yet farther , if it were at all needful . the substance of what is delivered by them is this , that if any controversie arise in the church concerning the sense of scripture , if the persons do not allow the scripture , then we are to proceed by the best means we can have without it , viz. the tradition of apostolical churches from the beginning ; if they do allow the scripture then we are to examine and compare places of scripture with all the care and judgement that may be . if after all this , the dispute still continues , then if it be against the ancient rule of faith universally received , that is a sufficient prescription against any opinion ; if not against the rule of faith in express words , but about the sense of it , then if ancient general councils have determined it which had greater opportunities of knowing the sense of the apostolical church than we , it is reasonable we should yield to them ; but if there have been none such , then the unanimous consent of fathers is to be taken , so it be in some late and upstart heresies , which men pretend to have by revelation or some special grace of god. now either all these means were sufficient or not to find out the sense of scripture , if not , then the ancient church was wholly defective and wanted any certain way of finding out the sense of scripture ; if these were sufficient , then there is no necessity of infallibility in the guides of the church to give us a certain sense of scripture : which was the thing to be proved . but n. o. towards the conclusion of his book produces st. augustin for the churches infallibility , in delivering the sense of scripture in obscure places ; which being contrary to what i have already said concerning him , must be examined before i conclude this discourse about the sense of scripture . the place is out of his answer to cresconius concerning the obscure point of rebaptization ; in these words , since the holy scripture cannot deceive , let whosoever is in fear of being deceived by the obscurity of this question , consult the same church about it , which church the holy scripture doth without all ambiguity demonstrate . and before , the truth of the holy scriptures is held by us in this matter , when we do that which hath pleased the vniversal church , which the authority of the scripture does commend , &c. all which is false and said to no purpose saith n. o. if the scripture be not clear in this , that this church can determine nothing in such important contests contrary to the verity of the scriptures , and that we ought to give credit to what she decides ; for then it would not be true , what he says the truth of the same scripture in this matter is held by us : and he who is in fear of being deceived by the obscurity of this question , is no way relieved in following the sentence of the churth . to which i answer , that st. augustin doth not suppose , that men cannot attain to any certainty of the the sense of scripture in this matter without the churches infallibility ; for , he saith , in the chapter preceding , that in this matter we follow the most certain authority of canonical scriptures ; but he puts the case that no certain example could be produced out of scripture , then he saith , they had the truth of the scriptures when they do that which pleased the vniversal church , &c. for the explaining st. augustins meaning , we are to consider , that there were two controversies then on foot in the church with the donatists , the one concerning rebaptization , the other concerning the church the former he looks upon as more intricate and obscure , by reason not only of the doubtfulness of scripture , but the authority of about seventy bishops of africa , who had determined for it , among whom st. cyprian was chief , which we see in all his disputes with the donatisis on this subject he is very much perplexed with ; therefore st. augustin finding that controversie very troublesome , was willing to bring it to that issue , that what the catholick church after so much discussing the point had agreed upon should be received as the truth . by this means the dispute would be brought to that other question , which he thought much more easie , viz. which was the true church , the catholick or the donatists : but by no means doth st. augustin hereby intend to make the churches authority to resolve all doubts concernig scriptures ; but he thought it much easier to prove by scripture which was the true church , than whether rebaptization were lawful or not . and accordingly his very next words are , but if you doubt whether the vniversal church be that which the scripture commends , i will load you with many and most manifest testimonies of scripture to that end . which is the design of his book of the vnity of the church : wherein he shews , that those testimonies of scripture which speak of the universality of the church , are very plain and clear : and needed no interpretation at all , that in this case we are not to regard what donatus , or parmenianus , or pontius hath said ; for neither , saith he , are we to yield to catholick bishops themselves , if they be at any time so much deceived as to hold what is contrary to canonical scriptures . by which it is evident that he supposed no infallibility in the guides of the church . and in terms he asserts , that the church is to be proved by nothing but plain scriptures , neither by the authority of optatus , or st. ambrose , or innumerable bishops , nor councils , nor miracles , nor visions and revelations , ( whatever n. o. thinks of them ) now st. augustin supposing there was much less ambiguity in scripture in the controversie of the church than in that of rebaptization , he endeavours to bring them to a resolution in the other point for the clearing of this : and so he only pursues the method laid down in the books of christian doctrine , to make use of plainer places of scripture to give light to the darker . and when they were convinced by scripture that the catholick church was the true church of christ , he doth not question but they would follow that which was the sentence of the catholick church . but here lyes the main difficulty , on what account the sentence of the church was to be followed ? in order to the resolution of it , we must take notice of these things . 1. that all the proofs which st. augustin brings for the church do relate only to the extent and vniversality of it , and not to any infallibility that is promised to it ; as will easily appear to any one that will read his discourses on that subject against the donatists . 2. that he asserts no infallibility in the highest authority of the church ; which in many places of his books of baptism against the donatists he makes to be a plenary or general council ; whose authority , he saith , was to be preferred before that of st. cyprian , or any particular councils either in his time , or before it ; which he calls the authority and decrees of the vniversal church . so that we see he resolves all the authority of the church in this matter into that of a general council : ( whether that of arles , or nice is not to my purpose to enquire ) and we shall then see what his opinion is of the churches infallibility by that which he delivers of general councils ; as well as any other church authority compared with the scriptures , in these remarkable words . who knows not that the sacred canonical scripture is contained within its certain bounds , and is so far to be preferred before all latter writings of bishops that there can be no doubt or dispute at all made , whether that be true or right which is contained therein ; but all latter writings of bishops which have been or are written , since the canon of scripture hath been confirmed , may be corrected if in any thing they err from the truth , either by the wiser discourse of any more skilful person , or the weightier authority of other bishops , or the prudence of more learned men , or by councils : and even councils themselves that are provincial yield without dispute to those which are general , and called out of all the christian world ; and of these general councils the former are often amended by the latter , when by some farther tryal of things that which was shut is laid open , and that which was hidden is made known without any swelling of sacrilegious pride , or stifness of arrogancy , or contentin of envy ; but with holy humility , catholick peace and christian charity . can any one that reads this excellent testimony of st. augustin delivered in this same matter , ever imagine he could so plainly contradict himself ; as to assert the churches infallibility in one place and destroy it in another ? would he assert that all councils how general soever may be amended by following councils , and yet bind men to believe that the decrees of the former councils do contain the unalterable will of god ? a lesser person than st. augustin would never thus directly contradict himself , and that about the very same controversie , which words of his cannot be understood of unlawful councils , of matters of fact or practice , but do refer to the great question then in debate about rebaptizing hereticks ; and hereby he takes off the great plea , the donatists made from the authority of st. cyprian and his council , which they continually urged for themselves . 3. he grants , that the arguments drawn from the churches authority are but humane , and that satisfaction is to be taken from the scriptures in this controversie . for mentioning the obscurity of this question , and the great debates that had been about it before the donatists time among great and good men , and diverse resolutions of councils and the settlement of it at last by a plenary council of the whole world ; but lest , saith he , i should seem to make use only of humane arguments , i produce certain testimonies out of the gospel , by which , god willing , i demonstrate how true and agreeable to his will the doctrine and practice of the catholick church is . and else where he appeals not to the judgement of men , but to the lords ballance , viz. to his judgement delivered in scripture , and in this same case when he was urged by the authority of cyprian , he saith , there are no writings they have not liberty to judge of , but those of scripture , and by them they are to judge of all others , and what is agreeable to them they receive , what is not they reject , though written by persons of never so great authority . and after all this is it possible to believe that st. augustin should make the churches decree in a general council infallible ? no : the utmost by a careful consideration of his mind in this matter that i can find , is ; that in a question of so doubtful and obscure a nature as that was , which had been so long bandied in the churches of africa , and from thence spread over all the churches of the christian world , it was a reasonable thing to presume that what the whole christian world did consent in was the truth , not upon the account of infallibility , but the reasonable supposition that all the churches of the christian world , would not consent in a thing repugnant to any apostolical doctrine or tradition . and so st. augustins meaning is the same with vincentius lerinensis as to the universal attestation of the christian church in a matter of tradition ; being declared by the decree of a general council , and that decree universally received but only by the litigant parties in africa . to which purpose it is observable that he so often appeals to the vniversal consent of christians in this matter ; after it had been so throughly discussed and considered , by the most wise and disinteressed persons , and that consent declared by a plenary council before himself was born . so that if authority were to be relyed upon in this obscure controversie , he saith , the authority of the universal church was to be preferred , before that of several councils in africa , of the bishops and particularly st. cyprian who met in them . and whereas st. cyprian had slighted tradition in this matter , christ having called himself truth and not custom , st. augustin replys to him ; that the custom of the church having been always so and continuing after such opposition and confirmed by a general council , and after examination of the reasons and testimonies of scripture on both sides , it may be now said , that we follow what truth hath declared . wherein we see with what modesty and upon what grounds he declares his mind , which at last comes to no more than vincentius his rules of antiquity , vniversality and consent . especially in such a matter as this was , which had nothing but tradition to be pleaded for it , the apostles , having determined nothing of either side , in their books as st augustin himself at last confesses in this matter . the most then that can be made of the testimony alledged out of st. augustin is this , that in a matter of so doubtful and obscure a nature wherein the apostles have determined nothing in their writings , we are to believe that to be the truth , which the universal church of christ agreed in those times , when the consent of the universal church was so well known by frequent discussion of the case and coming at last to a resolution in a general council . in such a case as this , i agree to what st. augustin saith , and think a man very much relieved by following so evident a consent of the universal church : not by vertue of any infallibility , but the unreasonableness of believing so many , so wise , so disinteressed persons should be deceived . let the same evidences be produced for the consent of the vniversal church from the apostolical times in the matters in dispute between our church and that of rome , and the controversie of infallibility may be laid aside ; for such an universal consent of the christian church i look upon as the most authentick interpreter of holy scripture in doubtful and obscure places . but let them never think to fob us off , with the consent of the roman faction for the vniversal church , nor of some latter ages , for a tradition from apostolical times , nor of a packed company of bishops for a truly general council . and thus much may now serve to clear that important controversie about the sense of scripture in doubtful places . the last thing to be considered is , whether the same arguments which overthrow infallibility , do likewise destroy all church-authority ? for this is by n. o. frequently objected against me ; for , he saith , thus it happens more than once in these principles laid down by me , that in 100 forward a zeal in demolishing the one , viz. church infallibility , the other is also dangerously undermined , viz. church-authority . and therefore out of his singular regard to the good of our church , he saith , it concerns my superior to look to it , whether their churches and their own authority suffers no detriment from my principles , and , again , he saith , my principles against infallibility conclude , the uselessness of any ecclesiastical authority to teach men , as of an infallible to assure men of the truth of those things , which by using only their own sincere endeavour they may know without them . and lastly , he saith , my principles afford no effectual way or means of suppressing or convicting any schism , sect or heresie , or reducing them either to submission of judgement or silence . and therefore he desires the prudent to consider ; whether the authority of the church of england is not much debilitated and brought into contempt , and daily like to wane more and more by this new taken up way of its defence . my answer is , that i have carefully examined and searched my principles and find no such gunpowder in them for blowing up authority either of church or state. for all that i can discover , they are very innocent and harmless ; and if all other mens had been so , we had never heard so much talk of this way , of undermining and blowing up . but is it not a pleasant thing to see , all of a sudden , what zeal these men discover for the preservation of our churches authority ? alas good men ! it grieves them at the very heart , to see the authority of our church weakned and that by its own members . what would not they do for the strengthening and upholding of it ? what pity it is , such a church should not stand , whose very enemies take such care for its preservation ; and are so ready to discover the pl●ts of its own children against it ? b●t to be ●ure , there is mischief intended when enemies discover it ; not by those whom they accuse , but by the honest informers ; who would be content to hold their peace , if they thought they could not sow mischief by pretending to discover it . it is a pretty plot to make those who design to defend our church to be the underminers of it , and the most professed enemies its surest friends . but such plots are too fine to hold , and too thin not to be seen through . how is it i beseech n. o. that my principles undermine all church authority ? have i any where made the church a meer shadow , and an insignificant cypher , a society depending only on the pleasure of men for its subsistence and authority ? this had been indeed to the purpose , but not the least word tending that way can be drawn out of any principles of mine . for i verily believe that the church is a society instituted by christ himself , and invested with authority necessary for its government and preservation . but though i cannot deny such an authority i may render it wholly useless . i cannot conceive any such malignant influence in any principles of mine , but if there be , it must be from one of these things . 1. either because i deny infallibility in the guides of the church . or 2. because i say that the scriptures are plain in things necessary to salvation . or 3. because i deny the authority of the church of rome . or 4. because i am not for such an effectual way of suppressing sects and heresies as is in use in the roman church . but i hope to make it appear that none of these do in the least tend to weaken , or bring into contempt the church of engl●nds authority , nor the just authority of any church in the world. 1. not the denial of infallibility . this n. o. seems to suppose to be the very faux in the gunpowder plot , the instrument of setting all on fire . but is there any thing peculiar to my principles herein ? have not all who have written against the church of rome opposed the pretence of infallibility ? how then come my principles to be of so mischievous a nature above others ? but i pray , sir , are authority and infallibility all one in your account ? we suppose that magistrates and parents , and masters have all of them an unquestionable authority but i never heard yet of any man that said they wre infallible : or that there was no ground to obey them , if they were not . why may we not then allow any authority belonging to the governours of the church , and yet think it possible for them to be deceived ? is this a sufficient reason for any man to cast off his subjection to his prince , because it 's possible he may require something unlawful ? or to disobey his parents , because they do not sit in an infallible chair ? or to slight his master , because he is not pope ? these are strange ways of arguing about matters of religion , which are ridiculous in any other case . if the possibility of being deceived destroys no other authority in the world , why should it do that of the church ? the magistrate does not lose his authority though we say we are to obey god rather than men , and consequently to examine whether the laws of men are not repugnant to the laws of god , which implys that he may require what it is our duty not to do . the authority of parents is not destroyed , because in some cases we are bound to disobey them , when they command men to destroy or rise up in arms against their soveraign . how comes it then to pass , that all church-authority is immediately gone , if we do but suppose a possibility of errour in those which have it ? but it may be said it is their office to be guides , and if we do not follow them absolutely , we renounce them from being our guides . to which i answer , there are two sorts of persons that stand in need of guides , the blind and the ignorant ; the blind must follow their guides because of an incapacity of seeing their way , the ignorant for want of instruction . yet neither of these are bound to believe their guides infallible , and to follow them at all adventures . for even the blind by their own sad experience of frequent falling into ditches or knocking their heads against posts may have reason to question , if not the skill , yet the sincerity of their guides , and though they must have some , may seek new ones . the ignorant follow their guides only upon the opinion of their skill and integrity ; and when they see reason to question these , they know of no obligation to follow their conduct over rocks and precipices ; if they are so careless of their own welfare , others are not bound to follow them therein . but we are not to presume persons so wholly ignorant , but they have some general rules by which to judge of the skill and fidelity of their guides . if a person commits himself to the care of a pilot to carry him to constantinople because of his ignorance of the sea , should this man still rely upon his authority , if he carried him to find out the north west passage ? no : though he may not know the particular coasts so well ; yet he knows the east and west , the north and south from each other . if a stranger should take a guide to conduct him from london to york , although he may not think fit to dispute with him at every doubtful turning , yet is he bound to follow him when he travels all day with the sun in his face ? for although he doth not know the direct road , yet he knows that he is to go northward . the meaning of all this is , that the supposition of guides in religion doth depend upon some common principles of religion that are or may be known to all , and some precepts so plain that every christian without any help may know them to be his duty ; within the compass of these plain and known duties , lyes the capacity of persons judging of their guides ; if they carry them out of this beaten way , they have no reason to rely upon them in other things : if they keep themselves carefully within those bounds , and shew great integrity therein , then in doubtful and obscure things they may with more safety rely upon them . but if they tell them they must put out their eyes to follow them the better , or if they kindly allow them to keep their eyes in their heads , yet they must believe them against their eye-sight , if they perswade them to break plain commands of god and to alter the institutions of christ , what reason can there be that any should commit themselves to the absolute conduct of such unfaithful guides ? and this is not to destroy all authority of faithful guides , for they may be of great use for the direction of unskilful persons in matters that are doubtful and require skill to resolve them , but it is only to suppose that their authority is not absolute nor their direction infallible . but if we take away this infallible direction from the guides of the church , what authority is there left them ? as much as ever god gave them , and if they will not be contented with that , we cannot help it ; and that it may appear how vain and frivolous these exceptions are , i shall now shew what real authority is still left in the governours of the church , though infallibility be taken away . and that lyes in three things . 1. an authority of inflicting censures upon offenders ; which is commonly called the power of the keys , or of receiving into and excluding out of the communion of the church . this the church was invested with by christ himself , and is the necessary consequence of the being and institution of a christian society , which cannot be preserved in its purity and peace without it . which authority belongs to the governours of the church , and however the church in some respects be incorporated with the common-wealth in a christian state , yet its fundamental rights remain distinct from it : of which this is one of the chief to receive into and exclude out of the church such persons which , according to the laws of a christian society , are fit to be taken in or shut out . 2. an authority of making rules and canons about matters of order and decency in the church . not meerly in the necessary circumstances of time and place , and such things the contrary to which imply a natural indecency ; but in continuing and establishing those ancient rites of the christian church , which were practised in the early times of christianity , and are in themselves of an indifferent nature . which authority of the church hath been not only asserted in the articles of our church , but strenuously defended against the trifling objections of her enemies , from scripture , antiquity and reason . and i freely grant , not only that such an authority is in it self reasonable and just ; but that in such matters required by a lawful authority ( such as that of our church is ) there is an advantage on the side of authority , against a scrupulous conscience , which ought to over-rule the practice of such who are the members of that church . 3. an authority of proposing matters of faith and directing men in religion . which is the proper authority of teachers , and guides , and instructers of others ; which may be done several ways , as by particular instruction of doubtful persons , who are bound to make use of the best helps they can , among which that of their guides is the most ready and useful , and who are obliged to take care of their souls , and therefore to give the most faithful advice and counsel to them . besides this , there is a publick way of instructing by discourses grounded upon scripture to particular congregations , assembled together for the worship of god in places set apart for that end and therefore called churches . and those who are duly appointed for this work , and ordained by those whose office is to ordain , viz. the bishops , have an authority to declare what the mind and will of god is , contained in scripture in order to the salvation and edification of the souls of men . but besides this , we may consider the bishops and representative clergy of a church as met together for reforming any abuses crept into the practice of religion or errours in doctrine ; and in this case we assert that such a synod or convocation hath the power and authority within it self ( especially having all the ancient rights of a patriarchal church ) when a more general consent cannot be obtained to publish and declare what those errours & abuses are , & to do as much as in them lyes to reform them , viz. by requiring a consent to such propositions as are agreed upon for that end , of those who are to enjoy the publick offices of teaching and instructing others . not to the end that all those propositions should be believed as articles of faith ; but because no reformation can be effected , if persons may be allowed to preach and officiate in the church in a way contrary to the design of such a reformation . and this is now that authority we attribute to the governours of our church , although we allow no infallibility to them . and herein we proceed in a due mean between the extremes of robbing the church of all authority of one side ; and advancing it to infallibility on the other . but we cannot help the weakness of those mens understanding , who cannot apprehend that any such thing as authority should be left in a church , if we deny infallibility . other diseases may be cured , but natural incapacity cannot . 2. not , the making scriptures plain to all sober enquirers in matters necessary to salvation . this is that principle which n. o. makes such horrible out-crys about , as though it were the foundation of all the heresies and sects in the world. this , he saith , makes all ecclesiastical authority useless ; for what need is there of bishops , presbyters , or any ecclesiastical pastors among protestants , as to the office of teaching or expounding these writings , if these in all necessaries are clear to all persons , who desire to know the meaning of them : but not content with this modest charge in comparison , in another treatise ; he makes this the very heighth of fanaticism , in spight of mother iuliana and their legendary saints : because , forsooth , this is to ground all our religion upon our own fancies , enquiring into the true sense of divine revelation ; and therefore , good man , seems troubled at it , that he can by no means in the world absolve me from being not only a fanatick , but a teacher of fanaticism . in earnest , it was happily found out , to return this heavy charge back upon my self with so much rage and violence ; ( for although n. o. be a modest man , yet s. c. is a meer fury ) for not meerly fanaticism , pure putid fanaticism follows from this principle , fanaticism without vizard or disguise , and all this demonstratively proved from this principle , but all our church is immediately gone with it ; men may talk of dangerous plots for undermining and blowing up of towns and forts and parliaments , but what are all those to the blowing up a whole church at once ? for since that train of my principles hath been laid , nothing like the old church of engl●nd hath been seen . it is true , there are the same bishops , the same authority , the same liturgy and ceremonies , the same ●●●achers and officers that were ; but what are all these to the church of england ? for from hence it follows ( if we believe s. c. ) that the ●overnours of our church have no authority to teach truth , or to condemn er●●urs ; and a●l the people are become prophets , and all their articles , constitutions and ordinances have been composed and enjoyned by an usurped authority . very sad consequences truly ! but like deep plots they lye very far out of sight . for to my understanding , not one of these dismal things follows any more from my principles , than from proving that s. c. and n. o. both stand for the same person . which will easily appear to any one ●●e that will but consider . 1. the intention of those principles . 2. the just consequence of them . 1. the intention of those principles ; which was plainly to lay down the foundations of a christians faith living in the communion of our church ; ( which is expressed in as perspicuous terms before them as may be ; ) and to shew that the roman churches infallibility is no necessary foundation of faith. now , this being the design of those principles , to what purpose should i have gone about therein , to have stated the nature and bounds of the authority of particular churches . i no where in the least exclude the use of all means and due helps of guides and others for the understanding the sense of scripture ; and i no where mention them ; because my business was only about the foundation of faith , and whether infallibility was necessary for that or no ? if i have proved it was not , i have gained my design ; for then those who deny the church of romes infallibility may never the less have a sure foundation , or solid principles to build their faith upon . now to what purpose in an account of the principles of faith should i mention those things , which we do not build our faith upon , i mean the authority of our guides ; for although we allow them all the usefulness of helps ; yet those are no more to be mentioned in the principles of resolving faith , than eulids master was to be mentioned in his demonstrations . for although he might learn his skill from him ; yet the force of his demonstrations did not depend upon his authority . i hope it now appears , how far i am from making church-authority useless ; but i still say our faith is not to be resolved into it , and therefore is not to be reckoned as a principle or foundation of faith. to that end it is sufficient to prove . that men in the due use of means , whom i call sober enquirers , may without any infallible church , believe the scriptures , and understand what is necessary to their salvation herein : if this may be , then i say it follows ( princ. 15. ) that there can be no necessity supposed of any infallible society of men , either to attest or explain these writings , among christians . not one word that takes away the use of authority in the church , but only of infallibility ; but it may be said that although it might not be my intention , yet it may be the just consequence of the principles themselves 2. therefore i shall now prove that no consequence drawn from them can infer this . for what if all those things which are necessary to salvation are plain in scripture , to all that sincerely endeavour to understand them , doth it hence follow that there can be no just authority in a church , no use of persons to instruct others , must all the people become prophets and no bounds be set to the liberty of prophesying ? these are bad consequences ; but the comfort is , they are not true . if i should say that the necessary rules for a mans health are so plainly laid down by hippocrates , that every one that will take the pains may understand them ; doth this make the whole profession of physick useless , or license every man to practise physick that will , or make it needless to have any professours in that faculty ? when the philosophers of old did so frequently inculcate that the necessaries for life were few and easie ; did this make all political government useless , and give every man power to do what he pleased ? men of any common understanding would distinguish between the necessaries of life and civil society ; so would any one but s. c. or n. o. of the necessaries to salvation , and to the government of the church ; for men must be considered first as christians , and then as christians united together : as in civil societies they are to be considered first as men , and then as cives ; to say , that a man hath all that is necessary to preserve his life as a man , doth not overthrow the constitution of a society , although it implys that he might live without it : so when men are considered barely as christians no more ought to be thought necessary for them as such , but what makes them capable of salvation ; but if we consider them as joyning together in a christian society , then many other things are necessary for that end : for then there must be authority in some and subjection in others , there must be orders and constitutions , whereby all must be kept within their due bounds , and there must be persons appointed to instruct the ignorant , to satisfy the doubting , to direct the unskilful , and to help the weak . it belongs to such a society not barely to provide for necessity but safety , and not meerly the safety of particular persons but of it self ; which cannot be done without prudent orders , fixing the bounds of mens imployments , and not suffering every pretender to visions and revelations to set up for a new sect , or which is all one a new order of religious men . how comes it now to pass that by saying that men , considered barely as christians , may understand all that is necessary to their salvation , i do overthrow all authority of a church and make all men prophets ? do i in the least mention mens teaching others , or being able themselves to put a difference , between what is so necessary and what not ; or doth s. c. suppose that all that understand what is necessary to salvation have no need to be ruled and governed ? if he thinks so , i assure him i am quite of another opinion , and do make no question but that government ought to be preserved in a church , though the necessaries to salvation be known to all in it ; and so i suppose doth any one else that in the least considers what he says . by this we see , that s. c ' s. recrimination of fanaticism on our church , by vertue of this principle is as feeble as the defence he hath made for his own , of which he may hear in due time . but if there be any fanaticism in this principle , we have the concurrence of the greatest and wisest persons of the christian church in it : two of them especially have in terms said as much as i have done , st. augustin in his books of christian doctrine already mentioned : and st. chrysostome in as plain words as may be . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . all things are plain and right in the holy scriptures ; all necessary things are manifest . let s. c. now charge all the dreadful consequences of this principle on st. chrysostome , and tell him that he destroyed all church-authority , and laid the foundation for the height of fanaticism ? nay s. chrys●stome goes much higher than i do , for he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. if i had made the guides of the church so useless as st. chrysostome seems to do in these words what passionate and hideous out-crys would , s. c. have made ? and by this let the skill or ingenuity of s. c. be tryed , who says , that i cannot find out one single short sentence in antiquity to support the main pillar of my religion , which he supposes this principle to be ; and for the finding out the sense of scripture without the help of infallibility , i have produced more out of antiquity in this discourse , than either he or his whole partie will be able to answer . 3. not the denying the authority of the church of rome . which i must do till i see some better proofs for it , than i have ever yet done . but how doth this , destroy all authority in a church ? can there be none , but what is derived from rome ? i do not think , i do in the least diminish the kings authority , by denying that he derives it from the cham of tartary , or the great mogol : although they may challenge the lordship of the whole earth to themselves : and may pretend very plausible reasons that it would be much more for the quiet and conveniency of mankind to be all under one universal monarch , and that none have so fair a pretence to it , as they that have challenged the right of it to themselves : and yet for all this , i do verily believe the king hath an unquestionable right to his kingdom , and a just authority over all his subjects . the time was when the first of genesis would serve to prove the popes title , and the suns ruling by day was thought a clear argument for his supremacy ; but the world is now altered and all the wit and subtility that hath been since used hath not been able to make good that crackt title of universal pastorship , which the bishops of rome have taken to themselves . but although we disown the popes authority as an unjust usurpation , we assert and plead for the authority of the church and the bishops who are placed therein , who derive their power to govern the church from christ and not from the pope . and i dare appeal to any person , whether the asserting the bishops deriving their authority from christ or from the pope , be the better way of defending their power ? we are not now disputing what authority were fit to be entrusted in the popes hands , supposing all other differences composed , and that things were in the same state wherein they were in the times of the 4. general councils ; in which case , it ought to be considered , how far it might be convenient to give way to such an authority so apt to grow extravagant , and which hath been stretched so very far beyond what the canons allowed , that it hath challenged infallibility to it self ; but the thing at present under debate , is , whether the disallowing the papal hierarchy doth overthrow all authority in the episcopal ; which is in effect to ask , whether there be any other power besides the popes in the church ? for if there be any other , the denying the popes authority over us cannot in the least diminish the just authority of bishops . the only considerable question in this case , is , whether the rejecting that hierarchy which was in being at the the time of the reformation , doth not make way for the peoples rejecting the authority of our bishops , and consequently no authority in the church can be maintained , unless we again yield to the papal authority . this i suppose to be n. o. meaning , when he tells us by church-authority he means that superior and more comprehensive body of the ecclesiastical hierarchy ; which in any dissent and division of the clergy , according to the church canons ought to be obeyed . and any particular church divided from this more universal cannot with the least pretence of reason challenge submission from her subjects , since she her self ( and particularly the church of england ) refused the same to all the authority extant in the world , when she separated her self . to this i answer , that the church of england in reforming her self did not oppose any just authority then extant in the world. it is to no purpose to make s●ch loud clamours about our churches refusing submission to all the authority then extant in the world , unless there be better evidence produced for it , than we have yet seen . for it is very well known that the dispute was then concerning the popes supremacy over our church , which we have all along asserted to have been a notorious encroachment upon the liberties of our church . and the popes usurpations were 〈◊〉 injurious both to the ecclesiastical and civil government , that those who adhered to the religion of the roman church yet agreed to the rejecting that authority which he challenged in england . which is sufficiently known to have been the beginning of the breach , between the two churches . afterwards , when it was thus agreed that the bishop of rome had no such authority as he challenged , what should hinder our church from proceeding in the best way it could for the reformation of it self ? for the popes supremacy being cast out as an usurpation , our church was thereby declared to be a free church , having the power of government within it self . and what method of proceeding could be more reasonable in this case , than by the advice of the governours of the church and by the concurrence of civil authority to publish such rules and articles , according to which religion was to be professed and the worship of god setled in england ? and this is that which n. o. calls refusing submission to all the authority then extant in the world ; was all the authority then extant , shut up in the popes breast ? was there no due power of governing left , because his unjust power was cast off , and that first by bishops , who in other things adhered to the roman church ? but they proceeded farther and altered many things in religion against the consent of the more vniversal church . it is plain since our church was declared to be free they had a liberty of enquiring and determining things fittest to be believed and practised ; this then could not be her fault . but in those things they decreed , they went contrary to the consent of the vniversal church : here we are now come to the merits of the cause ; and we have from the beginning of the reformation defended , that we rejected nothing but innovations , and reformed nothing but abuses . but the church thought otherwise of them . what church i pray ? the primitive and apostolical ? that we have always appealed to and offered to be tryed by . the truly catholick church of all ages ? that we utterly deny to have agreed in any one thing against the church of england . but the plain english of all is , the church of rome was against the church of england ; and no wonder , for the church of england was against the church of rome ; but we know of no fault we are guilty of therein ; nor any obligation of submission to the commands of that church . and n. o. doth not say , that we opposed the whole church , but the more vniversal church , i. e. i suppose the greater number of persons at that time . but doth he undertake to make this good , that the greater number of christians , then in the world , did oppose the church of england ? how doth he know that the eastern , armenian , abyssin and greek churches did agree with the church of rome against us ? no : that is not his meaning ; but by the more vniversal church , he fairly understands no more but the church of rome . and that we did oppose the doctrine and practices of the church of rome we deny not ; but we utterly deny that to be the catholick church ; or that we opposed any lawful authority in denying submission to it . but according to the canons of the church we are to obey , in any dissent or division of the clergy , the superior and more comprehensive body of the ecclesiastical hierarchy . what he means by this , i do not well understand , either it must be the authority of the pope and councils of the roman church , or a general council of all the catholick church . for the first , we owe no obedience to them , for the second , there was no such thing then in the world , and therefore could not be opposed . and for the canons of the catholick councils before the breaches of christendom , no church hath been more guilty of a violation of them , than the church of rome , since the rules of the fathers have been turned into the royalties of s. peter . we are no enemies to the ancient patriarchal government of the christian church , and are far more for preserving the dignity of it , than the roman church can be : for we should think it a happy state of the christian church , if all the patriarchs did enjoy their ancient power and priviledges , and all christendom would consent to a truly free and general council ; which we look on as the best expedient on earth , for composing the differences of the christian world , if it might be had . but we cannot endure to be abused by meer names of titular patriarchs , but real servants and pensionaries of the popes , with combinations of interested parties instead of general councils , with the pleasure of popes instead of ancient canons . let them reduce the ancient government of the church within its due bounds ; let the bishop of rome content himself with the priviledges he then en●oyed ; let debates be free and bishops assemble with an equal proportion out of all churches of christendom ; and if we then oppose so gener●l a consent of the christian church , let them charge us with not submitting to all the authority extant of the world . but since , the state of christendom hath been so much divided , that a truly general council is next to an impossible thing , the church must be reformed by its parts , and every free church , enjoying the rights of a patriarchal see , hath according to the canons of the church a sufficient power to reform all abuses within it self , when a more general consent cannot be obtained . by this we may see how very feeble this charge is of destroying all church-authority by refusing submission to the roman hierarchy : and how very pityful an advantage can from hence be made by the dissenting parties among us , who decry that patriarchal and ancient government as anti-christian which we allow as prudent and christian. but of the difference of these two case , i have spoken already . 4. but yet n. o. saith , my principles afford no effectual way or means in this church of suppressing or convicting any schism , sect or heresie , or reducing them either to submission of judgement or silence : therefore my principles are dest●●ctive to all church-authority . to which i answer , 1. that the design of my principles was to lay down the foundations of faith , and not the means of suppressing heresies . if i had laid down the foundations of peace and left all persons to their own judgements without any regard to authority , this might have been justly objected against me ; but according to this way , it might have been objected to aristotle that he was an enemy to civil government , because he doth not lay down the rules of it in his logick , or that hippocrates favoured the chymists and mountebanks , because he saith not a word of the colledge of physitians . if i had said any thing about the authority of particular churches , or the ways of suppressing sects ; then how insultingly had i been asked ; what is all this to the foundations of faith ? excellent protestant principles of faith ! they begin now to resolve faith into the authority of their own church : or else to what end is this mentioned , where nothing is pretended to but laying down the foundations on which protestants do build their faith ? but although there be no way of escaping impertinent objections , yet it is some satisfaction to ones self to have given no occasion for them . 2. i would know what he understands by his effectual means of suppressing sects or heresies . we are sure the meer authority of their church hath been no more effectual means , than that of ours hath been ; but there is another means they use which is far more effectual viz. the inquisition . this in truth is all the effectual means they have above us ; but god keep us from so barbarous and diabolical a means of suppressing schisms ; the sanbenits have not more pictures of devils upon them , than the inquisition it self hath of their spirit in it ; however that gracious pope paul 4. attributed the settling of it in spain to the inspiration of the holy ghost ; not that holy ghost certainly , that came down from heaven upon the apostles ; but that which was conveyed in a portmantue from rome to the council of trent . but if this be the effectual means he understands , i hope he doth not think it any credit to the authority of their church , that all who dispute it must endure a most miserable life or a most cruel death . all the other means they have are but probable ; but this , this is the most effectual . how admirably do fire and faggots end controversies ! no general council signifies half so much as a court of inquisition ; and the pope himself is not near so good a judge of controversies as the executioner , and dic ecclesiae is nothing to take him gaoler . these have been the kind , the tender , the primitive , the christian means of suppressing sects and heresies in the roman church ! o how compassionate a mother is that church , that takes her froward children in her hands to dash their brains against the stones ! o how pleasant a thing it is for brethren to be destroyed for lack of vnity ! how beautiful upon the 7. mountains are the feet of those who shed the blood of hereticks ! never were there two men had a more catholick spirit , than dioclesian and bishop bonner . men may talk to the worlds end of councils and fathers and authority of the church and i know not what insignificant nothings ; come , come , there is but one effectual means , which the good cardinal baronius suggested to his holiness , arise peter , kill and eat . let the hereticks talk of the kind and merciful spirit of our saviour who rebuked his disciples so sharply for calling for fire from heaven upon the samaritans , and told them they did not know what spirit they are of : let them dispute never so much against the cruelty and unreasonableness of such a way of confuting them ; let them muster up never so many sayings of fathers against it ; yet when all is done , what ever becomes of christianity , it was truly said of paul 4. that the authority of the roman see depends only upon the office of the inquisition . and that we may think , he was in good earnest when he said it , onuphrius tells us it was part of the speech he made to the cardinals before his death . was not this think we , a true vicar of christ ? a man of an apostolical spirit ? that knew the most effectual means of suppressing heresies and schisms and advancing the authority of the roman see. and that we may not think their opinion is altered in this matter , one of the late consulters of the inquisition hath determined that the practice of the roman church in the office of the inquisition is reasonable , pious , useful , and necessary ; which he proves by the testimony of their greatest doctors . and by which we may easily judge what n. o. and his brethren think to be the most effectual means of suppressing sects and heresies , with the want of which we are contented to be upbraided . but setting this aside we have as many reasonable means , and i think many more of convicting dissenters , than they can pretend to , in the roman church . 3. it is very well known that we do endeavour , as much as lyes in us , to reclaim all dissenters ; but god never wrought miracles to cure incorrigible persons , and would not have us to go out of the way of our duty to suppress sects and heresies . the greatest severities have not effected it , ( which made one of the inquisitors in italy complain that after 40. years experience , wherein they had destroyed above 100000. persons for heresie , ( as they call it ) it was so far from being suppressed or weakned that it was extremly strengthened and increased . what wonder is it then , if dissenters should yet continue among us , who do not use such barbarous ways of stopping the mouths of hereticks with burning lead , or silencing them by a rope and flames . but we recommend as much as they can do to the people the vertues of humility , obedience , due submission to their spiritual pastors and governours , and that they ought not to usurp their office , and become their own guides : which n. o. in his conclusion blames us for not doing . yet we do not exact of them a blind obedience , we allow them to understand the nature and doctrine of christianity , which the more they do , we are sure they will be so much the better christians and the more easily governed . so that we have no kind of controversie about church-authority it self but what it is , and in what manner , and by whom to be exercised ; but surely n. o. had little to say , when from laying down the principles of faith , he charges me with this most absurd consequence of destroying all church-authority . i have thus far considered the main foundations upon which n. o. proceeds in opposition to my principles , there is now very little remaining which deserves any notice : and that which seems to do it as about negative articles of faith , and the marks of the true church i shall have occasion to handle them at large in the following discourse . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a71070-e200 ha●●●mull . hist iesuit . ordin . c. 8. s. c. p. 79. s. c. p. 46. roman doctrine of repentance , &c. vindicated p. 19. p. 44. p. 47. p. ●9 . et quamvis sine sacramento poenitentiae per se ad justificationem perducere peccatorem nequeat ( attritio ) ; tamen cum ad dei gratiam in sacramento poe●ite●tiae impetrandam disponit . concil . trident. sess . 14. c. 4. * si quis dixerit sacramenta novae legis non continere gratiam quam significant , aut gratiam ipsam non ponentibus obicem non conf●rre — anathema sit . sess. 7. can. 6. si quis dix●rit non dari gratiam per hujus modi sacramenta semper & omnibus , qua●tum est ex parte dei , etiamsi ritè ea suscipiant , sed aliquando & aliquibus , a●athemae sit . can. 7. sess. 14. c. 4. p. 45. melch. cano relect. de poenit. part . 6. p. 932. morinus de poenit. sacramento l. 8. c. 4. n. 27. la morale de iesuits ●●v . 2. ch . 2. ● . 253. layman . theol. moral . l. 5. tract . 6. c. 2. sect . 2. tolet. summ cas. l. 3. c ▪ 4. morinus de poenit. l. 8. c. 4. n. 1. lugo de poenit. disp . 5. sect . 9. n. 130 135. o. n. p. 45. lugo disp . 7. sect . 11. n. 201. sect. 13. n. 263. greg. de valent. tom. 4. disp . 7. q. 8. pua● . 4. sect . secundo potest . morin . de poenit . l. 8. c. 4. n. 15. id. ib. n. 26. sacramentorum evangelicorum supra legaliaa praestantiam & praerogativam in hoc potissimum fulgere , quod evangelica gravissimo contritionis , & dilectionis dei jugo nos liberaverint . morin . de poenit. l. 8. c. 4. n. 26. index exp●rg : alex. 7. n. 87. 88. ribadin . 〈…〉 l. 5. c. ● . p. 38. p. 39. p. 50. p. 40. p. 21. p. 13. sanctissi●●● domini n. d. innocenti● divina providentia pap● . 10. declaratio nullitatis articulorum nuperae pacis germaniae religioni catholicae , sedi apostolicae , ecclesiis , aliisque l●●is piis ac personis , & iuribus ecclesiasticis quomodo libet praejudicialium . romae ex typographiâ reverend . can●●● apostolicae . a. d. 1651. p. 312. book of hom. second tome . p. 46. p. 214. p. 19● . p. 30. appeal p. 263. answer to the gagg . p. 319. p. 110. concil . trident . sess . 7. can . 9. sess . 23. can . 4. v. vasquez . in 3. p. thom. disp . 137. c. 3. n. 20. vasquez . in 3. p th. disp . 243. c. 1. est. in sente●t . l. 4. disti . 25. sect . 3. aug. ●l . 2. c. epist. pa●●ca . c. 13. 17. c. donat. l 1. c. 1. l. 3 c. 1● . aug. e●ist . 50. epist. 162. c. c●ss . l. 2. c. 11. 12. co●ex ca● . eccles. a●ic . c. 63. apud . ba●samon . et zonar . ● . 71. hallier de ordi● . sacris . p. 2. sect. 4. c. 5. ss . 1. n. 4. p. 2. sect . 3. c. 2. sect . 5. 6 7. sect. 4. c. 5. s●ct . 1. to. aquin. suppl . q. 38. art . 2. 〈…〉 . l. 4. ●●ist . 25. q. 2. mori● . d● sacris ordi●at . pa● . 3. exercit . 5. c. 1. n. 12 exer●it . 5. c. 8. n. 7. extra● . de temp . 〈◊〉 . c. quod trasl . morin . de sacris ordinat . part . 1. c. 3. 4. 5. leo allatius de aetat : et inte●st . in collat : ordin . p. 5. 14. isaaac . habert . po●tifical . graec. in praef . morin . de sacris ordin . p. 1. c. 4. notes for div a71070-e9260 §. 1● of the nature of these answers . §. 2. of their common way of answering our books . §. 3. of their ca●●mnies against me . mat. 26. 65. 1 j●h 4. 1. §. 4. expo●ing fanaticism no disservice to christianity . dr. 〈◊〉 against dr. stilling●●●t . p. 11. m●●●h . ca● . loc . t●col . l. 11. p. 534. lud. viv. a●trad . 〈◊〉 . l. 5. dr. 〈◊〉 princip . con●id . 〈◊〉 . notes for div a71070-e10940 §. 1. the insufficiency of his way of answering . p. 14. st. against st. p. 14. §. 2. no contratradiction about the charge of idolatry . rational account . p. 596 , 606. §. 2. the sophistical cavils in this argument . tit. 1. 16. §. 3. a distinct answer to his propositions . §. 4. in what sense the church of rome is owned by us as a true church . rational account . p. 47. §. 5. his appendix considered . dr. st. against dr. st. p. 21. roman idolatry . p. 55. 2. edi● . isa. 40 ▪ 19 , 22. deut. 4. 15 , 16. 〈◊〉 ▪ 20. § 6. the second contradiction examined . 〈…〉 p. 293. p. 295. arch b. la●ds conference . p. 280. p. 282. p. 285. p. 299. rational account . p. 622. st. against st. p. 7. p. 8. §. 7. the charge of fanaticism de●ended . p. 8. fanaticism of rom. church . s. 16. p. 299. 2. ●d . st. against st. p. 9. 1 king 19. 18. rom. 11. 3. §. 8. no contradiction in the charge 〈◊〉 divisions . rational 〈◊〉 . p. 56. divis. of the rom. church . s. 15. ● 397. 2. ed. §. 9. the conclusion . p. 14. p. 14. notes for div a71070-e20390 §. 1. the occasion of annexing the principles . p. 483. ● 2. ed. protestants without principles , chap. 1. p. 17. p. 18. p. 19. p. 20. p. 21. p. 22. p. 23. p. 24. p. 25. p. 42 , 43. §. 2 ▪ or the notion of infallibility . §. 3. n. o● . concessions . prop. 2. prop. 3. prop. 4. prop. 10. p. 22. s. 15. p. 52. p. 54. p. 56. p. 55. pro● . 27. p. 67. p. 94. ●rot . without princip . chap. 6. guide in controv. disc . 5. chap. 10. s. 134. sect. 135. § 4. n. o's . principles laid down . p. 1● . §. 5. n. o's . exceptions answered . prop. 13. p. 13. ioh. 20 , 31. p. 13. p. 14. luke 10. 31 , 32. mat. 25. 29. p. 14. field of the church l ▪ 4. ch 5. p. 350. ch. 2 ▪ ch. 5. p. 15. psal. 25. 9. james 1. 5. luke 11. 13. john 7. 17. §. 6. n. o's . proofs of infallibility examined . § 7. of the arguments from scripture for infallibility . 〈◊〉 . 25. 26. 〈◊〉 17. 10. 11 , 12. 〈…〉 . ration . account . p. 1. ch . 8. sect. 2. p. 239. prop. 16 , p. 27. p. 28 , 29. 1 cor. 14. 22. heb. 2. 4. p. 29. p 30. prop. 17. p. 37. §. 8. of the argument from tradition for infallibility . p. 38 , 39. b●ll de concil . l. 2. c. 10. field of the church , l. 4 c 4. rat. account . part ▪ 3. ch . 1. sect. 4. p. 510. rat. acc●unt . p. 1. ch . 4. p. 101 ▪ p 43. p. 44. § 9. of the argument for infallibility from parity of reason . prop. 13. § 10. of the authority of the guides of the church john 5. 36 , 9. 1 cor. 10. 15 1 thess. 5. 21. acts : 7 ▪ 11. 1 john 4. ● gal. 1. 8. jude v. 4. mat. 24. 4 , 5. 23 ▪ 24. acts. 20. 29 ▪ 30. 1 t●m . 4. 1 2 thess. 2. 3. 2 tim. 4. 3 , 4. 2 t●ess . 2. 9 , ●0 . matt. 15. 14. 〈◊〉 1. 8. ● cor. 11. 1. 2 cor. 1. 14. 〈…〉 . ba●o● a. d. 546. 547 55● . petav dogmat . theolog. tom. 4. l 1. c. 18 petr. de marca , dis●rt . de vigilii decr●to . bell. de rom. pon●it . l. 4. c. 3. b●lla●m . de concil . auctor . 2. c. 12. concil . constat . 3. act. 13. can. lo● . theol. l. 6. c. 8. francise . toa●●ens . de 6. 7. 8. synod . flor. a. d. 1551. p. 11. 12. p. 14. p. 24. 〈◊〉 . allocutio 3. hadriani 2. ad co●c . ro. tom 8. conc. gen. ●d lu● . par. 1671. p. 1● 91. baron . a. d. 681. n. 29. francis. combesis historia h●res . monotheli●●r . c. 2. alex 7. index expu●g●tor . p. 277. bellarm. de rom. pontifice l. 4. c. 11. petav dogmat . theol. l. 1. c. 21. s. 11 bal●zius de vi â petri marcae p. 28. 29. petav. ib. ●ect . 13. combesis . c. 2. sect . 3. tab●lae su●●rag . p. 130. iacob . de vitriaco hist. orient . cap. 77. bellonii obser . l. 1. c. 35. article 21. articl . 3. concil . lateran . a. d. 15 16. s●ct . 11. §. 11. of the s●nse of scripture . p. 37. p. 6. 14. p. 47. ephes. 4. 11 , 13 , 14. 2 pet. 3. 16. p. 67. 2 pet 3. 17 , 18. § 12. of a judge of controver●●es . §13 . the way used in the primitive church f●r finding the sense of scripture 〈…〉 . ●6 . sect . 2. 3. 〈…〉 〈…〉 c. 29. l. 3. c. 11. epipha● . hae● . 42. iren l. 3. c. 11. t●rtull . de praecip haeret . c. 38. eus. b. hist. eccl●s l. 4. c. 29. 〈◊〉 l. 1. c. 1. iren. l. 1. c. 1. tertull. de praescrip . haeret . c. 39. pet. scrive i● fragmata ●● tragicorum . p. 187. isidor : or●gin . l. r. c. 38. iren. l. 2. c. 46. iren. l. 1. c. 1. c. 2. c. 3. l. 3. c. 1. c. 2. c. 3. c. 4. l. 1. 6. 2. l. 4. praebat . l. 5. praehat . tertull. de praescript haeret . c. 8. c. 9. c. 10 c. 13. c. 14 c. 16. c. 17. c. 18. c. 19. c. 20. c. 21. 22. c. 23. c. 24. c. 25. c. 26. c. 27. c. 28. c. 29. c. 30. c. 32. c. 33. c. 36. c. 37. t●rtull . c. mar. l. 1. c. 2. c. 4. 5 , 6. c. 11. 12. l. 3. c. 5. c. 8. 9. l. 4 ▪ c. 4 c. 5. c. 7 & ●● tertull. adversus hermog . c. 19. c. 20. 21. c. 22. t●rtull . adversus prax●am . c. 20. clem. ale● and. stro● . ● . cyprian . epist . 74. firmil . inter e●pas cyprian 75. baron . annal . ad a. d. 258. n. 36. n. 52. euseb. ● . l. 7. c. 5. concil . arelat . 1. c. 8. 〈…〉 2. c. 16. 17. aug. de haer●s . cap. 44. g●●ad . de e●cl●s d●gmat . c. 52. ba●il epist. ca● . 1. ad ●●●●●loch . concil la●di●ea . c. 7 ▪ 8. baron . annal . tom. 4. in append. 〈…〉 . 65. 〈◊〉 eccles● . ●istor . l. 5. c. 28. 〈…〉 b. l. 7. c. 30. epipha● . haeres . 64. sect. 5. sect. 6. athans . co●t . 〈◊〉 orat. 1. p. 287. atha . co●● . a●a● . 〈…〉 . p. 116. &c. eph 4 16. 〈…〉 c. 〈◊〉 . p. 549. ath●● o●at . 1. c. arian . ad ad ●ph . c. paul. samosat . cp . ad s●rapi . h●ar . de t●ait . l. 1. hilar. l. 9. 〈…〉 69. ● 50. co●cil . gen●ral . tom. 2. p. 84. greg. nazia● ep. ●5 . bellar. de co●cil . author . l. 2. c. 7. august . c. maxim. l. 3. c. 14. aug. de doctri . christia● l. 1. c. 35 , 36. l. 2. ● . 7. l. 2. c 9. ib. l. 3. c. 26. l. 2. c. 6. l 2. c. 10. c. 11. l. 3. c. 4. l. 3. c. 5. c. 9. c. 15 , 16. l. 3. c. 26. l. 3. c. 28. vincent . lerin . commonitor . p. 4. commonit . 1. c. 39. ●● commonit . 2. c. 〈◊〉 . vincent . commonit . 1. a● . 26. ad 35. petav. dogm . theol tom. 2. in praefat . l. 1. c. 8. sect . 2. hier. a o● . 2. c. russi● 1. c. 39. c. 37. c. 39. §. 14. s. augustins testimo●● examined p. 85. aug. c. cresco● . l. 1. c. 33. aug. de unit . eccles. c. 4. 5 , 19. c. 10. c. 16. aug. de baptis . c. donat . l 2. c. 1. c. 9. l. 4. c. 6. l. 2. c. 4. l. 3. c. 10. l. 6. c. 2. de bapt ● do●at . l. 2 c. 3 : de bapt. l. 3. c. 4. de baptis . l. 2. c. 14. c. c●e●cor . l. 2. c. 31. 32. c. cr●s●on . io. de bapt. c. do●at . l. 1. c. 18. l. 2. c. 9. l. 3. c. 10. l. 4. c. 6 , 7 l. 5. c. 4 l. 6. c. 2. l. 4. c. 7. de bapt. ● . donat. l. 5. c. 23. §. 15. of church authority . p. 50. p. 84. p. 98. p. 99. art. 20. p. 15. fanaticism fanatically imputed to the roman church . p. 93. p. 96. p. 92. p. 89. p. 99. chrysost. in 2. 〈◊〉 thess. hom. 3. s. c. p. 117. praeface to principles considered . p. ●98 . iacob simanca enchir . judic ▪ viol . relig. tit. 68. n. 18. luke 9. 55. onuphr . vit . pauli 4. del. bere de officio inquisit . part . 1. dub . 162. petit. 5. n. 8. ger. ●usdragi epistol . ad cardinal . pisan.